The Critical Thinking About Sources Cookbook 0838947778, 9780838947777

Table of contents :
Table of Contents
Introduction
1.1.1. Indentifying the Components of a Research Article
1.1.2. Content Form and Function
1.1.3. Deconstructed Journal Articles
1.1.4. Like Oil and Vinegar
1.1.5. Evaluating Sources on the Scholarly Spectrum
1.1.6. Popular Magazines vs. Scholarly Journals
1.1.7. Popular and Scholarly Source Stew
1.1.8. Yams and Sweet Potatoes, Jams and Jellies
1.1.9. Who Did it Better
1.1.10. Show Me the Ingredients
1.1.11. Assorted Rolls in the Breadbasket
1.1.12. Research Telephone
1.2.1. Add Data, Mix Well
1.2.2. Tapas for Success
1.2.3. Rate that Source
1.2.4. Identifying and Diluting the Dominant Flavor of a Source
1.2.5. A Human Library with a Side of Critical Thinking
1.2.6. Cooking from your Pantry
1.2.7. Boiling Water
1.2.8. Historic Misinformation Reflection and Remix
1.2.9. Primary Secondary Mixed Grill
1.2.10. Developing Critical Thinking
1.2.11. Taste Test
1.2.12. It Looks Yummy, but is it Good for you?
1.2.13. Y Tho
1.2.14. Teaching Evaluative Criteria
1.2.15. Where the Recipe Goes Wrong
1.3.1. From CRAAP to KOALAty
1.3.2. Quit Serving CRAAP
1.3.3. Rotten Resource Burger
1.3.4. It's a TRAP
1.3.5. The Best Cheeseburger Ever
1.3.6. Scholarly Journal Evaluation Activity
1.3.7. Reliable Article or Bogus Science
1.3.8. Investigate your Ingredients
1.3.9. Wait Twitter isn't Bad
1.3.10. Something Smells Fishy
1.3.11. Consuming Information Like a Scientist
1.3.12. Ranking Relevant Articles
1.3.13. Inviting Students into the Kitchen
1.3.14. The Credibility Continuum
1.3.15. What's in the Sauce
1.3.16. If I APPLY
1.3.17. Evaluating Mystery Ingredients
1.3.18. Meant to Appeal to Different Tastes or...
1.3.19. Alien Babies and Angelina Jolie
1.3.20. Scroll-Worthy Sources
1.3.21. A Dash of Investigation
1.3.22. Fact-Check Lightning Round
1.4.1. Reverse Engineering the News
1.4.2. Trust this Recipe
1.4.3. The Proof of the Pudding
1.4.4. Sweet and Savory
1.4.5. Tin Foil Hats
1.4.6. A Heaping Scoop of Literacy
1.4.7. The Whole Facts Diet
1.4.8. How Do They Know That?
1.4.9. Cooking up Critical thinking in the Flipped Kitchen
1.4.10. How Sweet it is
1.4.11. Discovering the I in Bias
1.4.12. Food for Thought
1.4.13. Popping the Filter Bubble on Internet News
1.4.14. Cooking with GMOs
1.4.15. Got Misinformation
1.4.16. Fighting Infobesity
1.4.17. Mindfulness and Information Consumption
2.1.1. Why Can't Intellectual Freedom and Copyright Get Along
2.1.2. Open Source and Royalty Free
2.1.3. Communicating Research Three Ways
2.1.4. 7-Layer Citation Salad
2.1.5. A Pinch of Peer Review
2.1.6. Mind Shapers
2.1.7. Replicating Research
2.1.8. Evaluating and Selecting Library Resources
2.1.9. Creating and Using Infographics
2.2.1. Cookies or Cake
2.2.2. Excavating the Conversation
2.2.3. Mixing up an Authority Matters Batter
2.2.4. Plan your Shopping
2.2.5. Audience a la Carte
2.2.6. Restaurant Confidential
2.2.7. Sous Vide or Deep Fry
2.2.8. Using Popular Media to Craft Research Questions
2.2.9. Crafting Credible Cocktails
2.2.1.0. Stop the Presses
2.3.1. Writing Buffet
2.3.2. Poached Barrier Reef
2.3.3. Using Wikipedia to Critically Evaluate Information
2.3.4. Asking Question Quesadillas
2.3.5. Mixing Up a Balanced Research Plan
2.3.6. Hot Twitter Tips
2.3.7. Repost This Not That
2.3.8. How Social Media Shapes News
2.3.9. Make Your Own Mix
2.3.10. Scholarly Journal Evaluation Activity
2.3.11. Media Manipulation

Citation preview

The Critical Thinking about Sources Cookbook edited by Sarah E. Morris

Association of College and Research Libraries A division of the American Library Association Chicago • 2020

The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences-Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1992. ∞ The ACRL Cookbook series was conceived of and designed by Ryan Sittler and Doug Cook. Other books in this series: The Embedded Librarian’s Cookbook edited by Kaijsa Calkins and Cassandra Kvenild The Discovery Tool Cookbook: Recipes for Successful Lesson Plans edited by Nancy Fawley and Nikki Krysak The First-Year Experience Cookbook edited by Raymond Pun and Meggan Houlihan The Library Assessment Cookbook edited by Aaron Dobbs Library of Congress Control Number: 2020933268 ©2020 by the Association of College and Research Libraries, a division of the American Library Association. All rights reserved except those which may be granted by Sections 107 and 108 of the Copyright Revision Act of 1976. Printed in the United States of America. 24 23 22 21 20 5 4 3 2 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS vii Introduction

1

PART B: WORKING WITH POPULAR SOURCES

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

PART A: EVALUATING INFORMATION 2

Identifying the Components of a Research Article Jane Hammons and Andrea Brooks

4

Content, Form, and Function: Evaluating the Measured Filling of a Scholarly Article Jessica Mahoney

6

Deconstructed Journal Articles: An Active Learning Recipe for Reflection Lisa Campbell

8

Like Oil and Vinegar: Exploring Different but Complementary Scholarly and Popular Resources Malina Thiede

10

Evaluating Sources on the Scholarly Spectrum Janet Pinkley and Linda Carroll

12

Popular Magazines versus Scholarly/Academic Journals Dusty Folds

15

Popular and Scholarly Source Stew Samantha Martin and Beth Miller

17

Yams and Sweet Potatoes, Jams and Jellies: Differentiating Between Popular and Scholarly Sources Helene Gold

19

Who Did It Better? The True Test of Popular vs. Scholarly Sources Amy Dye-Reeves

21

Show Me the Ingredients: Tracking Down the Original Ingredient Joy Oehlers

24

Assorted Rolls in the Breadbasket: Selecting Articles from a Single Scientific Journal Issue to Please Different Palates Nancy R. Curtis

26

Research Telephone: Calling All Chocolate Lovers Melissa Harden and Anna Michelle Martinez-Montavon iii

28

Add Data, Mix Well: Finding and Assessing Data Sets Debbie Bezanson, Megan Potterbusch, and Tina Plottel

30

Tapas for Success: An Information Source Sampler for Critical Thinking Leslie Poljak, Marnie Hampton, and Diana Dill

32

Rate That Source: An Information Evaluation Game Virginia L. Cairns

35

Identifying and Diluting the Dominant Flavor of a Source Lindsay Bush and Courtney Seymour

37

A Human Library with a Side of Critical Thinking: Considering Oral Narratives and Scholarly Articles Nancy Goebel, Yvonne Becker, and Kara Blizzard

40

Cooking from Your Pantry: Using Inquiry to Evaluate and Understand Primary Sources Pamela Nett Kruger and Adrienne Scott

42

Boiling Water: Examining Chernobyl as a Method of Teaching History Students about Primary and Secondary Sources Jennifer Beach

44

Historic Misinformation Reflection and Remix Sarah E. Morris

46

Primary/Secondary Mixed Grill Abbey Lewis and Emily Dommermuth

48

Developing Critical Thinking and Archival Literacy through a Three Perspectives Project Erin Lawrimore

50

Taste Test: Primary vs. Secondary Sources Candace K. Vance

52

It Looks Yummy, but Is It Good for You? Evaluating Images Olga Hart

54

Y Tho: Cooking with Catchphrases is Meme-orable Melissa Langridge and Samuel Kim

Table of Contents 56

Teaching Evaluative Criteria to Increase Critical Thinking: Infographics 101 Dana Statton Thompson

87

Inviting Students into the Kitchen: Inquiry-Based Learning as a Critical Thinking Instructional Strategy Mandi Goodsett

59

Where the Recipe Goes Wrong: Stirring Bias into the Information Mix Susan K. Boyd

89

The Credibility Continuum Eric Shannon and Leslie Inglis

91

What’s in the Sauce? Using Rhetorical Analysis to Differentiate Source Types Joel Burkholder

93

IF I APPLY: A New Recipe for Critical Source Evaluation for the (Dis) Information Age Kathleen Phillips, Eryn Roles, and Sabrina Thomas

PART C: RECOGNIZING SCHOLARLY SOURCES 61

From CRAAP to KOALAty Brittany Hickey

62

Quit Serving CRAAP, Start making DRAMA Hanna Primeau

64

Rotten Resource Burger Abbey Lewis

96

Evaluating Mystery Ingredients: Chopping the CRAAP Test Sarah Kantor

66

It’s a TRAP! Laura Dumuhosky and Jennifer Kegler

99

69

The Best Cheeseburger Ever Anne Marie Gruber

Meant to Appeal to Different Tastes, or How’s Your Internet B*** S*** Detector? Gail Gradowski

71

Scholarly Journal Evaluation Activity Mellanie Reeve

102 Alien Babies and Angelina Jolie: Evaluating Sources Using Tabloids with a Taste of News Literacy Ashley Cole and Heather Beirne

73

Reliable Article or Bogus Science: Evaluating Claims Found in Popular Sources Joshua Becker

104 Scroll-Worthy Sources: Information Literacy Instruction Through Harry Potter’s Glasses Frames Sherry Larson-Rhodes

75

Investigate Your Ingredients: Interrogating Sources and Sharing Findings Martinique Hallerduff and Jennifer Lau-Bond

107 A Dash of Investigation: A Critical Thinking Recipe Jodi Brown and Kristen A. Cooke

78

“Wait, Twitter Isn’t Bad!?”: The Power of a Personal Evaluation Plan Alexander Deeke

80

Something Smells Fishy: Evaluating Journals for Credibility Carolyn Caffrey Gardner and Dana Ospina

82

Consuming Information Like a Scientist: Evaluating and Comparing Scientific Resources Rita Premo

84

Ranking Relevant Articles with First-Year Nursing Students Brandy Whitlock

109 Fact-Check Lightning Round Sarah E. Morris

PART D: DEALING WITH MISINFORMATION 111 Reverse Engineering the News Marla Lobley and Calantha Tillotson 113 Trust this Recipe: Trust Indicators and Critical Media Analysis Nicole Branch, Leanna Goodwater, and Shannon Kealey 115 The Proof of the Pudding is in the Eating: Practicing Mike Caulfield’s “Four Moves and a Habit” Approach for Evaluating Online Content Elizabeth St. Clair and Jennifer Bodley

iv

Table of Contents 117 Sweet and Savory: Separating Fact from Fiction Jennifer Pate and Derek Malone

149 SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

119 Tin Foil Hats: Using Science Communication Skills to Tackle Science Conspiracies Sarah E. Morris

PART A: EXAMINING PRODUCTION TECHNIQUES AND NORMS 150 Why Can’t Intellectual Freedom and Copyright Get Along? Alyssa Wright and Kelly Diamond

121 A Heaping Scoop of Literacy, with a Side of Gamification Kara Conley, Kayla Del Biondo, Kim Hoffman, Nicole Potter, and Jillian Scarson

153 Open Source and Royalty-Free: Beyond the Frontier in Scholarly Research Sue Wozniak, Katherine Kelley, and Greg Bem

123 The Whole Facts Diet: No Artificial Additives Sally Stieglitz

156 Communicating Research Three Ways: Critically Reflecting on Access and Privilege Silvia Vong

125 How Do They Know That? An Evaluation Exercise for News Emilia Marcyk

158 7-Layer Citation Salad—The Joy of Identifying Distinct Ingredients and Assembling a Glorious Delight: Students as Information and Citation Creators Barbara E. Weeg and Leila June Rod-Welch

128 Cooking up Critical Thinking in the Flipped Kitchen Kristen A. Cooke 130 How Sweet It Is: Recognizing Misinformation and Disinformation Heather Brodie Perry

160 A Pinch of Peer Review Megan L. Anderson and Linda L. Crosby

133 Discovering the “I” in Bias Laura Luiz

162 Mind Shapers: Participating in The Peer-Review Process Amy Dye-Reeves

135 Food for Thought: Slow Information Principles and Practices Colette Hayes

165 Replicating Research on a Small Scale Using a Scholarly Journal Article as the Main Ingredient Barbara Eshbach

137 Popping the Filter Bubble on Internet News and Recognizing Bias Lauren McMillan and Vivian Bynoe 139 Cooking with GMOs: Confirmation Bias and Misinformation in Scientific Controversies Dianna E. Sachs

168 Evaluating and Selecting Library Resources as Ingredients in Individual Professional Development: Student-Driven Acquisitions Michelle Costello and Dennis Showers

142 Got Misinformation? Critically Evaluating Sources for Credibility, Accuracy, and Usefulness Neyda V. Gilman and Julia Glauberman

170 Creating and Using Infographics: Introduction to Best Practices Olga Hart

145 Fighting Infobesity: Creating A Healthy News Diet Aisha Conner-Gaten, Jennifer Masunaga, and Elisa Slater Acosta

PART B: EXPLORING INFORMATION ECOSYSTEMS AND DISTRIBUTION METHODS

147 Mindfulness and Information Consumption Sarah E. Morris

172 Cookies or Cake? It Depends on the Process! Madeline Donnelly 174 Excavating the Conversation on a Research Topic Martinique Hallerduff

v

Table of Contents 177 Mixing Up an “Authority Matters” Batter Jen Hasse

207 Repost This, Not That! Evaluating News Beyond the Headline Bridget Doloresco, Melissa Langridge, and Lirim Hajrullahu

180 Plan Your Shopping: Using the 5 Ws to Map the Business Information Economy Heather Grevatt

209 How Social Media Shapes “News”: Thinking Critically about Sources Michalle Gould 211 Make Your Own Mix: Using Social Media Stories to Explore Primary Sources Marcela Isuster

182 Audience a la Carte: Understanding Information Production through Storytelling Sam Becker

213 Scholarly Journal Evaluation Activity: A Health Sciences Spin-Off Carol Hutte

184 Restaurant Confidential: Authority and Information Creation in a Crowd-Sourced World Jenny Mills

216 Media Manipulation Sarah E. Morris

186 Sous Vide or Deep-fry? Teaching Students to Cook Research for Different Tastes Silvia Vong 188 Using Popular Media to Craft Research Questions William Cuthbertson, Dawn Frank, and Irene Korber 190 Crafting Credible Cocktails: Blending Context, Genre, and a Hint of Pop Culture for the Perfect Libation Sarah Naomi Campbell, Jenny Castel, and Kelly Faulkner 192 Stop the Presses! Sarah E. Morris

PART C: NAVIGATING INFORMATION ONLINE 194 Writing Buffet Joseph Matson and Anne Shelley 196 Poached Barrier Reef: Evaluating Articles on the Web Judy Opdahl and Denise Kane 198 Using Wikipedia to Critically Evaluate Information Kathleen Heidecker and Andrea Metz 201 Asking Questions Quesadillas Joyce Garczynski 203 Mixing Up a Balanced Research Plan: One Part Google to Two Parts Deep Web Robin D. Lang 205 Hot Twitter Tips: Recipe for Social Media Success Haley L. Lott vi

Introduction

Introduction Navigating increasingly complex media and information ecosystems can be overwhelming. Whether it’s dealing with a barrage of breaking news alerts, trying to keep up with your friends’ social media posts, trying to keep up with your own social media posts, falling down a Wikipedia rabbit hole, struggling to find an answer to a medical question, wondering why your search terms don’t seem to be working, or attempting to fact check something that seems suspicious, the online information environments we inhabit are not always easy to handle. Thanks to the internet, we have an almost dizzying array of information and content at our disposal. And yet, thanks to the internet again, we are living in an era where the challenges of dealing with all this information are extreme. From the challenges of misinformation and disinformation to privacy concerns, from issues of access and equity to the emotional effects of social media, our society at large, and particularly youth, are grappling with these incredibly thorny and complicated issues. If the youth librarians we work with are often considered “digital natives,” then they are natives of a complicated and complex land with a difficult terrain and a confusing geography. Librarians in higher education environments often encounter students in transition. And transitioning into a higher education environment can be incredibly challenging for students, and for the educators and librarians who support those students. Digital native ideas and myths aside, many of the students that librarians encounter are being asked to grapple with—and produce—new types of information and to utilize and navigate information environments that might be unfamiliar or even alien. This is in addition to the complex online environments they are already dealing with on a daily basis. One crucial area that can play a major role in ensuring that students succeed in college and beyond is critical thinking. Critical thinking skills can empower students to become savvy consumers, producers, and distributors of information and can equip students to better navigate and participate in complex twenty-first-century information

ecosystems. This Cookbook was conceived out a desire to empower librarians and to explore ways to help students develop the crucial critical-thinking and information and media literacy skills they need to tackle the numerous challenges in our modern media and information ecosystems. As part of the ACRL Cookbook series, this book provides resources, ideas, and inspiration around a given topic—in this case, the complex and sprawling topic of sources. But I also found the notion of a Cookbook metaphor particularly appealing in this case, since cookbooks, in general, are sources that (ideally) focus on being clear, being welcoming, and providing a wide range of ideas to try. And cookbooks encourage production and the consumption of both information and food. In thinking about ways to support students in working with different types of sources (to put it mildly) and in developing their critical-thinking skills, I’ve been keeping the notion of cookbooks in mind, which ultimately are resources that can provide an entry point to a broader world of experimentation and discovery and a way to grow in confidence, from kitchen novice to master chef (or a savvy critical thinker and information-literate individual, as the case may be). Like the best cookbooks, this book boasts a rich array of ideas to try. From new twists on old classics to highly original approaches, the lessons and ideas in this book will hopefully inspire and energize librarians and other educators. This book provides librarians and educators with a series of adaptable and innovative approaches to teaching critical-thinking skills, with an emphasis on critical thinking about sources. Ensuring that students can not only identify different types of sources but can also delve more deeply into how and why different types of sources are produced can be a way to empower students with the skills they need to find, evaluate, and use information for a variety of purposes, in college and beyond. The lessons and activities in this Cookbook are divided into two broad sections. The first, Consuming Information, features chapters vii

Introduction on evaluating information, working with popular sources, recognizing scholarly sources, and dealing with misinformation. From deeper and more complex considerations of what it means to evaluate a source to a rich array of approaches to the classic CRAAP test (including reimagining, revisions, and remixes) to a recognition of the new types of sources students are asked to work with, both in and out of the classroom, the chapters here look at information consumption as anything but a passive or simple activity.

Libraries are spaces for knowledge production and creation as well as consumption, and all of us, in our daily online lives, often inhabit the role of information producer. From provocative considerations of issues like copyright and open access to deep dives into pop culture and social media to explorations of visual literacy skills, the chapters here explore many of the challenges inherent in our twenty-first-century media ecosystems and take a broad look at the types of sources our students are expected to use and produce.

The second section, Producing and Distributing Information, features chapters on synthesizing sources, exploring how different sources are produced, examining how technology mediates our experiences with information, understanding the economics of information ecosystems, and using different tools to create and share information.

This Cookbook will hopefully serve as a resource for academic and school librarians and other educators looking for ways to help their students build vital critical-thinking skills and gain a richer understanding of different types of sources and information ecosystems. Sarah E. Morris

viii

Section I. Consuming Information

1

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Hammons and Brooks

Identifying the Components of a Research Article Jane Hammons, The Ohio State University, [email protected]; Andrea Brooks, Northern Kentucky University, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

As students advance in their disciplines, it is important that they are able to critically read research articles. They must learn to analyze lengthy and complex articles often containing unfamiliar jargon and identify relevant information about the author’s intention, methodology, and findings. To do this effectively, students need to identify the different components of a typical research article and understand the purpose of each section. The goal of this activity is to move beyond distinguishing between scholarly and popular sources and instead encourage students to consider the format and structure of research articles so that they can effectively navigate disciplinary research. The activity may also help students better understand the role of a specific article as part of a broader conversation and see how they can use an article to identify directions for their own research.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

Students will be able to identify common components of a research article relevant to their field of study. Students will be able to describe the purpose, methodology, major findings, and directions for future research found within a research article in their field.

COOKING TIME

20–30 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

Authors have tested this recipe with groups of 20–30 students, but it could be appropriate for smaller or larger groups.

•

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This recipe best connects with the Scholarship as Conversation and Research as Inquiry frames from the ACRL Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. When engaging with this activity, students are thinking broadly about the purpose of the research, how it fits into a larger conversation on the topic, and how the research might spark new ideas.

COOKING METHOD

• •

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • •

Two sets of notecards per group Whiteboard and marker Copies of two research articles

PREPARATION

• •

Create notecards for each group. Each group will need to have two different sets of cards. For example, if you are expecting 5 groups, you will need 10 sets of cards. Article Section cards: The first group of cards should have the name of one of the common sections of a typical 2

research article in that discipline (such as “Abstract,” “Literature Review,” “Methods,” “Results,” “Discussion,” “Limitations,” “References”). Definition cards: The second group of cards should have definitions of each of the different sections included on the first cards. (Example: “In this section, the authors provide a description of how the research was conducted and might include descriptions of surveys, interview questions, or focus groups.”)

•

Direct students to work together in groups to try to match each Article Section card to the appropriate Definition card. Next, ask students to organize the matched cards in the order they think the sections most commonly appear in a typical article. After groups have matched and organized their cards, the librarian should question students about the order of the cards and the purpose of each section. The librarian should write each section of the article in the appropriate order on the whiteboard as students provide the answers, correcting any misconceptions that students might have about the order or purpose of the sections. The librarian can also ask questions about

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Hammons and Brooks

•

the value of each section for students as they read an article. Recommended questions: ◊ What usually comes first in a research article? What usually comes at the end? ◊ What is the purpose of having a literature review? ◊ What type of information will you find in the “Methods” section? ◊ Why have both a “Results” and a “Discussion” section? What is the difference? ◊ If you wanted to understand the purpose or significance of the research, which sections would be most helpful? ◊ If you need ideas for your own research, which section would be most helpful? ◊ Should you read articles in this exact order? Finally, the librarian should show students two examples of research articles. One should be an article that closely follows the format in the activity. The second could be an article that deviates in some way (for example, not including some of the section headings). This will show students that there can be differences in the format of research articles depending on the discipline and the journal.

•

•

•

do this activity more than once, consider laminating the cards. When collecting the notecards, be sure to keep them carefully organized so that you have two different sets for each group, rather than combining all of the cards into one pile. This will save time having to organize the cards for the next use. This activity is most appropriate for upper-level undergraduate students who are learning how to evaluate research articles in their discipline. Ideally, students should already be aware of the basic characteristics of scholarly articles. This activity may not be as appropriate for students in fields such as English or history, in which research articles do not typically contain distinct sections.

CHEF’S NOTES

•

•

This activity could be very helpful to students who need to identify a research topic. The librarian could end the activity by having students locate and analyze a research article on their own topic and use that article to identify two possible topics for their own research. This activity could be completed in an online format by using a quiz tool that allows for matching and ordering responses.

ALLERGY WARNING

•

The time it takes to prepare the notecards can be significant. If you plan to

3

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Mahoney

Content, Form, and Function:

Evaluating the Measured Filling of a Scholarly Article Jessica Mahoney, Assistant Director and Information Literacy Librarian, Franklin College, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

This recipe introduces students to the components (such as the purpose and the logical order) of a scholarly article, particularly an empirical study in the field of psychology. Main ingredients may be adjusted to fit other disciplines.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

Students will identify the components/ order of an original research article. Students will evaluate the content, form, and function of a scholarly article.

•

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • • • •

NUMBER SERVED

This lesson was originally designed for a class of 25 but can easily accommodate any grouping of 10–30.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

ACRL Frames Information Creation as a Process

•

Six 3×5 index cards (pre-labeled) per student* Whiteboard Student/librarian access to computers Scholarly, empirical article Content, Form, and Function handout (see online at https://bit.ly/2tpyCQZ)

PREPARATION

•

COOKING TIME

Cooking time is approximately 50–75 minutes, serving two class meetings of secondsemester psychology freshmen. Preferably, most student appetites will best consume 50 minutes of instruction (steps 1–7) followed by a second session of 20 minutes for assessment and follow-up (step 8).

Scholarship as Conversation

•

Prior to the start of class, the librarian will need to prepare six, 3×5 index cards per student. Each card will need to contain one of the following components: Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, and References. Paper clip each set of six index cards or place each set in an envelope so that each student will get six cards during class.

COOKING METHODS

• • • •

Think-pair-share Lecture Group assignment Reflection

THE INSTRUCTION SESSION

1. Think (2–3 minutes)

4

a. Give each student a set of six 3×5, pre-labeled index cards. Each student should have one of each card: Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, and References. b. Explain to each student that the index cards contain the main components of a scholarly, empirical article. Instruct each student to work individually placing the index cards in the order they would expect to find each section of an empirical article. 2. Pair (5–6 minutes) a. Keeping their cards in order, ask students to pair up with another student (trios if odd number), share the order of their cards, discuss why they chose the order they did, and make any changes. 3. Share (5 minutes) a. At the direction of the librarian, students will share the order of their cards with the class as a student volunteer records them on the whiteboard. The librarian should not reveal the correct order but simply record class consensus. 4. Lecture (10 minutes) a. Inform students that the correct order will be verified shortly after more information is presented about empirical research studies.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Mahoney b. Take some time to highlight the main content and purpose of each section of an empirical research study. Share this information in the same order as listed on the whiteboard in step 3. c. Consider sharing the following: „ Abstract – the purpose of the study, provides an overview of sample, methods, and results „ Introduction – often contains a literature review, identifies gaps in the literature, identifies the purpose of the study, poses a hypothesis/research question „ Methods – lists procedures, participants, instruments, demonstrates the “how” of the study making it easier for replication „ Results – provides data, statistics, tables, graphs, figures „ Discussion – shares interpretation of results, implications for future research, limitations of the present study, addresses areas of research question that could not be answered „ References – provides research cited in the study, useful for verifying information and following the scholarly conversation 5. Sharing continued (2 minutes) a. Revisit the whiteboard list and verify the correct order. b. Ask for questions/comments from students. 6. Group assignment (15 minutes) a. Provide students with a permalink to a scholarly, empirical article. For variety, assign each group a different article.

b. Pass out copies of the Content, Form, and Function worksheet, https://bit. ly/2tpyCQZ. c. Ask students to complete the evaluation of their article with their groups. d. Collect the worksheets before the students leave. 7. Reflection (5 minutes) a. Gather students’ thoughts: Why does this information matter? How does the information learned today shape how they evaluate information? 8. Follow-up (20 minutes) a. During the second session, lead a discussion about the assessment/ evaluation of the scholarly, empirical article.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

Traditionally, students will ponder the order of Results and Discussion; some will even confuse the order of Abstract and Introduction. Students may also struggle to articulate the Function – Why section on the Content, Form, and Function group assignment. Also, students might be discouraged by the lack of librarian affirmation during the initial sharing segment (step 3). Encouraging students to share all ideas rather than focusing on correct responses will lead to better discussion during the assignment follow-up that takes place during the second class meeting.

CHEF’S NOTE

Students generally enjoy being engaged and like the use of the index cards because of the visual flexibility it allows them as they decide the correct order. Traditionally, I have found, 5

too, that students interact and discuss more effectively after having a chance to think on their own and analyze with a partner or trio. Generally, this recipe is the second of three with the same group of students. Usually, a lesson about the function of a literature review serves as the appetizer, and a lesson about strategically searching for empirical studies from a given literature review is the dessert; this recipe serves as the main course. In place of the six 3×5 index cards, the librarian can prepare a half-sheet of paper with the six components: Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, and References randomly placed. If computers are not available, copies of an empirical article can be provided, one per group. The entire lesson can be completed in 75 minutes consecutively if time permits and a second class meeting is not scheduled.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Campbell

Deconstructed Journal Articles: An Active Learning Recipe for Reflection Lisa Campbell, University of Florida, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

Undergraduate students are often tasked with finding and using academic journal articles, but the instructional focus is often on how to find and identify scholarly sources, rather than on the engagement with the research process and evaluation of scholarship. This activity was designed to encourage students to look at journal articles closely and critically. The activity mixes active learning, with students doing meaningful activities and thinking about what they are doing, and cooperative learning, with students working in groups to accomplish a goal. It has been successfully delivered in a one-credit library research course but can be implemented in a single one-shot as well.

NUMBERS SERVED

This activity is designed for 18 students, but it can be modified for various class sizes (i.e., using more or fewer articles, assigning pairs to parts, or assigning multiple parts to individuals).

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This activity addresses the following ACRL Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education frames: Information Creation as a Process Scholarship as a Conversation Authority is Constructed and Contextual

• • •

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

•

LEARNING OUTCOMES

After this activity, students will be able to identify and sort the parts of an academic journal article; examine and discuss a research study; synthesize a scholarly conversation; and evaluate and reflect on the research process.

• • • •

COOKING TIME

50 minutes

• • •

Three printed academic journal articles from the same social science/science journal (e.g., three articles about college students from College Student Journal but on various topics) Scissors Music (e.g., “Come Together” by the Beatles) (optional) Sticky easel pad (optional)

COOKING TECHNIQUE

• •

Active learning Cooperative learning (Jigsaw strategy)

6

PREPARATION

1. Find three suitable academic journal articles for the activity, each with the seven parts mentioned below. 2. Cut each article into seven parts: a. Title/author(s) b. Abstract c. Introduction/literature review d. Method e. Results f. Discussion/conclusion g. References 3. Mark out any identifying headings. 4. Remove abstracts and mix remaining parts.

COOKING METHOD

1. Inform students that they will each receive a single part from one of three academic journal articles. They will first identify and evaluate the part they received and then locate the other parts of their article among their classmates. 2. Provide each student with one part. 3. Ask students to read, identify, and think critically about their part. After reading, ask them to write down their response to the following questions: What do you now know? What questions do you have? What information might you want to have had answered prior to reading your part? What

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Campbell

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

would you anticipate learning in the next part? Ask the students to get up and “find” the other parts of their article, forming into three groups. Play a song to encourage students to move around the classroom. After groups emerge, ask groups to assign a recorder to take notes (on sticky easel pad paper or regular notepaper) and a presenter to share the group’s ideas to the rest of class. Ask the students, in sequential order, to share within their group their reflections: What do they know and what questions do they have about their part of the article? Encourage students to answer any questions that are raised. The recorder should keep track of questions that remain unanswered. Ask presenters to share with the class a brief summary of their articles and the unanswered questions that the article raised.

of concept, the reflective aspects were added to further engage students with critical thinking about sources. The reflective questioning can lead to interesting conversations between groups and within the class on topics such as authority, research methods, and scholarship.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

Some students may be hesitant at first to find their groups, but usually the other group members will bring them into the fold.

CHEF’S NOTE

Typically, this activity would follow an instructor’s introduction of peer-reviewed academic journal articles, including an overview of the purpose, content, and process of publication. This iterative activity was initially designed to engage students with thinking and learning about academic journal articles. After proof 7

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Thiede

Like Oil and Vinegar:

Exploring Different but Complementary Scholarly and Popular Resources Malina Thiede, SUNY Plattsburgh NUTRITION INFORMATION

Just like vinegar and oil, popular and scholarly resources don’t mix naturally, but they can come together to garnish a delightful paper or be used separately to marinate ideas or add flavor to an essay. This guided practice lesson invites students to analyze a popular and a scholarly resource and to identify the characteristics of each type of resource. Time permitting, the instructor can also include a resource from a trade journal.

LEARNING OUTCOME

Students will differentiate between types of resources based on their characteristics in order to select an appropriate type of resource for a particular information need.

COOKING TIME

50–60 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

Up to 30 students

DIETARY GUIDELINES

Students are accustomed to searching the open web for information and often do not know the difference between different types of resources. This lesson hangs primarily on the Information Creation as a Process ACRL

frame but also overlaps some with Authority Is Constructed and Contextual and Scholarship as Conversation when addressing topics such as peer review.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• •

Copy of worksheet with questions and instructions (paper or electronic) Access to a computer workstation with internet access for every 2–3 students

PREPARATION

Students should have knowledge of the following terms and concepts, or the instructor should be prepared to explain them: periodical, publication, database, credentials, affiliation, in-text citation, peer review, bibliography/reference list. Familiarity with the library website is helpful, although step-by-step instructions can be included. Students should also understand how to read a citation for a journal article, or the instructor should prepare to explain a citation’s components during the lesson. The instructor should select two articles on the same theme or topic, one from a popular source and one from a scholarly source. Citations for the sources should be listed at or near the top of the worksheet that is distributed to students. For the scholarly source, 8

a journal with a title that contains words or phrases such as “quarterly,” “journal of,” or the name of the discipline is a good choice.

COOKING METHOD

1. Lead a brief discussion about different types of information needs. Solicit different types of information needs from students and jot down different scenarios on the board. 2. Distribute worksheets to students. 3. Review the two citations at the top of the worksheet with students. Ask them to identify the author(s), title of the article, and title of the journal. Have students write down the title of the journal on the worksheet. 4. For most of the rest of the lesson, students in their pairs/groups work independently while the instructor circulates through the classroom answering questions and providing support. 5. Students locate each article in the library database. Click-by-click instructions may be provided on the worksheet if the instructor deems them necessary. 6. Students skim the full text of the article and note whether each article contains in-text citations and a bibliography/ reference list. They should also note any credentials or affiliations listed for the

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Thiede authors of each article if they are listed. 7. Students then locate the information page of each journal using the appropriate search tool on the library website and note the following information about each journal: frequency of publication, publisher, and whether or not the publication is peer reviewed. 8. After examining information about the articles and journals in the library databases, students then search for the titles of the journals on the open web. They should examine the homepage of the journal website and answer the following questions about each site: Are there many images? What kind of images? Are there ads? What kind of ads? How is the content organized? How do you feel looking at each site? Who do you think is the audience for each of these publications? 9. The last question on the worksheet should ask the students which of the publications is scholarly and which one is popular. 10. After the students have completed the worksheet, the instructor can start the review by asking what they think the answer is to the final question before going back to the beginning to review all of the answers. The instructor can write a chart on the board with scholarly sources on one side and popular on the other. As the students share their answers to the worksheet, compile a list of characteristics for each type of resource. 11. At the end of the lesson, review the list of information needs that was discussed

at the beginning and ask the class to determine what kind of source they think would best suit each information need.

CHEF’S NOTES

Extra time may need to be spent discussing concepts like peer review and comparing it to the fact-checking process most popular press sources undergo. It is also crucial to stress that scholarly does not mean better in every single case. There are many high-quality popular sources that are full of accurate information, even if they do not undergo peer review.

9

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Pinkley and Carroll

Evaluating Sources on the Scholarly Spectrum Janet Pinkley, Head of Access Services, California State University Channel Islands; Linda Carroll, Public Services Librarian, California State University Channel Islands NUTRITIONAL INFORMATION

Part of our jobs as instruction librarians is to not only demonstrate to students how to effectively and efficiently conduct searches for information but also to demonstrate how to evaluate a source for scholarly merit. Students also need to understand how to determine if a source is appropriate to use for their assignment, which can vary based on the research topic. This activity explores ways to introduce students to different types of sources and get them to start thinking about the utility of each of these sources.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• • •

Students will begin to recognize different information types and the range of utility for each. Students will apply different criteria to evaluate a library and internet source. Students will demonstrate critical-thinking skills in order to evaluate the sources and eventually be able to determine what makes a source scholarly versus non-scholarly.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

The purpose of this exercise is not to label less scholarly sources as unsuitable for use in research. Rather, we intend to help the students become more information literate by introducing the ideas behind two of the ACRL Frames: Authority is Constructed and Contextual and Information Has Value. Throughout this activity, emphasis will be placed on the creation and intent of different source types as well as benefits of using all different types of resources and/or media, including some deemed “not scholarly.” We want to highlight the value of each source type from blog entries all the way to peer-reviewed publications. This activity will not only prove beneficial to the student during the academic research process but any time they encounter a new piece of information. They will have a deeper understanding of what it means to be information and media literate.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

•

COOKING TIME

30–45 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

Typical undergraduate class with up to 40 students

• • •

Variety of resources, i.e., newspaper article, peer-reviewed article, book published by university press, trade journal article, printed blog post, Wikipedia entry, etc. Classroom space with group seating and access to a whiteboard Supportive and engaged faculty Willing students 10

•

Librarian(s) ready and able to lead students in a meaningful discussion about the importance and usefulness of evaluating a variety of sources

COOKING METHOD

1. Have students and instructor meet you in a library classroom or do an in-class visit during one of their weekly class sessions. 2. The students will work in groups and each of the groups will be given a different resource type. 3. Draw a long line on the whiteboard with “not scholarly” written on one end and “scholarly” written on the other. 4. Students will then be directed to review and discuss their resource and determine where it falls on the “scholarly spectrum” and what utility it might have in research.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Pinkley and Carroll 5. After the groups have discussed, a representative from each group will take a turn coming to the board, introducing their source and determining where it falls on the spectrum that has been written on the whiteboard. The librarian and the professor will facilitate this discussion, engaging other members from the student’s group regarding specific evaluative criteria, such as who authored the piece they reviewed or who published the information.

ALLERGY WARNING

•

•

Be prepared to discuss the utility of each of these resource types, as students will need some guidance with this. For example, what type of research might benefit from citing newspaper articles? This will help reinforce the fact that different types of sources have different utility depending on the research. Students often equate non-scholarly with being not usable for research. Although this may be true for some research it is not true across the board. If considering eliminating the aspect of utility in this recipe, proceed with caution as it may limit the learning outcomes for students.

CHEF’S NOTE

•

6. After each resource type is added to the spectrum, the librarian and professor can review some of the different uses for each information type. 7. At the end of the activity, ask students to now help you identify the criteria used in evaluating each of these sources to reemphasize techniques they should be using in their research. 8. List each of the criteria the students mention on the board, further explaining why it is important to evaluate things such as validity, currency, authority, etc.

Initially, physical examples in their originally published form were used for the newspaper article, peer-reviewed article, magazine article, and trade publication. The thought was that this would help students differentiate between the sources viewing and learning about them in their physical form. However, it was quickly discovered that students were not making the connection that these are the same types of resources they might come across in the databases. As a result, the activity was modified to utilize printed versions of these same resource types from the database to reinforce that these different material types will often be encountered when searching in a database. 11

• •

Students will be most engaged in this recipe if their professor is invested and participating as well. Do not be afraid to gather feedback from the professor and be willing to adapt the recipe for future semesters. Trial and error will perfect this recipe for your students!

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Folds

Popular Magazines versus Scholarly/Academic Journals Dusty Folds, Librarian, Jefferson State Community College, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

Throughout their education, students often hear that they should use scholarly or academic journals when conducting research. Even during library instructions, they learn how to limit their searches to academic/ scholarly articles in various databases. But they might not know exactly why one source is preferable over another. This activity provides students with a hands-on experience to explore different types of publications and then apply that knowledge to electronic material.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

At the end of the assignment, students will be able to articulate the differences between popular magazines and scholarly journals; identify an author’s credentials; and determine the reason for using certain types of resources for research.

• • •

COOKING TIME

• •

Prep time: Allow fifteen minutes to gather necessary material—magazines, journals, and worksheet. Activity time: 30 to 45 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

8 to 30 divided evenly into groups; the groups should be no larger than six people each

DIETARY GUIDELINES

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

Dispositions: Realize that information sources vary greatly in content and format and have varying relevance and value, depending on the needs and nature of the search.

1. Divide the class into evenly numbered groups.

Frame: Searching as Strategic Exploration Knowledge practice: Utilize convergent (e.g., selecting the best source) thinking when searching.

• • •

Classroom of students (divided) Equal parts print popular magazines and print academic journals Worksheet, either in print or electronic format

PREPARATION

Figure 1. Popular Magazines versus Scholarly/Academic Journals Look at the two publications you have received. Answer the following questions: 1. Which of the two publications is the popular magazine? 2. Which is the academic or scholarly journal? 3. How do you know this? Provide three ways that the magazine and journal are different: a. b. c. Now, locate an article in each publication. Complete the table below: Popular Magazine Scholarly/Academic Journal Title of the article Author(s) of the article What are the author’s credentials? (What school did they attend? What institution do they work for now? What is the author’s area of research specialty?) Do you notice anything else about the differences between the two articles? Would you use a popular magazine for research? Why or why not? 12

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Folds 2. Provide each group with the following items: a. Print popular magazine (e.g., People, Essence) b. Print academic journal (e.g., American Journal of Nursing, PMLA) c. Evaluation worksheet or link to an electronic version (see figure 1)

COOKING METHOD

1. Once students have completed the first three questions on the worksheet, discuss the findings with them. a. The first two questions could also be answered by a simple demonstration: ask the students to hold up the popular magazine and then ask them to hold up the academic journal. b. Make sure to spend time unpacking the third question. 2. The next part of the analysis will require the students to locate an article in each publication and answer questions about each. Discuss the findings as a class. 3. Finally, pose the following question to the class as a whole: Would you use a popular magazine for research? (An alternative form: Would you use the popular magazine or the academic journal for research?) Discuss. 4. Once this assignment is complete, you can lead the students on an exploration of electronic resources available from the library. They should keep these worksheets handy and refer to them as you explore databases and the use of academic/scholarly limiters in the search.

ALLERGY WARNING

Ensure that all groups speak during the session. To do so, the librarian should take time to walk around the room and comment to groups so they feel more comfortable speaking up in the public discussion. Make sure to facilitate discussion so that certain students or groups do not dominate the discussion. When you instruct students to locate an article in each publication, you should place certain parameters on the types of articles they can use. Book reviews in academic publications can be too confusing for this assignment. Additionally, editor’s notes and certain other types of special sections in either publication can create some confusion. Attempt to direct students toward actual articles.

CHEF’S NOTES

As you and the students make your way through the worksheet, several points will become apparent. In terms of the first three questions, you will find that students know almost immediately which is the popular magazine and which is the academic journal, thus the final question is important: How do you know this? Here students will have to identify what makes each different from the other. Sometimes the students might get hung up on specifics by flipping through the publications but encourage them to consider how they knew the difference upon first glance. Students should note how each publication looks different and why. Who is the audience for each publication? Where would you likely find each publication? Notice what 13

“popular” means in “popular magazine” and how that differs from “academic” in “academic journal.” As they move beyond the cover, they will notice other differences inside the publications. Here you can discuss the use of advertisements and the type of paper used for each publication. This latter issue will lead to a discussion of cost and sustainability for each publication. As you move into the second part of the assignment, make sure the students realize the nature of each article and how the title engages different audiences in different ways. You should also highlight why credentials are important for an author and where these credentials appear for each publication. Students will probably discover other differences on their own, but you can lead them to discover the importance of references for an article and the use of images and charts as well as section headings and abstracts. In posing the final question, we come to the biggest question of this assignment. Many students have probably been told that they should use “academic sources” or “scholarly sources” for research, but now we want students to consider why popular sources can be useful in research. Explore the use of popular magazine stories as anecdotal evidence or as an introductory element for an essay or speech. You can also explore how popular magazines might be of interest for specific topics (e.g., How would you use Entertainment Weekly to discuss media depictions of race and gender?).

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Folds

As you move into an exploration of your library’s electronic resources, students should now be equipped to answer the following question: Do they need to use the limiter for academic/scholarly sources? What does the limiter actually mean? How will it narrow the search? Overall, though, students should now understand the difference between popular magazines and academic journals, why they have been encouraged to use academic/scholarly sources, and how popular sources can be helpful in research.

14

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Martin and Miller

Popular and Scholarly Source Stew Samantha Martin, Washington & Jefferson College, [email protected]; Beth Miller, Washington & Jefferson College, bmiller@ washjeff.edu NUTRITION INFORMATION

Source evaluation is rarely black or white, although students often approach it that way. In this activity, students will identify and evaluate a variety of physical and electronic sources. The focus of this session is to help students realize that source evaluation requires consideration of many criteria that inform whether a source will meet the student’s information need. Ideally, sources used in this activity will pertain to the general topic of the class or the specific assignment so the activity is more engaging.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• • •

Students will be able to differentiate between popular, scholarly, questionable sources. Students will be able to evaluate the quality of sources using agreed-upon criteria. Students will be able to defend their evaluations.

COOKING TIME

• • •

Prep time: 45 minutes Cook time: 90 minutes Total time: 135 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

About 20 students; easily doubled with a proportional increase in cooking time

DIETARY GUIDELINES

Students are introduced to concepts included in the Authority is Constructed and Contextual and the Information Creation as a Process frames from the ACRL Information Literacy Framework for Higher Education. The primary focus is on Authority is Constructed and Contextual with many aspects of the activity supporting the concepts within this frame.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

•

An assortment of physical sources, enough for everyone in the class to work in pairs ◊ Tweets ◊ Magazine articles ◊ Newspaper articles (for a spicier stew consider using something from the Op-Ed page)

• • • • • • •

◊ Peer-reviewed journal articles ◊ Wikipedia page ◊ Website, credible or bogus ◊ Books Citations for each source, created using the style required for the class. Source Evaluation Worksheet Video on the information creation process (ex.: “The Information Cycle,” https://vimeo.com/171415865, created by University of Central Florida Libraries) Video explaining peer-review (ex.: “What is a Journal and a Peer-Reviewed Article?” https://youtu.be/1Fc7UixWEzc, created by Ronald Williams Library) Instruction station Presentation software Enough computers so students can comfortably work together in pairs

Figure 1. Source Evaluation Worksheet 1. Title of Publication: 2. Type of Publication (ex.: book, journal, magazine, newspaper, etc.): 3. How would you classify this source? (Select one.) N Scholarly/Peer-Reviewed N Popular/Credible N Consider carefully before using 4. Which criteria helped you make this decision? (List a few examples of how you decided your answer to Question 3.) 5. Were you able to find all the information you needed to evaluate your source? (Source type, author and currency information, citation, etc.) 15

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION PREPARATION

1. Find out the theme of the class or the assignment topic and the required citation style. 2. Locate a variety of relevant sources (1 per pair). 3. Print physical copies of electronic sources. a. For lengthy items, you only need to print one page. Students are only using it to find their partner. 4. Create citations for each source. 5. Print out citations. 6. Print enough copies of the Source Evaluation Worksheet for each group.

COOKING METHOD

1. As students enter, pass out items and citations, one per student. 2. Students find their match (citation to item) and sit with their partner for the duration of the class. 3. Play video on “The Information Cycle.” ◊ Mini-discussion covering how students should consider the information creation cycle and how it relates to their information need. Ex.: What is the “best” source available for current events versus historical topics? 4. Play the video on the peer-review process. ◊ Mini-discussion reinforcing the value of peer-reviewed resources and why students are asked to use them. 5. Brainstorm or discuss a list of criteria for evaluating sources. ◊ For example, audience, purpose, author, publication criteria/source, documentation of facts, format/

6.

7.

8.

9.

Martin and Miller

appearance, and time needed to publish. Hand out Source Evaluation Worksheet and instruct pairs to complete it for their source. ◊ Encourage students to use the computers to seek out additional information that will help them make their evaluation. Each pair presents their source and evaluation to the rest of the class, highlighting what criteria they used to determine whether their source is scholarly, popular, or something they should consider carefully before using. Librarians, faculty, and classmates can debate with the presenters about whether or not they agree with their assessment allowing the presenters to defend their choice or change their mind. Make sure you have enough time to allow for these discussions. To wrap-up, talk about how physical representations of magazines, newspapers, and journal articles look very different; however, the same items represented in a list of search results or on a webpage are not as easy to differentiate. Reinforce that correctly identifying your source type is important when determining if it will meet your information need and heavily influences how you evaluate it.

ALLERGY WARNING

•

Be prepared to assist students with interpreting citations; some may not be familiar with how to read them. Students 16

•

seem to struggle locating their match when the match is between someone with an entire book or periodical and someone with the citation indicating a specific article or chapter from within. Librarian should plan to walk around while pairs complete their Source Evaluation Worksheet to provide guidance as needed and encourage them to seek out more information than what has been given to them.

CHEF’S NOTE

• •

•

•

For tech-savvy chefs, consider using polling software to add interaction during mini-discussions. For shorter class periods or freshman participants, consider having a premade list of criteria for evaluation. For longer interactions or upperclassmen participants, allow student discussion to generate the list. If you have a shorter class period, consider presenting videos and discussion content online prior to class so all in-class time is devoted to the Source Evaluation Worksheet and presentations. Consider having students work in groups of three, adding a screenshot of the search result for the item along with the physical representation and citation. Adding this piece of information sooner might help make the connection between physical resources and their online representations more concrete.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Gold

Yams and Sweet Potatoes, Jams and Jellies: Differentiating Between Popular and Scholarly Sources

Helene Gold, Research, Instruction and Information Literacy Librarian, New College of Florida NUTRITIONAL VALUE

At Tallahassee Community College, we found that most of our traditional first-year students were unfamiliar with periodicals and rarely, if ever, used or read print periodicals for research or leisure. The first-year English class assignments required students to access sources from subscription databases, and it’s important for students to understand what they’re looking for before they began to search. This engaging hands-on activity with print magazines and journals was a great way to introduce periodicals to students prior to teaching them how to search the databases.

COOKING TIME

15–25 minutes

DIETARY GUIDELINES

ACRL Frame: Information Creation as Process

COOKING TECHNIQUE

Hands-on activity, some lecture, discussion

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

10–15 issues of a print scholarly journal and a print magazine appropriate for the subject/ assignment (or enough for each student group of three to have a set)

PREPARATION

This lesson is appropriate for any subject area that requires students to use library databases for their research. It can be used as part of a one-shot instruction session or leading up to a class on searching databases. Share the lesson plan with the instructor so that they may participate in the conversation. On the day of the class, provide 10–15 print journal issues for students to peruse.

COOKING METHOD

Part 1: Lecture/discussion/hands-on activity 1. Display a slide containing a variety of magazine and journal covers. Ask students any of the following questions: a. How many of you have a subscription to a newspaper or magazine? b. Who reads print newspapers and magazine? (And if so, which ones?) c. Do your parents or grandparents have subscriptions? (Maybe ask about National Geographic or Readers Digest.) d. Ask students what the name of the local newspaper is. Ask why local newspapers are important. 2. Explain that even if they and their families do not read magazines, they see them every time they go to the grocery store and doctor’s office. Even those magazines 17

can be useful for research purposes, but it depends on what kind of information is needed. Newspapers, magazines, and scholarly journals are very different and it’s important to determine which one(s) can meet your information needs for the assignment. Part 2: Hands-on activity 1. Break students into groups of 3 or 4. 2. Distribute one magazine and one journal to each group of students. 3. Explain that they have five minutes to review them with their group. They will identify one aspect of the magazine that is different from the journal and one aspect of the journal that is different from the magazine. Differences can include anything they observe: writing style, appearance, reading level, etc. Ask students to jot down their findings and be ready to report to the class after perusing. 4. Draw a large T on the whiteboard and label one side “Magazines” and one side “Journals”. 5. When students are done reviewing the magazines and journals, ask for a volunteer to be the class scribe to write down the responses. I tell students I need a scribe because my handwriting is terrible

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION and I’m too short to reach the top of the board. 6. Go around the room asking groups to report their findings. (Clarify to the scribe what to write in each column if necessary.) Part 3: Discussion 1. Authority: a. Who writes these articles? What are their educational credentials and job titles? 2. Audience/purpose: a. Who are they written for? b. If journals are written by experts for experts, why does your instructor want you to read them? You can ask the instructor to answer. I also explain that in choosing to attend college, students have entered a conversation that might not be had outside of college. As novice scholars, they are now able to participate in the scholarly conversation. The first step is to understand why the conversation is happening and how it is structured. Welcome them to this conversation! Welcome them as novice scholars! 3. Profit/advertising: a. Why do the magazines have ads? b. How do the journals make money? Explain that their tuition allows the college to purchase journals and other research materials. Also explain that journal authors do not get paid and why. 4. Format: a. Why are magazines so colorful with so many fonts and graphics?

Gold

b. Why are journals so “boring”? Why does every article look exactly the same? Use MLA and APA style as examples of structured style rules in academia. 5. Fact check/peer-review: a. Who fact-checks magazines? Why do magazines sometimes have information that is scientifically false (such as erroneous nutrition or health claims)? b. What is peer-review? Who are the author’s peers? Why is this process important? 6. Citation: a. Why don’t magazines include citations? b. Why are there so many citations at the end of a journal article? c. How can those citations be useful for your own research?

ALLERGY WARNINGS

• •

I designed this lesson for first-year community college students who have had no/little experience with print periodicals. Modify questions for students who have had more experience with periodicals. For students who are more familiar with periodicals, you can include discussions on ◊ predatory journal publishing ◊ open access journals ◊ federal research funding and public availability ◊ ever-increasing costs of traditional scholarly journals ◊ spoof research papers and the Sokal Affair 18

◊ publish or perish ◊ journal impact factors

CHEF’S NOTE

There’s a lot of opportunity for humor with this exercise, such as making fun of advertisements in the magazines or that in lieu of being paid to publish, professors have to settle for wine and cheese parties (if they’re lucky!). I’ve had very engaging conversations about why people are skeptical of the scholarly publication process or science in general (since it is very exclusive to academia). Also, ask the instructor how long it took for their book/research to finally appear in print or explain the research/publication process in their subject area.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Dye-Reeves

Who Did It Better?

The True Test of Popular vs. Scholarly Sources Amy Dye-Reeves, Associate Education Librarian, Texas Tech University NUTRITION INFORMATION

Students are familiar with popular magazines such as People, US Weekly, and Seventeen. A recognizable question in popular magazines includes: “Who Wore It Best?” and in that vein, this recipe compares and contrasts different sources. This recipe allows for students to completely immerse themselves in hands-on experiences.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

Clearly define the terms popular and scholarly sources. Compare and contrast popular and scholarly sources using chart paper.

COOKING TIME

• • • •

Lecture – 10 minutes Main activity – 30 minutes Post activity – 10 minutes Total – 50 minutes

ACRL Frames addressed include: Authority is Constructed and Contextual Information Creation as Process Scholarship as Conversation

• • •

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • • • • • •

PREPARATION

•

NUMBER SERVED

Approximately 30 students

DIETARY GUIDELINES

The general purpose of the recipe is to enhance student understanding of popular and scholarly sources.

Flip chart paper (30” × 25”) Small sticky notes (3” × 3”) Markers (one color for each group) Print copies of any popular magazine (People, US Weekly, etc.) and academic journals (Journal of Psychology, etc.) highlighting each needed section (such as advertising, etc.). See Cooking Methods. Student observation chart Chart paper questions A large space for students to move around from station to station

•

Place 10 flip chart sheets around the room. Each chart will contain a different question relating to popular and scholarly sources. The flip chart can be displayed on the wall or tables accompanied by a variety of different colored markers. Draw a line down the middle of the flip chart. One side will be dedicated to popular sources and the other one being scholarly sources. 19

Figure 1. Chart Paper Questions Topic

Question

Advertisement

Do the ads match the source? How does each source differ?

Audience

Who is the source intended for and why?

Author(s)

Who is the author(s)? What information is given about his/ her credentials?

Citations

Does the source provide any stylization guide? Do you see any footnotes or endnotes within the article?

Format

What did you notice about the layout? Does it follow any particular style of writing?

Frequency

How often does the source come out? What differences did you notice?

Publisher

How is the work submitted? Where would you obtain this material?

Purpose

What is the purpose of this material? What observations did you notice?

Review policy

How are the articles selected?

Stylization of language

Does this source use any particular word or phrases? What did you notice?

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

•

•

Place sticky notes in the middle of the room and instruct students to take 20 (one for each section). Each student will place an observation on both sides of the popular versus scholarly argument from the flip chart question. Give this statement to students for a pre-assessment question: “Take a look at the following sources: People Magazine vs Journal of Psychology. What initial differences did you notice?”

COOKING TECHNIQUE

Small group carousel, whole group discussion

COOKING METHOD

Part 1: 1. Begin with a brief discussion of popular versus scholarly sources and what they mean. 2. Divide the class into groups of 4–5, depending on the classroom size. Ask the questions: “Which sources are you most familiar with?” and “What do you remember about popular and scholarly sources from the discussion?” Instruct students to keep these things in mind while walking around the room. 3. Ask students to move around the room counterclockwise. Students are given 5 minutes to reflect and give evidence. Each student must complete the observation chart. They are expected to add short ideas or drawings (encouraged) to the flip charts. The observation chart is where students will record all of their complete findings from each station.

Dye-Reeves

Figure 2. Student Observation Chart for Popular vs. Scholarly

scholarly source issue and choose an aspect to discuss (advertisement, citations, etc.). The big question is: “Which sources did it best?” and “Why?” Each student must give contextual evidence from the text.

Directions: Answer the prompt from the flip chart and record any textual evidence given from the photographic image. Chart Title

Popular Source

Scholarly Source

ALLERGY WARNINGS

Advertisements

•

Audience Authors

•

Citations Format Frequency Publisher Purpose

Give students verbal instructions before the groups break into stations for the group project. As the facilitator, walk around and discuss the topics with each group. Ask follow-up questions regarding the main discussion question(s) on the flip charts.

CHEF’S NOTES

Review policy Stylization of language

4. When the groups get back to their initial chart, each student will have 3–4 minutes to finish up any final thoughts. Part 2: 1. Students will stay at their initial chart paper and reflect on the sticky notes attached to both columns. One person from the group will present a brief summary of the findings from that particular chart paper to the class. The conversations allow students to understand the material and points of view from each perspective. 2. Reflection section: Each student will write a short 3- to 4-minute reflection summary. The student must pick either a popular or 20

Short on time? Cut down the number of rotations to the ones needed solely for instructional purposes and combine sections that make sense. Really short on time? Have the students sit around a table and give them photocopies of popular and scholarly sources. Create one handout (one side popular and one side scholarly) and focus on 1–2 sections of the chart paper questions. The observation handout can be used to guide their personal instruction rather than a group setting.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Oehlers

Show Me the Ingredients:

Tracking Down the Original Ingredient Joy Oehlers, Information Literacy Librarian, Kapiolani Community College, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

This activity introduces first-year psychology students to scholarly scientific research via articles from popular websites, magazines, or newspapers. This activity requires students to hunt down and examine scientific studies mentioned in the everyday leisure articles. It encourages students to develop strategies to be savvy readers by always fact-checking their sources when consuming information. This activity may be expanded to get students to examine the additional findings from the scientific study and then compare how it is presented or omitted in the leisure article.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Primary learning outcomes: Locate psychological research evidence mentioned in leisure articles. Recognize differences between popular and scholarly sources.

• •

Secondary learning outcomes: Think critically about psychological concepts and research evidence mentioned in leisure articles. Cite popular and scholarly sources.

• •

May be adapted for additional learning outcome:

•

Differentiate between primary and secondary sources.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

Frame: Searching as Strategic Exploration Dispositions: Realize that information sources vary greatly in content and format and have varying relevance and value, depending on the needs and nature of the search.

COOKING TIME

60 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

No limit. May also be used for online classes. 21

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION Frame: Authority Is Constructed and Contextual Dispositions: Learners who are developing their information-literate abilities motivate themselves to find authoritative sources. For many students, this may be the first time they are searching for and reading scientific research articles. Frame: Information Has Value Knowledge Practices Dispositions: Give credit to the original ideas of others through proper attribution and citation.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• •

Computers with access to Microsoft Word or Google Docs For resources, an assessment rubric, and the interactive online class worksheet (see https://bit.ly/2Toz8NP)

PREPARATION

• • • • •

Consult with instructors to match their course learning outcomes with library learning outcomes. Collaborate with instructors to find articles related to topics in their textbook. Gather five pop psychology articles from popular online sources. Check that the keywords in the article when entered in your library databases or Google Scholar will find the full text of the original scientific study. Consider from the student’s viewpoint how they might identify variations of the keywords or concepts and consider:

•

Oehlers

◊ What hints may be provided to help students stay on course? ◊ Which clues are not met by the scientific article they found? For online classes, provide a step-bystep example of how to complete the tasks. See http://go.hawaii.edu/jHs.

COOKING METHOD

1. Have students select one of five leisure articles and track down the scientific study

mentioned in it. Explain that they need to find the original study mentioned in the magazine article, not just any article related to the topic mentioned in the article. They are not required to find other research articles about this topic. 2. See the leisure articles and the full, online worksheet here: https://bit.ly/2Toz8NP. 3. Provide or demonstrate a step-by-step example to help students complete this assignment.

#

Questions to Answer

1

Copy and paste the APA reference for the everyday leisure article you selected.

2a

Copy and paste the section from the everyday leisure article that refers to a scientific study. If more than one scientific study was mentioned, you only need ONE.

2b

Highlight the words in the section that will help you find the scientific study. Remember, you must find the exact scientific study mentioned in the leisure article, not any article that is related to the topic.

3a

Which database did you use to find the full text of this scientific study?

3b

What search words did you use to find the scientific study?

4a

Download the pdf full text. Use the highlighter in your Adobe Reader to indicate the same scientific study mentioned in Step 2b.

4b

Submit the highlighted pdf.

5

List one significant finding mentioned in this scientific study that was not mentioned in the popular leisure article.

6

Copy and paste the APA reference for the scientific article from the database.

7

What are the differences between the everyday leisure article and the scientific study? Use examples from both articles to illustrate differences.

8

Which major perspective(s) of psychology (behavioral, neuroscience, cognitive, evolutionary, humanistic, psychodynamic, and sociocultural) were used in this scientific study? Explain your choice.

22

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Oehlers

ALLERGY WARNING

Sometimes students mistakenly choose a scientific article based on one or two keywords from the leisure article and fail to notice that it is not the scientific study mentioned in the leisure article. Encourage students to check their highlighted words in steps 2b and 4a. Some students attempt to impose their personal opinions or experiences on the leisure and scientific articles without identifying the scientific evidence. Others may try to search for a website or personal blog about the topic instead.

23

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Curtis

Assorted Rolls in the Breadbasket:

Selecting Articles from a Single Scientific Journal Issue to Please Different Palates Nancy R. Curtis, Science Reference Librarian, University of Maine, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

Undergraduate science students engaging in library research must navigate collections of bibliographic records and full text, searching for the elusive scholarly articles required by their instructors. However, the records for primary research articles, letters to the editor, editorials, and other works are virtually indistinguishable from each other, leading to confusion and frustration. Database limits for scholarly, academic, or peer-reviewed “articles” operate at the level of journal titles, contributing to the problem. This activity introduces students to the scientific journal issue as a container holding a mix of items written for varied audiences.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

Given the table of contents of a scientific journal issue, students will be able to distinguish between sections likely to contain original research articles and sections housing other works. Students will be able to look over an item reproduced from a scientific journal and correctly determine whether it is a primary research article or not.

COOKING TIME

30–45 minutes of class time 1–2 hours preparing ingredients

NUMBER SERVED

Scale this recipe as needed for varying class sizes.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

Beginning science students examine articles written for scholarly, clinical or professional or trade, and popular audiences, all housed within the same issue of a peerreviewed journal. They identify the intended audience(s) of the items. They also examine the publisher’s version of the issue to discover how visual design and/or section headings provide clues to the nature of individual works. This activity addresses the frames of Information Creation as a Process and Searching as Strategic Exploration.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• •

Adequate seating, preferably at tables Guide describing characteristics of articles written for scholarly, clinical or professional or trade, and popular audiences

In kitchens equipped with networked workstations or wireless network access: Instructor workstation or device Projection system Networked workstations, devices with wireless capability, or other means of

• • •

24

•

providing online access to library resources for all students Bibliographic database indexing the selected journal issue

In kitchens with simpler or minimal equipment: Printed screenshots displaying the appearance and location of the scholarly, academic, or peer-reviewed limiter in a bibliographic database Packets containing at least one article of each type (scholarly, clinical or professional or trade, and popular), all selected from the same journal issue Copies of the issue’s table of contents Optional garnish: copies of the article records as displayed in a bibliographic database

• • • •

PREPARATION

Any issue of the titles listed in table 1 offers choices ranging from chewy slices of wholegrain science to savory mini-muffin creative works. Select items written for each of the three audiences.

COOKING METHOD

1. Introduce yourself. Ask the whole class: a. What is a scholarly, academic, or peerreviewed journal? b. What does it contain?

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Curtis TABLE 1. Suggested Journal Titles and Sections Journal Title

Sections Containing Popular Material

Sections Containing Clinical, Professional, or Trade Material

JAMA

• JAMA Patient Page [although initial audience is clinical] • A Piece of My Mind [often] • Poetry and Medicine

• JAMA Clinical Challenge • JAMA Diagnostic Test Interpretation • A Piece of My Mind [occasionally]

Nature

• • • •

• Careers • Technology

New England Journal of Medicine

• Medicine and Society • Case Records of the Massachusetts General • Perspective Hospital • Sounding Board [occasionally] • Clinical Practice • Clinical Problem-Solving

Science

Comment Futures News in Focus This Week

• Feature • Policy Forum

c. Who creates it? d. Who uses it? 2. Briefly describe scientific journals, noting that one issue may contain research articles, clinical or professional or trade material, opinion pieces, cartoons, and more. Explain that this activity will introduce students to a journal widely used in their subject area. 3. Refer students to the guide describing characteristics of works written for different audiences. 4. Ask students to follow along as you navigate to a subscribed issue on the publisher’s website or to look at the print table of contents. Ask students to form small groups and assign at least one preselected article to each group.

8. Briefly explain to students that many writing assignments will require them to use primary sources created for scientists and/ or clinicians, and comment on the primacy of original research articles in most scientific fields.

ALLERGY WARNING

• Products & Materials • Working Life

5. Groups examine the website or table of contents and their assigned articles and determine which audience(s) their articles address. 6. Display or refer to each article in turn. Ask groups to explain the audience(s) for the articles. Discuss with students how they arrived at their decisions and any questions they have. 7. Optional: Ask students to follow along as you retrieve records for the articles from one or more bibliographic databases. Ask them to locate the format or document type descriptors (if any) hinting at intended audiences, and the database limit, filter, or facet they can use to select articles by format or type. 25

If possible, provide devices with larger screens to facilitate skimming lengthier articles. Students and chefs may find some content from health sciences titles (images and descriptions of human death and disease) disturbing.

CHEF’S NOTES

I presented this activity at the 2018 SLA Annual Conference (https://digitalcommons.library. umaine.edu/lib_staffpub/28/).

NOTES

Inspired by Joanna M. Burkhardt, Teaching Information Literacy Reframed: 50+ FrameworkBased Exercises for Creating Information-Literate Learners (Chicago: ALA Neal-Schuman, 2016), 75–81, 87; and Kevin Patrick Seeber, “It’s Not a Competition: Questioning the Rhetoric of ‘Scholarly Versus Popular’ in Library Instruction” (PowerPoint presentation, Critical Librarianship and Pedagogy Symposium, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, February 25, 2016). https://repository.arizona.edu/ handle/10150/607784.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Harden and Martinez-Montavon

Research Telephone:

Calling All Chocolate Lovers Melissa Harden, University of Notre Dame, [email protected]; Anna Michelle Martinez-Montavon, University of Notre Dame, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

Just as silly messages get distorted when playing the classic game of “telephone,” scientific research can get distorted when it goes from a scholarly publication to university press release and then out to the popular media. This activity asks students to trace a scientific claim back to the original source while evaluating what distortions may have been introduced in the process.

ACRL Frames Information Creation as a Process and Searching as Strategic Exploration.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• •

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

Students are able to identify the audience and purpose of different types of information sources. They are able to select the type of source that best meets their needs and justify their choice.

•

COOKING TIME

30 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

15–30

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This recipe helps students think about the rhetorical nature of sources and examine different processes of information distribution. It can be used to start conversations about the

• •

Belluck, Pam. “To Improve a Memory, Consider Chocolate.” The New York Times, October 27, 2014. Brickman, Adam M., Usman A. Khan, Frank A. Provenzano, Lok-Kin Yeung, Wendy Suzuki, Hagen Schroeter, Melanie Wall, Richard P. Sloan, and Scott A. Small. “Enhancing Dentate Gyrus Function with Dietary Flavanols Improves Cognition in Older Adults.” Nature Neuroscience 17, no. 12 (2014): 1798–1803. https://doi. org/10.1038/nn.3850. Columbia University Irving Medical Center. “Dietary Flavanols Reverse AgeRelated Memory Decline.” Newsroom, October 26, 2014. http://newsroom. cumc.columbia.edu/blog/2014/10/26/ flavanols-memory-decline. Google Scholar Classroom with a computer and projector

PREPARATION

1. Print copies of each of the articles for each of the students. 2. Ask students to sit in small groups of 3–4. 26

COOKING METHOD

1. Tell the students: Often, we hear about interesting research through the news or from our friends or family. If someone shares with you a source summarizing a recent interesting scientific discovery, what might you do in order to learn more about this study? a. Nothing. Reading the headline is enough! b. Research what other information there might be about the study and the results. 2. Give each student a printout of the article from The New York Times and time to read it. Ask them to make note of anything interesting they notice while they read. 3. Discuss as a class what observations they made. Is the headline accurate? Were there other pieces of information they found noteworthy? Who is the audience for this article? What is its purpose? 4. Ask them to highlight the pieces of information in the news story that might help them find the original study. For example, name of author/co-author of the study, name of university or research center where they work, journal where the study was published, date of the study, and main keywords of the topic of research.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Harden and Martinez-Montavon 5. Next, demonstrate how students can use Google Scholar to find the original study (e.g., search for [scott small flavanol nature neuroscience]) 6. In the results list, how do you know which is the right article? (Check the date, authors, journal name, year.) 7. Give each student a copy of the first page of the original study and ask them to read the abstract. 8. In small groups, discuss: Who is the audience for this article? What is its purpose? How can you tell? 9. As a whole group, discuss: a. How is this scholarly article different from the article from The New York Times in terms of describing this research? b. In particular, how are the findings of the study presented in each article? 10. Explain that universities often publish press releases about studies conducted by someone on their faculty. This is one way that news outlets learn about new research. 11. Hand out copies of the Columbia University press release. Ask each student to skim the press release and make note of how it differs from the previous two articles they have already reviewed. 12. Ask students to talk with their small group about the audience and purpose of the press release. Discuss as a whole class. 13. Discuss: a. Today we’ve examined three articles about the same research study. Each was written for a different audience and serves a slightly different

purpose. What does that mean for choosing sources for your research? (e.g. As a researcher, you may want to track down the original study or other information about the study so you can weigh all the information.) b. If you were to come across a situation like this in your research process, how might you engage with these different types of sources? (This likely depends on who your audience is.)

ALLERGY WARNINGS

Help students temper cynicism (e.g., “Nothing can be trusted!”) by encouraging them to consider different perspectives, to read full articles (not just headlines), and to think about how different sources of information can be engaged with in different ways during the research process.

CHEFS’ NOTES

•

Expand the discussion: If time allows, you might tell students more about how one of the authors reacted to the way the study was presented in the media: “‘We [were] very careful about not referring to [the cocoa flavanols] as chocolate. . . . Nothing was more upsetting than seeing the headlines along the lines of ‘eating chocolate cures Alzheimer’s,’ which was not what our study was about.” (See Additional Resources for citation.) The statement in Vox highlights that information can change from source to source, so it is important to go back to the original source when possible. 27

•

For local flavor: Replace the chocolate article with research done by your own university that has been picked up by news outlets. A good place to start is with university press releases.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Belluz, Julia. “Dark Chocolate Is Now a Health Food. Here’s How That Happened.” Vox, October 18, 2017. https://www.vox.com/scienceand-health/2017/10/18/15995478/chocolatehealth-benefits-heart-disease.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Bezanson, Potterbusch, and Plottel

Add Data, Mix Well:

Finding and Assessing Data Sets Debbie Bezanson, Senior Research Librarian, George Washington University; Megan Potterbusch, Data Services Librarian, George Washington University; Tina Plottel, Research & Instructional Librarian, Salisbury University NUTRITION INFORMATION

Students often attend library sessions that teach critical-thinking skills with regard to assessing books and articles but may not include the assessment of statistics and data sets. Data literacy is an integral part of overall information literacy. This recipe provides detailed steps on how to incorporate evaluating data sets into information literacy sessions. It provides steps that will help students learn how to understand and discover the specified language that may be used to find data and the kinds of tools to use, from novice to gourmet.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to do the following: Acknowledge how data is created according to specific standards Recognize how data is collected and disseminated Use search strategies to determine keywords to search for data

• • •

DIETARY GUIDELINES

The following ACRL Frames are incorporated into the mix: Authority is Constructed and Contextual: the workshop begins with allowing

•

• • •

students to acknowledge how data is created according to specific standards of reliability. Information Creation as a Process: students will understand how data is collected and disseminated. Information Has Value: determining the provenance of data sets. Searching as Strategic Exploration: using search strategies to determine the best keywords to search for data sets in various disciplines.

COOKING TIME

This exercise was developed for a 90-minute workshop but could be modified for a longer or shorter cooking time if used for a library one-shot session or embedded coursework. For example, if using as course-integrated instruction, a librarian may utilize a flipped classroom model to assign the “think” step for homework.

COOKING TECHNIQUE

Think/pair/share. Students will work collaboratively to answer questions about how their disciplines utilize and analyze data.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

•

Language of disciplinary data (examples 28

• • •

might be API, quantitative, qualitative, or open data to use along with their own topical keywords) Google or other search engines such as data.gov Subject-specific databases (examples might be: search in Sociological Abstracts “poverty rate” AND data in [subject]) Provenance and authority of data

PREPARATION

•

Before cooking, gather your mise en place by introducing concepts to learners: “provenance,” “statistics vs data,” and “microdata.”

COOKING METHOD

1. Break the group into pairs or trios and have them choose a subject of interest and then write down a few keywords related to that subject. 2. Ask pairs to search Google using their keywords with the addition of first the word “data,” then “datasets,” then “open data,” then “API.” Next, pairs or trios discuss the differences in the results they got for each search. From each search result, pairs or trios should be prepared to share 1–2 that would be worth exploring, and 1–2 that are clearly not helpful.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Bezanson, Potterbusch, and Plottel 3. Next, ask groups to explore the databases (examples of databases to use are Data Citation Index, Proquest Statistical Insight, and Statistical Abstract of the United States) using their keywords to identify any related results. How easy is it to find data and statistics relevant to your topic? 4. Finally, ask pairs to select several article databases related to their chosen subject area (example: include Academic Search Complete, Sociological Index, and PsycInfo). Groups then search for articles where the authors either have used third-party data to support their research or have made their data available for additional analysis; then, they discuss their findings. 5. Bring the groups together to answer questions and discuss: What strategies did they find most helpful for this research? How does looking at other publications and the work that other authors have done help with methodologies of your own research? What kind of results did you get searching each of these tools and methods? 6. Optional garnish: If homework is appropriate, then assign this for assessment: write a reflective essay comparing the three sets of tools used in the workshop and consider how each might fit into your research project.

CHEF’S NOTES

• • •

Different topics may respond better to one set of tools than another. By sharing discoveries across topics, learners can see these differences and can consider what factors account for them. Once mastered, you may wish to develop a recipe on how to artistically plate your data (i.e., data visualization). Many thanks to Ann Brown, Workshop Coordinator for GW Libraries & Academic Innovation, for the inspiration that led to this workshop.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

Data can seem foreign to many librarians, but with more exposure, many may begin to realize how similar literacy skills can be. Also, some learners may require examples of topics if they are unclear about how to proceed. 29

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Poljak, Hampton, and Dill

Tapas for Success:

An Information Source Sampler for Critical Thinking Leslie Poljak, Outreach and Engagement Librarian, University of Pittsburgh, [email protected]; Marnie Hampton, Open Education Librarian, University of Pittsburgh, [email protected]; Diana Dill, Instructional Designer, University of Pittsburgh, [email protected] NUTRITIONAL INFORMATION

The Information Source Sampler activity serves to introduce first-year students to a spectrum of sources they might find during the research process and encourages critical thinking around source credibility, bias, and information need. This one-shot activity builds upon a pre-class tutorial covering basic catalog searching and introducing scholarly information. While this activity was presented on a larger scale to more than 1,200 students in 76 classes over a threeweek period, it can be adapted to a variety of class sizes, disciplines, and research topics.

COOKING TIME

30 minutes, serving 20 students in small groups. Cooking time may increase or decrease depending upon class and group size.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

•

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • • • • •

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

The primary objective of this activity is to generate discussion and critical thinking about information sources. Students will be able to discuss and identify authorship and bias, different source types, and how information can be used.

This activity addresses the Authority is Constructed and Contextual frame from the ACRL Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education.

Worksheet or online form for resource evaluation with questions asking students to consider source type, author trustworthiness, and information need. 1 class research question 5–6 different sources, 1 for each group. Sources should be related to the class research question. Computer access for each group (optional) Bibliography of sources and discussion talking points for library instructor Handout introducing the research process and characteristics of scholarly information

PREPARATION

•

Select a research question around a current event or relevant class topic and locate 5–6 different sources related to this question. Special attention should be paid to “hot topics” for increased engagement and variety of informa30

• •

tion sources. Sources should include a spectrum of media, trustworthiness, and research value in order to drive in-class discussion. Source examples include a book, book chapter, bibliography, scholarly journal article, trade journal article, magazine article, blog post, radio or news transcript, TED talk, editorial, or Wikipedia article. Gather or print these sources if a computer is not available to make them accessible for in-class use. Create a bibliography of sources and talking points for the class instructor to highlight that are relevant to the class worksheet.

COOKING METHOD

1. Introduce students to the exercise by providing a quick overview to the class about the characteristics of scholarly information and elements of the research process. 2. Supply students with a relevant handout and distribute one source and a worksheet to each group. 3. Give students sufficient time to evaluate their group’s source and complete the worksheet. Circulate to encourage group discussion and offer activity clarity.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Poljak, Hampton, and Dill 4. Re-convene as a class and begin discussion. Ask groups to present their findings to the class using worksheet discussion questions, which include: a. What type of material did you have? b. When would you use it during the research process? c. If it is not of more scholarly quality, what would make it stronger or more scholarly? d. Did the author present any bias? How did you determine this? 5. Reiterate the importance of selecting sources for quality and information need.

Figure 1. A class research question, related sources, and bibliography of sources and discussion talking points.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

A “wildcard source” can be used allowing students to search and select their own source related to the research question, although at times this was found to be more time-consuming and somewhat confusing.

CHEF’S NOTES

•

• •

Highlighting differences in information sources, such as the purpose of editorials versus articles and authority in websites versus books adds extra spice to the activity. The activity could be assessed by scoring completed worksheets with a rubric, but be sure to use source identifiers on the worksheet for a successful assessment. If using links and online forms for sources and worksheet information, use shortened, distinct URLs to decrease cooking time and enhance assessment capabilities. 31

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Cairns

Rate That Source:

An Information Evaluation Game Virginia L. Cairns, University of Tennessee, Chattanooga NUTRITION INFORMATION

This activity is designed as a class “opener” to set the stage and start the cognitive wheels turning before students tackle database or web searching. The set-up is extremely simple: a PowerPoint, a whiteboard, and a marker. The length of the PowerPoint can vary depending on how many examples the instructor wants to include to reinforce various aspects of source evaluation.

al reading and browsing into more advanced evaluation skills useful in academic work.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

Setup requires a slide deck, a whiteboard, and a marker.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will become familiar with clues to credibility across a wide variety of source types in order to become stronger information evaluators in their own research.

COOKING TIME

This activity takes about 15 minutes to conduct.

NUMBER SERVED

Works best with a class size of at least 15, for good lively debate.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This recipe fits well with first-year college students who are just getting acclimated to more sophisticated information skills. It is designed to take students from the forms of evaluation they practice in their own person-

COOKING METHOD

PREPARATION

• •

suggested question prompts to encourage dialog and debate. Be sure and mix up the order of the slides so that higher reliability sources are mixed in among lower ones for better comparison, debate, and discussion.

The instructor puts together a slide deck of screenshots showing a wide variety of sources and postings that any of us might encounter every day in the course of web browsing for personal or school needs. Below are sample slide types along with

The primary learning outcome of this activity is for students to make the connection between the types of judgment calls they make every day in their own internet browsing and the decisions they will need to make in gathering sources for academic projects.

Figure 1. Suggested Slides and Questions 1. A self-published book on Amazon a. Who can publish a book on Amazon? b. What do we know about this particular author? 2. A “doctored” photo a. Can we tell anything about where this photo actually came from? b. Are there ways to track the source of a photo? (Google reverse image search) c. Are there any other ways you could verify whether this is real or not? 3. A bot-generated fake news post from Facebook or Twitter a. What sort of post is this? Who might have produced it? b. Are there any clues as to intent/source/authorship? 4. A New York Times editorial on a topic of current interest a. Who can write for the NYT? b. What happens to any piece before it actually gets published in the NYT? c. Does the author provide any backing for their claims? 5. A book published by a “big” name such as Harvard U Press a. Who published this book? b. What sorts of credentials do you suppose the author has to have? 32

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Cairns Figure 1. Suggested Slides and Questions (continued)

6. A peer-reviewed article from a scholarly journal a. What is this item? What do we know about the authors? b. What else can we discern about this item? 7. A health advice website a. Who wrote this? Is there an About section for the author or organization? b. Are there any biases at work here? Anything for sale? c. Are there any sources cited or solid research to back up claims? 8. A post from a lobbying organization a. What agenda might this organization have? b. Are they “experts” in their field? What determines “expertise”? c. What would be a means of determining if bias is at work? 9. A long-form magazine article a. What is this publication? Can anyone write for it? b. Do we know anything about the author? 10. An infographic or chart from a US Government website a. Who produced this? b. What do we know about government information? c. How current is it? How long did it take to collect the information? 11. A news item with an obviously inflammatory headline a. What jumps out at you about this piece? b. What cues can we take from the language used in headlines and in the articles themselves? 12. A personal blog post from an expert a. Who is this person? b. What sources are they citing?

1. The instructor provides the following guidelines before beginning the activity: I am about to show you a series of slides that include sources from around the web. These will include information of all types, not just library sources. What I would like you to do is closely examine each slide for about 1 minute. After taking that time to review the item, I would like you to do TWO things: a. Rate the information depicted on the slide on a scale of 1–5, 1 being the least reliable source—something you’d discard or distrust—and 5 be-

ing a highly reliable source that you would trust completely. b. Be able to give me at least one reason WHY you scored item as you did. 2. Before showing the first slide, draw a long (2–3 feet) arrow across the center of the whiteboard and place a 1 at the left end and a 5 at the right. Label each end like so: Figure 2. Reliability Scale

33

3. The first slide of the PowerPoint will also have this same diagram to reinforce the instructions for the activity. 4. The instructor then begins moving through the slides, giving students 1–2 minutes per slide to look each item over and then determine their thoughts on reliability and articulate their reasons for scoring. 5. Begin by asking the room at large what they think of the first slide. Where does this one fall on the reliability scale from 1 to 5? Once the first person responds with a score, ask them to elaborate on the reason WHY they scored it as they did. Once they comment, then ask the rest of the room to weigh in. Is that a similar score to what you would have assigned it? What other criteria did you consider when you scored it? Use the question prompts suggested as needed to keep the discussion flowing. 6. Try and get the room to reach a consensus on what score they want to assign to each slide/source. If the room cannot agree (for example, one group says 3, another insists on 4, then split the difference and assign it a 3.5). Once you reach a consensus on a score for the slide, then mark it on the continuum line. 7. Sometimes students react strongly to obviously manipulative or deliberately inflammatory content and want to score something as “less than zero” or “negative 2.5.” I usually go along with this if the whole class feels strongly about it. It also injects an element of humor into the dialog.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Cairns

8. Move through the remaining slides until all of them have been examined, discussed, and rated by consensus. If you use your discussion prompts well, you will wind up covering most of the commonly encountered evaluation criteria we’d like students to be aware of and utilize. When you are done, you will have a very crowded continuum line with the visible results of a lot of judgment calls that looks something like this: Figure 3. Sample Continuum Line

9. As a wrap-up, remind them of the various criteria and decision points that were touched on during the slideshow. Make sure they understand that these same tips and guidelines will come in handy as they search both the web and library databases to find sources to back up their research projects.

34

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Bush and Seymour

Identifying and Diluting the Dominant Flavor of a Source Lindsay Bush, Union College, [email protected]; Courtney Seymour, Bates College, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

Students prioritize the wrapper of a source (i.e., the type, who published it and a conflation of the significance of a source being scholarly versus being peer-reviewed) as its “dominant flavor” to determine its credibility. Our lesson challenges this limited definition by placing sources within the context in which they will be used by emphasizing the elements of Bizup’s BEAM Method (Background, Exhibit, Argument, and Method) within the given scenarios. Students will be introduced to the BEAM Method, which focuses on the use of the source rather than the type of source. The lesson also amplifies other credibility factors such as bias, what audience the source was written for, and time frame, and encourages students to break down and construct their own meanings of scholarly and peer review.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• • •

Articulate different aspects—author, publisher, date—and integrate these aspects into a comprehensive evaluation; students learn that one aspect alone does not define value. Students examine a source of information to determine the point of view in order to interpret bias. Identify the usefulness as well as the limitations of unmediated sources (i.e., social media, blogs) in order to use them when appropriate.

COOKING TIME

COOKING METHOD

30 minutes of in-class activity

NUMBER SERVED Ideal for a small class of 15–20 students Dietary Guidelines ACRL Framework: Authority is Constructed and Contextual Information Creation as a Process

• •

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • • •

Stack of blank index cards Three sources Six research scenarios Six sets of “credibility factor” cards

PREPARATION

• •

Print, cut, and collate credibility factor cards. Locate sources and write research scenarios.

1. Students start by writing down three ways in which they evaluate sources on an index card and then put this aside. 2. Students are broken into six groups and given a source and a research scenario for which they will recommend if it should or should not be used. Each source is assigned to two groups for a total of three sources. There are six distinct scenarios. Sample sources might be: ◊ A book written by an academic scholar and published by a scholarly press, but on a subject outside the scholar’s area of expertise provides a personal reaction to the content and could be an exhibit source. It isn’t, however, an appropriate argumentative source. ◊ An article that isn’t research but is a review article is good for background research. Or an article that is good for leading students to the types of sources they need isn’t necessarily

Figure 1. Credibility Factor Cards Scholarly

Peer-Reviewed

Date of Publication

Publisher

Author

Bias

Language

Sources Cited

Audience

Cited By

35

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION good in a scenario where original research is needed to provide methods. ◊ A popular blog post that only references a study published in a peerreviewed academic journal doesn’t present as an original exhibit source. 3. To help the groups identify and use other credibility factors (“ingredients”) they are provided with a stack of cards that each list one factor. They are then challenged to place them in red, yellow, and green categories depending on the level of importance of each factor given the scenario. The groups report out their recommendations and the discussion includes the importance of the context in deciding if the source is credible enough to use. 4. At the end of the session, students go back to their index card and write a new “recipe” for new ways of thinking about how they evaluate a source.

Bush and Seymour

about how to evaluate usability of sources in the context of different scenarios. Ideally, the second iteration of the card will emphasize context over the “wrapper” criterion.

NOTES

Bizup, Joseph, “BEAM: A Rhetorical Vocabulary for Teaching Research-Based Writing,” Rhetoric Review 27, no. 1 (2008): 72–86. JSTOR Complete.

ALLERGY WARNING

If the faculty member has not adopted BEAM terminology so everyone is using a common language, students are likely to be confused and/or frustrated.

CHEF’S NOTES

In lieu of cards, one could use a flipped classroom approach to conduct the first pieces of this activity in Articulate or a course management system and facilitate the discussion in class. You can assess the index card submissions by looking for changes in the students’ thinking 36

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Goebel, Becker, and Blizzard

A Human Library with a Side of Critical Thinking: Considering Oral Narratives and Scholarly Articles

Nancy Goebel, University of Alberta Augustana Campus, [email protected]; Yvonne Becker, University of Alberta Augustana Campus, [email protected]; Kara Blizzard, University of Alberta Augustana Campus, augustana. [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

This project involves both a human library event and an accompanying assignment. A human library is an event in which “human books,” individuals with personal life experiences relating to prejudice or discrimination, share their stories with “readers” who want to learn more about those experiences. Planners should refer to humanlibrary.org for planning assistance and guidelines. The assignment challenges students to consider information from two very different sources: a personal narrative and scholarly journal articles.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to reflect on the experience of reading a human book and engaging with journal articles in order to understand the roles of both oral narrative and scholarly information in research; evaluate the authority of human books and scholarly articles in order to use appropriate information sources for a given context; and think critically about and reflect on differences in order to develop empathy.

COOKING TIME

• •

Four to six weeks of preparation for the first batch. After you’ve made it a few times, the recipe tends to come together more efficiently. Each human library “read” takes up to one hour. Multiple reads may start at the same time.

NUMBER SERVED

Small groups to large classes

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This assignment serves to develop students’ critical-thinking skills, consideration of authority, and empathy.

•

Relevant frames from the ACRL Framework: Authority is Constructed and Contextual Information Creation as a Process Information Has Value

•

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

•

• • • • • • •

Human books who speak to relevant topics Teaching faculty collaborator(s) Space to host the event Promotional materials and signage 37

•

Staff or volunteers to help (depending on the size of the event)

PREPARATION

1. First course: Event planning a. Recruitment of human books. For this project, we recruit individuals who have experienced gender- or sexuality-related prejudice or discrimination (e.g., being transgender, living with HIV/AIDS, sexism in the workplace), as well as individuals who have unique life experiences related to gender or sexuality (e.g., sexual abuse, breast cancer, testicular cancer). We use three recruitment methods: i. Contacting individuals who we know have relevant personal experiences ii. Contacting individuals who have been in the media iii. Responding to individuals who have submitted the recruitment form on our website b. Selection of date(s) for the event c. Scheduling specific times for human book “reads.” Our event typically takes place in the evening.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION d. Promotion of the event, if it will be open to more than class participants 2. Second course: Assignment preparation a. Design the assignment in collaboration with the teaching faculty member. For our assignment, we have worked with a women’s studies professor to develop an assignment in which students i. attend the human library ii. search for scholarly articles iii. cite the human book and scholarly article iv. reflect on their learning process b. Librarians provide a citation guide for citing a human book. 3. Third course: Assignment evaluation a. The teaching faculty member uses a rubric which evaluates the extent to which students meet the following criteria: i. Depth of thought and reflection, quality and clarity of writing ii. Synthesis of information learned from the human book and the scholarly articles iii. Consideration of authority as it relates to different information sources iv. Citation of human book and scholarly articles

Goebel, Becker, and Blizzard

scheduling. For example, at our human library event, each read is scheduled for one hour, with multiple reads starting at the same time. Other models are more spontaneous, with no schedule available in advance. For more event planning details, visit humanlibrary.org. 2. Assignment a. Provide students with the list and schedule of human books related to the course assignment. Students then attend the human library event and read a human book who speaks

to their life experiences of gender and/or sexuality. After attending the event, students write a brief reflection about learning via an individual’s lived experience. b. Next, the librarian provides a brief (e.g., 30-minute) instruction session on searching for articles in a relevant database. Students then search for three scholarly articles on the same topic as their human book and write an annotated bibliography, which contains descriptive and evaluative annotations.

COOKING METHOD

1. Event a. The delivery of the event can vary widely, depending on scale and

Figure 1. A conversation with a human book at the augustana human library. Copyright © Augustana Campus Library, University of Alberta 38

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Goebel, Becker, and Blizzard c. Finally, students write a reflection in which they compare the process of learning from the oral narrative of a human book with the process of learning from scholarly articles. This challenges the students to consider the authority of these two types of information sources in different contexts.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

• • •

Make sure to consult humanlibrary. org to align with the practices outlined there. Consider privacy concerns of human books. We choose not to publicize human books’ personal names. Ensure that human books are aware that students will be reflecting on their story as part of a course assignment. To date, this has not been a concern for our human books.

ties and social sciences to be a good fit with this approach to information literacy.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

A guide for citing a human book can be found at aug.ualberta.ca/citehumanbook. For more information about the augustana human library, email augustana. [email protected] or visit aug. ualberta.ca/humanlibrary.

CHEF’S NOTES

• •

•

For librarians who want to make connections with a curriculum, this is an engaging and impactful way to do that. Anecdotally, students have mentioned that this is a favorite assignment. This event and assignment were awarded the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) Women and Gender Studies Section (WGSS) Award for Significant Achievement in Women and Gender Studies Librarianship. We have found courses in the humani-

39

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Kruger and Scott

Cooking from Your Pantry:

Using Inquiry to Evaluate and Understand Primary Sources Pamela Nett Kruger, Institutional Repository Librarian, Meriam Library, California State University, Chico, [email protected]; Adrienne Scott, Museum Curator, Valene L. Smith Museum of Anthropology, California State University, Chico, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

Then, as they gather information and share it with other students during the activity, they engage in the iterative process of research. When students first encounter the primary source ingredients, the recipe seems deceptively simple. Over the course of the dining experience, students realize the final outcome is tastier than expected. Let’s use our pantry to cook up some primary source inquiries!

The inquiry-based method builds on student’s observational, critical-thinking skills and prior knowledge as they interact with these primary sources. Through this method, they ask themselves a series of questions to recognize the prior knowledge they bring to the research interaction and what information they can deduce from the primary sources. Using this activity, we have observed that students can ascertain points of view, purposes, biases, and underrepresentation resulting in gaps and silences.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Sometimes it is hard for students to engage with primary source materials, as they don’t know where to start. We advocate using an inquiry-based cooking approach. Inquirybased learning is a great way to evaluate primary sources and can reveal how history and our understanding of it is not a once and forever thing.

At first, students may think they may know nothing about the historical event illustrated with the primary source materials. Remind them that we all bring knowledge and information, and by asking questions, we can begin to interact and engage in a way that reveals what we actually know and can deduce.

To empower students to engage with primary source materials. Teaching that these resources are accessible in many formats, in libraries, museums, and online. The student will begin to recognize the authoritative point of view in charge of the message and become sensitive to the muted and missing perspectives. Students recognize the secret ingredient, also known as omissions, silences, and gaps.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

As you eat at the table of history, be sure to remember that someone else has set the table. Dare to wonder about the context of this history. What was the agenda of those preparing this informational feast? Who has been left off the guest list and what ingredients have been omitted to make this a balanced meal? No matter your prior dining experience, a feast can be joined at any time. At the history buffet, it does not matter if you start with the entrée or dessert. The contextual model and inquiry model are flavor compliments. ACRL Frames addressed: Authority Is Constructed and Contextual Research as Inquiry

• •

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

COOKING TIME

10–30 minutes. This can be a quick meal or longer depending on your number of guests and appetite.

NUMBER SERVED

2–35 students; small group learning as well as whole class modeling 40

• • • •

2–6 primary source materials, depending on time allowed for activity. Recommended types: photos, letters, cartoons and artifacts Inquiry worksheets Clipboards Pencils

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Kruger and Scott

PREPARATION

• •

Prepare stations with groups of like ingredients. For example, photographs at one station, letters another, etc. Hand out worksheets to each student or student grouping.

COOKING METHOD

1. Students are given a clipboard with a worksheet. On the worksheet are four simple questions: a. What is the overall message of this photo/letter/cartoon? b. Who do you imagine took the photo/ wrote the letter/drew the cartoon? c. Who is the intended audience? d. What other questions come to mind? 2. Students can also be paired or put in small groups. 3. Students look at the primary sources and examine them as they move around to the stations, filling out the worksheet. 4. Students discuss their findings with the group. 5. Optional: facilitator can collect data from all groups to share results and broaden the discussion.

ALLERGY WARNING

• •

Seasonings can be adjusted from basic salt and pepper to ultra-spicy, depending on topic and students grade level. As students interact and “taste” these ingredients, it is acceptable to move ingredients around for comparison at other stations.

CHEF’S NOTES

• •

•

•

Some groups are more comfortable with posing questions of presented content or even accepting that there is an authoritative perspective behind what is being presented. This recipe will foster critical-thinking and evaluation skills. By prompting students with these questions, we hope to model how to ask questions when examining primary sources. And by exposing students to many primary sources, the practice of evaluation, interrogation, and asking questions should become more routine over time. Through the inquiry process, students identify points of view, gaps, silences, biases, and perspectives. This discovery activity then leads to the natural next step of ways to research and find out more about the primary sources. Sometimes it is helpful to ask follow-up questions after the students share their answers to prompt further discussion for those less comfortable with tasting new things. The instructor must help these students by having questions ready to tempt their inquiry appetite.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

ACRL & SAA Guidelines for Primary Source Literacy. 2018. http://www.ala.org/acrl/ sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/standards/ Primary%20Source%20Literacy2018.pdf. Hinchliffe, Lisa Janicke, and Christopher J. Prom. “Teaching with Primary Sources.” Trends in Archives Practice. 2016. 41

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Beach

Boiling Water:

Examining Chernobyl as a Method of Teaching History Students about Primary and Secondary Sources Jennifer Beach, Research and Instructional Services Librarian, Longwood University, VA NUTRITION INFORMATION

Nuclear engineer Leslie Dewan is quoted in The New Yorker as stating, “A nuclear power reactor is just a fancy way of boiling water.” This recipe is designed to help new history students, at the 100–200 level, think critically about the differences between primary and secondary historical sources, including the gray area of historical newspapers. It is as simple as boiling water. Chefs should pick a topic for which they can find multiple primary and secondary sources and with which the students are likely not very familiar. The Chernobyl nuclear accident works particularly well, as it is recent enough history that librarians will find multiple resources but happened before most students were born and is thus not part of their common knowledge. The international nature of this topic adds additional richness to discussions of language, politics, and access.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Upon completion of this activity, students will be able to differentiate between primary and secondary sources; explain why newspapers can be classified as either primary or secondary

• •

•

sources; and justify their classification of historical newspapers as either primary or secondary sources within the framework of a specific historical event.

COOKING TIME

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

•

• • •

30–50 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

15–20 students

DIETARY GUIDELINES

The active nature of this recipe engages students better in the process of evaluating historical sources than a standard lecture. With the help of an engaged and like-minded professor, librarians can challenge student expectations for classifying historical sources. This activity may be a stretched to fill an entire 50-minute session but pairs well with further instruction on scholarly and popular sources. Given enough time and available technology, this recipe may also be stretched to include practice searching electronic newspaper resources. ACRL Framework addressed Authority is Constructed and Contextual

•

42

Pre-selected copies of journal, magazine, and newspaper articles on the chosen topic, from the time of its occurrence and from a later perspective, either printed or preloaded to available computers 1 actively-engaged librarian and 1 disciplinary faculty Worksheet (optional) Pencils (optional)

COOKING TECHNIQUE

Small group activity followed by class discussion

PREPARATION

• •

•

Librarian preparation time is about 1 hour. Search your electronic and print resources for newspaper, magazine, and journal articles on the Chernobyl accident. Select a mix of sources from April 1986 through the most recent you can find. You will need one article for every 2–3 students. If you wish, you may use the included worksheet or prepare your own to allow students to work through key questions on discerning source type.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Beach

COOKING METHOD

1. Begin class with an overview of how historical scholars differentiate primary and secondary sources. Co-teaching this part with your faculty is a savory option. 2. Break the class into groups of 2–3 students and pass out articles and evaluation worksheets, if using. 3. Set the groundwork on the Chernobyl accident, including place of occurrence, dates, and a brief discussion of US-Soviet relations at the time. 4. Allow 5–10 minutes for students to read and evaluate their articles. 5. Bring the group back together and ask them to describe their articles and report their conclusions. 6. Librarians might try posing some of these useful questions to reinforce the criticalthinking skills necessary for evaluating sources: a. What clues made you decide this is a primary/secondary source? Did anything in your article suggest the opposite? Did everyone in your group agree? b. Is it reasonable to expect to find English-language, primary newspaper articles reported from Chernobyl by American journalists, given the geo-political climate of the time? c. Would a newspaper source still be considered a secondary source if it is as close to the international action as we can get? d. How does our knowledge of the state-run media of 1986 USSR change our perception of the accuracy of the

original accounts? e. How might a historian find stronger primary sources?

ALLERGY WARNINGS

• •

Advanced communication with your history faculty could be useful in developing consensus on how historical newspapers may be classified, as this is a gray area for more than just students. In groups of more than three students, it is easy for a single student to dominate the group and for the remaining students to lose interest. Keeping groups small improves engagement.

CHEF’S NOTE

Some additional explanation on spelling flexibility when searching foreign-language translations is a useful addition. In the case of Chernobyl, interpreting place names that originate in the Cyrillic alphabet resulted in a

few accepted spellings for Chernobyl in the 1980s. For an alternate flavor, the Boston Molasses Flood of 1919 is a delicious alternative, as it seems implausible, made national news at the time, and modern secondary sources are available. For this alternative, you may have fun taking the “I saw it on TV” approach and move from random historical “fact” found on TV or the internet to more reputable sources.

RESOURCES

Brown, Alton. Good Eats. Season 12, episode 14, “Pantry Raid X: Dark Side Of The Cane.” Aired Feb 16, 2009, on The Food Network. https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=HEI7YVF-IAY. Cook, Gareth. “Elements: A New Way To Do Nuclear.” The New Yorker, June 13, 2013. Accessed 15 June 2018. Retrieved from https://www.newyorker.com/tech/ elements/a-new-way-to-do-nuclear.

Figure 1. Primary and Secondary Sources Worksheet Title of article: Date published: Source: This source is a: … Primary source … Secondary source

List 2 clues that led you to this decision:

43

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Morris

Historic Misinformation Reflection and Remix Sarah E. Morris, Head of Instruction, Emory University Libraries, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

This activity introduces learners to misinformation throughout history and helps them gain a deeper understanding of how different types of sources are produced and how different source formats can create different effects by giving them the chance to remix different forms of media. This activity can also provide an entry point for discussing misinformation and related issues with students. Students will discover that misinformation is not a completely new problem and will discover how misinformation has worked over time and how different communication technologies have impacted the way in which misinformation has spread.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to do the following: Identify characteristics and trends of misinformation and gain deeper insights into how misinformation can spread Utilize evaluation skills to determine the credibility of information Use technology and historical and media literacy skills in order to remix and create media Use digital tools to communicate and share ideas

• • • •

COOKING TIME

50 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

Up to 30 students

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This activity uses concepts from the ACRL Framework, most particularly the frame Authority is Constructed and Contextual. This activity also borrows concepts from research by the Stanford History Education Group into historical and media literacy as well as Marshal McLuhan’s notion of “medium as the message” (see Additional Resources).

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • • • •

PowerPoint slides A projector Computers for students An online folder, such as a Google Drive or Box folder, where students can upload their remixes from the activity to share with the class Guided worksheets and assessment (see https://bit.ly/2TcVS4m)

PREPARATION

•

Prepare some examples of historic misinformation that you can share with your students. You can come up with your own or you can use some of the examples located here: https://bit.ly/2TcVS4m. Examples you might consider including are propaganda from totalitarian 44

•

regimes, World War I propaganda and rumors, the Roswell incident, yellow journalism coverage of the Spanish American War, advertisements for “snake oil” medicine, etc. Select an historic misinformation example for students to remix. I’ve used the Roswell incident, snake oil and dubious advertising for medicine (which connects back to some rather outlandish claims for various health products today), and examples of rumors from the French Revolution. Feel free to use whatever examples work best for you or consider topics that connect to whatever your students are studying.

COOKING METHOD

1. Divide students up for a think-pair-share opening activity. Have students silently brainstorm the following: a. How would you describe misinformation? b. What are some recent examples of misinformation that you can think of? 2. Have the pairs discuss their responses and then have groups share their ideas with the entire class. 3. Repeat the process, but this time have students try to brainstorm examples of historic misinformation. 4. Explain that misinformation is not a new problem, but technology today is causing

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Morris

5. 6.

7.

8.

9.

misinformation to appear and spread in different ways and is posing new challenges. Highlight a few pre-selected examples of historic misinformation. Discuss how these examples relate to types of news and media content we see today. What is similar and what is different? Note that misinformation, today and in the past, often has relied on emotional appeals and manipulation as well as an audience’s lack of in-depth knowledge of the topic at hand. The communication technologies may have changed (in some cases), but certain facts like emotionally charged language and imagery, rhetorical tricks and logical fallacies, and even topics covered (bogus “miracle” cure stories have been around for eons) remain fairly consistent in examples of misinformation. Tell students that they will be experimenting with remixing historic stories using modern media technology and will reflect on how different technologies can change the impact of a story. Assign groups to a pre-selected historic misinformation story of your choosing (you can have every group work on the same story or different stories) and have them remix it using a modern media tool or method. Consider having students create any of the following: ◊ A Twitter thread ◊ A listsicle ◊ An emoji thread ◊ A Snapchat or Instagram story ◊ A podcast introduction

◊ An infomercial ◊ An Onion-style article 10. Have groups share their work and discuss what they noticed and what surprised them about this production process. 11. For a closing reflection, have students consider how the communication technology they used influenced the story they were telling about their topic.

ALLERGY WARNING

Be sure to leave time for reflection and discussion. Diving into the ways in which media formats and technology can influence a story—and can even help misinformation spread—might be a new concept for some learners, so leaving time for discussion can help everyone grapple with new ideas and avoid having the remix activity feel like busywork.

CHEF’S NOTES

•

•

You can run a variation of this activity on remixing that considers popular and scholarly sources and has students remix scholarly content into popular formats, and vice versa. The focus here would be on audience as a key change factor in the remix, as opposed to time and technological developments. Another variation could be to transform misinformation into a more credible source. The ideas of exploring types of sources, the impact of things like audience and technology on sources, and narrative techniques can be revisited throughout a semester if you are working with a 45

class over a longer period of time or if you are teaching your own full-semester class, in-person or online. Remixing activities could become a recurring assignment and a way for students to keep practicing and strengthening their media and information literacy skills.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Stanford History Education Group. “Reading Like a Historian.” Accessed February 1, 2019. https://sheg.stanford.edu/historylessons. McLuhan, Marshall, and Quentin Fiore. “The medium is the message.” New York 123 (1967): 126–128.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Lewis and Dommermuth

Primary/Secondary Mixed Grill Abbey Lewis, University of Colorado Boulder, [email protected]; Emily Dommermuth, University of Colorado Boulder, emily. [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

Teaching students the difference between primary and secondary sources can easily become rote memorization of which sources fall into which category. Even when students understand what a dissertation is and why it’s a primary source, there can still be a fair amount of confusion when it comes to picking one out of an array of other sources. A gamified activity where students are prompted to explore the identifying characteristics of these sources creates a more meaningful learning experience that will better serve students when they search for sources on their own. The recipe below was developed for science students, for whom the process of learning to differentiate between primary and secondary sources can be especially problematic when different kinds of sources are published in one location (i.e., scholarly journals publish original research alongside literature reviews, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews). However, the activity could be adapted for a variety of disciplines by simply using the types of primary and secondary sources prevalent in the appropriate field. This bingo-style game helps students explore the characteristics and learn to identify various forms of primary and secondary sources.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

Students will be better able to differentiate between primary and secondary sources. Students will be able to identify characteristics of various forms of primary and secondary sources.

•

COOKING TIME

20–40 minutes for the in-class activity Creating the game boards and picking out an array of primary and secondary sources will require substantial planning time (2–4 hours), but the end result gives students valuable experience with unfamiliar source types.

NUMBER SERVED

This activity can work for a larger class (even a lecture/bingo hall-sized one) but may require more variety in game boards.

• • • •

PREPARATION

•

DIETARY GUIDELINES

ACRL Standards for Libraries in Higher Education Principle 3, Indicator 3.1, Indicator 3.4 ACRL Frames addressed: Information Creation as a Process Scholarship as Conversation

• •

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

•

A healthy mix of various types of pri46

mary and secondary sources. Select the kinds of sources that are most relevant to the class. Game boards (4×4 or 5×5 grids are recommended) with the kinds of sources you selected in the boxes. Feel free to repeat types of sources. Create several versions so each student/group has a different board. Two colors of board markers (i.e., poker chips of two different colors). One color will signify primary sources, one will signify secondary. Scratch paper and pens for the students to take notes Prizes: candy, library swag, etc. (optional) A way for students to view the sources (online guide or digital display)

•

Create a bingo grid that is an appropriate size for the amount of time you have and the number of sources you want to cover. If you have a shorter amount of time or want to play multiple rounds of the game, consider creating a smaller game board grid (i.e., 4×4). Creating a larger game board (i.e., 5×5) will allow for longer games and the exploration of more source types. Select the sample sources, keeping in mind that some sources, like newspaper

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Lewis and Dommermuth

•

articles and patents, are easy to identify. Others, like a literature review or technical report that’s not clearly labeled as such, might need more examination. You’ll need a significant number of sources, enough to allow someone to win, especially if you’re planning on working through multiple rounds of the game. Selecting sources of the same type but from various publications (i.e., finding three different original research articles) is also recommended to show students the variety of ways in which certain characteristics can appear.

COOKING METHOD

1. This game follows a bingo format to get students (individually or in small groups) competing to be the first to correctly identify the different kinds of information sources and whether they are primary or secondary sources. 2. The instructor will act as a bingo-caller, presenting different example sources to the students. The students will have to identify what kind of source the example is and whether it is primary or secondary. 3. The source will be identified by putting the right color (i.e., primary source = blue, secondary = yellow) marker on the right square on the board. 4. It’s recommended to have the students or groups take notes for each source—for example, why they thought #1 was a dissertation and a primary source.

5. The first student or group to fill up a row or column and yell bingo will win the prize after they correctly explain why they identified each example. 6. To evaluate student learning, gather their scratch paper at the end of the game.

Review the students’ notes to ensure that they were on track with correctly identifying sources and whether they were primary or secondary. Consider some kind of follow-up for sources that are consistently confusing for students.

Figure 1. Sample Game Board

Data Set

Magazine Article

Meta-Analysis

Original Research Article

Opinion Piece

Literature Review

Conference Proceedings

Patent

Textbook

Encyclopedia

Original Research Article

Data Set

Free Space

Thesis

Technical Report

Magazine Article

Systematic Review

Conference Proceedings

Blog Post

Data Set

Patent

Literature Review

Newspaper Article

Dissertation

Original Research Article

47

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Lawrimore

Developing Critical Thinking and Archival Literacy through a Three Perspectives Project Erin Lawrimore, University Archivist, UNC Greensboro University Libraries NUTRITION INFORMATION

Analysis of archival documents can provide students with valuable firsthand experience in evaluating primary sources. In an assignment dubbed the “Three Perspectives Project,” undergraduate students in a course at UNC Greensboro examine multiple primary sources to learn more about how to identify biases, explore the creation of established narratives, and critically question sources.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students can critically question the motives of the record creator, context of creation, and intended audience of a record; recognize that a record creator’s individual background, position, and/or biases impact the content of the record; articulate different types of authority and recognize the way in which this authority might impact the archival record (content, preservation, etc.); and understand that “history” is a constructed narrative that may not include all perspectives.

• • • •

COOKING TIME

This project typically is covered over two 50-minute class sessions, after students have

been given a very broad overview of university history.

NUMBER SERVED

While the assignment could be scoped for use in any size of class, ideally you would have 25 or fewer students involved. The students would be divided into small groups of three of four.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This assignment leads students to understand that, as the ACRL Frame notes, Authority is Constructed and Contextual. In examining original primary source documents from a variety of perspectives, students understand that the traditional historical narrative that evolves from an event often privileges certain voices while ignoring others. Students examine a wide range of types of primary source records and develop skills that allow them to critically question sources, regardless of format.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

A packet of 10–12 primary source documents centered on a single event in university history is curated prior to the class. A short contextual essay is also included in the packet. The primary source documents should represent three perspectives of individuals who typi48

cally impact (or are impacted by) university actions and decisions—the perspective of an administrator and/or faculty member, the perspective of a student, and the perspective a “concerned citizen” who has no direct ties to the university. The documents also represent a variety of formats, from internal memoranda to newspaper articles to selected segments of oral history interviews.

COOKING METHOD

1. Each group of students receives a curated primary source packet. The students examine the documents and compare the perspectives shown in the documents with the traditional historical narrative of their event. For example, a packet of information related to the 1960 Greensboro Woolworth’s Sit-Ins contains records from students, administrators, “concerned citizens” who wrote to the campus administrators about the student movement, and the man who was the manager of the Woolworth’s store at the time. In addition to exploring the content of the documents, students are asked to consider the documents’ context of creation. How might an alumna’s oral history interview from 2010 about an event that occurred fifty years in the past differ in content and perspective from that of the university’s

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Lawrimore chancellor in an internal memorandum written during the event itself? 2. After a class session is devoted to students’ research and small-group discussion of the documents presented in their packets, each group makes a short presentation in which they describe their assigned event, discuss the variety of perspectives offered in the packet, and provide an analysis of how and why the perspectives they have identified differ. Students are assessed on their ability to critically question the documents and clearly articulate how the documents they viewed support, contradict, or bring into question the prevailing narrative of their assigned historical event.

ALLERGY WARNING

Depending on the documents selected for the packets, students may encounter names or places with which they are not familiar. They may also encounter cursive handwriting that may be difficult to decipher or coded references that they may not understand without a deeper understanding of the time. We also have copies of a published history of the university on hand in the room where the students are working so that they can quickly look for additional information. We also encourage the students to use context clues to help them interpret difficult handwriting or unfamiliar references. If questions remain after the students have done this preliminary work, both the instructor and the archivist are on hand to work with the students to help them better understand the documents.

CHEF’S NOTES

At the end of their time in the archives (and then again at the end of the semester), students complete a short reflection essay, thinking about what they have learned. In her reflection, freshman Maggie B., who is studying to become a teacher, wrote: Education . . . is about recognizing the holes or half-truths in our textbooks and seeking out the full story. . . . Our local communities have a rich history that, if one digs deep enough, holds truths and perspectives one would not normally expect. This was illustrated . . . perfectly by learning about many perspectives on segregation in the archives and learning UNCG’s history with [different kinds of] minorities. I learned, however, stopping at the things we are exposed to is a mistake, and so we must look further, beyond our own school, city, state, country, and perspective. Through archival research assignments that introduce primary sources and primary source literacy skills, students learn how to critically question sources and established narratives. This type of assignment can be completed with packets consisting of original documents or, as is the case with the Three Perspectives Projects, with photocopies from a range of collections in our university archives. Ultimately, the range of perspectives and formats represented in the packet are more important than if the document is an original or a copy of the primary source. In 49

the end, the goal is for students to walk away with the same mindset as Maggie—with a desire to dig deeper into sources and formats and with critical-thinking skills that support one’s ability to effectively question an established narrative.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Vance

Taste Test:

Primary vs. Secondary Sources Candace K. Vance, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

This assignment is equally delicious in-class or as take-out. It can be served in a threecredit-hour beginning undergraduate information literacy class to introduce students to aspects of primary and secondary sources, with the primary source being original medical research published in a scholarly journal and the secondary source being a medical news article written about a noteworthy research article by a medical news reporter. The primary article is heavier and harder to digest—a main entrée that will keep you full longer. The secondary source is a lighter appetizer to whet your craving for the main entrée. Comparing and contrasting the primary and secondary source can open up conversations about the importance of citing the original source and why open access is valuable for scholars. The class learns that following the research trail to the full text of the original article can be challenging but ultimately rewarding. Frequently, the original research article is difficult to read, so this assignment can also lead to discussions about how to cut a scholarly article down into manageable bites. The assignment also illustrates how the news report is easier to read and understand, so it’s a good place to start for background research.

Once the students understand the concepts of the secondary news article, they can better understand the original research.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to search for medical news articles from reputable sites; understand how news articles synthesize original research articles; understand the importance of open access; evaluate the authority of both articles; become familiar with the format of scholarly articles; and become familiar with evaluating original research articles.

• • • • • •

COOKING TIME

• •

Preparation time: 15 minutes for students to do the assignment 10–15 minutes for discussion

NUMBER SERVED

This recipe can serve any number of students as long as they have access to a computer. Works well for 10–30 students.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

ACRL Frame: Information Creation as a Process 50

Knowledge practice: ◊ Develop, in their own creation processes, an understanding that their choices impact the purposes for which the information product will be used and the message it conveys. Dispositions: ◊ Value the process of matching an information need with an appropriate product. ◊ Understand that different methods of information dissemination with different purposes are available for their use. ACRL Frame: Authority is Constructed and Contextual Knowledge practice: ◊ Define different types of authority, such as subject expertise (e.g., scholarship), societal position (e.g., public office or title), or special experience (e.g., participating in a historic event). Disposition: ◊ Motivate themselves to find authoritative sources, recognizing that authority may be conferred or manifested in unexpected ways. ACRL Frame: Scholarship as Conversation Knowledge practice: ◊ Critically evaluate contributions made

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Vance by others in participatory information environments. Disposition: ◊ Recognize that scholarly conversations take place in various venues.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • •

Computer access for all students Assignment sheets Access to databases (preferred)

PREPARATION

• •

Choose a list of topics that have links to primary articles. Tastes best if students have access to the full text of the primary articles.

COOKING METHOD

1. Introduction (include learning objectives). 2. Give a link to the online assignment or hand out the paper assignment (with a topic circled). 3. Students could work individually or in pairs. 4. Give the class 15 minutes to search for their topics and answer the questions. 5. Then, as a group, have a class discussion about the differences between the news articles and the primary research. Which is best for background research? Which should you cite? Ask them if they were able to find the original research article for free? If not, why do they think that is? 6. Instructor should answer questions while the students are doing the assignment. Walk around to make sure they’re finding a medical news article and the full text

of the original research. If it is an online assignment, answer questions in a timely manner and share with other students.

ALLERGY WARNING

This session works best when students already have a rudimentary understanding of open access and searching the internet and library resources.

CHEF’S NOTES

I update my topics every semester to try and make them fresh. I do this assignment as a precursor to discussing the importance of citation mapping

FIGURE 1. Online Assignment Example

51

Formative assessment of this assignment: 1. Regarding today’s assignment, what is one thing that you still don’t understand? 2. What were the two most important things you learned from this assignment?

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Online assignment example at http://bit. ly/2Jtwc9A.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Hart

It Looks Yummy, but Is It Good for You? Evaluating Images

Olga Hart, University of Cincinnati, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

In many courses, students use images as information sources and include them in their presentations. Our recipe was inspired by a professor of political science who was unhappy with stereotyped and often clearly fake images she had seen students use in class presentations. This was several years before the recent surge of fake news and misinformation, and the importance of thinking critically about images along with the textual information has only increased over time.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

After participating in the session the students will be able to articulate the power of visual information; think critically about images applying suggested evaluation criteria; and find reliable images using recommended tools and techniques.

• • •

COOKING TIME

60–90 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

25–40 people per class. The size of the audience could be even bigger, but it would be more difficult to monitor and moderate hands-on activities.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This session contributes to students’ awareness of the necessity to determine the validity of information and ask questions about the origin, context, and suitability for the specific information need. It teaches them to use research methods appropriate to the need and discipline.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • • •

Computer, projector, and screen for the instructor Students’ own or library-supplied computers or laptops PowerPoint presentation or a series of images Access to the course in the Learning Management System (LMS) (optional but desirable)

PREPARATION

• • •

Prepare a PowerPoint or talking points and images to illustrate them. Prepare activities to accompany the lecture. Publish images, URLs, etc. for class activities to the course in LMS (optional but desirable).

COOKING METHOD

1. Show some compelling, discipline-spe52

cific images first by themselves and then accompanied by a story/context. Have students respond to the prompts: “Why are images important? What can they do better than text?” 2. Show several images of varying quality and degrees of authenticity. Invite students to respond to the prompts: “What were some problems with the images you found on the Web for this class? What are the challenges with evaluating images found on the public Web?” Summarize the responses. 3. Present examples of the following ways of image manipulation: a. hoaxes (inserting or deleting details, cloning, creating composite images, cropping, etc.) b. doctored images (color adjustments, resizing and repositioning details, etc.) c. trick angles and forced perspective d. staged images (using models and props) e. false captions 4. Activity: Working in pairs or small groups, students examine assigned images and do research to answer the following prompts: a. Who is the photographer? b. Where was the photograph published? c. What is the publisher’s reputation?

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Hart 5. Have students report back. Provide tips on determining authority and the publisher’s reputation. 6. Optional: Discuss companion images and how they help to understand the story. 7. Discuss the ways images can be presented (title, captions, placement, etc.). Invite students to pay attention to the text accompanying the image (if applicable) and examine the relationship between the text and the image. 8. Share the checklist for thinking critically about images. 9. Point students to library resources for finding reliable, high-quality images. If the

links and tips are not added to the LMS, provide a handout or show where they can be accessed. 10. Time permitting: Have students start searching for images related to their topics. 11. Provide a handout on citing images or a link to the appropriate resource.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

•

If you are embedded in the course in LMS, you can ask students to share images they found and provide feedback. You will also be able to communicate with them and provide follow-up sup-

Checklist for Thinking Critically about Images

• • • • • • • •

CHEF’S NOTES

The session was originally designed for the course on women in the developing world and was later modified for other courses. Elements of this session, such as the image evaluation activity and checklist, were used in other classes, including best practices in the visual presentation of information.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Who is the author?

Curtis, James. “Making Sense of Documentary Photography.” History Matters: The U.S. Survey on the Web. Accessed September 23, 2018. http://historymatters.gmu.edu/ mse/photos/.

Is the author credible? Where is the image published? What can we learn about the publisher? What is the intended audience?

NOTES

What effect is the image intended to achieve? What is the main argument of the image? Is there text accompanying the image? ◊ If so, what is the relationship between the text and the image?

• •

•

port leading to the final presentation, which will demonstrate what the students learned. In a 60-minute session, you may not have time for activities, but you can still engage students by soliciting responses to questions and prompts.

Has the image been manipulated? What is left out? ◊ (Modified from: May 2009, 228).

53

May, Frances A. “Visual and Media Literacy, the Overlooked Competencies: How We Are Influenced by What We See.” In LOEX Conference Proceedings 2009, edited by Brad Sietz, Randal Baier, Susann de Vries, Sarah Fabian, Suzanne Gray, and Robert Stevens. 223-229. Ypsilani: Eastern Michigan University. https://commons. emich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1 037&context=loexconf2009.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Langridge

Y Tho:

Cooking with Catchphrases is Meme-orable Melissa Langridge, Niagara University; Samuel Kim, Pace University NUTRITION INFORMATION

This recipe encourages the cultivation of curiosity in freshmen while demonstrating how information is disseminated and could be misconstrued. We have access to a multitude of information since the advent of the internet. Too often, students describe that the sole use of a library database validates their appropriate selection and use of evidence. This problem-based learning scenario highlights flaws with this common first-year student perspective.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to identify the difference between keywords and subject terms; compare results when different databases are used; critically examine their results to construct new meaning; and identify the need to use multiple sources when conducting research.

• • • •

COOKING TIME

•

Approximately 55 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

This activity may work with a class of any size as long as everyone has access to a computer.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

ACRL Frame: Authority Is Constructed and Contextual Knowledge practice: ◊ Understand that many disciplines have acknowledged authorities in the sense of well-known scholars and publications that are widely considered “standard,” and yet, even in those situations, some scholars would challenge the authority of those sources. ◊ Recognize that authoritative content may be packaged formally or informally and may include sources of all media types. Dispositions: ◊ Motivate themselves to find authoritative sources, recognizing that authority may be conferred or manifested in unexpected ways. ◊ Question traditional notions of granting authority and recognize the value of diverse ideas and worldviews. ACRL Frame: Research as Inquiry Knowledge practice: ◊ Formulate questions for research based on information gaps or on reexamination of existing, possibly conflicting, information. 54

◊ Synthesize ideas gathered from multiple sources. Dispositions: ◊ Value intellectual curiosity in developing questions and learning new investigative methods. ◊ Seek multiple perspectives during information gathering and assessment.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• •

The updated CRAAP test/Y Tho Meme Handout (in-class activity based on handout is printed on the other side). Copies of a popular magazine article

PREPARATION

1. Create an instruction aid to highlight the evaluation criteria of the CRAAP test under the umbrella question of the popular “Y Tho?” meme. The use of this familiar visual in information literacy sessions demands higher-order thinking while remaining relatable. 2. Select one article in advance that has personal meaning to you. The instructional technique of storytelling acts as an icebreaker and immediately engages the class. For example, we chose a popular magazine article that featured breast cancer myths and misconceptions. Some of these “myths” were in opposition to

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Langridge the research the library instructor had previously read. One myth claimed there wasn’t a connection between deodorant and breast cancer.

COOKING METHOD

1. The library instructor should demonstrate how to apply the Y Tho evaluation when evaluating credible sources to the example article. 2. Inform the class to always ask, “Can I believe this source to be true? Y Tho?” For our article featuring breast cancer myths and misconceptions, we offered example questions such as the following: Have there been recent discoveries in cancer research? Whom did the authors consult? Why does this article exist? Should it be the final source on which to base your research? Do I need to continue to purchase expensive non-aluminum-based deodorants? This last question was used as the class research question for the lesson activity. Going through your thought process aloud demonstrates the use of the news to garner ideas and develop a research question of personal interest. This demonstrates lifelong learning and curiosity. 3. Inform students that they will each have to find one journal article that provides evidence to support or refute the magazine’s claim that deodorant does not cause cancer. 4. Break students into small groups. Assign various subscription databases to each one in order to demonstrate the variety of

information each one offers. 5. Once everyone found one article to analyze and has answered the questions on the Y Tho activity, take a quick poll of the entire class to find out who found that the myth was found to be true. 6. Ask one student from each group to review their results. Place emphasis on the keywords and subject terms used. The library instructor should prod for further explanation using the catchphrase, Y Tho.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Formative assessment is collected on a worksheet. This worksheet models the use of the Y Tho questions they should ask. Don’t forget to include the popular meme. The use of a free meme generator will allow you to add the following text to the meme: “When your professor says you can’t Google everything”:

ALLERGY WARNINGS

Walk around the classroom while students are attempting to find their own examples to either support or refute the example claim. You may need to assist in the generation of alternative keywords and/or point out the listed subject terms in the database as it was not covered during the review of the Y Tho handout.

CHEF’S NOTE

Want to modify the example topic? Consider the calendar year when selecting hot topic articles in popular sources. In our example, the October issue of a popular magazine offered a feature article on Breast Cancer Awareness month. Current headlines would also work but might limit lesson usage as the news changes quickly.

NOTES

Botero, Fernando. Pope Leo X (After Raphael). 1964. Oil on Canvas. Uffizi Gallery, Florence, Italy. Accessed October 11, 2017. https:// www.wikiart.org/en/fernando-botero/ pope-leo-x-after-raphael. 55

• • • • • • •

Which database did you use? Which keywords did you use? Which filters did you use? Which article(s) did you choose? Why did you select this particular source? How will this information be used to inform your audience? How do you know this is accurate and reliable information?

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Statton Thompson

Teaching Evaluative Criteria to Increase Critical Thinking: Infographics 101

Dana Statton Thompson, Research and Instruction Librarian, Murray State University, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

This one-shot instruction session is intended to increase students’ critical thinking and visual literacy skills by teaching students how to evaluate and create infographics using specific, evaluative criteria.

•

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to evaluate infographics by checking for meaningful and accurate textual and visual content and create their own infographic using evaluative criteria to guide their editorial and creative choices

• •

COOKING TIME

The cooking time for this activity is 50–75 minutes.

NUMBER SERVED

This recipe serves no more than 40 students.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

• •

ACRL Visual Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education ◊ Standard Four: A visually literate student evaluates images and their sources ACRL Visual Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education

◊ Standard Six: A visually literate student designs and creates meaningful images and visual media ACRL Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education: ◊ Frame: Authority is Constructed and Contextual „ Knowledge practices: Ū Use research tools and indicators of authority to determine the credibility of sources and understand the elements that might temper this credibility. Ū Acknowledge they are developing their own authoritative voices in a particular area and recognize the responsibilities this entails, including seeking accuracy and reliability, respecting intellectual property, and participating in communities of practice.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• •

Computers with web access for students Instructor workstation with a projector for librarian

PREPARATION

Create a presentation with examples of “bad” infographics and a handout that outlines the CRAAP test for textual analysis and the prin56

ciples of design for visual analysis (see Chef’s Note 1). If you want the students to evaluate an infographic on their own, it is highly recommended that you develop a handout with 3–5 questions for them to answer, specifically referencing the CRAAP Test and the principles of design.

COOKING METHOD

1. Introduction (10 minutes) a. Begin with a short introduction of the topic and the goals of the session. b. Introduce students to the CRAAP test in the context of textual analysis and the principles of design in the context of visual analysis for infographics. c. Provide a short lecture of what “bad” infographics look like and explain your reasoning. 2. Group discussion (5–10 minutes) a. Analyze the “bad” infographics using the CRAAP test and the principles of design as a group. 3. Individual work (25–35 minutes) a. Direct the students to find and evaluate an infographic they find on the internet according to the specific, evaluative criteria you have discussed. Pass out the handout with the 3–5 questions for them to answer, if including. b. Direct the students to create an

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Statton Thompson infographic using Canva, Piktochart, or Infogram (choose one web-based software for everyone to use, depending on preference) while keeping the CRAAP test and principles of design in mind. Provide the students with a set of standard information or data points you would like them to include in the infographic (5 or fewer is recommended; see Chef’s Note 2). Remind them that that this is a quick, low-stakes assignment and will not be graded (see Chef’s Note 3). 4. Group report (10 minutes) a. Have students upload their infographic to the LMS or padlet.com and ask students for volunteer presenters to share their infographic with the group. If no one volunteers, the librarian can select a few lucky winners! 5. Conclude (5–10 minutes) a. Restate the learning outcomes and check for comprehension. Summarize the lesson and allow for some Q&A time, if possible.

ALLERGY WARNING

Students may feel unsure of using new, unfamiliar software. If possible, partner with the professor before the lesson and direct students to online tutorials for the software. Students may also have no familiarity with the principles of design, leading to some frustration or “I can’t do it” moments. Remind the student(s) that they are constantly, unconsciously evaluating their everyday surroundings and to tap into that skill set.

CHEF’S NOTE

1. Be sure to explain to the students that since infographics contain both text and visuals, both types of information need to be evaluated. Because infographics frequently utilize information found on the internet and are also found on websites themselves, the CRAAP test provides a sound method for determining how accurate and reliable an infographic is. Likewise, infographics rely on visual information, so utilizing the principles of design is equally important. 2. Depending on the course content, it may be appropriate to bring in aspects of data literacy here. Speak with the professor beforehand to determine how much time to devote to data literacy, if needed. 3. If the session feels rushed or the students need more time to evaluate their found infographics, students are welcome to create their infographic independent of the session or after the session concludes. The infographics can then be graded by the professor as a low-stakes assessment.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

“Understanding Formal Analysis: Principles of Design.” J. Paul Getty Museum. https:// www.getty.edu/education/teachers/ building_lessons/principles_design.pdf.

57

Examples of Student-Created Infographics Without Learning Evaluative Criteria

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Statton Thompson

Examples of Student-Created Infographics With Learning Evaluative Criteria

58

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Boyd

Where the Recipe Goes Wrong: Stirring Bias into the Information Mix

Susan K. Boyd, Engineering/Math Librarian, Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, CA, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

This instruction session was developed to address an engineering professor’s concern that his students weren’t able to discern between factual and biased information. They weren’t evaluating the information they found, and readily accepted as truth anything pertinent to their research topic. While this plan was done in an elective civil engineering class, it could easily be adapted for any class using controversial and biased sources.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students learn to evaluate information from the internet and to recognize and explain how the creation of information, namely building a document by citing other sources, can lead to bias. Students also learn to counter an argument by searching library databases for reliable information.

COOKING TIME

This recipe calls for a one-shot session in a longer 100-minute time frame. To adjust this recipe or a shorter 60-minute class, skip the first exercise on evaluating websites and begin with the document selected and the analysis of its citations.

NUMBER SERVED

This recipe was cooked by a small class and

students worked individually. However, for larger classes, recommend cooking in pairs or small groups.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

Students examine the ACRL Frame Information Creation as Process and how that process can create bias. They also discover that being deemed an “authority” doesn’t always mean the information you created is credible.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • • • • • • • •

One computer lab One librarian Class of students LibGuide (example: https://libguides.scu. edu/CENG161) which will include websites on two sides of a controversial issue Evaluation guidelines for internet websites and other documents A controversial document with references as the example for Activity 2 (50 minutes), such as https://tpusa.com/wpcontent/uploads/2016/12/10WaysFossilF uelsImproveOurDailyLives.pdf Links to the full text (if possible) of the references Worksheet as an aid for students evaluating the document and sources they cited Here are some examples for this particu59

lar class for Activity 1 (30 minutes) where C label is Conservative and an L label is Liberal: ◊ CATO Institute Global Warming (https://www.cato.org/research/ global-warming) — C ◊ Heartland Institute (https://www. heartland.org/Center-ClimateEnvironment/index.html) — C ◊ IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (https://www.ipcc. ch/report/ar5/) — L ◊ National Climate Assessment (https:// nca2014.globalchange.gov/) — L

PREPARATION

Set up the ingredients (as listed in Ingredients and Equipment) in the LibGuide.

COOKING METHOD

1. Introduction a. Explain what the students are expected to learn. 2. Activity 1 (30 minutes) a. Students view the website they’re assigned and discuss their opinion on the evaluation criteria, such as purpose, authority/trustworthiness, advertising/sponsorship, etc. 3. Activity 2 (50 minutes) a. Students move on from evaluating websites (or start here if they are in

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION a class of about an hour) to examining a document from a controversial organization. Assign each student or each student group to a section of the document making sure that it cites references. b. Ask the students to read through the short section and click on the cited references which are given in the LibGuide. c. Assign the worksheet. d. Discuss the students’ findings.

ALLERGY WARNING

If you decide to select your own sources for these two exercises, here are two recommendations: 1. Select a variety of websites on obvious ends of the liberal/conservative spectrum. 2. Select a document, again from an obvious end of the liberal/conservative spectrum that has chapters and references for each chapter for the students to evaluate.

CHEF’S NOTES

The faculty member chose 10 Ways Fossil Fuels Improve Our Daily Lives for this exercise because the conservative campus organization (Turning Point) was already well-known to students. Turning Point was first denied registration as a student organization on campus, but then that decision was reversed. This notoriety and reputation got the students’ attention and their eager participation. An “Ah-ha” moment came when students were shocked by how data was presented in the book The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels, by

Boyd

Alex Epstein. This book was cited numerous times in the document. For example, two charts were placed next to each other, one showing the increase in fossil fuel use and the other showing the decline in cases of tuberculosis. The title of the figure was “More fossil fuel use, less tuberculosis.” Use of evidence from sources like this one showed students how data can be manipulated to show desired outcomes. There was a lively conversation among students, their professor, and the librarian throughout this library session. The faculty member said the goals of the class were reached, it exceeded his expectations, and he would be telling other faculty members about it.

NOTES

Epstein, Alexander J. 2014. The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels. New York, New York: Portfolio/Penguin. Hjorland, Birger. 2012. “Methods for Evaluating Information Sources: An Annotated Catalogue.” Journal of Information Science 38 (3): 258–268. https://doi-org.libproxy. scu.edu/10.1177/0165551512439178. Turning Point, USA. 2016. 10 Ways Fossil Fuels Improve our Daily Lives. Lemont, IL: Turning Point USA.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES Directions and questions on Google Forms worksheet for Activity 2: You’ll be assigned to ONE of the Ten Ways Fossil Fuels Improve Our Daily Lives in the document by Turning Point USA. Answer the questions below: What is your opinion on point? [Note which number] Besides their website, where would you search for information on the organization that published this document? Read the content of point [note which number] carefully. What source(s) do they use to back up their contention? Can you find your own evidence for or against point [note which number]? Use library resources (preferably one or more peer-reviewed articles) as evidence.

• • • •

Recommended environmental databases: Agricultural and Environmental Science Collection or GreenFILE. Recommended statistical databases: Data-Planet or Statista.

60

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Hickey

From CRAAP to KOALAty Brittany Hickey, Reference & Instruction Librarian, Columbia College NUTRITION INFORMATION

This recipe offers a “punny” twist on the classic CRAAP test, inspired by our school’s mascot. It is meant to be an appetizer or side dish, not the main course. This recipe pairs well with lessons discussing popular versus scholarly sources.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to evaluate the quality and appropriateness of a resource in relation to their research assignment.

COOKING TIME

Cooking time is approximately 15 minutes for ten students. Add one to two minutes per additional student.

printed depending on the needs and technology capabilities of the class.

COOKING METHOD

1. Using PowerPoint slides or a video, explain what it takes for a source to KOALAfy as good information. 2. Have students repeat the KOALAfications back to you. 3. Give each student a specific source and have them ponder (individually, in pairs, or in groups) whether or not the informa-

tion source is one of KOALAty. Let simmer for approximately five minutes. 4. Discuss the sources as a class.

CHEF’S NOTES

This recipe was created after some allergic reactions to the CRAAP test. The chef needed a gluten-free alternative for the sophisticated palate of the women’s college students. KOALA was chosen because it is the Columbia College mascot, making it easier for students to relate to and remember.

Does your source meet KOALA-ty standards? Knowledge: Is the author knowledgeable on the subject? What are their credentials? What makes the author an expert on this subject?

DIETARY GUIDELINES

Objective: What is the purpose of this website/article? Is it persuasive or informative? Educational or entertaining? Who is the target audience (children, students, general public, experts, etc.)?

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

Accuracy: Is this the latest information on the topic? Is the information correct? Can the information be verified elsewhere? When was it published? Did the author list their references? Has it been updated? Are links functional?

ACRL Frame: Authority is Constructed and Contextual

• • •

Computer with PowerPoint/internet capabilities Examples of sources KOALTy standards on a PowerPoint slide

PREPARATION

Gather a collection of good and poor information sources. They may be online or

Leaning: Is the website/journal or author known to have any particular biases? Does the website/journal/author regularly spin stories to favor a certain side of a topic? What is the reputation of the website/journal/author? Applicability: Is the content related to your topic? Does it help you answer a research question or provide background information? Is the information too simple or overly detailed? 61

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Primeau

Quit Serving CRAAP, Start making DRAMA Hanna Primeau, The Ohio State University, [email protected] NUTRITIONAL INFORMATION

Students understand that source evaluation is a serious topic, but freshmen fall into the trap of binary thinking, where a source must be good or it must be bad. Working with the CRAAP test just continues this binary thinking, while DRAMA helps to move them out of this mindset and can still serve as a toolkit that evolves as they grow as scholars. Source evaluation can cause drama in a student’s life when they choose wrong sources or when their relatives argue over current events. An update to an old tool was needed, with Currency not nearly as straight to the point as Date, and the concept of Purpose being lost when speaking to a group who have little experience in thinking of themselves as content creators. Instead, we replace Purpose with Motivation, with all students understanding Motivation to create content, even if it’s at the basic level of “I want to pass this class to get a degree.”

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to successfully identify the credibility of sources for a variety of scenarios.

COOKING TIME

30–40 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

One classroom of any varying size

DIETARY GUIDELINES

•

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

•

This fulfills one serving of Authority is Constructed and Contextual from the ACRL Framework, along with a healthy dash of Research as Inquiry.

• • • • •

Enthusiastic librarian Digital link distribution method Kahoot Quiz created (example found here: go.osu.edu/nodrama) 6–7 sources of varying questionable credibility, related to course content Visual and/or audio aid defining DRAMA

PREPARATION

Prepare a briefing for students of the concept of DRAMA: Date, Relevance, Accuracy, Motivation, and Authority. Date: Inform students that the importance of this varies based on the topic, suggesting that historical dentistry versus modern is a very different thing and they wouldn’t want their dentist confusing the two. This can evolve into speaking about how certain types of information are slow to print, pushing whole-picture thinking. Relevance: Remind students that they do this already by looking at the title and then at the content of the media to see if it matches the topic they are personally researching.

•

•

62

•

Accuracy: Have students look to see if spelling and grammar are as they should be and then checking links. This can evolve into source checking and more depending on how advanced the course is. Motivation. Ask the students, “Why did someone spend time to make the resource you are looking at?” They are reminded that a webpage can cost money to create and maintain, and even the free ones involve someone’s time to create. Depending on how advanced the course is, even more depth can be taken here. You can discuss motivation to deceive and manipulate, or how a lack of proper motivation can cause facts to be reported without proper diligence. Authority. Remind students that anyone with an internet connection and the ability to read and type is all that is necessary to carve out a corner of the web. Give them a hypothetical situation: If class was canceled due to a water main break, why do they trust the school’s website? Would they trust a classmate or double-check? Authority allows this conversation to evolve over their lifetime as scholars but is a great starting point getting students to start thinking, “Should this person be writing this? Or should someone else?”

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Primeau

COOKING METHOD

1. Introduce students to the concept of DRAMA (see information in the Preparation section). 2. After having been introduced to DRAMA, students are then told to, either solo or in groups, look at 6–7 links and go through the DRAMA checklist, being given one minute per website. They are reminded that, statistically, people spend less than that on a webpage deciding if it is reliable. 3. A Kahoot, or similar online quiz, is distributed. This quiz shows a screenshot of each webpage that had been distributed earlier, each paired with a scenario for use, asking if this resource is appropriate or not.

4. While this quiz asks for binary responses, websites can be repeated with different scenarios, helping to emphasize that credibility is situational and non-binary.

ALLERGY WARNING

•

Screenshot showing a Kahoot.com quiz question, “Would you use this resource in your scholarly paper on marathon runners?” with another screenshot of an article titled, “Pathetic excuse for man only runs half marathon” from the satire site The Daily Mash, accessed October 1, 2018.

• •

Most freshmen are familiar with Kahoot quizzes, making the process of students navigating to the page a breeze. Kahoot includes the ability for anonymous names, allowing for a more inclusive learning environment, those who want to be vocal and competitive can be, but no one is being called out for lagging behind either. This is a low-stakes approach to students testing these new skills and with opportunities between each question to ask why students responded as they did for each scenario. This allows for both sides to be vocal while utilizing this new toolkit and allows for your own expert interjections as well. This leads to surprisingly civil, thoughtful conversations, particularly when you cue students to tell you what part of DRAMA led them to answer the way they did. Students can get incredibly competitive; be prepared to give a prize, even if it’s to high-five the librarian after class! This is a great group activity, allowing students with varying levels of technology to assist one another. A group dynamic allows students to make decisions on their own but allows them to explore other perspectives as well.

63

CHEF’S NOTES

• •

Let your faculty be your sous chef, asking them for a short list of the most commonly seen questionable resources that show up in research projects, making your prep easier. When making the Kahoot questions, ensure that more than one resource is ambiguous, allowing the students to work out how the sources could swing either way depending on a deeper inspection of the source.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Lewis

Rotten Resource Burger Abbey Lewis, University of Colorado Boulder, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

The CRAAP test (Blakeslee 2004) and other resource evaluation frameworks are often used to teach students about the characteristics of quality information. Turning the standard evaluation activity on its head and asking students to apply the framework to flawed resources allows them to examine problematic characteristics and learn to recognize and avoid academically unacceptable materials. Instructors also benefit from discussion on resource evaluation concepts for which students may need further clarification. Use the evaluation framework of your choice (CRAAP, RADAR, etc.) and a resource that doesn’t adhere to it to sharpen and assess students’ understanding of key evaluation concepts.

NUMBER SERVED

10–25 (5 groups of 2–5 students)

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • •

DIETARY GUIDELINES

ACRL Standards for Libraries in Higher Education (2011) Principle 3, Indicator 3.4 ACRL Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education (2016): Authority is Constructed and Contextual; Information Has Value

PREPARATION

• •

COOKING TIME

30 to 60 minutes, depending on the length of the resource and the degree to which students’ answers are discussed

The CRAAP test or another questionbased resource evaluation framework of your choice A collaborative writing tool, such as Google Docs, or self-stick easel pads A rotten resource that can’t pass the CRAAP test ◊ Pseudosciences, like phrenology and modern flat-Earth theory, offer fantastic ideas for rotten resource examples. Look for something strange and exciting to grab students’ interest but avoid satire and parody. The resource should present itself as actual science.

•

Make sure students have had at least some prior exposure to resource evaluation concepts. You may want to do a quick refresher on bias, credibility, and other pertinent concepts. Introduce students to your chosen evaluative criteria, such as the CRAAP test, providing a brief overview of its purpose and how it might be applied in their course assignments. Don’t tell the students that the resource is problematic prior to the activity. The 64

goal is to provide them with the experience needed to make that determination on their own.

COOKING METHOD

1. Have the students read through the resource. If you’re able to use a flippedclassroom model, this is an excellent reading assignment for them to complete prior to the class. 2. Divide the students into five groups with each group assigned to the questions associated with a particular letter of the test (i.e., Group #1 answers the Currency questions, Group #2 answers the Relevance questions, and so on). You may find it useful to tweak the questions in the test to apply more directly to the resource or students’ information needs. ◊ For example, if the resource isn’t online, the question “Are the links functional?” could become “When were the sources cited by this source created?” If students are exploring widely differing topics in their own assignments, “Does the information relate to your topic or question?” could be rephrased as “What kind of topic might someone interested in this resource be researching?” 3. The groups should post their answers to the class document or the easel-pads as they work. Circulate through the room to help the students think through their

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Lewis answers and encourage them to write full explanations of their reasoning. What makes them think that the resource was intended for a general audience? What sort of evidence is used to support the information presented? These details can be helpful for class discussion and will provide additional insight during the assessment phase. 4. Review the answers as a class. Take special care to examine the questions where students recognize a problem with the resource and talk about how a more appropriate resource might differ from the one used. For example, if the author is not qualified to write on the topic, discuss the types of professional affiliations and educational background that might be expected from a more credible author. Ask the students what they thought about the resource as a whole and encourage them to discuss additional aspects of the resource not covered by the CRAAP test that affected their perception of it.

•

What insights did students have about the resource that weren’t covered by questions in the CRAAP test? The first two questions are helpful for gauging students’ understanding of resource evaluation concepts. These can identify areas where students need more clarification and generate ideas for explaining them. The last two questions help instructors re-imagine the CRAAP test in ways that better serve students and allow for a more complete discussion of desirable and undesirable information qualities.

NOTES

Blakeslee, Sarah. 2004. “The CRAAP Test.” LOEX Quarterly. http://commons.emich.edu/ cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&conte xt=loexquarterly.

ASSESSMENT (DIGESTIF)

After the class, review the students’ answers and use them, along with your observations and any notes, to answer the following questions: What questions were students unable to answer correctly or completely? What questions did students have as they worked through the test? How might a question be rephrased to allow a student to think about the idea more thoroughly?

• • •

65

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Dumuhosky and Kegler

It’s a TRAP! Laura Dumuhosky, The College at Brockport, State University of New York (SUNY), [email protected]; Jennifer Kegler, The College at Brockport, State University of New York (SUNY), [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

The librarians at The College at Brockport collaborated with faculty from the introductory English composition course to deliver a threepart lesson on evaluating sources and integrating them into an argumentative paper. The lessons outline the research process from beginning to end and implement the TRAP method for evaluating resources (Timeliness, Relevance, Authority, Purpose). The first session introduces students to a librarian and the TRAP method and requires the students to complete a worksheet for the next session. The second session involves a continuation of the TRAP method discussion and a handson application where students learn how to search databases and find articles about their topics. The final session deals with MLA citation style and why that is important for the scholarly conversation.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

This activity provides a formative assessment of the following learning outcomes, which are part of the SUNY General Education Requirements under the Information Management Competency. Students will understand and use basic research techniques. Students will locate, evaluate, and synthesize information from a variety of formats.

• •

COOKING TIME

Class sessions: 80 minutes spread out over 3 class sessions Full project with assessment activity done by librarians: 1 semester

NUMBER SERVED

22 students + 1 instructor/class section

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This activity helps students think about evaluating resources with the simple acronym TRAP (Timeliness, Relevance, Authority, Purpose). Three sessions demonstrate different threshold concepts. 1. A brief (15 minutes) in-person session, facilitated by a librarian or the instructor, to demonstrate search strategies online (Searching as Strategic Exploration). 2. A full (50 minute) research session in the library, facilitated by a librarian or the instructor, to discuss using the TRAP method for source evaluation. Students come to the session having completed the library assignment. TRAP is applied to one source the students identify that might help them with their topic, scholarly and non-scholarly, by the end of the session (Authority is Constructed and Contextual and Information Creation as Process). Discussion in the full session also includes 66

strategies for searching databases and the library catalog (Research as Inquiry). 3. A brief (15–20 minute) in-person session, facilitated by a librarian or their instructor, to discuss the basics of MLA and the purpose of citation (Information has Value and Scholarship as Conversation).

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• •

TRAP/generating search terms worksheet, citation activity, and rubric: http:// bit.ly/ReframingCollegeFY LibGuide: https://library.brockport.edu/ TRAP

COOKING METHOD

1. In the first session, students meet a librarian in their own classroom to decrease library anxiety. The librarian outlines brainstorming for search terms and introduces the TRAP method, explaining its importance for sources found through a Google search. This is a great opportunity to briefly introduce why a student would use a database and what a database does better than Google (despite appearances). Students are assigned a “TRAP worksheet” where they use one of their sources to answer how it meets the requirements. They also are shown a LibGuide where they can find more information about each piece of the TRAP.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Dumuhosky and Kegler 2. In the second session, students visit the library and a computer lab for a hands-on workshop. Here, the librarian outlines how to use a database and reviews why they are superior for scholarly researching, as well as reviews why the search term brainstorm is so important as a first step. The librarian models a search and reinforces the TRAP concept by using one of the search results as an example. The students then use most of the session to begin their own research, with both instructor and librarian available to answer questions. 3. The final (though not always chronologically) session deals with citation. The classes use MLA style, but the session focuses more on why citation is important to the research process. It serves not only as a

way to give credit to the original author but as a way to prove their own credibility. There is also an emphasis on the citation’s purpose of leading the reader to more information. 4. The library’s assessment of the activity is done using the Library Assignment worksheet and an annotated bibliography (preferred) or works-cited page from each participating student. These materials are run against the TRAP rubric.

• •

ALLERGY WARNING

•

Meeting with a class three times can be time-consuming. We have started with two librarians and with the initiation of a new information literacy team this summer; we hope to add three more to

TRAP table that students receive as part of the assignment Timeliness

Relevance

Authority

Purpose

When was this published?

Does this discuss at least part of my topic?

Who is the author?

Is the source peerreviewed?

Has it ever been updated?

Does this allow me to build on the topic?

Does the source tell me about the author?

What is the purpose?

Do I need up-to-date information?

Does this provide a point I can disprove?

Is the author qualified?

Is the purpose stated clearly?

Where did the author get their information?

Who is the intended audience?

Would an older source Is my topic still imporbe better? tant in the field?

67

the rotation. We do not meet with every introductory composition course, but the methods and materials are shared at a meeting of the course instructors at the start of the academic year to allow for voluntary participation. Even among the instructors who participate, not all choose to include the citation session, so supplemental online materials are being pursued. Another issue is how long to allow students to keep the Library Assignment worksheet after they fill it out. Some instructors have asked for students to retain their completed copy until the annotated bibliography or paper is finished, but some students lose them before they can hand them in with the paper.

CHEF’S NOTES

•

•

Overall, faculty have reported that the lessons have helped to decrease library anxiety among their students and that the sources students used were of a higher caliber than ones in previous years. In the librarians’ assessment of the TRAP worksheets, students showed a better understanding of how to evaluate their sources and a higher quality of sources than those who did not use the TRAP worksheet. The TRAP worksheet and works cited/ annotated bibliography have now been formally approved to serve as the assessment for the Information Management Competency student learning outcomes

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Dumuhosky and Kegler

for the college. This allows the library to work with more general education classes, whether in person or virtually.

NOTES

College at Brockport. “College Composition Course Description.” Last modified October 1, 2018. https://www.brockport. edu/academics/english/composition/ english_112.html. Mellon, Constance. “Library Anxiety: A Grounded Theory and Its Development.” College and Research Libraries, 47, no. 2 (1986): 16–165. https://crl.acrl.org/index.php/crl/ article/view/14195/15641. Nelson, Jody, Joan Morrison, and Lindsey Whitson. “Piloting a Blended Model for Sustainable IL Programming.” Reference Services Review 43, no. 1 (2015): 137–151. doi:10.1108/RSR-09-2014-0040. State University of New York. “General Education Requirements.” Accessed October 2, 2018. https://www.suny.edu/attend/ academics/genedreq/.

68

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Gruber

The Best Cheeseburger Ever Anne Marie Gruber, University of Northern Iowa, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

as subject expertise, societal position, or special experience and recognize that authoritative content may be packaged formally or informally and may include sources of all media types.

2.

3.

Students will develop increased motivation for critically evaluating sources and describe multiple criteria for evaluating sources.

Dispositions focus on learners’ inclinations to motivate themselves to find authoritative sources, recognizing that authority may be conferred or manifested in unexpected ways; develop awareness of the importance of assessing content with a skeptical stance and with a self-awareness of their own biases and worldview; and question traditional notions of granting authority and recognize the value of diverse ideas and worldviews.

COOKING TIME

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

This flexible recipe about evaluating sources can be done with minimal time, preparation, and equipment. It helps students think about sources in a different way than they likely have before, encouraging careful consideration of various source evaluation criteria without using an oversimplified checklist approach. The recipe can apply to any level or discipline and primarily targets students’ dispositions related to source evaluation.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

15–20 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

10–40 students

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This recipe meets several dietary needs related to the ACRL Framework concept Authority is Constructed and Contextual. Knowledge practices focus on learners’ abilities to define different types of authority, such

•

• • • •

Whiteboard and whiteboard marker (or poster paper and marker). Since this recipe is free of specialty ingredients, it can be cooked nearly anywhere.

4.

PREPARATION

No preparation is required, but you might consider practicing this recipe first with colleagues or student employees.

COOKING METHOD

1. Ask students to think about the best cheeseburger they ever ate. Have them 69

5.

share aloud what made the burger so good. As students share, write each characteristic on the whiteboard in two unlabeled columns. One column includes ingredients, such as bacon, cheese, lettuce, tomato, etc. The other goes beyond simply listing ingredients, including things that truly determine burger quality, i.e., ingredients’ freshness, local sourcing, the cook/ chef’s skills, etc. Students may need to be prompted to list things for the second column. When prompting, be sure not to give away the differences between the two columns or why you are writing characteristics in columns. Some relevant questions include: Who made the burger? How many of you were thinking about a restaurant burger? A home-cooked burger? Does the training of the cook/chef matter? When the columns are populated (the first will likely be far longer), ask students to vote for which column is more important to the overall quality of the burger. Generally, the students will come to an agreement that the second column has more bearing on quality. Debrief together about why the second column is more important. A typical conclusion is that if those characteristics are in place, the ingredients will follow. It’s the actual quality of the ingredients and

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION credentials/experience of the chef that elevate the humble burger into something special, not just the fact that there are a bunch of toppings. 6. Explain how the burger metaphor is related to sources. Be creative! Examples:

Gruber

Cost/convenience: An amazing burger might cost a bit more and might require traveling to a particular restaurant.

Cost/convenience: High-quality sources can be more expensive to produce and might be behind a paywall or require placing a request.

The chef/cook: It’s important that they have some credentials, such as a culinary degree or even just lots of experience at the backyard BBQ in order to put out a quality product.

The author: We need to consider how qualified they are to write about the topic. For example, journalists may write about the same topic as researchers but likely don’t have a related degree.

7. If it didn’t come naturally for students to populate the second column, point out that evaluating sources doesn’t come naturally at times. We initially may look more at the content itself and even how long a source may be. But we should train ourselves to look beyond that.

The setting: The restaurant matters. After all, your favorite burger probably came from someplace a little better than McDonald’s!

The source: The book, magazine, newspaper, journal, or website where a chapter or article appears says a lot about its credibility.

Quieter student “diners” may need some encouragement to partake.

Freshness: I don’t care if you have a giant burger and tons of toppings. If they aren’t fresh, the quality is compromised.

Publication date: This matters more for some topics than others but should be a factor when selecting sources.

Sourcing: Fresh, local beef and vegetables harvested in the chef’s own garden are going to taste much better than anything that had to travel a long way.

Citations: What sources did the authors cite? If they are high-quality, they’ll contribute to a higher-quality source.

ALLERGY WARNING

CHEF’S NOTES

•

•

This recipe was created by a stroke of inspiration during a class discussion and was later formalized into a structured recipe. While designed for early college students in required introductory courses, this recipe has been successfully tested with undergraduate students at a variety of levels/subjects. Some students will need to think about a veggie burger or other cheeseburger alternative. My diners often include many from small towns. I gain credibility when sharing how this city kid finally discovered that locally produced meat is much higher quality and tastier than typical grocery store meat! If your diners include inter70

•

•

national students or other diverse populations, be ready to modify this recipe accordingly. It can even double-dip as a lesson about American food culture! A little humor goes a long way. You might ask students to stop drooling as they think about a burger, or you may give a negative review of the hockey puck burgers your mom made during your childhood. (My librarian mom knows I do this.) This quick bite can be a standalone lesson with limited time or an appetizer to a larger instruction session “meal.” It would transition nicely into hands-on searching time, discussion of the popular/scholarly source spectrum, or analysis of sample sources in groups. Encourage students to keep the columns in mind as they evaluate and select sources.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Reeve

Scholarly Journal Evaluation Activity Mellanie Reeve, Chaffey College NUTRITION INFORMATION

The Scholarly Journal Evaluation workshop has been offered at Chaffey College for one year through the Language Success Center. It was developed in order to walk students through the process of how to evaluate and recognize a scholarly journal article. The workshop breaks down what key pieces of information students need to examine in order to determine if an article is scholarly as well as to consider issues of currency, bias, authority, information on the peer-reviewed process, and reference sources. Most library one-shot sessions are focused on how to access and develop search strategies in order to locate relevant articles for students’ research assignments. This activity digs in a little deeper and focuses more on detailed evaluation and determining if an article is scholarly and appropriate to use for a college research paper.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Student demonstrates the ability to critically evaluate information and its sources

COOKING TIME

50 minutes

DIETARY GUIDELINES

ACRL Framework: Authority is Constructed and Contextual

NUMBER SERVED

•

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • • • •

Student handouts Student worksheets Articles Answer key Instructor computer with web access and projector

Scholarly Journal Evaluation Worksheet Name:_________________________________ Student ID#:_____________________

•

Class Name & Section #:_____________________________ Today's Date:_____________________ Article Title: _____________________________________________________________________________ Author(s): _______________________________________________________________________________ Title of the Journal/Publisher:________________________________________________________________ Article Publication Date: _________________________________

Information to Evaluate:

Circle One:

Currency:​​ Is the information current and up to date?

Yes No Maybe

Reference Sources: ​Does the article list references and/or sources, that tell you where the facts, quotes, or statistics came from?

Yes No Maybe

Publication: ​Is it a ​scholarly journal ​article?

Yes No Maybe

Bias: ​Is the article ​biased​​? Does the author(s) or publication have a specific opinion on the topic?

Yes No Maybe

Bias: ​Does it appear that there is any ​financial gain​​ for the author(s), publisher, or corporate sponsor?

Yes No Maybe

Would you use this article as a ​scholarly journal source​​ if you were researching this topic?

Yes No Maybe

•

Notes:

•

What is one thing you learned today in this session?

Up to 40 students

PREPARATION

How would you rate this activity 1-5 (with 5 being the highest rating)

1

2

71

3

4

5

Begin by locating at least 15 articles, including scholarly articles, magazine articles, and scholarly articles, with issues that make them problematic to use for a research paper. Because the workshop is offered through the Language Success Center and is open to all students, the articles cover various subject areas, vary in length, and range in how challenging they are to evaluate. Some of the topic areas include sports, beauty ideals, marijuana legalization, immigration, stem cells, and zombification. The articles are ranked and numbered by level of difficulty, and an answer key is created listing each article, the ranking, if it is scholarly, any issues, and whether it is appropriate to use for a research paper. A student handout was created that defined the main terms and provided students with tips on how to evaluate an article in order to determine if it is scholarly. This activity was designed in print format, as many of the classrooms do not have students’ computers. A student worksheet was also created, which covers the information in the same order as the student handout. For each evaluation area, options are listed for students to circle yes, no, and maybe, as well as a section for notes.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION The student worksheet also contains an assessment question, asking students to list one thing they learned and the workshop and to score the workshop from 1–5.

COOKING METHOD

1. The workshop is 50 minutes and starts off with a 10- to 15-minute discussion asking students to define a scholarly article, what the peer-reviewed process consists of, and how they determine if an article is scholarly and peer-reviewed. As the discussion wraps up, show the handout and review the main pieces of information that students should examine as they are evaluating the article. It is also helpful to pull up an example of a magazine article and a scholarly article to quickly show students the differences. This is also a good point to quickly show them how to locate scholarly articles in a database. 2. The next step is having the students break into groups of two to three students, as they will be working together to evaluate an article. Offer each group an article, depending on their interests and their experience with scholarly articles. Reassure the students that they do not have to read the whole article, they are just focusing on evaluating key pieces of information, as they would in determining if an article is scholarly and appropriate to use for a research paper. Make sure to check in with students as they work and talk through their thought process as they are evaluating each piece of information. This gener-

Reeve

ally takes about 20 minutes. 3. The final 10–15 minutes of the workshop is spent with each group discussing their thought process and conclusions they reached about the article. Generally, students will chime in during the discussion to add their thoughts on the different areas of the evaluation process. It is also helpful to clarify any confusion and reinforce the key pieces of information that should be evaluated. At the end of the workshop, students take the handout with them, but the librarian keeps the worksheet for assessment.

ALLERGY WARNING

This activity has been more challenging for students who have never performed research previously or who do not understand what a scholarly article is, but it still has been successful, and students do tend to evaluate the articles correctly. It generally has been more successful with English 1A students, the transfer level course, and when students are taking courses where they are required to research topics throughout the semester, as most of these students have become more familiar with the research process.

CHEF’S NOTES

•

The response to the Scholarly Journal Evaluation activity has been overwhelmingly positive from both students and faculty. For the next step, we will offer the activity to faculty in specific disciplines, as an option to cover during or in addition to library one-shot sessions. We 72

•

feel that it could be particularly effective in courses that focus on using scholarly articles, such as psychology, nursing, and gerontology, and we often hear that, in those courses, it continues to be a challenge to get students to utilize and recognize scholarly journal articles. The only modification needed would be to locate articles specific to the subject area prior to the instruction. We have also had success in modifying the activity in order to include it in a standard library one-shot session. The activity can be condensed into 20–30 minutes. This can be accomplished by having all the students in the class pair up to evaluate one or two articles, instead of having each pair of students evaluating different articles. This also saves time during the wrap-up group discussion on student findings, as they are evaluating a more limited number of articles, which makes for fewer variables to address when discussing student findings.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Becker

Reliable Article or Bogus Science:

Evaluating Claims Found in Popular Sources Joshua Becker, Information Literacy and Assessment Librarian, Southern New Hampshire University NUTRITION INFORMATION

Students will generate and share criteria to evaluate the credibility of published information. Working in small groups, students will use their criteria to evaluate a short article from a popular publication. This activity motivates students to be selective consumers of information and to seek sources that go into sufficient depth. This session is intended for first-year students without previous academic library experience.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

Students will be able to evaluate a published article based on personal and class generated criteria. Students will be able to recognize the differences between secondary sources and original research.

COOKING TIME

• •

35–40 minutes for the lesson 1–hour pre-class preparation for the librarian

NUMBER SERVED

Serves a first-year class of up to 30 students

DIETARY GUIDELINES

ACRL Frames: Authority is Constructed and Contextual

•

•

Information Creation as a Process

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • • • •

3×5 index cards or lined paper for each student Dry-erase board with markers Computer access for all students An instructor workstation with a projector and screen Copies of a popular article for the class (a link to an online article will also work)

• •

Copies of a short group worksheet to collect at the end of class An online copy of the original research study that is the basis for the popular article

PREPARATION

Prior to class, the librarian will find a short article from a popular source that makes a scientific claim with limited supporting evidence;

•

Article Title: Do you accept, based on the evidence presented, the main claim of this article? q Yes q No Provide three supporting reasons why you accept or reject the article’s claim: 1) 2) 3) List two ways this article could have been more convincing: 1) 2) 73

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

• •

find the original study that is mentioned in that popular article; and create a short worksheet for groups to use when evaluating this article.

COOKING METHOD

1. Begin by asking students: “What criteria do you use to determine whether claims from a published source are accurate and trustworthy?” Distribute index cards or lined paper. Students will each brainstorm at least five personal criteria. (2 minutes) 2. Student criteria will be written on the board and discussed with the class. Wait until at least 8–10 criteria are introduced before moving on. Supplement student responses with additional considerations if necessary. (Despite different terminology, most components of the CRAAP test should easily be generated by students.) (10–12 minutes) 3. Students will get into small groups (2 to 4 students depending on class size). All students will be given the same article to read. The brief article (generally 250–500 words) will be from a “popular source” that makes broad scientific claims. (3–5 minutes) 4. After students have finished reading, groups will evaluate the article’s main arguments using the criteria that were discussed earlier. Each group will be given a short worksheet to assist them in their evaluation. (5–7 minutes) 5. Groups will share their critical observations of the article with the class. At the conclusion of this discussion, students

Becker

should recognize that this article does not have enough supporting evidence to make a convincing argument. (10 minutes) 6. The librarian will discuss how this article was a secondary source. Using the class projector and screen, the librarian will briefly contrast the article with the primary source that contained the original research study. Students will recognize that secondary sources often summarize and simplify scientific research. Students will also understand the value of working with primary sources. (5 minutes)

ALLERGY WARNINGS

• •

• •

Controversial topics should be avoided as personal biases can sidetrack students. Students shouldn’t immediately believe the article is bogus science even if some of the claims appear vague or exaggerated. Effective articles are generally from well-known sources, while the lack of significant detail should cause some skepticism. It’s common for students to be fairly divided when first reading the article. Guide the class discussion to the quality of the evidence. Some groups will finish quickly. Encourage these groups to detail their observations on the worksheet.

CHEF’S NOTES

•

Article topics should be chosen to elicit student interest. Successful topics have included, “Do musical preferences reveal 74

• • • • •

your personality type?” and “Is chocolate a superfood?” Test the article on student workers and colleagues to ensure the topic is both interesting and open to disagreement. The librarian should stress that popular sources are an excellent place to start, but that original research is necessary to support one’s position. A useful follow-up to this activity, time permitting, would be to show students how to find the original research study in the library databases. Groups of three students work best during the article evaluation. The group worksheet often serves as the primary assessment for this activity.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Hallerduff and Lau-Bond

Investigate Your Ingredients:

Interrogating Sources and Sharing Findings Martinique Hallerduff, Associate Professor of Library Services, Oakton Community College, [email protected]; Jennifer Lau-Bond, Instruction Librarian, Harper College Library, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

This recipe teaches students to investigate sources, draw conclusions, and receive feedback on their work, thus enhancing their learning. Instead of beginning with direct instruction, we employ a problem-based learning activity to allow students to explore the sources on their own. Students first examine two different information sources on the same topic in different formats and record their findings in Google Forms. Findings are projected in class and the results are used to provide feedback and focus discussion. Students are then provided with two new types of sources, again on the same topic, and a final discussion is conducted.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

Students will describe the qualities/ features of different formats and categorize these resources by type in order to examine the idea that information is valued differently in different contexts. Students will investigate an author’s background and profession in order to define different types of authority.

• •

COOKING TIME

50 minutes

PREPARATION

NUMBER SERVED

Typically, 20–30 students; could be adapted for larger or smaller groups

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This activity is an excellent way to gauge students’ abilities and facility with interpreting information while learning to differentiate among source types, examine authority, consider discipline, purpose, and more. It most explicitly addresses the ACRL Frame Information Creations as Process, in that students are determining the usefulness of information by examining its audience, author, matching information needs with sources, and comparing the various ways professions or disciplines engage with a particular topic.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• •

Computers for all students Computer with projector for the librarian

Four different articles on the same topic in four different source types. Suggestions include scholarly article, news article, trade journal article, reference article, organizational website, etc. Google Forms

75

The preparation is fairly involved but can be reused or easily modified for future classes. The librarian must select four different articles, each from a different source type on the same topic. A separate Google Form needs to be prepared for each source, allowing the librarian to show students’ answers in real time and provide feedback as well as collect formative assessment information. Include the article citation and a permalink to the article at the top of the form. The Form should contain short-answer and multiplechoice questions about the assigned source. Examples: Elements of the citation: What is the title of the article? What is the source title? etc. All about the author: What is the author’s profession, credentials, etc.? What does the source look like: Does it contain photographs or advertising? Is it very technical or more readable? Are there graphs/tables? Audience: For whom is the source written?

• • • •

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Hallerduff and Lau-Bond

•

Example of the Google Form students complete:

How would you categorize the source? (Offer definitions of each.) ◊ A scholarly journal ◊ Newspaper/news magazine ◊ Trade journal ◊ Reference source

COOKING METHOD

1. Divide students into pairs or small groups. Assign article #1 to half the class and article #2 to the other half. 2. Have students begin at the prepared Google Form for the article they were assigned, which includes a link to the assigned source and a series of questions about that source. 3. Emphasize that this is not a “test” and that student responses are anonymous to mitigate any anxiety. 4. Tell students that they are free to use any resources they can find to answer the questions on the form, including searching online, examining the article, reading the database record, etc. It is important the students come up with the answers on their own, rather than asking the librarian to help them. 5. Give students time to fill out one form per pair/group. Be sure to ask students to explain their choices and debate answers with their pair/group. 6. Once all groups have submitted their forms, conduct an all-class guided discussion. Google Forms aggregates the summary of the results in real-time. The librarian should project the summarized responses in front of the class and use

Example of the Google Form results the librarian projects:

76

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Hallerduff and Lau-Bond those summaries to drive the conversation. This allows the librarian to focus on issues that seem most challenging to the students, and it gives both the librarian and the students the chance to debate the “answers” and discuss the implications of authority and information creation. 7. Repeat the process with two different types of sources and another all-class discussion.

CHEF’S NOTES

One of the benefits of this activity is adaptability. For instance, articles can be selected to correspond to the subject matter of the course or the level of the students. While it does take time to find appropriate articles for the students to explore, once articles have been identified and Google Forms have been created, they can be reused many times. Librarians can also tailor the questions on the form to prompt students to explore different aspects of the Framework. Examples might include having students more deeply investigate an article’s research methodology, trace an issue or single author’s work over time, scrutinize an author’s or publication’s potential sources of bias, etc.

77

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Deeke

“Wait, Twitter Isn’t Bad!?”:

The Power of a Personal Evaluation Plan Alexander Deeke, Digital Learning Librarian, University of Michigan, [email protected] NUTRITIONAL INFORMATION

This recipe was developed to introduce firstyear writing students to evaluating sources by encouraging them to think critically about their own evaluation criteria. The process of developing and applying their own criteria to sources impacts student learning more than simply giving students a criteria checklist by encouraging students to confront and reflect on their own evaluation practices and assumptions.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to understand the importance of credibility, relevance, currency, voice, and bias in order to create their own criteria to critically evaluate sources.

COOKING TIME

25–30 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

Typically serves 10–20 students but easily applies to larger classes

COOKING TECHNIQUE

Peer learning, group discussion, reflection time

DIETARY GUIDELINES

The ACRL Frame Authority is Constructed

and Contextual is addressed in this recipe by teaching students to evaluate all sources critically while encountering their own biases and assumptions on the authority of different types of sources.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • • •

Student computers Librarian website or LibGuide Worksheet Whiteboard

PREPARATION

• •

Website or LibGuide for students to access sources Worksheets for students with instructions for activity and link to the website/ LibGuide

COOKING METHOD

1. Brainstorm (3 minutes) ◊ Begin by explaining that sources are easier to evaluate when looking for specific criteria or characteristics. ◊ Ask students to get in pairs and brainstorm 4–5 criteria. Provide one example criteria (e.g., publication date) and have students write down their criteria on the worksheet. 2. Evaluating sources (6 minutes) ◊ Direct students to the librarian’s web78

site or LibGuide. The website should provide a sample research question or topic and links to four sources that might be used in a paper. Sources should vary in type and challenge assumptions such as: „ Scholarly article not directly related to the topic or was published much earlier than the topic „ Newspaper that has a political leaning „ News piece or interview that gives one side of the topic „ Social media post from an authoritative source such as a government official or expert directly relevant to the topic ◊ Give students 5 minutes to individually skim each source and then evaluate them following their worksheet criteria. Each student then ranks the sources from most to least credible on the worksheet. 3. Partner comparisons (3 minutes) ◊ Ask students to find a different partner to share their evaluation criteria and source rankings with. Students should briefly explain the rationale of their rankings to their partners. 4. Group discussion (10 minutes) ◊ Bring the class together and ask for students to share criteria they brain-

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Deeke stormed or heard. Comment or expand on the benefits of each criterion shared. ◊ Ask students to share their source rankings and write them down on a whiteboard. Typically, there are sources that are constantly near the top of the rankings (e.g., scholarly article) and others that are toward the bottom (e.g., social media post). Starting with sources that trended toward the bottom in multiple rankings, ask students about the positives and negatives for each source. Encourage students to explain their reasoning if there are different rankings for a source. ◊ The group discussion should reveal assumptions made by students, especially about social media and the scholarly article. Address the common assumptions of each source and then ask students to think about and explain how each source might be useful in a paper (primary versus secondary source, personal experience, voice, etc.). 5. Reflection (3 minutes) ◊ Give students a minute to review their criteria on the worksheet and ask them to revise it. Encourage them to think about what they used or didn’t use and to apply what they learned during the activity. ◊ After the reflection, give students 4–5 criteria that are important to consider from a librarian’s perspective. Criteria such as credibility of the source, relevance to topic, assignment require-

ments, currency, voice, and bias work well for most first-year classes.

ALLERGY WARNING

•

•

Students are sometimes hesitant to share their source rankings if they are different than the first ranking shared. It is important to create a positive and open atmosphere at the beginning to reinforce the idea that it is ok to have different rankings. It is very important to start from the bottom of the rankings during the group discussion to encourage participation for two reasons: ◊ Lower-ranked sources are usually not as straightforward for students, which often leads to more debate and discussion at the beginning and which continues throughout the discussion. ◊ Students are often very confident in their highest-ranked source, and demonstrating problems with a high-ranked source at the beginning can shake their confidence, which represses participation for the rest of the discussion.

CHEF’S NOTES

• •

Using a controversial or real-life issue such as concussions in football or the Flint water crisis can be helpful in finding a variety of sources and engaging students in the activity. Students tend to get excited when comparing their source rankings and usually start to debate with their partners on 79

•

•

their reasoning. This has led to highly participatory and fruitful class discussions where students are primarily learning from the experience and each other. The librarian’s role focuses on facilitating the conversation and clarifying points or arguments brought up by students. Four sources are the ideal number to use but this number can be adjusted. Testing this activity found that more than four sources really increased the discussion time while fewer than four limited the range of rankings students developed due to the lack of source variety. However, three sources have worked for classes with tighter time constraints. Using a close but not perfect scholarly article subtly teaches students to avoid trying to find a “silver-bullet” article on their topic. The activity teaches students to think critically on how scholarly articles can be incorporated to support parts of a student’s argument or topic.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Caffrey Gardner and Ospina

Something Smells Fishy:

Evaluating Journals for Credibility Carolyn Caffrey Gardner, California State University Dominguez Hills, [email protected]; Dana Ospina, California State University Dominguez Hills, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

Students produce and publish information in addition to consuming it. How do we help students evaluate potential publication venues for their scholarly work? This class asks students to explore journals within their discipline and to develop a framework for evaluating journal credibility with an eye toward potential publication. While not all students will publish scholarly work after graduation, thinking about the audience and the credibility of an information source is a transferable skill that can be used as an information creator in other contexts. This activity also helps students develop their identity as student-scholars.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

•

• •

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

Evaluate the quality of academic journals using a combination of factors, such as editorial board, publisher, peer-review process, and metrics. Reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of historic markers of journal quality, such as price.

COOKING TIME

45–60 minutes

NUMBERS SERVED

Digested best by undergraduate students conducting and presenting their own research, either within a course or as part of a workshop related to undergraduate research activities on your campus (McNair Scholars, Student Research Day, etc.). Can be served as a first course for graduate students as part of a tasting menu. Addressed the ACRL Framework concepts of Information Creation as a Process and Authority is Constructed and Contextual.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • •

“Think. Check. Submit.” YouTube video: https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=L4z0Nxq4Epc Online form or worksheet Several journals from the same discipline to evaluate. We recommend one high-quality, well-known journal, one middle-tier yet credible journal, and a potentially disreputable publication.

Serves undergraduates in classes of 15–35 80

COOKING TECHNIQUE

• •

Distribute active learning activity in small groups. Sauté with group discussion.

PREPARATION

•

•

Assemble your example journals for the activity. Journals within a single discipline are easier for students to compare; this is a great place to involve a faculty member if you are collaborating with a particular course instructor. Create an online form or worksheet for the activity.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Caffrey Gardner and Ospina

COOKING METHOD

Part I: Background (7 minutes) 1. Introduce students to the objectives of the library session. 2. Watch the “Think. Check. Submit.” video as a class. Part II: Activity and exploration (20 minutes) 1. Break students into small groups of 3–4 people. 2. Assign each group a different journal to explore. If it’s a large class, you can have groups double up on a journal. 3. Encourage students to answer questions about their journal, such as: a. Find your journal’s homepage on the web and locate the editorial board and publisher. Who is on the editorial board? Who is the publisher? What does this information tell you about the journal? b. What is the peer-review process like for your journal? What is the acceptance rate? Sometimes you’ll find information about the peer-review process on the journal’s homepage, under a section for instruction to authors; however, it’s not always easy to find. With that in mind, there are databases that provide additional information on journals. We have one in our database list called Cabell’s Directories. Find your journal in Cabell’s and answer the questions above. c. Now let’s find some journal metrics! An h-index is a citation metric that measures how many articles are cited a particular number of times and helps demonstrate the impact

of a particular journal. Go to scholar. google.com and click on “Metrics” toward the top of the screen. Find your journal and look at the five-year h-index. How does it compare to other journals in the same discipline? What does the h-index tell you? d. Finally, review several articles or issues of your selected journal. Now that you have thoroughly reviewed the journal, what overall letter grade would you give this journal (F to A+)? Why? Part III: Discussion (20 minutes) 1. Discuss a. Have each group describe their journal and its letter grade to the rest of the class. Do classmates agree based on the information presented? b. Emphasize the importance of reviewing all these factors together, in addition to the actual content published. c. Discuss with the faculty member the importance of checking with other colleagues in the field regarding journal reputation. d. Debunk myths of what is indicative of journal quality (price, open/closed access, article processing charges, place of publication). If they don’t arise through the information presented by students, ask general questions of the class such as, “Do you think the cost of a journal indicates its quality?” e. Note the importance of journal scope. A journal on addiction research will never be a great place for your research on educational testing, no matter the quality of the publication. 81

Part IV: Optional add-ons (15–20 minutes) 1. Transition to searching for publications for students’ own research projects as time allows, or look at sample author agreements and begin to talk about author rights.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

• •

Watch out for reinforcing problematic biases toward the superiority of Western scholarship to publications produced in the Global South. Avoid blacklists and the overly simplistic approach they take to determining credibility.

CHEF’S NOTE

•

• •

If you’re short on time, you can move the first half of the cooking method to a flipped classroom model and have students watch the video and complete the form before attending a librarian-led discussion in a short class session. Faculty love this recipe too! Feed all your hungry campus constituents by adapting the recipe for a faculty or graduate student-focused workshop. A set of journals we used for one psychology class were Journal of Applied Psychology (APA), Psychological Reports (SAGE Publishing), and Psychology Research (David Publishing Company).

NOTES

ThinkCheckSubmit.org. “Think. Check. Submit.” YouTube. January 15, 2016. https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=L4z0Nxq4Epc.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Premo

Consuming Information Like a Scientist: Evaluating and Comparing Scientific Resources

Rita Premo, Scholarly Communications Librarian, Sonoma State University, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

This recipe represents the primary information literacy instruction session for freshmen enrolled in a multicourse first-year experience that combines curricular and other elements in math, science, and logical and critical thinking. The class and the course director (from the Chemistry Department) come to the library for instruction during the second or third week of the fall semester.

• •

COOKING TIME

2 hours total

NUMBER SERVED

No more than 40 freshmen

DIETARY GUIDELINES

Objectives are to introduce freshmen to library resources broadly, discuss scientific information specifically, and prepare them for a year of interacting with different types of scientific information and creating their own works.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

•

42 copies: San Francisco Chronicle article “State’s Dentists Sink Teeth into Healdsburg Fluoride Fight,” from October 30, 2016

•

42 copies: handout based on the SMART test from the Constitutional Rights Foundation 9 numbered index cards, each naming a different resource: ◊ Clean Water Sonoma-Marin ◊ California Dental Association ◊ MedlinePlus ◊ Access Science ◊ Sage Knowledge ◊ National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research ◊ CQ Researcher ◊ Sonoma County Water Agency ◊ Academic Search Complete Library instruction classroom with ◊ 4 or 5 seats at each table ◊ A laptop at each seat

COOKING METHOD

1. Orientation a. After introducing yourself and presenting the session objectives, begin with a 15-minute tour of the library website and search demonstration, emphasizing the different types of resources available and avenues for research help. 2. Research cycle a. As a transitional activity, ask students where they’ve found scientific information previously; you may want to 82

provide examples as prompts. The goal is to learn more about students’ experiences and to remind them that they already regularly consume and use science information—whether handouts from a nurse, Twitter feeds, conversations with family, or popular magazines—beyond those traditionally considered “scholarly.” b. Then, briefly (10 minutes), describe the research cycle, starting with a researcher investigating the existing literature on their topic of interest, and place the sources named by students within that timeline. Be sure to acknowledge the nonlinear nature of the information cycle (e.g., that social media dissemination could stem from research institutions, individual authors, news outlets, etc, at different points). Note that scholarship is a conversation, with different parties, including themselves, contributing to the body of knowledge. 3. Think-pair-share exercise a. Now, introduce the think-pair-share exercise that constitutes the remainder of the session. Distribute to everyone the newspaper article and the handout. Students are already in groups of 4–5 people; give each group one of the index cards naming a resource.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Premo b. Explain that after scanning the article they should individually search their assigned source (via either the internet or the library website) for information about fluoride. c. Then, as a group, they should use the guidelines provided to critically evaluate the information’s reliability and discuss what it contributes to the scholarly conversation. d. Specific questions to address: What evidence of persuasion, prejudice, deception, or manipulation did they encounter? Would this source help them learn more about how communities should address water fluoridation? Why or why not? e. Be clear that each group will informally present to their classmates about the source and their review. f. Dedicate 30 minutes for the review, walk around the classroom to answer questions and interact with students, and move to the report-out earlier if students show signs that their discussions are complete. 4. Report-out a. During the report-out, signs that students are engaging with the exercise as intended might include statements about i. the inclusion of references and other source material; ii. clearly identified authors and their credentials; iii. the type of information: reference article, government report, blog post, journal article, etc.;

iv.

whether the material is for a general or expert audience; v. the specificity and context of the information; vi. the inclusion of graphic elements or videos; and vii. the ease in obtaining and/ or sorting through results. b. As each group presents its findings, ensure that everyone who wants to contribute has the opportunity. Ask questions that encourage students to share their thoughts and that support their participation. Be gentle if you need to correct a misstatement or suggest an amendment to a contribution. 5. Closing discussion a. Once all groups have presented their findings, ask for further questions or comments. b. Close the exercise by explaining the applicability of this session to their research activities in this and other courses: They must interrogate different types of information from a variety of resources, evaluate each in terms of validity and applicability to their own understanding and research need, and recognize the iterative nature of research. c. Remind everyone that this session represents just a taste of the research skills they will develop and reaffirm the library and yourself as available for assistance.

CHEF’S NOTES

•

This recipe’s research topic—fluoride— was chosen based on prior incarnations 83

•

•

of the course and its culminating student projects, such as patient handouts about vaccination safety and infographics on illicit drugs. Additionally, the news article used involves the local region, adding a layer of connection to students’ lived experience. The nine sources investigated and discussed offer examples of the wide range of scientific information students might encounter in terms of material types, search interfaces, and evaluation-related concerns. The resources were available from the library or the internet generally. A carefully developed mix will provide strong fodder for the share-out. Keep everyone engaged by avoiding a strict lecture format and framing the session as a conversation. Encourage students to ask questions and the faculty member to add their input.

NOTES

Constitutional Rights Foundation. “Fact Finding in the Information-Age.” Accessed July 17, 2018. http://www.crf-usa.org/images/ pdf/fact_finding.pdf. Ioannou, Filipa. “State’s Dentists Sink Teeth Into Healdsburg Fluoride Fight.” San Francisco Chronicle. October 31, 2016. https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/ article/State-dentists-sink-teeth-intoHealdsburg-10422972.php. Sonoma State University. “Chemistry and Biochemistry Freshman Learning Community.” Accessed May 15, 2018. https://web.sonoma.edu/aa/flc/ nonresidential/chemistry-biochem.html.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Whitlock

Ranking Relevant Articles with First-Year Nursing Students Brandy Whitlock, Professor and Instruction Librarian, Anne Arundel Community College (AAAC) NUTRITION INFORMATION

This recipe provides first-year nursing students the opportunity to work together to practice evaluating scholarly sources for relevance. Students also learn how to access and search appropriate databases for relevant sources.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to utilize a set of evaluation criteria to rank a set of scholarly articles for how relevant they are in addressing a specific information need and access and effectively search the library databases most relevant for finding information in nursing.

• •

COOKING TIME

30–35 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

Up to 40

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This recipe addresses a number of frames from ACRL’s Framework: Authority is Constructed and Contextual Research as Inquiry Searching as Strategic Exploration

• • •

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

•

Copies of four selected scholarly journal articles

• • •

Copies of evaluation criteria and scoring rubric Computer with internet access and projection Whiteboard and markers (optional)

PREPARATION

•

Find citations and abstracts for four scholarly journal articles with varying

degrees of relevance to a topic in nursing—in this case, the research question: What’s a proven strategy for helping nurses cope with work-related stress? ◊ Two of the abstracts should describe a study that is not very relevant, even though it contains the keywords from the research question (for instance, because the scope is quite narrow,

Relevancy: Is there information that addresses your research question directly? Does the article answer your specific research question (or provide a set of answers)? Is the topic of your question the main focus of the article? How relevant to your research question is the population that was studied or discussed? For research studies and meta-analyses, how generalizable are the findings, given sample size, level of correlation between variables, consistency of results, etc.?

• • •

Authority: Is the information authoritative enough? Are the authors’ credentials easy to find, and do they convince you that authors have expertlevel knowledge and/or experience? Was the article published in a reputable periodical? Is it peer-reviewed? Are there formal citations for works referenced, and are referenced works from reputable sources?

• • •

Reliability: Is the information reliable enough? If the article presents original research, do the authors prove correlation or causation between variables through experimentation? Was there a control group for the study, and, if so, were participants assigned randomly? Do the authors find compelling evidence through meta-analysis of previously published research? How was the research funded?

• • •

Currency: Is the information current enough? Was the article published recently? If original data are presented, were they gathered recently? If other research studies are discussed or analyzed, how old are those studies?

• • •

84

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Whitlock

• •

the focus is on students in nursing school rather than working nurses, etc.). ◊ The final two abstracts should be more relevant, and at least one might provide highly relevant meta-analyses. You want two articles that are clearly more relevant than the other two, and at least one whose evidence for a particular strategy’s success is particularly compelling. Make enough copies of these citations and abstracts for the class. Compose a short list of general evaluation criteria to copy and distribute to students.

COOKING METHOD

1. In class, present an information need related to nursing: “You are looking for information that will help you in recommending an effective strategy that nurses can use to cope with work-related stress. You are looking for strong evidence of a strategy’s effectiveness.” Ask students to jot down a few search terms they might use when looking for this information. 2. Pass out the copies of citations and abstracts you made, along with the list of evaluation criteria. Ask students to work in groups to rank the abstracts in terms of relevance, from least useful (1) to most useful (4) in providing strong evidence of a strategy’s effectiveness. Suggest that students consult the evaluation criteria you provided, but stress that their citations and abstracts won’t likely provide enough information to address every

criterion. 3. Each group should come to a consensus and report its rankings. A whiteboard or online document works well for recording their work. Once all groups have reported their rankings, ask why some groups ranked particular articles as more relevant than others. Highlight any patterns you see (e.g., if one of the articles in consistently ranked low or high). 4. Expect there to be wide disagreement at first, but help students understand why two of the articles are generally more relevant and two are less relevant. Lead a discussion about how relevant each article is in relation to the others, stressing the strength of evidence each presents and introducing factors that might complicate the rankings. 5. To begin a discussion about how to find relevant scholarly articles, have students revisit the search terms they brainstormed at the beginning of class. Group students’ possible search terms around the research question’s key concepts, and, for each key concept, have students list alternative terms that might prove helpful in a search. To come up with synonyms and closely related terms, encourage students to review the citations, metadata, and abstracts they have. 6. Discuss how to access library databases most relevant to nursing and how to set up advanced searches with key terms and the most relevant alternative search terms. Demonstrate helpful database features, like how to truncate and use phrase 85

searching, how to find out if a journal is peer-reviewed, and how to apply useful limiters. 7. Finally, task students with finding at least two recent, highly relevant articles from peer-reviewed medical journals that provide evidence for a particular intervention(s) related to a medical topic they’re studying. Hold up the two most germane articles from the earlier relevancy exercise as exemplars.

ALLERGY WARNING

Be careful not to let the conversation around the rankings get too competitive or judgmental. Also, you want to provide examples of factors that could complicate the rankings, but you don’t want to get mired down in the exceptions. There should be two articles that are, in almost all situations, clearly more relevant than the other two.

CHEF’S NOTES

At AACC, students are assigned topics by nursing faculty, and each student will eventually present the findings of two highly relevant articles to a medical team. Before students start working on their presentations, though, they must have their sources approved by the nursing faculty. We created a scoring rubric for nursing faculty to use that’s based on the evaluation criteria that we gave students in class. Instead of a grading scale, the rubric describes when students are “all set” with the sources they chose, when they “should consult a librarian,” and when they “must consult a librarian.”

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Whitlock

The article was published fairly recently, but the data analyzed were not collected recently, or the other studies authors cite were not published recently.

Authors do not attempt experimentation or rigorous metaanalysis or overviews of previously published research but instead provide opinion without compelling evidence. Research findings are absent, inconsistent, or unclear. Research funding may unclear or suspect. The article was not published recently.

tion, and so we designed this activity to let for relevancy and to provide them with strategies for searching on their own with relevancy in mind.

y,

l

86

.

© Andrew G. Truxal Library –evaluating Revised: 07/25/2018 students practice articles

d

The article was published fairly recently, but the data analyzed were not collected recently, or the other studies authors cite were not published recently.

The article was not published recently.

Authors do not attempt experimentation or rigorous metaanalysis or overviews of previously published research but instead provide opinion without compelling evidence. Research findings are absent, inconsistent, or unclear. Research funding may unclear or suspect.

It is difficult to find authors’ information, or the authors do not have expert-level knowledge or experience. Citations for referenced works are not formal or are absent. The article may not have been published in a reputable, peer-reviewed journal.

It is difficult to find authors’ information, or the authors do not have expert-level knowledge or experience. Citations for referenced works are not formal or are absent. The article may not have been published in a reputable, peer-reviewed journal.

Authors’ credentials are easy to find and point to some expert-level knowledge and/or experience but perhaps not in the area the student is researching, or the article was not published in a peer-reviewed journal. Citations may not be formal or may be absent, and they may not come from the most reputable sources. Authors do not attempt experimentation or rigorous metaanalysis of previously published research but instead provide overviews of past studies or details of case studies. Research findings may be inconsistent or unclear. Research funding may be unclear or suspect.

because students didn’t know how to search well enough to find the best evidence or if students did not know how to choose the best evidence from among the results they found. We imagined it was some combina-

f

s

We developed this learning activity in response to concerns that nursing faculty had with the work their students were submitting. Faculty felt students were not using the best evidence, and they weren’t sure if it was

MUST CONSULT A LIBRARIAN The article is not very relevant in addressing the student’s research question. The topic of the student’s question is not the focus of the article, the population studied in the article is not closely related to the student’s population of interest, and/or the findings are not generalizable.

n

Currency: Is the information current enough?

Authors prove correlation or causation between variables through experimentation. There was a control group for the study, and participants were assigned randomly. Alternatively, authors provide compelling evidence through rigorous meta-analysis of previously published research. Research was funded independently. The article was published recently, and any original data were gathered recently. Other research studies discussed or analyzed are also recent.

SHOULD CONSULT A LIBRARIAN This article may provide some useful information about the student’s topic, but the topic of the student’s question is not the focus of the article, or the population discussed in the article is not closely related to the student’s population of interest, or the findings are not very generalizable.

Authors’ credentials are easy to find and point to some expert-level knowledge and/or experience but perhaps not in the area the student is researching, or the article was not published in a peer-reviewed journal. Citations may not be formal or may be absent, and they may not come from the most reputable sources. Authors do not attempt experimentation or rigorous metaanalysis of previously published research but instead provide overviews of past studies or details of case studies. Research findings may be inconsistent or unclear. Research funding may be unclear or suspect.

Reliability: Is the information reliable enough?

MUST CONSULT A LIBRARIAN The article is not very relevant in addressing the student’s research question. The topic of the student’s question is not the focus of the article, the population studied in the article is not closely related to the student’s population of interest, and/or the findings are not generalizable.

Authority: Is the information authoritative enough?

ALL SET The article answers the student’s specific research question (or provides a set of answers). The topic of the student’s question is the main focus of the article. The population studied or discussed is appropriate. Findings are generalizable, with adequate sample sizes, levels of correlation between variables, consistency of results, etc. Authors’ credentials are easy to find and indicate that the authors have expert-level knowledge and/or experience. The article was published in a reputable, peer-reviewed periodical. There are formal citations for works referenced, and referenced works are from reputable sources.

SHOULD CONSULT A LIBRARIAN This article may provide some useful information about the student’s topic, but the topic of the student’s question is not the focus of the article, or the population discussed in the article is not closely related to the student’s population of interest, or the findings are not very generalizable.

CRITERIA Relevancy: Is there information that addresses your research question directly?

© Andrew G. Truxal Library – Revised: 07/25/2018

EVALUATING ARTICLES RUBRIC

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Goodsett

Inviting Students into the Kitchen:

Inquiry-Based Learning as a Critical Thinking Instructional Strategy Mandi Goodsett, Cleveland State University, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

This recipe was developed to teach first- or second-year students source evaluation using inquiry-based learning. The method could be modified for a variety of settings, including online. The purpose behind using inquirybased learning is to develop students’ cognitive habits of questioning, so they are able to transfer the evaluation skills they learn in the library session to other contexts. The evaluation process is focused less on finding quick answers and more on developing meaningful, searching questions about sources that are found as evidence.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will use inquiry-based learning to develop evaluation skills and the ability to ask meaningful questions about sources.

COOKING TIME

20–60 minutes

INGREDIENTS

• •

Whiteboard, blackboard, or smartboard Computers for students to find their own source to evaluate

PREPARATION

•

Establish a relationship with the instructor.

• •

•

Review the course syllabus. Confirm that the students will be conducting research and/or evaluating information sources as part of an assignment for the course. Determine what kind of information students are being asked to evaluate. Ascertain when students will be expected to choose sources for their research assignment and time the library instruction session accordingly.

COOKING METHOD

1. Often, we use checklists or other mnemonics to help students evaluate sources, but these tools may not encourage students to develop habits of inquiry or skepticism. This cooking method provides an alternative. 2. Instead of giving students an acronym and having them evaluate sources using it, start by working with the students to create a comprehensive list of questions that students might have about an information source. It can help to frame it as putting the source “on trial”; if students really needed to be certain a source was reliable, what would they need to know? Ask students to be as thorough as possible in their questioning. Usually, this question list is developed as part of a group 87

discussion, but it could also be completed as a think-pair-share activity. Sometimes it takes some prompting, but the students generally generate questions that meet all of the elements of the CRAAP test or a similar checklist and beyond. 3. Next, ask them to find a source and come up with their own list of questions about that source. 4. Once they have a list of questions, ask them to try to answer the questions on their own or with a partner. Emphasize the importance of the questions themselves, not just the answers. 5. This activity could be modified by having students choose resources, develop questions about the resources, and then switch with each other. The students would then be required to answer the questions developed by another student and perhaps even think of a few additional questions for another round of swapping. In an online environment, students could share their questions on a Padlet page.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

•

Students may not be immediately forthcoming with ideas for questions about a source. It can help to give them an example of a time they would need very high-quality information (e.g., when

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

•

•

researching a personal health-related issue, making a big purchase, or writing an important assignment) and ask them to really interrogate their information source. You may also find it helpful to evaluate an example source with the entire class to demonstrate the level of skepticism you’re expecting. If students are hesitant to come up with their own questions about a source on their own, provide the CRAAP test or another checklist as a starting place for developing questions. You can also give them a question bank to choose from, but the activity will have the greatest impact if students develop their own questions. Developing good questions is only half the battle; sometimes student-generated questions about a source are tricky for them to answer. You may need to provide some instruction on how to find answers to these difficult questions or plan for one-on-one time with students who are struggling to answer their questions. The struggle to answer tough questions about a source is, in itself, a learning opportunity.

Goodsett

skills. By drilling the development of evaluative questions, librarians can increase the impact of their instruction beyond the single session or assignment of the library instruction.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Halpern, Diane F. “Teaching Critical Thinking for Transfer across Domains.” American Psychologist 53, no. 4 (1998): 449–55. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.53.4.449. King, Alison. “Designing the Instructional Process to Enhance Critical Thinking across the Curriculum.” Teaching of Psychology 22, no. 1 (February 1995): 13.

CHEF’S NOTE

While it sounds simple, the act of developing their own questions about a source helps students develop habits of inquiry that can transfer to new contexts. One challenge of critical thinking skills is that they are often learned contextually, and humans are not naturally good at transferring these kinds of 88

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Shannon

The Credibility Continuum Eric Shannon, Collection Strategies and Services Librarian, Keene State College, [email protected]; Leslie Inglis, Electronic Resources Librarian Franklin Pierce University, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

This session is designed to inspire students to think about information sources critically. It consists of a hands-on session looking at various types of information (print, electronic, digital) to introduce students to the different types of information sources that they are likely to encounter while conducting zresearch and the process of evaluating their respective degrees of credibility. The session was originally created for students enrolled in First Year Inquiry (FYI), a required class for first-year students at Franklin Pierce University. FYI is designed to introduce students to college-level research and addresses two learning outcomes: information literacy and inquiry and analysis. Prior to developing the Credibility Continuum classroom session, we had developed a oneshot library session for FYI aimed to orient students to the library website and basic research skills by having them come up with a list of keyword terms and perform simple keyword searches in both the library catalog and the Academic Search Complete database. Feedback from professors indicated that although this session provided students with a basic familiarity with library resources, they still struggled with identifying the credibility of different sources of information.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

This instruction session fits most closely into the ACRL Frame Authority is Constructed and Contextual. The goal of this session is to enable students to evaluate the credibility and authority of different sources of information; recognize the point of view or bias of the information source; and identify the types of publications of various information sources (i.e., scholarly peer-reviewed journal article, popular newspaper or magazine article).

• • •

COOKING TIME

50- to 75-minute class

NUMBERS SERVED

10–30

DIETARY GUIDELINES

The goal of this session is to teach students to identify and evaluate sources that have varying degrees of credibility. This session goes beyond the scholarly versus popular paradigm by exposing students to sources that might not initially appear to fall succinctly into one category or the other. This session also uses the CRAAP test to help students critically evaluate sources in a step-by-step manner. 89

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • • • •

Credibility Continuum LibGuide http:// libguides.franklinpierce.edu/credibility Computer and projector for library instructor Internet access A box filled with sources from the library representing a wide range of source types Worksheets for students

PREPARATION

•

Gather sources that represent the spectrum of source types reflected on the credibility continuum LibGuide. Types of information sources used include academic, popular and substantive news journals, scholarly books, books geared toward a more popular audience, scholarly and popular articles printed from a database, URLs to a variety of websites, including those for .com, .org, and .gov, DVD documentaries, and a book of first-person interviews. Most of the sources that we hand out to students are physical print sources found in the library. Although students primarily use our databases to find both scholarly and popular articles, we have found that exposing students to print magazines and journals helps them better understand

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

• • •

the electronic database articles that they find in their disambiguated form. Use, create, or modify the credibility continuum LibGuide http://libguides. franklinpierce.edu/credibility Create worksheets with a hypothetical inquiry question related to a source followed by a set of questions aimed to get students to think critically about their source. An example of the types of questions that are asked on the worksheet is provided below: ◊ Research question: What is the impact of social media on human relationships? ◊ Source provided: September 2016 print issue of Social Psychology Quarterly bookmarked to an article titled “Toxic Ties: Networks of Friendship, Dating, and Cyber Victimization” ◊ Questions asked: 1. Is this source relevant to your research question? 2. How current is your source? Look at the date that your source was published and try to determine if it is appropriately current for your given research question. 3. Who is/are the author(s)? What makes (or fails to make) the author an authority on the subject that he or she is writing about? 4. What is the point of view/ perspective of the source? Does the author have a

Shannon

particular bias or opinion, or does the author try to remain objective? 5. Where would you place your source on the credibility continuum? Cooking Method 1. The librarian hands out a source to each student/or student group along with the corresponding worksheet. 2. Librarian demonstrates how to get to the credibility continuum LibGuide and projects it on the screen to students. 3. Students are given 20 to 25 minutes to work through the questions on the worksheet. 4. Students are then asked to line up in class according to the credibility continuum (from least credible to most credible source). Through this process, students not only think critically about their own source but also about the sources of their peers as they attempt to form a line. 5. Once students are lined up, the librarian then asks each student (or student group) to identify their source on the credibility continuum and discuss their rationale for their source’s placement on it.

90

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Burkholder

What’s in the Sauce?

Using Rhetorical Analysis to Differentiate Source Types Joel Burkholder, Penn State York, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

All information sources are social acts, constructed by authors to achieve specific purposes with specific audiences. To meet the expectations of audiences within academic disciplines, scholarly sources use specific conventions related to structure (e.g., the IMRAD format), terminology (e.g., clinical disciplinary jargon), appeals to authority (e.g., credentials), and evidence (e.g., other scholarly sources). First-year students, lacking experience with college-level research, may be unaware that such expectations and conventions even exist. This recipe introduces students to rhetorical analysis—the deliberate deconstruction

THE RHETORICAL SITUATION

of a text to identify and evaluate how specific choices address the needs of a rhetorical situation—to help them identify and negotiate these situated expectations and conventions.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to describe the essential elements of rhetorical analysis; analyze popular and scholarly sources rhetorically to differentiate the rhetorical situations addressed by each type; and discuss the appropriateness of different source types to various research situations.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

COOKING TIME

PREPARATION

• • •

Purpose - What is the author of the text trying to accomplish?

Cooking time is 50–75 minutes.

Author - Who is the author of the text? Does she or he possess the authority necessary to accomplish the purpose?

25–30 students in a first-year course

Audience - Who is the author trying to influence? Do they have certain expectations you must meet?

Nancy Foasberg writes, “Information, in the [ACRL] Framework, does not inhere in information artifacts themselves. Rather, information is a social phenomenon produced and understood in specific communities.” Thus, information sources must be understood in their social contexts. Rhetorical analysis offers a way to explore the role context plays in the

Context - What external elements (e.g., ideology, culture, time, geography, etc.) impose constraints (e.g., behaviors, styles, values, etc.) on the construction of the message?

construction of texts by demonstrating how authors make purposeful choices to establish authority, ensure accuracy, and limit bias to meet the expectations of particular audiences.

NUMBER SERVED

DIETARY GUIDELINES

91

• •

Multiple copies of different popular magazines with similar purposes (e.g., health and fitness, current events, entertainment news, etc.) Multiple copies of different scholarly journals with similar purposes (e.g., sociological research, business research, biological research, etc.)

Collect enough material for each group to have two different magazines with similar purposes (e.g., Cosmopolitan and Glamour) and two different journals with similar purposes (e.g., Journal of Family Psychology and Journal of Consumer Psychology).

COOKING METHOD

1. Introduction: Interactive lecture a. Briefly describe the types of evidence expected in a typical academic research assignment (e.g., scholarly articles, scholarly books, dissertations, etc.). Explain the social function

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION such evidence performs in scholarship (e.g., establishes credibility, gives credit, provides a roadmap). b. Introduce the concept of the rhetorical situation and its core elements (purpose, author, audience, and context). To illustrate the interdependent nature of these elements, provide a brief example (e.g., draft an email to a professor asking for a change in grade). Explore how changes to one element affect the overall effectiveness of the text. c. Introduce the concept of rhetorical analysis. Stress to the students they are not simply looking for features in a text; they are evaluating how those features perform specific social functions within the text. 2. Activity: Rhetorical analysis a. Divide the class into groups of 4 to 5 students. Each group should have at least two different popular magazine titles and two different journal titles. b. Begin by analyzing the popular magazines. i. Looking at specific choices in construction (e.g., cover design, layout, advertisements, word choice/tone, story choice/ content, photographs, etc.), ask groups to determine the rhetorical situation (purpose, author, audience, or context) each magazine addresses. To support any of their conclusions, have them identify and record specific examples from the text.

Burkholder ii.

Have groups identify specific strategies that establish authority, ensure accuracy, or limit bias. Again, have them identify and record specific examples. iii. Ask groups to account for similarities and differences by considering how variations in purpose, author, audience, or context may result in different choices. c. Repeat process with scholarly journals. 3. Discussion a. In a class discussion, have groups share their analyses of the popular magazines and scholarly journals. Question prompts could include: i. How do individual elements in each magazine reflect its respective rhetorical situation? How do individual elements in each journal reflect its respective rhetorical situation? Explain. ii. Comparing the magazines to the journals, why are certain strategies that establish authority, ensure accuracy, or limit bias included or excluded? Explain. iii. Which types of sources might be more appropriate for academic research assignments? Explain. b. Record comments on the board.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

•

Students may not have much experience evaluating the social intentions of a source’s rhetorical strategies. Move around the classroom, offering guidance 92

•

when necessary. This will also ensure each is engaging with the rhetorical analyses. To avoid the misconception that only articles in magazines and journals are social acts, stress that all texts—from tweets to books—are constructed by authors to achieve specific purposes with specific audiences.

CHEF’S NOTE

Explicitly teaching students how to differentiate source types through rhetorical analysis is not common in library instruction. Communicate with the course instructor of your intention to take this approach. Collaboration with her or him can result in additional practice in differentiating sources through their social intentions, as well as selecting evidence that meets the expectations of academic research assignments. It may also encourage course instructors to define key terms laden with disciplinary meaning (i.e., credible, primary, etc.).

NOTES

Burkholder, Joel M. “Redefining Sources as Social Acts: Genre Theory in Information Literacy Instruction.” Library Philosophy and Practice, 2010. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/ libphilprac/413/. Foasberg, Nancy M. “From Standards to Frameworks for IL: How the ACRL Framework Addresses Critiques of the Standards.” portal: Libraries and the Academy 15, no. 4 (2015): 707. https://doi. org/10.1353/pla.2015.0045.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Phillips, Roles, and Thomas

IF I APPLY:

A New Recipe for Critical Source Evaluation for the (Dis)Information Age Kathleen Phillips, Penn State University, [email protected]; Eryn Roles, Marshall University, [email protected]; Sabrina Thomas, Marshall University, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

IF I APPLY is a refreshed method of source evaluation encouraging healthy, civic, and lifelong learning, and begins when the researcher takes personal inventory on their emotions attached to the investigative topic. It utilizes a basis of a cluster of flexible, interconnected core concepts, rather than a set of standards or prescriptive skills. The method can easily be adapted to feed all students, from First-Year Experience to distance learners to higher-level students in graduate and doctoral courses. Establishing this method with any group of learners facilitates stronger researchers and information gatherers in class at work and in life.

NUMBERS SERVED

25–50 students

COOKING TIME

50–75 minutes; can be adapted for distance teaching environments

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • • •

IF I APPLY handout or research guide Internet access Sample resources Sample research topics

IF I APPLY SOURCE EVALUATION

Often we seek information that confirms our own thoughts and feelings towards a topic. This is NOT RESEARCH. Research and learning comes from finding sources that speak to the truth of a topic, no matter how much it hurts. Only by keeping personal biases in check can you begin to vet information for credibility. These steps will help you find sources that are credible and reliable in your research process. Personal steps

Identify emotions attached to the topic. Find unbiased reference sources that will provide a proper and informative overview of the topic.

Intellectual courage is needed to seek authoritative voices on the topic that may fall outside your comfort zone or thesis. Source steps

Authority established. Does the author have education, experience, and expertise in the field?

Purpose/Point of view. Does the author have an agenda beyond education or information? Publisher? Does the publisher have an agenda? List of sources (bibliography). Is the evidence reliable, sensible, and accessible? Year of publication. Does the date of publication affect the information? 93

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

• •

Research topic Discussion board (optional)

PREPARATION

Preparation for in-person instruction: Create an IF I APPLY handout and select a sample topic and sample resource(s) to demonstrate to the class. Generate a list of topics for students to discuss. This preparation pairs best with students who have prepared individual research topics ahead of time or who work in teams to find one non-biased resource in teams to discuss with the whole class.

2.

• •

Preparation for distance instruction: Create an IF I APPLY research guide (or similar supplemental content) to embed into or link in the course via the content management system. Also, create an 8–10 minute, captioned, instructional video using IF I APPLY with any resource (i.e., website, journal article, blog, Tweet, newspaper article, etc.). Be sure to comply with ADA guidelines. This preparation pairs best with a graded assignment and active discussion between students and the librarian.

3. 4. 5.

•

•

6.

COOKING METHOD

In-person instruction: 1. The librarian begins the session by asking students if they have strong opinions about anything at all and then asks if they feel like their opinions have ever swayed how they search for resources. Students are asked to share (A) how they search for

7.

Phillips, Roles, and Thomas

resources and (B) if they determine the credibility of any resource, how they do so. Librarian asks students to define confirmation bias. Once defined, ask how confirmation bias can lead to errors and misjudgments. The librarian introduces the IF I APPLY method of resource evaluation and discusses each step (Think-Questions). The librarian applies the IF I APPLY methodology to a sample resource. Students will use IF I APPLY and discuss a selected resource’s credibility. a. For larger classes, students form teams and are assigned topics to find one resource or are assigned specific pre-determined resources to discuss whether or not they judge the resources to be credible. Each team will discuss their resource’s credibility with the class. b. For smaller classes, students will work individually to select one resource that fits their pre-selected research topic. Librarian and students will have a wrap-up discussion about resource-seeking habits and will review what students can do differently in the future when conducting research for school, work, and personal endeavors. Optional step (time allowing): Small teams of students evaluate different types of sources on the same topic using the APPLY steps, decide on the source’s level of credibility, and discusses their findings with the class. This works best during a 75-minute or follow-up class. 94

Distance instruction: 1. The librarian creates a forum for students to discuss (A) how they search for resources and (B) if they determine the credibility of any resource, how they do so. 2. Students read the IF I APPLY research guide to familiarize themselves with the method and to review the Think-Questions. 3. Students watch the 8- to 10-minute video applying IF I APPLY to a sample resource. 4. Students answer discussion questions such as, “Before you reviewed the guide and watched the tutorial, did you feel that you effectively evaluated resources? Please explain/provide examples to support your response,” and/or “After reviewing the guide and watching the tutorial, will you change your evaluation process? If so, how? If no, why not?” 5. Assign topics to students so that they can select a resource to evaluate, and then discuss their evaluation process leading to the final determination of the resource’s credibility, biases, etc.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

When pre-selecting topics and resources to demonstrate, make sure you remain as unbiased and neutral as possible. Be open for emotionally charged discussions regarding personal opinions and how they influence the research process. Not everyone will be prepared to accept the “IF I” steps of the IF I APPLY method.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Phillips, Roles, and Thomas

CHEFS’ NOTES

•

•

The authors use this method in a variety of settings and across several disciplines. Bringing this information not only to students but also to faculty and staff is beneficial in generating instructor buy-in and becoming more involved with a department as a whole. While this recipe can be prepared and served in a variety of ways, the authors recommend having students individually free-write about a selected topic in order to identify personal biases and worldview on the topic. This focuses on what information a student already has, or thinks that they have, where that information originated, and why they think it is credible.

95

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Kantor

Evaluating Mystery Ingredients: Chopping the CRAAP Test

Sarah Kantor, Studio Librarian, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, [email protected]. NUTRITION INFORMATION

This recipe engages critical-thinking skills by avoiding CRAAP list-style checklists. Undergraduate students, typically in the early positions of Perry’s scheme of cognitive development, generally see the world in black and white. Evaluation checklists support this view. This recipe gives students context to effectively evaluate sources. Undergraduate students create their own process for determining credibility while being encouraged to think critically and creatively.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

After this activity, students will be able to identify indicators of reliability in various source types and evaluate web sources effectively.

• •

create their own guidelines for determining credibility. The activity prepares them to evaluate both academic and non-academic sources.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

•

• •

COOKING TIME

Cooking time is 30–45 minutes.

NUMBER SERVED

Serves a class of 15–30 first- and second-year undergraduates.

•

PREPARATION

•

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This activity ties into the frame Authority Is Constructed and Contextual. By removing the process of evaluating sources from an academic checklist, undergraduate students

1 real website that you have already determined is unreliable. Note: Find something that looks real. Avoid anything too Web 1.0, too silly, or an obvious hoax (i.e., “The Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus”). 2 web-based collaborative documents, such as a Google Doc or Padlet. One document should be editable by students, and one should only be edited by the instructor. A website to serve as a launchpad. If you don’t have access to the course page in your university’s LMS, a store-bought LibGuide, Google Site, or even short link to a Google Doc is fine. Computers (at least 2 per group)

•

Pick out your unreliable website. Dive into your internet pantry to find something interesting. The more unusual the website you choose, the more fun and flavorful your finished dish will be. Create your collaborative documents 96

• •

and make them accessible to the class. Padlet can be embedded in a course page or LibGuide. A Google Doc can be linked in the course page or LibGuide.

COOKING METHOD

1. Divide the class into groups of 4–5 students. 2. Introduce the activity. a. Show students the collaborative document and how to use it, if necessary. b. Tell the students that the website they are looking at is unreliable. „ Do not go into details why; they need to find the reasons. „ Do not say that the website is bad; this will not make them think critically about the website. 3. Give students about 10 minutes to review the website. Each group should come up with at least 5 reasons why the website is unreliable and record them in the collaborative document. 4. While the students work in groups, answer questions as needed, but let the students come up with their own reasons the website is unreliable. 5. Discussion: a. After 10 minutes, come back together as a class. Have each group report back on what they found.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Kantor b. Have the group members explain anything they found that other groups did not notice or anything another group listed that they think is not a valid indicator of unreliability. c. After all of the groups have presented and/or defended their reasons, discuss all of the reasons as a class. Identify any major themes. 6. Using the points that they identified, come up with criteria they can use to decide if a source is reliable. Enter these using the second document that only the instructor can edit. Have the students or-

ganize their criteria into groups. The 5 W’s (who, what, when, where, and why) are a good method of grouping criteria. 7. Keep both documents available to students after the class is over.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

Students may already be familiar with some elements of the CRAAP test from high school or other library instruction sessions. Other students may confuse reliability with different types of sources (i.e., popular or scholarly). Redirect students but try not to guide them too much.

Figure 1: A Padlet featuring reasons why students found the website unreliable

CHEF’S NOTES

This exercise is adapted from “Teaching Web Evaluation: A Cognitive Development Approach” by Candace Benjes-Small, et. al. When I first began teaching evaluation in freshman composition classes, I used the CRAAP test and found that students almost always failed to recognize parody, satire, or malicious hoax sites. Even if they mastered the rest of the CRAAP test, they struggled with identifying the purpose of a source. I found that using an approach rooted in Perry’s theory of cognitive development allows students to stretch their thinking and evaluation skills. Perry’s research found that the average first-year college student sees the world in black-and-white, values absolute Truth, and relies on information from authority figures. Checklist-style evaluation techniques fail to push students toward more advanced positions. It’s also a more fun method of teaching something that students find distasteful, and it translates into real-life skills more easily than a checklist.

NOTES

Benjes-Small, Candice, Alyssa Archer, Katelyn Tucker, and Lisa Vassady. “Teaching Web Evaluation: A Cognitive Development Approach.” Communications in Information Literacy 7, no. 1 (2013): 39– 49. http://www.comminfolit.org/index. php?journal=cil&page=article&op=view &path%5B%5D=v7i1p39. Blakeslee, Sarah. “Evaluating Information: Applying the CRAAP Test.” Last modified September 17, 2010. https://www.csuchico.edu/lins/ handouts/eval_websites.pdf. 97

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Kantor

Figure 2: A Padlet featuring criteria students decided would make a source more reliable

Kantor, Sarah. “Flushing the CRAAP Test: A New Method for Teaching Evaluation.” Lecture presented at the Atlanta Area Bibliographic Instruction Group Conference, Atlanta, GA, June 2018. Perry, William G. Forms of Intellectual and Ethical Development in the College Years: A Scheme. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1999.

98

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Gradowski

Meant to Appeal to Different Tastes, or How’s Your Internet B*** S*** Detector? Gail Gradowski, Reference/Instruction Librarian, Santa Clara University, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

Working with a partner or in small groups, first-year students are given pairs of websites and a purpose for which each pair would be used. They must then argue for whichever website is more appropriate for that purpose. The websites selected are ones that are likely to be listed in the first page of Google results doing a simple search for the topic described. Some of the sites I have actually seen in student work. Their decisions and decision-making processes can lead to very interesting class discussions about evaluating information, types of information, searching for information, and more.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

Students will assess the value of specific websites in light of a particular context/ need. Students will argue in support of their evaluation/conclusion.

COOKING TIME

A minimum of 30 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

You need to have enough students to have them working in more than a couple of pairs or small groups so that a class debriefing/discussion can follow the pair/group work.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

Yet another research report recently noted that although they are heavy users of the web, college students are not very savvy when it comes to evaluating websites. This activity attempts to develop students’ skills at looking more deeply at websites. It asks them to consider a variety of factors when assessing the potential value of a site in light of a particular information need. They should find themselves wrestling with the nuances of defining authority contextually. The activity works to develop student practices and dispositions in three of the ACRL Frames: Authority is Constructed and Contextual, Information Creation as a Process, and Information Has Value.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• •

Classroom setting where students can comfortably work in pairs or small groups around a screen large enough for them all to see details Access to the internet for these pairs or groups

PREPARATION

You need pairs of websites that meet these criteria: The two are topically related.

•

99

• • •

They would likely appear in the first page of a simple Google search on that topic. You can describe a reasonable scenario in which someone would be looking at the pair for a specific purpose. The differences in the two make a real point about what to consider when evaluating an information source and lead to discussion about how to evaluate a website.

COOKING METHOD

1. Introduce the activity. a. Briefly explain why you (and the professor) are asking them to engage in this activity. b. Optional, if time allows: Have students complete their individual analysis of the pairs of websites before putting them in groups. This is probably done most easily and quickly with a paper worksheet. Their comparison of responses then can work to quickly initiate discussion in the groups. With luck, they will perhaps disagree or at least offer different arguments. 2. Form the pairs or groups. a. It is important that students working together are able to read the screen together, so that may determine the size limits of working groups.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION 3. Instruct the class in the procedure and give them a time limit. a. Either direct students to the LibGuide with links to the pairs of websites, scenarios for the pairs and links to the Google form for posting their conclusions/arguments. b. Or distribute paper worksheets with tinyurls for the website pairs and scenarios. 4. While students are working: a. The librarian (and faculty if you can engage them) needs to go around and encourage students to provide detailed explanations of their decisions about the websites. Their explanations tend to be very superficial initially, so it helps to arm yourself with some preplanned questions for each pair of websites. b. If you are using paper, you’ll need to make notes to yourself about which pairs/groups have the more “interesting” decisions to share at the end. The Google form enables you to project them all but the paper doesn’t. 5. Class discussion: a. If you have used Google Forms, you can project group decisions and comments so that everyone can see and compare the responses. Students will probably be very interested in seeing what their classmates decided and commented on. You can debrief by asking the class questions about different items in the responses or voting on the best response. b. Depending on time available, the debriefing can be followed by a

Gradowski

Example of Worksheet:

How’s Your Internet Bààà Sààà Detector? You are going to look at pairs of websites on the same topic. They are typical of what would appear in the 1st page of a Google search. In each case, one of the items in the pair has a serious flaw, and is not, generally, the kind of thing you’d want to see cited in college-level work. Or, if it were used in a college paper, for example, it would require an explanation. In other words, one of these sites could cause you some embarrassment should you end up using information from it in a research paper or other research-based project for a class. Circle the problematic/flawed one. Explain your decision. Your explanation should make it clear that you fully understand the nature of each site. Be sure to consider the intended audience as well as the motivations of the publisher/sponsor of the website. Feel free to write on the back for more space! 1st pair: Imagine you wanted to get an overview of stem cell research in medicine. http://tinyurl.com/3ouu6qr http://tinyurl.com/ztmvtd9 Your explanation:

2nd pair: Imagine you were in an upper division psychology class on child development and writing a paper about the effect of television violence on children. http://tinyurl.com/27ewmc2 http://tinyurl.com/8ctth Your explanation:

3rd pair: Imagine you were writing a research paper in a WWII holocaust history class on Claude Lanzmann’s film Shoah. http://tinyurl.com/27k7yl5 http://tinyurl.com/6dn5ut5 Your explanation:

4th pair: Imagine you are a 1st year student in a CTW 2 class writing a paper is comparing the effectiveness of charter schools and regular public schools and you are considering using the documentary Waiting for Superman as a source. http://tinyurl.com/altjjx9 http://tinyurl.com/2v2c6jh Your explanation:

5th pair: Imagine your CTW paper is going to be looking at health issues related to factory farming. http://tinyurl.com/pnqjf88 http://tinyurl.com/26aasgm Your explanation:

100

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Gradowski challenge to “find something better” on each of the topics. That activity would logically lead to a discussion of better ways to search the web, different library databases, choosing a database, issues of authority, whose voices appear where, and more.

• •

ALLERGY WARNING

As with any class activity organized in the think-pair-share manner, making sure the pairs have something significant to share is the big challenge. As mentioned above, it is important that you have questions in mind about each pair of websites to use when walking around and encouraging students to look more closely and critically at the pairs of websites.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Pairs of websites: “Explore Stem Cells,” accessed September 18, 2018, http://www. explorestemcells.co.uk/. “Stem Cell Information,” National Institutes for Health, 2016, accessed September 18, 2018, https://stemcells.nih.gov/ info/basics.htm. “Childhood Exposure to Media Violence Predicts Young Adult Aggressive Behavior, According to a New 15-Year Study,” American Psychological Association, March 9, 2003, http://www.apa.org/ news/press/releases/2003/03/mediaviolence.aspx. “How Media Use Affects Your Child,” KidsHealth from Nemours, last reviewed

• • •

•

• • • •

December 2016, https://kidshealth.org/ en/parents/tv-affects-child.html. David Denby, “Look Again: ‘Shoah’ and New View of History,” New Yorker, January 20, 2011, https://www.newyorker. com/magazine/2011/01/10/look-again. Robert Faurisson, “Review: Shoah,” The Journal of Historical Review 8, no. 1 (Spring 1988): 82–91, http://www.ihr.org/ jhr/v08/v08p-85_Faurisson.html. Neal McCluskey, “No More Waiting for Superman,” Cato Institute, October 11, 2010, https://www.cato.org/publications/ commentary/no-more-waitingsuperman. Diane Ravitch, “The Myth of Charter Schools,” The New York Review of Books, November 22, 2010, https://www. nybooks.com/articles/2010/11/11/mythcharter-schools/?pagination=false. “Factory Farming,” Farm Sanctuary, 2017, https://www.farmsanctuary.org/learn/ factory-farming/. “Factory Farm Map,” Food & Water Watch, 2018, https://www. factoryfarmmap.org/.

NOTES

Wineburg, Sam, Sarah McGrew, Joel Breakstone and Teresa Ortega. “Evaluating Information: The Cornerstone of Civic Online Reasoning.” Stanford History Education Group. November 22, 2016. https://sheg.stanford.edu/ upload/V3LessonPlans/Executive%20 Summary%2011.21.16.pdf.

101

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Cole and Beirne

Alien Babies and Angelina Jolie:

Evaluating Sources Using Tabloids with a Taste of News Literacy Ashley Cole, Reference and Instruction Librarian, Eastern Kentucky University, [email protected]; Heather Beirne, Reference and Instruction Librarian, Eastern Kentucky University, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

The following activity is meant to demonstrate the concepts of authorship and authority to first-year writing students. Students will use their prior knowledge and everyday experiences with subpar information and/or misinformation to draw parallels between evaluating academic, news, and popular sources.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• • •

• • •

Students will be able to define evaluation criteria for evaluating information. Students will be able to clarify the terminology we use when evaluating information and discuss what they mean/ why they’re important. Students will activate their prior knowledge to critically and metacognitively develop strategies for evaluating information that can be applied in multiple contexts and for various information needs. Students will be able to apply evaluation criteria to their information need. Students will differentiate between popular sources and news sources. Students will be able to transfer their knowledge about evaluating popular and news sources to evaluating academic sources and vice versa.

COOKING TIME

50–60 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

10–40 students

DIETARY GUIDELINES

Authority is Constructed and Contextual (Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education) This constructivist recipe helps activate students’ prior knowledge about concepts of authority and credibility in a low-stakes context with which they have familiarity and requires them to think intentionally and metacognitively about evaluating information in ways that are transferable to more complex and nuanced contexts. It could form the foundation for further scaffolded, student-driven critical examination of authority within other information needs and situations, both academic and personal.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • •

Digital scans of print sources to use during discussion (optional) Whiteboard with markers “Evaluating Information” handout. Consider using one of the following: 102

◊ Paul-Elder Universal Intellectual Standards (https://www. criticalthinking.org/pages/universalintellectual-standards/527) ◊ Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education (http://www.ala.org/ acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/ issues/infolit/Framework_ILHE.pdf) ◊ CRAPP (http://pauluslibrary.weebly. com/uploads/6/1/1/6/6116739/crapp_ test.pdf)

PREPARATION

Gather several print drugstore checkout-line tabloids, such as Star Magazine, OK Magazine, The Sun, or In Touch Weekly. You may also consider curating a list of articles from online tabloids, such as Weekly World News, National Enquirer, or The Globe.

COOKING METHOD

1. Introduction: We all instinctively know that tabloids are not good sources of information; in fact, we laugh about how crazy they are when we see them in the checkout line or even online. 2. Group think-pair-share: Look through the tabloids you have in front of you and identify three specific reasons that we find them laughable, non-credible, and untrustworthy. Be as specific as possible.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Cole and Beirne a. Give students time to work in small groups/pairs (5–7 minutes). b. Ask groups/pairs to share their reasons why their article is non-credible or untrustworthy. c. As students to talk, then record answers on the board. 3. Group think-pair-share: Imagine you’re your favorite celebrity and you saw an article like this written about you. a. How would you refute erroneous gossip that is published about you? „ Responses like: Find other articles that contradict the gossip. b. What journalistic guidelines would you want in place and why? 4. Discussion to chew on: So, what makes information “good?” Alternatively, what makes news “good?” a. As students talk, map answers to the board—bad information versus evaluation criteria. b. Point out that students have good instincts—they know a “bad source” when they see it, and their criteria maps to criteria by “professionals.” „ As groups share, consider mapping student answers to your library’s evaluation criteria, Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education, and/or the discipline/dept.’s criteria (e.g., the CRAPP principles). „ Pass out the “Evaluating Information” handout and compare student responses to the criteria by “professionals.” „ Discuss how the things they identified could be applied to any information source.

c. Ask, “Why is it important to think critically about sources, especially in current times?”

ALLERGY WARNING

• •

• •

Some answers may veer off topic; be prepared to steer the conversation back to what matters. Students are thrown by the sometimes shocking and outrageous articles found in Weekly World News. The authors recommend the facilitator find fun and lighthearted material to evaluate but not so much that it distracts participants. Examples: ◊ Good: “Millions of Stingrays Wash Ashore” ◊ Bad: “Leprechauns Attack!” Depending on your goals for the session and the type of discussion you wish to elicit, you may choose to use articles that have to do with politics, or you may wish to avoid politics altogether because of the potential for conversations to become heated. If political articles are used, do so intentionally and carefully, and proceed with caution.

CHEF’S NOTES

This lesson is a revision of a standard evaluating information session. It has been revamped to include material that students/ participants come across every day. Using popular sources to introduce criteria for evaluating information is an easy way to get students to understand that you can evaluate research in the same way you would 103

evaluate the material you come across every day. Consider using headlines/articles found/ shared on social media and comparing how one would evaluate those materials to how one might evaluate an article from a scholarly journal or news publication.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Rhodes

Scroll-Worthy Sources:

Information Literacy Instruction Through Harry Potter’s Glasses Frames Sherry Larson-Rhodes, First Year Experience Librarian, State University of New York at Geneseo, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

SUNY Geneseo’s first-year students are required to take an interdisciplinary writing class, which includes a research paper component and a mandatory information literacy lesson. It is unfortunate but true that students tend to view these lessons as boring and unnecessary. To enliven the instruction and “meet the students where they are,” the world of Harry Potter is used to frame the evaluate goal of the research skills class. By dividing students into Hogwarts Houses, choosing articles on Harry Potter to evaluate, and developing a mnemonic using a Harry Potter spell, the skill of evaluating information can be learned through hands-on activities and discussion in a way that’s more appealing to the first-year audience.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

Students will become familiar with how to evaluate resources by using a set of criteria. Students will determine the scholarliness of a source and where to place it on a continuum of popular-to-scholarly sources.

COOKING TIME

25–30 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

24, but the recipe can be easily doubled or tripled.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

The ACRL Frame for this lesson is Authority Is Constructed and Contextual, in particular how to 1. use research tools and indicators of authority to determine the credibility of sources, understanding the elements that might temper this credibility; and 2. recognize that authoritative content may be packaged formally or informally and may include sources of all media types.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

•

Handouts: 8 packets, 2 for each Harry Potter House (e.g., Gryffindor 1 & Gryffindor 2, etc.) ◊ Each packet includes four Harry Potter–related resources (two scholarly articles, a book review, and a short blurb on sales of a Harry Potter coloring book), a Harry Potter–related mnemonic (ACCIO SOURCES; if you’re not familiar with Harry Potter, “accio” is the spell that means “bring me” or “come here”) that describes criteria to consider when evaluating a source, and a worksheet to fill out with the group’s rankings. 104

•

Online research guide (https://libguides. geneseo.edu/scholarlyvspopular)

COOKING METHOD

1. To introduce the idea of evaluating sources, the class is shown the library’s research guide. The guide is left visible on the screen for students to refer to during the exercise. 2. The librarian explains that students will learn how to evaluate resources to determine where they fall on a popular-scholarly continuum and what the criteria are to determine where the resources should be placed. 3. Students are grouped by threes and receive a packet of materials, the cover page of which states that group’s “House.” 4. Students need to look at each resource as a group and rank the resources in order from most scholarly (1) to least scholarly (4). They then fill out the worksheet with their rankings and their reasons why they chose to order the resources as they did. 5. After the groups have completed their worksheets, the librarian holds up each article, one at a time, asks each student to hold up the appropriate number of fingers to indicate where they ranked the source, and asks a member of each House to give one reason why they ranked the

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Rhodes

resource as they did. After each House has provided one reason, the librarian can point out some of the important things that the House members noted as well as any important factors that weren’t mentioned. The librarian then leads the class in a couple of minutes of discussion about the source to come to a final determination of its ranking; this discussion includes topics such as levels of scholarliness, peer-review, and how to use non-scholarly sources to find scholarly sources.

Figure 1. Evaluative Criteria Mnemonic: ACCIO SOURCES!

A: Author(s)/affiliation: Who wrote this? What organization is/are they affiliated with (university, think tank, government agency, newsmagazine, blogger, etc.)?

C: Current: When was the source published? Is it recent? C: Citations: Does the source contain citations? Footnotes? I: Illustrations: Does the source contain illustrations? If so, what type? Pictures, tables, graphs? Are there advertisements on the same page?

O: Objective (1): Why did the author(s) publish this? What is their argument? S: Structure: How is the paper organized? Does it follow the general outlines of a scholarly paper (abstract, summary of past research in the area, section on methods, discussion, conclusion)? Or is it more general in nature?

O: Objective (2): Is the material presented in a factual manner? Does it rely on logic, not emotions, to make its points?

U: Users: Who is/are the audience(s) for this work? Experts/researchers in a field or anyone with a general interest in the topic?

R: Relevant: Is the material covered related to the subject of your paper? C: Complete: Have the authors included research on all aspects of their topic? Or have they ignored certain areas that contradict their argument?

E: Expert-reviewed: Was the source peer-reviewed before publication? S: Supported: Is the argument in the source backed up by other credible sources? How about the supporting points?

105

ALLERGY WARNING

1. It’s a good idea to walk around the classroom while the students are evaluating the articles to ensure that they’re actually working. 2. Almost without exception, students are tripped up by the book review, ranking it as very scholarly.

CHEF’S NOTES

•

This lesson is readily adaptable to different audiences. The Harry Potter elements can be emphasized with a class of high school students, such as the librarian identifying as “Madam Pince” (the librarian from the Harry Potter series) and students being “sorted” into their Houses by drawing slips of paper from a witch’s hat. Conversely, the Harry Potter elements can be de-emphasized; this activity was used to teach evaluation of resources to an environmental studies class, but the Harry Potter–-themed sources were replaced with environmen-

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

•

Rhodes

tally related articles and the Hogwarts House names were replaced with names (and pictures) of animals from the Harry Potter world. As mentioned, the recipe can be doubled; the environmental studies class was nearly 60 students. To double the recipe, 15 fantastic creatures were chosen to serve as the names for the groups, and the number of students in each group was increased to four.

106

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Brown and Cooke

A Dash of Investigation: A Critical Thinking Recipe Jodi Brown and Kristen A. Cooke NUTRITION INFORMATION

This face-to-face, or online learning recipe, is designed to introduce students to the importance of evaluating sources and the formats in which they are packaged. The T.E.A.M. Test provides a visual means for examining sources by presenting evaluation criteria in the form of a target. It is recommended to determine the information literacy level of the chefs-in-training for recipe customization and adequate cook time.

COOKING TIME

Ready in 50–60 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

Serves 10–25

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This recipe is intended to prepare students to actively engage with information and its evaluation. After the meal, students should understand information literacy concepts that influence reliable information. The recipe prepares students to understand that Authority is Created and Contextual and Information Creation as Process (ACRL Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education).

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

•

• • • • • •

10–25 chefs-in-training 1 serving of T.E.A.M. Test 10–25 servings of information sources 1 serving Authority is Constructed and Contextual 1 serving Information Creation as Process LMS to taste

PREPARATION

The head chef, or librarian, should prep the workspace by gathering ingredients and preheating the minds of chefs-in-training (perhaps introduce an icebreaker such as content-related humor). The T.E.A.M. Test should be defrosted slowly at room temperature to ensure even cooking and avoid glazed-over expressions.

COOKING METHOD

1. Introduce the T.E.A.M. Test. This test helps students evaluate each source based on how timely it is, the expertise of the author, whether the source is appropriate for the meal, and the motivations that may flavor the information. Use the supplied infographic as a memory aid. 2. Pause after each concept introduction to allow for questions and ensure complete digestions by chefs-in-training.

1 head chef

107

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Brown and Cooke a taste test of their source by examining it with the T.E.A.M. Test. 5. Engage students in active cooking. Have a few students share their source’s score and discuss how they determined the score. Invite students who had trouble assigning a score to their source share where they had difficulty. Facilitate discussion by encouraging other students to offer solutions and discuss how they might rate the source with the T.E.A.M. Test and why.

ALLERGY WARNING

Some students may need additional assistance with information retrieval and finding an appropriate source. Head chefs should be prepared with a tiered instruction plan to accommodate students with such reactions.

CHEF’S NOTES

• •

3. Clearly explain how to score sources when using the T.E.A.M. Target Rubric. The higher the source scores in each category, the closer the source will land toward

the center of the target. The T.E.A.M. Test helps students stay “on target” when finding credible sources for their research. 4. Taste for flavor. Students should conduct 108

In order to maximize cook time, FLIP this recipe by instructing students to select an appropriate source and review it prior to cook time. If cooking at high altitude online in an LMS, try this variation: Utilize online discussion threads to facilitate peer review of ingredients. Students should create one post with a permalink or citation for their source with a written summary of the source’s T.E.A.M. Test score and what factors influenced their decisions. After their initial post, students should reply to one other original post, including a score for the original poster’s source and an explanation of points of agreement or disagreement.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Morris

Fact-Check Lightning Round Sarah E. Morris, Head of Instruction, Emory University Libraries, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

This ice-breaker activity can be used to introduce learners to some basic fact-checking and evaluation skills. In this activity, you’ll demonstrate how tricky fact-checking at high speeds can be and explore how vital factchecking skills are in our current information ecosystems. You can use this activity as a lead-in to a longer lesson on media literacy skills.

Constructed and Contextual, as well as concepts and ideas from media literacy, journalism fact-checking skills, and web literacy. Mozilla’s Web Literacy Map and the concept of Read the Web influenced this activity.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • •

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to do the following: Recognize elements of online media ecosystems. Discuss the importance of slowing down information consumption online. Develop fact-checking skills and techniques. Explore ways to be savvier consumers of online information.

• • • •

PREPARATION

•

COOKING TIME

15 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

•

This activity can work well with any number of students.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This activity uses concepts from the ACRL Framework, such as the frame Authority is

PowerPoint slides A projector Computers or other devices for students (cell phones or tablets can work for this activity)

•

Choose examples for students to factcheck. Consider using the following sources to help you find examples: ◊ Fact-checking sites such as Snopes, Politifact, The Washington Post Fact Checker, and FactCheck.org. ◊ Your own social media feeds ◊ Headlines from newspapers and magazines that you consume ◊ Clips from local or national TV news shows Create a brief slideshow to show screenshots of things for students to fact-check. Include a mix of images, headlines, memes, magazine covers, Facebook posts, tweets, Instagram posts, short video clips, etc. See a starter pack of slides at https://bit.ly/2TcVS4m. In your slideshow, be sure to include a 109

•

blend of credible and noncredible items as well as items that are easier or harder to prove or disprove. Depending on the amount of time you have, you can adjust the number of examples in your slideshow.

COOKING METHOD

1. Divide students into small groups of about 3–5 students. 2. Explain to students that they will vote on whether the media they are about to see (a headline, an image, etc.) is credible or not. 3. Begin showing students the slideshow and tell them they have one minute to fact-check what they are seeing. They can use their devices for this. 4. Have groups share out their thoughts on the slide. Inform them of the correct answer. 5. Repeat this process with the next few slides and reduce the amount of time students have to fact-check for each new slide. You can go from one minute to thirty seconds to fifteen seconds and so on. 6. After you have finished your slideshow, discuss how speed impacted everyone’s ability to fact-check and how we often consume information online very quickly and superficially. 7. Discuss suggestions for slowing down

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION how you consume information online and how you can be a savvier consumer of information with evaluation skills. a. Option: Use or modify the Take 5 Tips handout, which features suggestions for things to do when you encounter new information. 8. You can segue from here into a longer lesson on evaluation skills, fact-checking, or other information and media literacy topics.

ALLERGY WARNING

•

•

TAKE 5!

5 THINGS TO DO WHEN YOU ENCOUNTER NEW INFORMATION

Pause – Are you having an emo-

•

2.

Examine – Read horizontally

•

3.

Reflect – Ask what you know.

4.

Explore – Find out more! Check

5.

Share – Take care before you

tional reaction? Take a beat and ask yourself why!

Are you familiar with the source or the author? out the article’s claims and look at the author’s credentials.

share. Make sure the information is legit and share context.

I would suggest using fairly innocuous headlines for this activity. Consider using humorous examples, ridiculous true stories, etc. The goal for me was to focus on helping students build skills in fact-checking and not have them focus on the content of the example itself or the implications of said content beyond basic questions of credibility. An idea for a follow-up is to introduce more polarizing content and discuss how emotions can also impact how we consume and receive media.

CHEF’S NOTES

1.

and pay attention to things like ads, links, references.

Morris

•

This activity was inspired by and adapted from a MozFest presentation by Sarah Fitzhenry in 2017 and scaled up for an older audience with more complex asks, content, and fact-checking skills. If you do not have access to technology, you can run a variation of this activity where you print out images and have students use Post-it Notes to share what they think and whether or not they think the article is credible. I did a version of this at a community outreach event once, where I did not have a computer or projector, and the paper images and voting process proved entertaining and engaging. You can easily make themed slideshows that connect to disciplines and subject areas. I’ve done science and healththemed versions of this activity in the past. 110

NOTES

Fitzhenry, Sarah, and Kim Wilkens. “Foiling Fake News.” Mozilla Thimble Project. https://thimbleprojects.org/ techkim/258242/#overview. Mozilla Foundation. “Web Literacy.” Accessed January 10, 2018. https://learning. mozilla.org/en-US/web-literacy.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Lobley

Reverse Engineering the News Marla Lobley, East Central University; Calantha Tillotson, East Central University NUTRITION INFORMATION

This activity tackles several searching and evaluating learning objectives simultaneously.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• • • • •

Students will be able to identify the elements of a news source. Students will be able to identify the purpose of news sources versus research articles. Students will be able to identify the authority and accuracy of statistical information. Students will be able to identify the difference between search terms used on the web and used in databases. Students will be able to identify bias as well as techniques author’s use to mitigate or lessen bias.

COOKING TIME

45 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • •

Tablets, computers, or other devices Prompt for each group Article for each group (we used an NPR report on opioid use; see Notes section)

PREPARATION

Before introducing this activity, check students’ knowledge on the below topics and refresh said knowledge as needed: Basic principles of evaluating sources Basic library database skills Moderate to advanced web-searching ability

• • •

COOKING METHOD

1. Divide students into groups and distribute the prompt for each group. 2. Explain that students will be reading a news article, answering questions from the prompt, and presenting their answers to the class. As this is a problem-based learning activity, the instructing librarian must be available to help each group as needed.

5–25 students

DIETARY GUIDELINES

The activity places a heavy emphasis on the ACRL Frame Authority is Constructed and Contextual. Students will not only learn searching and citation skills they need in their courses but also how to be educated consumers of information.

3. Group 1 directions: a. The news story cites the article listed below. Find this article using the library databases. i. What parts of the citation did you use to find the article? ii. Does looking up the original source provide any context that changes your interpretation of the news article? iii. How does the purpose of the research article align or differ with the news article? b. Present to the class: i. How you found the article ii. How the citation helped (or didn’t) in your search for the article iii. Your answers to the questions above c. Citation: Winkelman, Tyler N. A., Virginia W. Chang, and Ingrid A. Binswanger. “Health, Polysubstance Use, and Criminal Justice Involvement Among Adults with Varying Levels of Opioid Use.” JAMA network open 1, no. 3 (2018): e180558-e180558.

Group Evaluating objective

Searching objective

1

Purpose of news vs. research articles

Searching library databases using a citation

2

Authority and accuracy in statistical information Searching government websites for statistics

3

How to verify the accuracy of an expert opinion

Creating search terms for web searching

4

How to verify the accuracy of an expert opinion

Creating search terms for library database searching

5

Detecting author bias and techniques used by the author to lessen or mitigate bias

Searching the web using linked resources

111

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION 4. Group 2 directions: a. The news story cites statistics from the National Institute on Drug Abuse—“About 65% of people who are incarcerated are known to have a substance use disorder.” i. Can you find this statistic from the National Institute on Drug Abuse? ii. How do you know this is an authoritative source for statistics on this topic? iii. After looking up the original source, can you tell if these statistics are being used to mislead the reader of the news article? b. Present to the class: i. How you found the website for the National Institute on Drug Abuse ii. How you found the statistic on the website iii. Your answers to the questions above 5. Group 3 directions: a. The news story quotes an expert as saying, “Incarcerating people with addiction without offering treatment makes them more vulnerable to dying from an overdose when they are released.” i. Find this quote in the news article. ii. Can you find information that verifies this quote on the web? iii. Is there any context around the quote in the news article that would help you with your search?

Lobley

b. Present to the class: i. What search terms you used ii. If you had to modify your search terms iii. Your answers to the questions above 6. Group 4 directions: a. The news story quotes an expert as saying, “Incarcerating people with addiction without offering treatment makes them more vulnerable to dying from an overdose when they are released.” i. Find this quote in the news article. ii. Can you find information that verifies this quote in the library databases? iii. Is there any context around the quote in the news article that would help you with your search? b. Present to the class: i. What search terms you used ii. If the first search terms you used worked or if you had to change them iii. Your answers to the questions above 7. Group 5 (or entire class discussion) directions: a. Evaluate the news story itself. i. Why does the author specify which experts were and were not involved in the research study? ii. Does the author insert their own opinion explicitly or implicitly (for example, by only interviewing people who agreed with their opinion)? 112

iii.

How does the author help readers verify the information presented? b. Present to the class: i. Demonstrate using the links in the article to search the web ii. Your answers to the questions above

ALLERGY WARNING

Be prepared for questions throughout the activity, as students rarely appear to read the instructions thoroughly. To limit confusion, remind students to read the news article before attempting to complete the prompt for their group.

CHEF’S NOTES

Choose a news article that is subject-specific and whose references are freely available, either through open access or in your library’s collection. In addition, use this activity solely with upper-level undergraduate students, as they are much more likely to possess the required searching abilities.

NOTES

Association of College & Research Libraries. Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. February 2, 2015. http:// www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework. Chatterjee, Rhitu. “With More Opioid Use, People are More Likely to Get Caught Up in the Justice System.” Last modified July 6, 2018. https://www.npr.org/sections/healthshots/2018/07/06/626176621/with-moreopioid-use-people-are-more-likely-to-getcaught-up-in-the-justice-syst.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Branch, Goodwater, and Kealey

Trust this Recipe:

Trust Indicators and Critical Media Analysis Nicole Branch, Associate University Librarian for Learning & Engagement, Santa Clara University, [email protected]; Leanna Goodwater, Humanities Librarian, Santa Clara University, [email protected]; Shannon Kealey, Science Librarian and Scholarly Communication Coordinator, Santa Clara University, [email protected]

NUTRITION INFORMATION

The public’s trust in the news has declined to low levels, and rising public awareness of this concern has brought a new urgency to the work of library instructors. Long understood to be an important skill by librarians, the public is increasingly grappling with how to improve our collective ability to analyze media critically. Hosted by the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University (SCU), more than 75 news organizations partnered on a Trust Project to establish industry-wide standards that bolster credible journalism, resulting in a set of Trust Indicators that provide guideposts for media organizations to increase trustworthiness and provide a useful frame for news consumers to examine media critically. SCU librarians recognized this model as a powerful framework for engaging students in critical evaluation of sources and developed a lesson plan that guides students through us-

ing the Trust Indicators to conduct their own analysis of media sources. This lesson helps illuminate the time-honored qualities of good journalism and provides a useful set of reflection points to guide students in thinking deeply about the information they encounter.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• • • •

Discuss the quality of the news media. Identify “Trust Indicators” to evaluate news and other media. Analyze media sources. Critically evaluate the quality of sources.

COOKING TIME

60–90 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

While this recipe was created to serve 20–30 first-year students, it can be adapted for gatherings of many sizes, from intimate dinners to large parties.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This lesson addresses the ACRL Frame Authority is Constructed and Contextual. Specifically, the recipe addresses these knowledge practices: 113

• •

Use research tools and indicators of authority to determine the credibility of sources, understanding the elements that might temper this credibility. Recognize that authoritative content may be packaged formally or informally and may include sources of all media types.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

The Trust Project LibGuide (https://libguides. scu.edu/TrustProjectRecipe), which links to the following ingredients: Trust Project Homepage Trust Project Video Trust Project Lesson Plan Trust Project PowerPoint Presentation Trust Indicators Worksheet (print or electronic) Media Analysis Debrief Questions

• • • • • •

PREPARATION

To prepare for this recipe, the instructor will need to do the following: Create or revise the workshop slides, perhaps choosing examples that are relevant to the class content. If showing live examples of the Trust Indicators, select and have on hand the links to selected examples.

•

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

• • •

If desired, create a LibGuide for the course. The guide might include the class slides, worksheets, and links to relevant sites. Create the worksheet for the media analysis (either as a paper copy or an electronic copy). If using preselected articles (see Cooking Method), prepare links or printed copies of selected articles.

COOKING METHOD

1. Preheat the pan (5 minutes). Have students break into pairs and discuss the following questions: a. Where do you really get your news from? b. What do you look for to know if something is trustworthy? c. Note: Display one question at a time, giving about 2 minutes to discuss each. 2. Combine the flavors (5 minutes). Bring everyone together for a brief class discussion, sharing major takeaways from the small group discussions. 3. Peel and cut the Trust Indicators (15 minutes). Begin by sharing the short Trust Project Video (linked on the LibGuide). Next, walk the class through real-world examples from the news of the Trust Indicators in action. This could be done with screenshots or with live examples. Share at least one example of each indicator, pointing out the main characteristics of each. (See example slides on the LibGuide.)

Branch, Goodwater, and Kealey

4. Simmer a small group activity (15 minutes). a. Part I: Divide students into small groups. The first task of the group is to decide where to find an article. This can be any news story on any topic of interest or related to a course theme. Groups can look to any source (Facebook, Twitter, CNN, Fox News, etc.) for an article. Group members then look for an article and select one to use. Groups share the links to the articles selected in a place that is accessible to everyone in the class (Padlet, Google Docs, etc.). i. Alternatively, each student may pick a different news story to search for, and the group can then examine each one. This will enable each group to compare the information provided by different news publications or web sites. ii. As another alternative, the instructor can provide a curated set of preselected examples for the students to examine during the activity. b. Part II: Once an article is selected, the group works together to complete the worksheet for each Trust Indicator for the article they selected. 5. Cool-down and plate (20 minutes). Once the exercise is complete, teams either present to the class or participate in a large group debrief discussion. Possible questions/ prompts are included on the LibGuide. 6. Clean-up. Various different assessment strategies might be applied with this 114

lesson. Completed worksheets, articles selected, and student work that results from this workshop could all be used to examine student learning.

ALLERGY WARNING

Care should be taken to avoid suggesting overall mistrust of the news media. Discussing the Trust Indicators in the context of journalistic ethics and the differences between sources that practice these ethics as opposed to those that don’t is a good antihistamine. Another potential adverse reaction may be construing this workshop as a partisan political exercise. Care should be taken to focus on critical evaluation as a non-partisan skillset, the pitfalls of which any political orientation might fall for.

CHEF’S NOTE

The lesson is designed to pair well with courses in which students may not have a research assignment or have an assignment that draws on popular news/media sources. It could be served alongside other lesson plans involving the critical evaluation of sources, from popular to scholarly.

NOTES

Lehrman, Sally. “What People Really Want from News Organizations.” The Atlantic, May 25, 2017, https://www.theatlantic. com/technology/archive/2017/05/ what-people-really-want-from-newsorganizations/526902/. The Trust Project. Accessed September 18, 2018, https://thetrustproject.org/.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

St. Clair and Bodley

The Proof of the Pudding is in the Eating:

Practicing Mike Caulfield’s “Four Moves and a Habit” Approach for Evaluating Online Content Elizabeth St. Clair, Research and Instruction Librarian, City University of Seattle; Jennifer Bodley, Research and Instruction Librarian, City University of Seattle NUTRITION INFORMATION

The “proof of the pudding is in the eating” means that tasting the pudding is the only way to find the evidence of its quality. We find the same is true for online sources. In this activity, we provide students with the skills necessary to “taste test” sources for quality by giving them the domain knowledge to effectively and efficiently appraise online information. In this activity, students in lower-division or introductory, undergraduate courses engage in an online, asynchronous, two-part media literacy activity and discussion about navigating information in a digital environment. Part One teaches students to quickly evaluate online information using Michael A. Caulfield’s “Four Moves and a Habit” approach, as found in Web Literacy for Student Fact-Checkers. The four moves are: 1. Check for previous fact-checking work. 2. Go upstream to the source. 3. Read laterally. 4. Circle back. Part Two encourages students to go one step further and closely read two articles that cover the same topic but come to different

conclusions. Students will both evaluate them quickly using the “Four Moves and a Habit” approach as well as conduct a more in-depth analysis of each piece. Students will discuss what they have learned about how information is published and shared online.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will learn to evaluate resources by reading Mike Caulfield’s “Four Moves and a Habit” approach found in Web Literacy for Student Fact-Checkers (see Additional Resources); practicing searching for previous factchecking work; finding original content by navigating hyperlinks and “reading upstream”; appraising online websites, publications, and authors by “reading laterally”; and thinking critically about the methods in which information is published, shared, and disseminated online.

• • • • •

COOKING TIME

DIETARY GUIDELINES

The goal of this activity is to teach students to quickly evaluate online information as well as think critically about how information is published, shared, and disseminated in an online environment. Checklist methods like the CRAAP test ignore the more habitual processes of validating information in a digital environment. This has to do with both a lack of domain knowledge (where and how to fact-check) as well as a misunderstanding of how information is created and organized online. The “Four Moves and a Habit” approach addresses these gaps in understanding by helping students build that domain knowledge, practice routine methods of evaluation, and think more deeply about information architecture. ACRL Frames addressed: Information Creation as Process Research as Inquiry

• •

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

One week

NUMBERS SERVED

1–30

115

• •

Learning Management System (LMS) Embedded librarian capabilities

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION PREPARATION

• • •

•

Create and embed a short video lecture covering the “Four Moves and a Habit” approach to web literacy. Embed class readings covering the topic. Create discussion board forums for parts one and two. ◊ Part One: Source 3–5 articles for students to evaluate using the “Four Moves and a Habit” approach. ◊ Part Two: Source two articles that both come from credible sources and cover the same topic but come to different conclusions. Create announcements, reminders, and support materials to encourage student participation.

topic. c. Students will discuss the methods in which information is published and shared online. d. In this forum, students will discuss these articles as a group. The librarian will monitor and join the conversation when appropriate.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

• •

COOKING METHOD

This assignment has two parts. 1. Part One: Source Evaluation Practice a. Students will evaluate a handful of online sources using the “Four Moves and a Habit” approach. They will write about their processes and conclusions in the forum created by the librarian. b. In this forum, students will post individually and receive personalized feedback from the librarian. 2. Part Two: Close Reading Activity and Reflection a. Students will read and evaluate two credible online articles covering the same topic or online report. b. Students will note the differences or similarities between each piece, both in the coverage and analysis of the

St. Clair and Bodley

This activity requires the librarian to be embedded in an online course. The librarian will need to work closely with the instructor and e-learning team to make this online activity possible. Students will respond better to the activity if the articles chosen are relevant to their class and reflect the type of information they will encounter online in their field of study.

CHEF’S NOTES

•

•

Focus on both the “how-to” and the “why.” Students at this stage may lack the domain knowledge to both seek out reliable information and fact-check content they encounter. In your lecture and readings, make sure to cover these strategies as well as common pitfalls you see students making. In online, asynchronous courses, community building and instructor support are important. Outside of this lesson, instructors should add announcements and support librarian-added content to ensure widespread student participation. 116

• • •

Make sure you are familiar with your school’s LMS and what is/is not allowed with the software before proposing this activity to the instructor. When student numbers are high, try reading student reflections and posting video feedback to the entire class, through either an announcement or group email. This assignment can be adapted for face-to-face instruction. Students can work in groups and review the articles as a class. Students will need to work in a computer lab or BYOD.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Caulfield, Michael A. Web Literacy for Student Fact-Checkers. 2017. https://webliteracy. pressbooks.com/. Caulfield, Michael A. “Yes, Digital Literacy. But Which One?” Accessed September 20, 2018. https://hapgood.us/2016/12/19/ yes-digital-literacy-but-which-one/.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Pate and Malone

Sweet and Savory:

Separating Fact from Fiction Jennifer Pate, Assistant Professor, Scholarly Communications & Instructional Services Librarian, University of North Alabama, jpate1@ una.edu; Derek Malone, University Librarian, Associate Professor, University of North Alabama, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

Too many information diets are overpopulated with junk. This information junk combined with a lack of critical-thinking skills can make digesting news, world events, and other content difficult. This recipe is intended to assist the consumer of information cuisine to get back on track with healthy habits. The intention is to expose those unhealthy lifestyle choices that we are predisposed to make, challenge the habits, and balance the diet through adding quality ingredients and enhanced preparation skills to our practices in the future.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

The students will be able to identify information concepts and resources in order to critically evaluate information presented from various sources. The students will approach new information with skepticism and will apply critical-thinking skills in order to make sound judgments about the quality of their sources.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

ACRL Frames: Authority is Constructed and Contextual Information Has Value

• •

COOKING TIME

40–50 minutes for activities and discussion

NUMBER SERVED

10 to 30 students

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

See the Notes section for links to the following resources: A website for analysis (we used a site dedicated to the Staten Island Ferry Disaster, which never occurred) Stanford History Education Group Evaluating Evidence activity Stanford History Education Group Home Page Analysis activity New York Times game, A Quick Puzzle to Check Your Problem Solving

• • • •

You will also need computers for students and a projector.

COOKING METHOD

1. Mise en place/prep: The Staten Island Ferry Disaster. We kickstart our information prep by looking at a website dedicated to a maritime disaster that never occurred. The Staten Island Ferry Disaster website claims to be about the memorial dedicated to those who died when an 117

octopus dragged a ferry under the water, killing everyone on board (http://www. sioctopusdisaster.com/home.html). How can something that looks so real have such a wild, fantastic story? Why haven’t they heard of this maritime disaster that claimed the lives of so many? Students will seek to legitimize the story using the reasoning and information presented on the website. Few students will seek outside validation for this information, which, when the truth is revealed, makes them begin to see how false information can be manipulated to look like facts. 2. Seasonings: Socially shared image as information. This exercise is adopted and modified from the Stanford History Education Group “Evaluating Evidence.” Now it’s time to season the knowledge the students gained in the first exercise and give them a chance to try implementing information skepticism. To do this, we show them an image of a flower that was found on the social media site Imgur. The caption states that the flower, which has unusual characteristics, has been altered by nuclear spill effects in Japan. Students are divided into small groups (2–4 students) to discuss if they believe the image is real or fake. They are asked not to look

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION for any online verification of the picture’s origins and accuracy of information. In a post-group evaluation, we discuss as a class the reasons that the image could be considered good or poor information. This necessary ingredient helps relay the importance of verifying socially shared information before passing it along and helps relay that negative consequences that result from socially shared misinformation. 3. Protein: Web ads. This exercise is adopted and modified from the Stanford History Education Group “Home Page Analysis.” Students are bombarded with ads every day, from social media to television. Because every click of the remote control or every post on social media is being tracked and monetized, the main ingredient is to have students focus on advertisements. The students are presented with a handout of a webpage screenshot and are instructed to identify which items are advertisements and which are actual news stories and recording their reasoning. We discuss the results as a class and include discussion of where we may encounter advertisements, sponsorships, and promoted content, what influence these ads have on our information consumption, and how our social media curates ads based upon previous searches. 4. Sauce: Confirmation bias: A Sweet Numbers Game. Sauce can make the dish, and this one is absolutely outstanding. We pair the students to play a “Guess my Sequence Rule” game to illustrate confirmation

Pate and Malone

bias by utilizing a New York Times Upshot game titled “A Quick Puzzle to Test Your Problem Solving.” Students are paired in twos and given limited information about a sequence of numbers. They are then permitted a minimum of five guesses in an attempt to determine what the rule is to build the sequence. The heart of the game is not math, it is information science, as the tendency of nearly every participant is to guess sequences that mirror the original shared information. Each pair is asked how confident they are in their assumption of the sequence rule before exposing the rule itself. Most groups fail this exercise because they try only to replicate the initial sequence instead of testing various number combinations.

CHEF’S NOTES

This recipe is a critical-thinking class that we teach during EN 111. It is part of a greater dining experience that also includes a library orientation for FYE courses and two information literacy sessions during EN 112.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

We use a brief survey before and after our course visits. The survey has the same focus and similar questions focused on how the participants regard their own abilities at evaluating and using information. These critical-thinking exercises obviously encourage skepticism; thus, we are looking for differences in the rating of abilities for information usage and misinformation perception before and after instruction. 118

NOTES

“Evaluating Evidence.” Stanford History Education Group, 2018. https://sheg.stanford. edu/civic-online-reasoning/evaluatingevidence. “Home Page Analysis.” Stanford History Education Group, 2018. https://sheg.stanford.edu/ civic-online-reasoning/home-pageanalysis. Leonhardt, David. “A Quick Puzzle to Test Your Problem Solving.” The New York Times, July 2, 2015, sec. The Upshot. https://www.nytimes.com/ interactive/2015/07/03/upshot/a-quickpuzzle-to-test-your-problem-solving. html. “Staten Island Ferry Disaster Memorial Museum.” Staten Island Ferry Disaster Memorial Museum, 2018. http://sioctopusdisaster. com/home.html.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Morris

Tin Foil Hats:

Using Science Communication Skills to Tackle Science Conspiracies Sarah E. Morris, Head of Instruction, Emory University Libraries, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

Inspired by the author’s long-time love of scifi shows like The X-Files and Fringe, this activity introduces learners to conspiracy theories and asks them to consider how and why they can be so impactful and why they can resonate so strongly with people. This particular activity focuses on conspiracy theories in the sciences, but it can be adapted to consider other topics. Students here will delve into communication strategies and will consider how conspiracy theories can be effective and will explore ways that science communication strategies and techniques can be used to ward off conspiracies. A key takeaway for students will be to recognize the importance of information literacy skills, science literacy, and some basic knowledge of how academic research is conducted.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to do the following: Identify characteristics of misinformation. Explore and discuss facets of scientific research and scholarly publication processes. Examine and discuss the importance of scientific communication and consider best practices for communicating science information.

• • •

•

Utilize science communication strategies to combat misinformation.

COOKING TIME

50–75 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

•

Up to 30 students

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This activity connects to the ACRL Frames of Authority is Constructed and Contextual and Scholarship as Communication, and it considers science communication best practices.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• •

Computers; at least one per group of 3–4 students A projector

PREPARATION

•

•

Select some sample scientific conspiracy theories or examples of scientific misinformation to use in the lesson. Look for examples at places like fact-checking websites that have sections dedicated to science misinformation (such as Snopes). Select an example of an overblown science story to use for class discussion. You can use the following example or 119

select your own. ◊ One glass of red wine equals an hour at the gym case study. Contrast enthusiastic coverage from Huffington Post with pushback from the author of the original scientific study (see Additional Resources). For additional examples, see https://bit. ly/2TcVS4m.

COOKING METHOD

1. Open with a discussion of how scientific research is done. 2. Note that scientific studies can often get misinterpreted, exaggerated, or misunderstood in popular media. 3. Optional: Show segments from a video on “Scientific Studies” from Last Week Tonight (see Additional Resources). Note that this video contains some adult language, so use your own discretion with showing clips. 4. Review an example of a science story where coverage has become exaggerated. Use the red wine and gym time equivalency coverage and resulting challenges or another example of your choosing. 5. Note that with the red wine example, it is difficult to find results for challenges to the original coverage when searching. Once misinformation gets out on the

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION internet, it can be hard to debunk or even contain. 6. Explain that scientific communication is a growing field where scientists are thinking about ways to better and more clearly communicate their work to a broad audience. 7. Divide students into small groups of 3 or 4. 8. Have the groups first brainstorm elements of a conspiracy theory: What are common features and what makes them effective? Have groups share their thoughts. 9. Explain to the entire class that conspiracy theories and science misinformation can often spring up from a lack of understanding about a subject or from emotions such as fear or anxiety around an issue. 10. Have the groups select a conspiracy theory from a pre-populated list and instruct them to do the following: a. Do some basic research to understand your conspiracy theory. i. Questions to consider: What is it saying and where did it originate? Why do you think it is effective? b. Think about ways that scientific communication strategies can be used to present accurate information to people or to debunk misinformation. i. Questions to consider: How could this information be clarified? Would visuals help? Could it be broken down into chunks? Could you make the information exciting without making it clickbait?

Morris

11. Have the groups share out their science communication strategy ideas with the entire class.

how the media has covered scientific topics in different ways over time.

ALLERGY WARNING

Examples to use during the class:

•

•

•

Consider selecting less well-known examples for this activity, so things other than vaccine hesitancy and anti-vaxxer sentiment. The idea here is for students to do some exploration and research before thinking about how to utilize science communication strategies. I’ve found that selecting topics that have a high saturation of coverage can send groups off into the weeds. Use your own knowledge of your students in selecting examples to avoid creating a polarizing atmosphere or derailing the activity. Questionable reporting on health topics (like the red wine example) or more out-there (so to speak) examples dealing with things like aliens have gone over well for me. You can use this activity as part of a broader lesson, or series of lessons, on scientific research, scholarship, and science communication.

CHEF’S NOTES

You can easily run a variation of this activity with other types of conspiracy theories, including historic ones or pop culture ones. One option I have been exploring is to use historic scientific misinformation or conspiracies as examples. It offers up an interesting way to talk about how science and our understanding of it have evolved, as well as 120

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

CBC News. “Jason Dyck, University of Alberta researcher, reveals truth behind wine study.” CBC News. January 31, 2015. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ british-columbia/jason-dyck-universityof-alberta-researcher-reveals-truthbehind-wine-study-1.2937395. Oliver, John. “Scientific Studies.” Last Week Tonight. May 8, 2016. https://youtu. be/0Rnq1NpHdmw. Sitch, Daisy May. “A Glass of Red Wine is the Equivalent to an Hour at the Gym, Says New Study.” Huffington Post. July 23, 2015. https://www.huffingtonpost. co.uk/2016/01/08/a-glass-of-red-wine-isthe-equivalent-to-an-hour-at-the-gymsays-new-study_n_7317240.html.

Resources to explore on science communication: Feliú-Mójer, Mónica I. “Effective Communication, Better Science.” Scientific American. February 24, 2015. https://blogs. scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/ effective-communication-betterscience/. Shipman, Matt. “Science Communication Needs and Best Practice: What Would a Top 10 List Look Like?” Science Communication Breakdown. January 14. 2015. https:// sciencecommunicationbreakdown. wordpress.com/2015/01/14/scicommtop-10-list/.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Conley, Del Biondo, Hoffman, Potter, and Scarson

A Heaping Scoop of Literacy, with a Side of Gamification Kara Conley, Reference Librarian at the Community Library of DeWitt & Jamesville; Kayla Del Biondo, Digital Services Librarian at New Canaan Library; Kim Hoffman, MSLIS ‘19 and M.A. Museum Studies ‘19, Syracuse University; Nicole Potter, Regional History Museum Librarian at The Community Library; Jillian Scarson, MSLIS ‘19, Syracuse University NUTRITION INFORMATION

Although young adults may be comfortable using technology to find information, recent high school graduates do not necessarily understand how to critically examine the information these tools yield. This recipe introduces undergraduates to information literacy and data literacy through an “escape room”-style workshop. Students escape the room by successfully completing timed challenges. These challenges help students develop the skills to be information and data literate “smart searchers” throughout their college experience. This workshop is best suited for undergraduates.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to do the following: Define and explain authority, information literacy, “fake news” (disinformation), and data literacy. Conduct smart searches by using key terms, narrowing or broadening focus, or by thinking about a search as a question. Create data visualizations and make theoretical data-driven decisions when presented with a data set.

•

• •

COOKING TIME

Approximately one hour

NUMBER SERVED

Class size of approximately 15–20 students, broken into teams of two to three

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This recipe provides a fun and interactive approach to literacy education, synthesizing the core skills of good search practices, determining source credibility and data analysis into a cohesive narrative. The workshop challenges closely align with the ACRL Frames Authority is Constructed and Contextual and Searching as Strategic Exploration.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

The following ingredients are needed in order for this recipe to be “fully cooked”: For instructor(s): ◊ computer and monitor/projector ◊ a PowerPoint presentation ◊ prizes (optional) ◊ whiteboard and markers (optional) For students: ◊ one computer per group of two to three students ◊ pencils ◊ worksheets

• •

COOKING TECHNIQUE

Short lectures, timed challenges for small 121

teams, and a scoring system to promote friendly and cooperative competition

PREPARATION

• • • •

Create PowerPoint, including ◊ agenda ◊ key terms ◊ directions for challenges ◊ instructor contact information Test technology in the classroom and adjust room setup as necessary. Create scoreboard. Create handouts.

COOKING METHOD

1. Introduce yourself and the topic. Set the stage and explain the escape room concept. a. Students are investigative journalists working to uncover the truth about information literacy. The deadline for their story is in an hour and they’re running out of time. If they don’t make this deadline, the world will never learn the truth about information literacy, and they will be trapped in the lab! 2. Define information literacy. a. Activate students’ prior knowledge. Ask any of the following questions to generate a brief discussion:

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION i.

Based on this definition on the board, what do you think information literacy means? ii. What are some of the abilities that would help you locate, evaluate, and use information (searching, critical thinking, asking questions, etc.)? iii. Do you think information literacy is important? Why? iv. How do we use information literacy in real life? 3. Connect the topic to your learners. Briefly explain to students that knowing these terms and their implications in information searching will help them in the various research tasks and assignments they will complete throughout the course of their college career. 4. Lay down the ground rules. a. Three challenges: i. fake news ii. smart searching iii. data literacy b. Points: i. First group to finish gets 3 points. ii. Other finishers get 2 points. iii. If the group didn’t finish the challenge, they do not get any points. c. To escape: i. Get 5–9 points to escape the lab! ii. Get only 1–4 points and you’re trapped! 5. The challenges. At the beginning of each challenge, provide students with a definition of the topic at hand. Include a Power-

Conley, Del Biondo, Hoffman, Potter, and Scarson

Point slide or handout that contains tips to help students examine the topic with a critical lens. Review this information with students and make it available for them to refer to throughout each timed segment. a. Challenge #1: Fake News. Students are directed to different news articles online in the instructions on their worksheets and must decide whether they are fake or credible and explain why. b. Challenge #2: Smart Searching. Students are presented with an image of a famous artwork and are not given any information about its title, creator, etc. They must use thoughtful keyword searches online to answer a series of questions about the artwork on their worksheets. c. Challenge #3: Data Literacy. Students are presented with spreadsheets of dummy data and must make data visualizations and data-driven decisions in Microsoft Excel and answer supplemental questions about their process on their worksheets. 6. Wrap up. Announce who “escaped” the room and ask students to write a personal reflection of key takeaways. Engage students in a closing discussion on what they learned about fake news and information literacy and how they would explain smart search skills to a friend.

ALLERGY WARNING

•

To avoid overwhelming students, try a gradual release model: present a few PowerPoint slides with key defini122

• •

tions, then transition into one of the three timed challenges, and repeat this process for each challenge. Because fake news, smart searching, and data literacy are such dense topics, we chose to break the transferable learning into bite-size chunks for the students to digest. Time moves quickly in this workshop, and we were not always able to predict how long students would take to answer each question. Be alert to time constraints. In our experience, students struggled with satirical sources for challenge #1. They had difficulty differentiating between facts and jokes, especially if the satirical article was published by a source generally deemed credible.

CHEF’S NOTES

• • • •

Instructors can assess the impact of this recipe by handing out brief surveys for students to complete at the end of class. Similar to library scavenger hunts, escape rooms can also be used to expose students to key areas of a library. Instructors can modify the focus of the timed challenges to highlight certain topics depending on the audience and the overall nature of the instructor’s role in the library they work in. Facilitators should be prepared to roam during challenges to provide encouragement and answer questions. We found it helpful to work in a group.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Stieglitz

The Whole Facts Diet: No Artificial Additives

Sally Stieglitz, Communications and Marketing Librarian, Long Island Library Resources Council NUTRITION INFORMATION

College students often struggle with recognizing unreliable information sources because they conflate digital nativism with the skills of critical information evaluation. In order to teach them to critically assess information sources for credibility, it is necessary to first convince them that they are lacking these skills. That is the goal of this lesson, to bring a new awareness to students of their non-critical approach to information and to help them develop the skills to become discerning information consumers. This lesson plan is designed for one-shot library instruction and is adaptable to different disciplines and academic levels. It focuses on helping students identify and acknowledge weaknesses in their news evaluation skills. The instruction can be tailored to specific populations and disciplines in the class discussion of authority and through the selection of online materials to be evaluated in the group exercise.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

•

Students will be able to evaluate online news and information resources using a variety of criteria to determine whether a resource is credible and suitable for their information needs. Criteria will

•

include currency, authority, accuracy, intended audience, bias, and purpose. Students will learn how information created in an online environment can mislead, and they will learn to recognize the red flags of misleading information sources.

COOKING TIME

• •

Preparation: 1 hour to select and review materials for instruction, such as an online article of questionable authority Instruction: 1 hour of classroom instruction

NUMBER SERVED

This lesson plan is most suitable for small or medium classes (15–30 students) as its effectiveness is rooted in the games used for instruction and the ability to foster participation among all. In a smaller group, there may not be sufficient participation to move the games along; in a larger class, the cohesion of group activity may be diminished.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

The overarching purpose of the lesson is to bring college students to an epiphany: that they are not fully cognizant about the trustworthiness of online information resources and that they need the tools of information 123

literacy to navigate and evaluate online information sources. Relevant ACRL Frames: Authority is Constructed and Contextual Information Creation as a Process

• •

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• •

Instructor workstation with projector and Internet connection An unreliable online news source to be vetted in class by students using newly learned information literacy skills

PREPARATION

The instructor librarian should select an unreliable online news source and review it for “red flags” of unsuitability as a credible or useful information source.

COOKING METHOD

1. Introduction interactive game/ice breaker. The lesson begins with an interactive online game, Factitious (http://factitious. augamestudio.com/#/), in which students are asked to identify a series of improbable news stories as real or fake. All the articles in the game are equally implausible and the students become increasingly frustrated and amused by their inability to tell the real news articles from the fake

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION ones created for the online game. The humorous content of the “news stories” is also an icebreaker and encourages comfortable class participation. 2. Class discussion. The resulting awareness that they are not skilled at recognizing fake news leads to a lively discussion led by the librarian instructor. Topics include how students define fake news (identifying characteristics), where they get their own news (social media, television, apps, print), and why it is difficult to distinguish between real and fake news (confirmation bias, sponsored content, a continuum versus a clear line). 3. Instruction on evaluating sources. The class discussion is followed by instruction on how to evaluate information sources for authority, currency, bias, and purpose. The discussion of purpose includes online video examples of satire and parody. Examples of these are: ◊ War of the Worlds 1938 audio broadcast ◊ The Onion website ◊ Saturday Night Live Weekend Update video

Stieglitz

and discuss a preselected (questionable) online article using their new skills. The selection of the article is an opportunity to tailor instruction to the class’ discipline or academic level. This exercise may be done in a single group or with smaller groups who share their conclusions after working separately for a set amount of time. 5. Wrap up: Interactive online game. The lesson concludes with another humorous online game, Get Bad News (https://www. getbadnews.com/#play), that allows students to build a fake news article to demonstrate how easily unreliable sources are created online. The game is an interactive experience along the lines of a “choose your own adventure” and encourages full class participation by asking all students to “vote” for the decisions needed to create then content.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

Confirmation bias: College students are generally unaware of their tendency to prefer information that agrees with their preexisting views. They can be desensitized to this reaction through the introduction of the concept of confirmation bias.

CHEF’S NOTES

This lesson plan has also been adapted to a stand-alone workshop for a campus-wide event. There are often opportunities to use the lesson in different academic disciplines, and the selection of the untrustworthy article can be changed to reflect the coursework. For example, for nursing students, an article may be about health advice; for political science students, it may be about politics. It is important to verify the links for the online games and resources a day prior to instruction to confirm availability and functionality.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

A dedicated online guide such as Adelphi University Libraries’ Fake News and Alternative Facts: A Guide to News Literacy (https:// libguides.adelphi.edu/fake_news) supports instruction by providing continued access to resources used in the lesson as well as additional resources that support further inquiry.

The instruction concludes with a survey of independent fact-checking tools and skills such as the importance of following up on an article’s supporting sources, how to use fact-checking sites (Snopes, Politifact), and the importance of reading broadly to educate one’s self as a news consumer. 4. Class activity: Testing new skills. At this point, the class is asked to participate in a group exercise in which they evaluate 124

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Marcyk

How Do They Know That? An Evaluation Exercise for News

Emilia Marcyk, Teaching & Learning/Instructional Technology Librarian, Michigan State University, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

This recipe asks students to consider how journalists report and source news stories. Students learn to ask the question “How do they know that?” when encountering information reported in a news story and to explore ways that reporters demonstrate how they know what they know. Worksheets give students examples of demonstrated evidence and encourage them to think critically about how and why a news story was written. This recipe works well with first-year writing students who are learning to evaluate information or who are tasked with finding a hot topic or trend in the news to write about. It can also be adapted for a wide variety of undergraduate or even graduate students who are developing their news literacy skills or even as a stand-alone news literacy workshop.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will ask critical questions about evidence they encounter in news stories in order to understand where the information originated; compare different sources of news; explore what factors make a news story credible; and

• • •

•

make informed decisions about which news sources to trust.

COOKING TIME

60–90 minutes, depending on the size of the group and the amount of discussion desired

COOKING TECHNIQUE

Close reading, small group work, and wholeclass discussion

PREPARATION

•

NUMBERS SERVED

10–30 students, broken into groups of 4–5

DIETARY GUIDELINES

Many students (and faculty!) only skim the news articles they consume without much thought about where the information originated. This activity encourages close and thoughtful reading and asks students to think about the work that goes into creating a wellresearched news story. In addition, it addresses the following ACRL Frames: Information Creation as Process Authority is Constructed and Contextual

• •

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • •

A few news articles (preferably longer, investigative articles), either printed out or online “How do they know that?” worksheet Computers or student devices (optional)

125

•

Find meaty news articles for each group to use during class. ProPublica, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, and National Public Radio all have investigative units that produce longer stories that rely on a variety of evidence types. These kinds of stories work best for this exercise since they give students more opportunities to see how journalists use and cite evidence. Choose articles that touch on the class topic or theme for even greater relevance. Print “How do they know that?” worksheets before class or set up a Google Doc version that students can access easily.

COOKING METHOD

Part I 1. Introduce the class to the idea that wellproduced news should include a variety of sources and evidence. 2. Connect the ability to assess the quality of news to the course outcomes. For example, if students need to identify a hot topic or trend in their field to write about,

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Marcyk

Figure 1: “How do they know that?” worksheet example

How do they know that? A simple but powerful question for evaluating the quality of the news you read.

Sources and Documents When a journalist makes a claim, ask yourself, “how do they know that?” • Ways journalists demonstrate they know something: o They cite multiple sources. o Those sources are people who know something about the situation or news event.  If the sources are anonymous, the journalist explains why. o The journalist was present at the event they are reporting on. o The evidence may be a document—a report, email, memo, study, among others. See if you can independently verify the contents of the document or if the journalist provides a link. • Other ways to evaluate sources and documents:

Expertise When a journalist interviews an expert, ask yourself, “How do they know that?” • Questions to ask yourself about experts: o Do they have demonstrated expertise in the area they are talking about? This can be expertise related to an advanced degree (a professor or researcher), or their job (a diplomat, a city employee, someone who works in a relevant field). o What evidence of their expertise can you find? o Do they speak for themselves, or on behalf of another person or organization? Are they currently employed by a company, political entity, or other group/person with an interest in the story? • Other ways to evaluate expertise:

Eyewitnesses When you read eyewitness accounts or view citizen-recorded videos of an event, ask yourself, “How do they know that?” • Questions to ask yourself about eyewitnesses: o Where they themselves present at the event? o How long ago did the event happen? Passage of time can affect memories. o Does the eyewitness provide corroborating evidence, like photos or videos, to back up their account? o If a video, did they film the video themselves or are they re-posting someone else’s work? • Other ways to evaluate eyewitnesses:

Your Turn The news article provided includes sources and documents, interviews with experts, and eyewitness accounts. Read the article keeping the question, “How do they know that?” in mind. 1.

Where was the journalist successful in demonstrating how they know what they know? Record some positive examples below and discuss with your group:

2.

Where were some areas where your group wasn’t convinced? What other sources, documents, experts, eyewitnesses, or other types of evidence would you like to see? Record some examples below and discuss with your group:

126

making sure that what they find really is a trend (rather than just something pushed by a particular company) is important. 3. Time permitting, ask students to talk about their own experiences with news verification. Some questions for discussion could include: a. When you read a piece of news, how do you assess its accuracy? b. What qualities make a news source reliable? c. What makes you most likely to trust (or distrust) a news article or journalist? Part II 1. Divide students into groups of 4–5. 2. Hand out (or provide a link to) the “How do they know that?” worksheet to each person and provide a copy of (or link to) one news article per group. If using paper copies, provide at least two per group. 3. Go over the three types of evidence (sources and documents, experts, and eyewitnesses) on the worksheet. Tell students that they will be doing a close reading of their article to identify where their article does a good job of demonstrating evidence and where they would like to see more. 4. Give at least 10 minutes for quiet reading. 5. After quiet reading is over, students will discuss their news article and provide positive and negative examples of evidence and sources. 6. Circulate to answer questions and encourage small-group discussion.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Marcyk Part III 1. Ask small groups to share positive examples of evidence and sources used. Discuss what kind of evidence the journalist used and why it was effective, referring back to the worksheet. 2. Ask small groups to share where they would have liked to see more evidence and why, referring back to the worksheet. 3. Ask the whole class what steps they would take to follow up on areas where they would like to see more evidence. Optional: list these strategies on a Word document or on the board in front of the class. 4. Informal assessment question: How has this activity changed the way you will read or engage with news in the future? Students can respond to this question verbally or write a one- or two-minute paper.

ALLERGY WARNING

Depending on how well you know the students, you may wish to avoid articles on emotionally charged topics. Talking in a meaningful way about controversial issues often requires more trust than can be built in a single class period.

CHEF’S NOTES

• •

To scaffold this activity, ask each group to look at one type of evidence, rather than all three at once. The worksheet and lesson format can be adapted for different types of information. The chef has used a modified version of this activity to examine evidence in peer-reviewed articles. 127

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Cooke

Cooking up Critical Thinking in the Flipped Kitchen Kristen A. Cooke, MLS NUTRITION INFORMATION

In this recipe intended for new researchers, the head chef leads students through a collaborative learning experience in a flipped kitchen that results in an understanding of the value of information, how to examine the authority of the author, and the many motives behind the creation of information. This is accomplished by identifying some characteristics of misinformation and employing active learning techniques.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to do the following: recognize the value of information examine the author of the information and the motives behind its creation identify characteristics of misinformation

• • •

COOKING TIME

Prep time for aspiring student chefs is approximately 30 minutes to 1 hour. Active cook time is adjusted to accommodate a 50-minute class session.

NUMBER SERVED

This recipe serves 10–25 people.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This recipe encourages chefs to engage with the ACRL Framework and utilize critical-think-

ing skills to understand the impact the value of information, the authority of the author, and the information creation process has on the information they have selected for their “dish.”

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • •

Three information sources 30–75 Post-it Notes Whiteboard or wall

PREPARATION

Prior to the cooking session, the librarian should select three pieces of information that address the same event or topic. Where we source our ingredients matters, so for this recipe, select sources from three distinct outlets: social media or a blog, a local news outlet, and a national news organization. The librarian should also provide an asynchronous learning opportunity that discusses and explains the information creation process and the value of information. Students should read and examine the ingredients and complete a rubric for each prior to class. Students should also review any asynchronous learning provided during this time. The librarian should prepare by writing the three headlines or titles of each information source on the class whiteboard or by posting them in a centralized place. As students enter, provide each student with three Post-it Notes. 128

COOKING TECHNIQUES

Flipped classroom, active learning, collaborative learning, feminist pedagogy, structured jigsaw

COOKING METHODS

1. Introduction a. Provide a brief review of the content introduced in the asynchronous learning opportunity. Encourage students to share any concepts that were new or that they did not understand. (10–12 minutes) 2. Activity a. Read each article title or headline aloud. After each is read aloud, give students 30–45 seconds to write a one-word response. The one-word response should be the first word that comes to their mind. (3 minutes) b. After the last article’s title or headline is read aloud, students post their responses under each title and review their peers’ responses. (5 minutes) 3. Discussion a. Increase the heat slightly by encouraging students to take note of any trends they see in the response cards. Then, bring to an active boil by asking students to discuss why such trends might emerge in the responses and what elements of the information might have influenced the trends.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Cooke b. If the meal looks like it may not cook completely, try some questions to heat things up. (20 minutes) i. Do all of the sources describe the event in the same way? Do they contain the same factual information? ii. Is there one source you trust more than the others? Why or why not? iii. Does each article have an author? Why would a person not include their name on their work? iv. Why do you think the author shared this information? What do you think their intention is? v. What could be another motive the author might have to share the information? vi. Did you have an emotional reaction to the article or headline? What methods do you think the author used to elicit that kind of response? vii. Have you ever “unfollowed” or “unfriended” someone on social media as a result of information they shared that supported beliefs that were different from your own? What effect could that have on the type of information and ideas you are exposed to? viii. What could the author have to gain by sharing this information? ix. Why does any of this matter? 4. Review a. Ask the students to recall information from the asynchronous presenta-

tions. What correlations do they see between their responses today and the information presented in the presentations?

ALLERGY WARNINGS

Some students may experience an allergy to a dialogue-based exploration of concepts. Breaking the students into smaller groups where they discuss differences in their rubrics or responses to the articles prior to the large group discussion can help engage reluctant participants.

CHEF’S NOTE

This recipe was initially written for an audience of concurrent, freshmen, or sophomore students with little experience in evaluating information. However, the recipe can be scaled to upper-level research by careful selection of the sources by the chef or by allowing upper-level classes to independently select sources that support their research.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES Rubric 1. Does not apply 2. Somewhat applies 3. Applies

1

The language and tone of the author are free from emotional or inflammatory language. The information provides dates, times, statistics, names, and other information that can be independently verified. The name of the author is clear and can be independently verified. The affiliation of the author is clear and can be independently verified. The author’s description of the event is appropriate given the available information on the incident

129

2

3

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Brodie Perry

How Sweet It Is:

Recognizing Misinformation and Disinformation Heather Brodie Perry, Ph.D., Stonehill College NUTRITION INFORMATION

This recipe helps students understand the role that funding sources can play in the construction of research, using examples from nutrition research. Students will recognize the importance of evaluating information and considering issues such as power and privilege when making determinations of quality and authority. This activity will engage students using a hands-on activity to evaluate information presented in news sources by examining the research upon which it is based. This assignment is designed to assist students in moving beyond evaluating sources using simple metrics and proxies of quality to assessing information with a more critical stance.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will learn the following: Recognize that varied sources of information can present information differently for specific audiences and purposes. Understand that the source of study funding can influence the design, conduct, and presentation of research. Research studies and reports of research need to be critically evaluated for authority and credibility. Understand that information has several

• •

•

dimensions of value. Some research is conducted to investigate questions while other research is designed for marketing, promotion, or thwarting regulation.

COOKING TIME

50 to 75 Minutes

NUMBER SERVED

This activity works best with small classes. This activity is flexible and can be adapted to a wide variety of situations and disciplines.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

Popular media reports of research studies frequently report benefits without mentioning drawbacks or study limitations. Corporations may sponsor research to promote their products rather than to increase understanding. This recipe introduces students to the importance of critically evaluating information to determine its suitability for their information need. Students may be new to the idea that research can be shaped by its funding source and that publications can benefit the funder by misinforming the reader. Students may accept information at face value rather than examining it more deeply. Becoming an informed consumer requires readers to ask questions and evaluate the quality of the evidence. 130

ACRL Frames addressed: Authority is Constructed and Contextual Information Has Value

• •

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

1. Articles from newspapers, magazines or websites reporting about research findings. You will want one article for each group (for examples, see https://tinyurl. com/yclv6xol) 2. Corresponding primary articles referenced in the secondary report 3. Evaluation tool handout 4. Whiteboards or paper for group responses

PREPARATION

•

•

Librarians leading the session should read Doubt is their Product to prepare to lead an introduction to the topic of disinformation (see Additional Resources). This article will introduce students to the concept of industry conflict of interest in the creation and dissemination of scientific research. This article can be assigned before class if desired. To prepare for this exercise, the librarian should select several magazine articles, news reports, or websites reporting about original research about food, nutrition, or other newsworthy topics. For suggestions, see https://tinyurl.com/yclv6xol.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Brodie Perry

• •

◊ This activity can also be used for a wide range of topics such as energy, pesticides, or pharmaceuticals. Librarian finds the original research referenced. Librarian copies evaluation instrument.

COOKING METHOD

1. Introduce students to the issue of disinformation. Discuss the article Doubt is Their Product, if assigned prior to class. 2. Introduce students to the role of power and money in the creation of research. Explain to students that information is disseminated for different purposes. Briefly discuss with students how news reports of research can be misleading, emphasizing the benefits and underreporting the drawbacks. 3. Give a brief overview of the session and the evaluation tool. 4. Break up the class into small groups of 3–5 students. 5. Hand out copies of the popular press article and the evaluation tool. 6. Each group should write their responses on their whiteboard or large sheet of paper. 7. Give groups 10–15 minutes for the first portion of the exercise. Groups should formulate 3–5 questions that arise from reading the article. 8. Pass out the primary research article upon which the secondary article reports. 9. Give students 15–20 minutes to answer the questions and discuss the article with their group. Students should be able to

establish whether the claims made in the popular account are supported by the research presented in the second article. 10. Reassemble the class and have each group report on their findings. 11. Wrap up the session with a class discussion of the differences between the Evaluation Instrument Popular Press Article Examine the news report about the research. Consider the following questions: What claims are being made? What evidence supports the claims? Is there a funding source mentioned? Research Article Examine the research study. Consider the following: What was the research question? What population was studied? What was the study’s methodology? Did the stated conclusions follow the results? Did the study list a funding source? Did the authors disclose conflicts of interest? Your Conclusions Did the research study support the claims made in the article? Did the news article accurately reflect the study? Why do you think this study was conducted? • To educate • To persuade • To evoke action

131

primary research and how it is reported in the media. Have the class discuss issues of funding source and confirmation bias.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

Students may be surprised that peer-reviewed journals need to be read critically.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Brodie Perry

Students may be accustomed to believing that sources are either good or bad; this exercise exposes them to greater nuance, which may cause discomfort. Some of the information may challenge deeply held beliefs.

CHEF’S NOTES

This is an opportunity to discuss with students the importance of the ethical conduct of research. While this exercise used nutrition research, the impact of a funding source on research conducted impacts many fields of study. Students should learn that criticalthinking skills are necessary for evaluating information in all disciplines. This exercise will familiarize students with the habit of checking the source of information and exercising an appropriate level of skepticism.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Michaels, David. “Doubt is Their Product: Industry Groups are Fighting Government Regulation by Fomenting Scientific Uncertainty.” Scientific American 292, no. 6 (2005): 96–101.

132

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Luiz

Discovering the “I” in Bias Laura Luiz, MLIS, Bakersfield College: Bakersfield, CA, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

This activity should be paired with a lesson on media bias and cognitive bias. It provides a great lead-in to a discussion on evaluating news sources. It works well in a library orientation or workshop devoted to fake news. The activity introduces students to the concept of media bias as a spectrum, leaving behind the binary idea of fake news and good news. This activity leads students to think critically about their reactions and feelings toward news outlets. Through collaboration, students will identify and distinguish between their emotional responses and logical analysis and why this matters in identifying media bias.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will ultimately learn about how accusations of media bias can be subjective and can be affected by our own personal biases/ cognitive bias.

•

•

Google Doc with a table that can be filled in by students. In the table, there should be spaces for each pair to write what column and rectangle they believe their news outlet belongs in. There should also be a space for a 1- to 2-sentence justification. Vanessa Otero’s Media Bias Chart Version 3.1

PREPARATION

Before the activity, be sure to have a discussion on journalistic standards, including fairness, balance, and bias. A breakdown of each with examples should be given. The types of bias with examples should be included. You may also want to include a discussion on opinion journalism versus fact-based journalism.

COOKING METHOD

Step 1 (1–2 minutes). After discussing bias, the first step is to have students write down one news outlet they trust and one they distrust. This can be a newspaper, television channel, radio station, podcast, etc. This should take place before they see Vanessa Otero’s chart; that way, their opinions are not influenced by it. Step 2 (2–3 minutes). Show Vanessa Otero’s chart and break down how it is sorted on two spectrums: ideology and quality. Explain what conservative and liberal means with basic definitions. Be sure to explain the key, so that students understand the differences between each color rectangle. Step 3 (5–6 minutes). Split up the students into pairs and have them discuss the news outlets and where they think they should be

COOKING TIME

This activity is designed to be combined with a lengthy discussion on media bias, cognitive bias, and evaluating news sources. The activity itself can take anywhere from 20–25 minutes.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

•

Computers

Vanessa Otero’s Media Chart: Royalty-free image can be obtained through website.* http://www.adfontesmedia.com/ *This activity uses Version 3.1 of Vanessa Otero’s Media Chart. 133

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION placed on the chart. (If needed, the students can be placed in groups of three. However, anything bigger and the students will have difficulty coming to a consensus quickly enough.) Have students choose one outlet from their selections; preferably, it should be an outlet that they are both aware of. If students can’t agree, assign them a local newspaper or popular outlet like CNN or Fox News. Once they have agreed on one outlet, have them write down their placement and a 1- or 2-sentence justification on the Google Doc.

the news. This is especially the case with first-year students. You may have to assign news outlets and have them do some quick research on them before they fill out the Google Doc.

CHEF’S NOTES

•

Step 4 (6 minutes). Discuss the Google Doc with the class. Ask them questions such as: Did anyone have difficulty agreeing their partner? Did anyone have difficulty coming up with a justification? Did anyone disagree with Otero’s map? If so, why? Pick groups at random or volunteer groups to discuss their justification. Discuss how and why so opinions are different and what that means. Step 5 (2–3 minutes). Explain cognitive bias and discuss how it can play a role in how we perceive bias in news outlets. Step 6 (4–5 minutes). Have the same pairs of students discuss how to combat cognitive bias and what they can do to make sure bias isn’t influencing their opinion of news outlets. Discuss as a class.

ALLERGY WARNING

Luiz

•

In my experience, students often struggle to grasp the concept of bias. Be prepared to have a lengthy discussion before the activity. Students often fail to identify instances of bias on their own. You may want to provide examples. For instance, you may want to show examples of headlines with loaded language or articles that strongly favor one point of view. Have a quick game on a presentation slide that asks students which headline has loaded language or something similar. This is a good way to check for understanding. You may find that you have to go over the concept again. Students may also struggle with differing between a single instance of bias versus a pattern of bias. Depending on the group of students, the discussion of bias could put you over your time. If you find yourself behind schedule, you can always adjust the activity by skipping the Google Doc. Have them write it down on a piece of paper instead. This should save you the time of having to explain how the Doc works.

Be prepared for students to be unaware of current events or different news outlets. Some are very apathetic in general toward 134

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Hayes

Food for Thought:

Slow Information Principles and Practices Colette Hayes, Reference and Instruction Librarian, University of San Francisco, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

JP Rangaswami says in his 2012 TED talk “Information is Food”: “I love my food, and I love information.” The recipe for the following meal or lesson, much like the Cookbook it’s been published in, links the seemingly amorphous idea of “information” with the familiar, material, and more concrete: food. It asks students to slow down and think about information production and consumption processes and practices and how they might improve and enrich them.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will leave the meal with a list of at least 3 “slow information” principles and/or practices.

COOKING TIME

45–60 minutes

indicate the underlying creation process,” “value[s] the skills, time, and effort needed to produce knowledge,” and “maintain[s] an open mind and critical stance.”

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• •

Optional: Slides displaying the meal and courses as well as quotes and other relevant and engaging visuals Snacks. I have received student feedback that this lesson makes them hungry— for food, and to learn more, I hope.

• •

PREPARATION

•

NUMBER SERVED

A classroom of 20–25 students or fewer

DIETARY GUIDELINES

The following recipe uses at least three ACRL Frames as guidelines: Information Creation as a Process, Information Has Value, and Research as Inquiry, which describe learner dispositions such as “[is] inclined to seek out characteristics of information products that

Whiteboard or butcher paper and colorful markers Internet connection, computer, projector, and sound system

•

Ensure that web links are working, video sound is amplified, and video captions are visible. Familiarize yourself with the ideas and ingredients in this recipe and remember to infuse the lesson with the very approach to information that this meal recipe hopes to highlight: go slowly and enjoy it!

COOKING METHOD

Appetizer

135

1. Invite students to, with you, write their favorite thing to read, and their favorite thing to eat on the board/butcher paper. First course 1. Start with a heaping cup of the “information/food” analogy by displaying or discussing the class as a meal you’ll enjoy for the next hour or so. 2. Pour in the fact that this analogy is both very old and currently popular. 3. Add a quote attributed to the rhetorician Quinctilian (d. 100 A.D.): “Our minds are like our stomachs; they are whetted by the change of their food, and variety supplies both with fresh appetites,” and throw in a dash of Clay Johnson’s book, Information Diets: The Case for Conscious Consumption (2012), which initially inspired some of this meal. 4. Let the idea simmer that we are all “information omnivores,” who gobble up all different sorts of information almost every minute of every day. Second course 1. Introduce Eric Carle’s 2010 Google Doodle: “First Days of Spring.” Ask if someone can describe what happens in the referenced children’s book. 2. Fold in the suggestion that we often approach information like the very hungry

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION caterpillar in Carle’s classic. Encourage students to think about how fast they click and scroll through Google results, news stories, Twitter feeds, Instagram posts, etc. 3. Mix in student voices by asking the class to share what happens when we forget or neglect to consider who is producing and how we are consuming information; we might share stale or incorrect information, for example. Third course 1. Start with a bit of background about the Slow Food movement and its call for people to slow down and think more critically about their food and its sources and production. Pose the idea that some slow food principles and practices might be able to be applied to information as well. 2. Break students off into small groups and ask them to think about engaging principles and practices that would make consuming information a deeper and more enriching experience. 3. For added flavor, direct students to excerpts of Farhad Manjoo’s 2018 New York Times article, “For Two Months, I Got My News From Print Newspapers. Here’s What I Learned,” focusing on the journalist’s attempt to “slow-jam” the news. 4. Allow enough time for ideas to percolate, then direct groups to decide on two of best slow information principles and/or practices they’ve come up with and to write them on the board/butcher paper. Note any similarities and differences that might emerge and attempt to distill the

Hayes

ideas into one list—a Slow Information Manifesto of sorts. Dessert 1. Indulge in a short clip of JP Rangaswami’s Ted Talk “Information is Food.” 2. Ask students to write a short paragraph of reflection on their current information consumption practices, and challenge them to think about changes they, personally, might make to be slower, more mindful, and more critical information consumers.

ALLERGY WARNING

Lively group discussion is essential to this meal. Remember to provide students ample time to think about and respond to questions, and be prepared with examples to help them digest ideas. There have been, rightfully so, critics of the Slow Food movement and the information as food analogy. You might address the fact that these ideas and principles be the subject of ongoing critical analysis, too.

CHEF’S NOTES

This recipe offers plenty of opportunities and possibilities. For one class, I wore an apron and put out cookbooks from our library’s collection to playfully emphasize the analogy and theme. I’ve also modified the recipe to go in other important directions. For example, one might use the idea of “food deserts” to introduce concepts such as information deserts, information privilege, and differences in access to information. 136

And it is ok to skip or expand courses! For example, sometimes I include additional information and discussion in the second course and condense or skip the third course. I often give students examples of different “flavors” or “dishes” of information (a website, newspaper article, a scholarly article, etc.). Together we discuss the varying “cooking times” (timeto-publication, if any) and “cooks” (authors) of these sources and why thinking critically about these differences is important.

NOTES

Carle, Eric. “First Day of Spring 2009.” Accessed October 12, 2018. https://www.google. com/doodles/first-day-of-spring-2009design-by-eric-carle. Johnson, Clay A. The Information Diet: A Case for Conscious Consumption. Sebastopol: O’Reilly Media, Inc., 2012. Manjoo, Farhad. “For Two Months, I Got My News From Print Newspapers. Here’s What I Learned.” New York Times, March 7, 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/07/ technology/two-months-newsnewspapers.html. Quinctilian. Quinctilian’s Institutes of Eloquence: Or, The Art of Speaking in Public in Every Character or Capacity. Translated by W. Guthrie. Vol. 1. London: Dewick and Clarke, 1805. Google Books. Rangaswami, JP. “Information is Food.” Filmed March 2012 at TED@SXSWi in Austin, Texas. Video, 8:08. https://www.ted.com/ talks/jp_rangaswami_information_is_ food?language=en.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

McMillan and Bynoe

Popping the Filter Bubble on Internet News and Recognizing Bias Lauren McMillan, Reference and Instruction Librarian/Assistant Professor, Georgia Southern University-Armstrong Campus, Lane Library, [email protected]; Vivian Bynoe, Reference and Instruction Librarian/Assistant Professor, Georgia Southern University-Armstrong Campus, Lane Library, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

In this session, students are challenged to think about how they access information and the biases that develop from exposure to the same news sources. The internet filter bubble is explained, and students are asked to identify positive and negative impacts and how the filter bubble can affect their research and how they process new information. Students are given some solutions to help “pop” their bubble and become more critical consumers of information. This activity may challenge students to think in ways they have never considered. Use examples that are current and relevant to the students in your course or even connect the session to their program of study. Adjustments will need to be made for each class. It is appropriate for all levels of students, freshman to graduate.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• • •

Students will be able to identify how the filter bubble impacts their research behaviors. Students will be able to distinguish bias between information sources. Students will use search engine tools in order to become responsible consumers of information.

COOKING TIME NUMBER SERVED

Slide 1: When you think of reputable newspapers, what comes to mind? ◊ What makes these “reputable?”

DIETARY GUIDELINES

Slide 2: What kinds of information do you seek in a newspaper?

•

50–60 minutes

Number varies. Can be adapted to small or large groups.

The larger purpose is for students to understand how the news media and social media contribute to confirmation bias. Critically thinking about one’s own biases, using search engine tools, and looking at a variety of sources will improve consumption of information in one’s academic life and life beyond the classroom. Related Frames from the ACRL Framework: Information Has Value Authority is Constructed and Contextual Research as Inquiry

• • •

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

Computers (lab or student laptops), projector, printed worksheets

PREPARATION

Prepare the poll, locate video links (and ensure volume is working!), and prepare PowerPoint questions.

137

•

Slide 3: Are newspapers exempt from presenting misinformation? ◊ What can you do to mitigate that? (Don’t rely on one source for info, compare info, check facts, etc.)

•

COOKING METHOD

1. Start with a poll question using a poll creator such as Poll Code or Poll Everywhere. Ask students to respond to the question, “Where do you get your news?” Discuss results with students and talk about confirmation bias. 2. Next, talk about information: ease of access, ease of using a search engine/ common ways of accessing info. But be aware that we build our own filter of information based on how we interact with the web. Explain the difference between searching “our” internet rather than “the” internet.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION a. Sample explanation: Have you ever noticed when you are searching for a pair of shoes online and you’ve compared various websites, then you check Facebook and you see advertisements for the same shoe brands that you previously searched? 3. Elaborate on how we need to be increasingly more responsible for the information we are using and processing in order to see the big picture and understand that we are not necessarily entering the “conversation” at the beginning. 4. This TED Talk is a good way to explain the concept of the internet filter bubble: https://www.ted.com/talks/ eli_pariser_beware_online_filter_ bubbles?language=en. Watch this in class and then give students a chance to discuss. Explore ways to pop the internet filter bubble. 5. This LibGuide, from the University of Illinois, has tips to “burst your bubble”: https://wit-ie.libguides.com/c. php?g=652919&p=4581472. Explore this guide for alternative ways to search for information, such as using a search engine that does not remember searches and create a filter bubble, like DuckDuckGo. a. The filter bubble confirms our own biases by ensuring you keep seeing the same information on “your” internet. Now, thinking about the filter bubble in a larger scope spreads to how we consume our news in that we tend to get news from sources with the same kinds of bias that confirm what we already believe (confirmation bias).

McMillan and Bynoe

6. At this point, go back to the poll question and have students discuss if they perceive their preferred news sources to be filtered or have a bias. Students can share with the class. 7. Talk about how news information is used. a. Sample explanation: News sources track societal evolution of an issue, provide a platform for opinions/facts/ analysis, and represent the contemporary, in-the-moment view of events as they are unfolding, etc. 8. Show the following PowerPoint slides and complete the think-pair-share activity attached to this lesson. Students can work in small groups to discuss and share with the class. 9. Ask students to conduct searches using search engines and different news websites. Students will compare and discuss.

Students will also compare news website searches to news database searches.

ALLERGY WARNING

Though the TED Talk video was created in 2011, it is still very relevant to how we currently interact with the internet. There are other links to explore at the bottom of the Ted Talk page to continue the discussion.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Pariser, Eli. “Beware Online ‘Filter Bubbles’.” TED Talk. March 2011. https://www.ted.com/ talks/eli_pariser_beware_online_filter_ bubbles?language=en. University of Illinois Library. “Filter Bubbles and the Deep Web: How to Burst your Filter Bubble!” Last updated November 1, 2019. https://wit-ie.libguides.com/c. php?g=652919&p=4581472.

Popping the Filter Bubble and Recognizing Bias Worksheet for Students

1. With a partner, on each of your computers, conduct the same search. (Pick topics that are current and in the news and have multiple viewpoints.) One of you will search from the New York Times site and one from the Washington Post site. Compare your results. Did the results present the information in the same way or in different ways from one source to the next? 2. Next, use the same search. One of you should use your search engine of choice and one should use DuckDuckGo. Compare the results list for each. Were the results identical? If not, how did they differ? 3. Now, use one of the library’s newspaper databases and conduct the same search from the newspaper websites. What newspapers have relevant articles for this search? 4. Taking into account the Ted Talk video we watched and the concept of filter bubbles, how will you think differently about internet searches? What can you do to mitigate misinformation and bias or how web searches yield different results for different users? 5. Have students view this document from Google’s help forum on how to control your web and app activity: https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/54068?hl=en&rd=2. 138

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Sachs

Cooking with GMOs:

Confirmation Bias and Misinformation in Scientific Controversies Dianna E. Sachs, Health and Human Services Librarian, Western Michigan University NUTRITIONAL INFORMATION

This recipe addresses the role that confirmation bias, misinformation, and emotional appeal have on perpetuating scientific controversies, such as the role of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in food (see Chef’s Note for other scientific controversies). Students use role-playing and group discussion to explore how individual preconceptions can impact the way we seek out and interpret information. Rather than teaching students to evaluate information through a set of fixed criteria, this lesson encourages students to build habits of healthy skepticism and ask thoughtful questions about all information sources.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

Students will develop their evaluation skills by learning to ask thoughtful questions of information sources. Students will be able to recognize aspects of confirmation bias, emotional appeal, and misinformation.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

ACRL Frames: Authority is Constructed and Contextual Information Has Value Searching as Strategic Exploration

• • •

MAIN INGREDIENTS

• • • • •

Farmer

Should I plant GMO crops?

Do GMO crops have better yield?

Parent About you: Congratulations! You just had your first baby. It seems everyone is giving you contradictory advice, and you’re exhausted and confused.

Role-playing, group exploration, mediated discussion

PREPARATION

•

12–30 students

COOKING TIME

•

Create character cards representing individuals seeking information on a topic for GMOs (or another topic for which there is significant scientific controversy; see Chef’s Note for other topics). Each character card should include ◊ the name or title of a character and ◊ one or more search questions that the character has about GMOs. Each search question should be some139

About you: You’re a fifth-generation farmer of a small family farm and you’re wondering if you should plant GMO or non-GMO crops. You care about: • making a living for your family for many years to come

COOKING TECHNIQUES

NUMBER SERVED

For best results, cook 45 minutes. (See Chef’s Note for quick and slow-cook versions.)

Enough computers or mobile devices for every 3–5 students Internet access Character cards with associated pre-selected search parameters (one per group) Character Research Worksheets (one per group) Written definition of confirmation bias

•

thing the character might realistically enter into a search engine. Keep the search questions short. Design a Character Research Worksheet for students to complete.

Are GMOs safe for my baby?

You care about: • your baby’s health • sleep (because you’re not getting any)

How do I know if there are GMOs in my baby’s food?

Activist

Can GMOs end world hunger? What are the environmental impacts of GMOs?

About you: You’re a social and environmental activist. You spent a year studying in Nigeria and you’re especially concerned about the impact of droughts on farming there. You care about: • making sure all people have enough to eat • environmental sustainability

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Sachs

GMOs: Saving the World or Destroying It? (Part 1) Familiarize yourself with your character and their situation and complete Part 1 of this worksheet while playing the role of your character. Before doing any research, how do you (as your character) feel about genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in food? GMOs are fabulous!

GMOs are evil!

I haven’t made up my mind

Use a search engine to search for one of the search questions on your character card. Look only at the results on the first page Roughly what percentage of the results reinforce your original feelings about GMOs? What is your emotional reaction to a result that reinforces your original feelings?

What is your emotional reaction to a result that challenges your original feelings?

Looking at your search results, would you change your mind about GMOs? Why?

Be Yourself Again! (Part 2) Complete Part 2 of this worksheet as yourself (not as your character). Which search results tried to appeal to your emotions?

Which search results appeared to intentionally mislead you through incomplete, incorrect, or outof-context information? What clues led you to conclude that the authors were intentionally misleading?

Which search results appeared to provide objective, verifiable evidence? What clues led you to conclude that the evidence is objective and verifiable?

140

•

Obtain a definition of confirmation bias. Do not share with students until Step 5.

COOKING METHOD

Step 1. Give a brief introduction to the topic for students who may not be familiar with the controversy. Be sure to remain neutral in your language and tone. (Example: “A GMO, or genetically-modified organism, is any organism whose genetic material has been altered through genetic engineering. Many foods, including both plant- and animal-based foods, contain GMOs. Some people are concerned about the safety GMOs in food while others believe GMOs are harmless and make food cheaper and more plentiful.”) Step 2. Divide students into groups of 3–5 and assign a character card to each group. Make sure each group has a computer or mobile device for internet searching. Step 3. Students read their character card and think about their character’s preconceptions about GMOs. Step 4. Students search for one of their search questions in a search engine and complete Part 1 of the Character Research Worksheet based on their search results. Step 5. Librarian shares the definition of confirmation bias and asks students to reflect for one minute. Step 6. Each group of students reports to the class ◊ their character’s preconception about GMOs; ◊ the search question they searched; ◊ if their character changed their mind about GMOs; and

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Sachs ◊ do they believe their character demonstrated confirmation bias? Step 7. Students complete Part 2 of the worksheet, this time as themselves (not in character). Step 8. Students share examples of intentional misinformation and emotional appeals from their individual searches. The librarian may call for a few volunteers or may ask every group to report. Step 9. Librarian mediates class brainstorming of techniques for recognizing and dealing with confirmation bias and misinformation. Librarian records students’ suggestions in a shared document.

•

•

To serve more people: For larger classes, assign several groups the same character card. During step 6, ask for groups with the same character card to share their findings and discuss any differences in interpretation. Additional ingredients: Other scientific controversies that make good topics for this recipe include childhood vaccinations, human-made climate change, the existence of extraterrestrial life, and euthanasia/assisted suicide.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

• •

Give a verbal overview of the activity before dividing students into groups or distributing the worksheet. It can be difficult to hold their attention once they begin. Some students may not pick up on certain features of their search results. Walk around the room and check in with each group to make sure they are on the right track. If they have missed a crucial piece of misinformation you can guide them to it.

CHEF’S NOTE

• •

Quick variation: Skip steps 7 and 8. Takes approximately 30 minutes. Slow-cooker variation: Have groups swap character cards and repeat steps 3 and 4 with a second character. Discuss how search results and emotional reactions differ. 141

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Gilman and Glauberman

Got Misinformation?

Critically Evaluating Sources for Credibility, Accuracy, and Usefulness Neyda V. Gilman, Binghamton University Libraries, [email protected]; Julia Glauberman, Binghamton University Libraries, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

Popular reporting on scholarly research findings often removes essential context and simplifies complex ideas, sometimes resulting in misinformation. This activity introduces students to this issue by having them evaluate several sources all based on the same scientific study. Depending on the context, this activity may or may not be preceded by a short lecture on the basics of source evaluation. This activity can be adapted to fit any discipline.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students learn the importance of identifying the original source of information and how to track it down. They also gain an understanding of how varied information creation processes result in different types of sources.

COOKING TIME

20–30 minutes (will vary based on number of sources provided; more time will be required if students don’t read sources ahead of the session)

NUMBER SERVED

50–100 students (can be easily adapted for smaller groups)

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

•

Sources (you can use the examples given here or select your own) ◊ 1 scholarly article reporting the results of research in a relevant discipline „ Hanks, Andrew S., David R. Just, and Brian Wansink. “Chocolate Milk Consequences: A Pilot Study Evaluating the Consequences of Banning Chocolate Milk in School Cafeterias.” PLoS ONE 9, no. 4 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0091022. ◊ 3-4 popular sources based on the scholarly study „ Freedhoff, Yoni. “No, Banning Chocolate Milk in Schools Didn’t Backfire.” U.S. News & World Report, April 22, 2014. https://health. usnews.com/health-news/blogs/ eat-run/2014/04/22/no-banningchocolate-milk-in-schools-didntbackfire. „ Oppenheimer, Mark. “Let Them Drink Chocolate.” New York Times, April 19, 2014. https://nyti.ms/ QlmDyi. „ MacVean, Mary. “Removing chocolate milk from schools caused plain milk to be wasted.” Los Angeles 142

• •

Times, April 18, 2014. http://www. latimes.com/science/sciencenow/ la-sci-sn-school-chocolate-milk20140418-story.html. „ National Milk Producers Federation. “Chocolate Milk Ban in Schools Backfires.” Accessed July 5, 2018. https://www.nmpf.org/ chocolate-milk-ban-in-schoolsbackfires/. Google Doc with link sharing enabled (provide a shortened link in class and/or have the instructor post the link in the LMS). Template available at https://goo. gl/W47EDW. Technology ◊ Computers, laptops, or mobile devices for students to use ◊ Projector or other display

PREPARATION

•

Sources ◊ Select 1 scholarly source and 3–4 related popular sources, or use the ones provided in the ingredient list above. ◊ Distribute the popular sources to students to read ahead of the session. (If this is not possible, be sure to account for the time in class that will be needed for students to read the sources.)

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Gilman and Glauberman Template

Look at the sources listed below. As you evaluate each source, add your notes to the table. Here are a few questions to consider: What do you think about the source? Would you trust the information in it? Why/why not? Would you cite it in a paper for a class? Why/why not? Where did the author(s) get their information?

• • • •

Sources 1. http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-school-chocolate-milk-20140418story.html 2. https://nyti.ms/QlmDyi 3. https://www.nmpf.org/chocolate-milk-ban-in-schools-backfires/ 4. https://health.usnews.com/health-news/blogs/eat-run/2014/04/22/no-banningchocolate-milk-in-schools-didnt-backfire Source 1

Source 2

Source 3

Source 4

Group 1 Group 2 Group 3

•

•

Collaborative note-taking ◊ Create a Google Doc with activity instructions, links to popular sources, and a table with columns for each of the popular sources. ◊ Set sharing permissions to “Anyone with the link can edit.” ◊ Create a shortened link and/or ask the instructor to post the link in the LMS. Classroom technology ◊ Confirm that students will have access to computers, laptops, or mobile devices for the session.

◊ Confirm that the classroom has a computer with internet access and a projector or other display.

COOKING METHOD

1. Open the Google Doc on the instructor’s computer and have students open it on their devices. 2. Have students work in small groups for 10–20 minutes to evaluate the popular sources, making notes in the Google Doc. While they work, circulate through the 143

classroom, checking in with groups on their progress. Also pay attention to the collaborative note-taking doc to monitor progress. If needed, prompt students to move on to the next article. 3. Bring the students back together for a class-wide discussion. 4. Review each source, asking for volunteers to summarize their group’s discussion. If needed, prompt by asking students to expand on particular comments from the Google Doc. Incorporate information about how to find the original scholarly source into the discussion. Other issues to highlight: bias, information lifecycle, the connection between how information is created and what type of need it satisfies, and capabilities and constraints of popular and scholarly sources. 5. Wrap up the discussion by summarizing students’ points and reiterating the importance of identifying the original source of information in any context.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

• • •

When sharing the Google Doc, be sure to set the permissions to “Anyone with the link can edit.” As with any large class, distraction during small-group work is a potential problem. Circulating through the room to observe and interact with the groups helps to alleviate this issue. Live collaborative note-taking documents are susceptible to immature students adding inappropriate or offensive

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

•

content. The authors have not personally experienced this issue. When typing in the shared doc, students may accidentally delete the instructions or links to sources, so it’s a good idea to have a back-up copy just in case.

CHEF’S NOTES

• •

•

For small, advanced groups where time constraints are less of a concern, students can select their own popular information sources that are relevant to the course. This activity can be adapted for use in an environment with no student computers, but the benefits of having students actively backtrack from the popular sources to the scholarly source will be lost. If adapting for use without student computers, the shared Google Doc can be replaced with flip-charts or whiteboards. In upper-level courses, the study used as an example in this recipe provides an opportunity for students to gain a more nuanced understanding of authority in scholarly publishing. While the legitimacy of this study has not been called into question, other articles by the lead author of the study have been retracted or had corrections and warnings added. For more information, see https://retractionwatch. com/2017/12/28/another-retractionappear-cornell-food-scientist-brianwansink/.

Gilman and Glauberman

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

For added context regarding how to teach students about types of sources, see: Jankowski, Amy, Alyssa Russo, and Lori Townsend. “‘It Was Information Based’: Student Reasoning When Distinguishing Between Scholarly and Popular Sources.” In The Library With The Lead Pipe, May 16, 2018, http://www.inthelibrarywiththeleadpipe. org/2018/it-was-information-based/.

144

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Conner-Gaten, Masunaga, and Slater Acosta

Fighting Infobesity:

Creating A Healthy News Diet Aisha Conner-Gaten, Loyola Marymount University; Jennifer Masunaga, Loyola Marymount University; Elisa Slater Acosta, Loyola Marymount University NUTRITION INFORMATION

We live in a continuous news culture where the average consumer must learn how to deal with information overload. We have plenty of information, but not all of it contributes to a healthy, balanced news diet. In addition to snacking on morning news and grabbing afternoon sound bites, there’s misinformation and fake news, packaged and sold in confusing ways. How can we get the news we need to become informed and engaged? In this activity, students are tasked with (a) placing a range of media sources on a grid whose axes are reliability and type of sources, and (b) articulating their reasoning and evidence for situating the sources where they did. The list of sources given for this exercise should be varied and present multiple perspectives and information genres that are open for debate or are ambiguous. Students will marinate on the format, authority, and context in which sources are produced and disseminated. This is a highly versatile activity; most features can be modified for any palette or cooking time.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

Students will practice techniques for evaluating the credibility of news stories. Students will reflect on their reactions

• •

to stories and practice identifying and distinguishing between their emotional responses and logical analyses of the items. Students will learn the value of information and sources from multiple perspectives. Students will become credible, trustworthy publishers in the digital age (sharing news).

COOKING TIME

This activity takes 20–30 minutes, or cook to taste.

(see https://perma.cc/577S-T3AA) Reliability of Media Grid (see Image A) 10–15 media sources (recommended serving for balanced news diet) computer or smartphone per student pair Suggested ingredients: Fake News Media Source List #2 (https:// perma.cc/4CKY-XLSP; provides media sources with variable reliability e.g. CNN, Buzzfeed, etc.)

• • • •

PREPARATION

•

NUMBER SERVED

25–30

•

DIETARY GUIDELINES

ACRL Frames Authority is Constructed and Contextual Searching as Strategic Exploration Information Creation as a Process

• • •

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • • • •

large whiteboard markers tape erasers Fake News Handout for students 145

Draw Reliability of Media Grid on the whiteboard. The grid should be large enough for media sources and multiple student groups. Print and cut out media sources logos in color.

COOKING METHOD

1. Working in pairs, students will be given 2–3 media source logos. 2. Using the computer or smartphone, each pair explores the media source and picks one article to evaluate applying the RADAR (Rationale, Authority, Date, Accuracy, Relevance) framework. 3. Students then place the logos on the whiteboard grid using tape.

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION 4. Students will explain media source placement on the grid. Have students compare media source placement across groups, consider the source’s audience and author, and discuss the visual appearance and features of each media source.

• • •

Conner-Gaten, Masunaga, and Slater Acosta

Substitute any media sources for additional flavoring (e.g., The Onion, Daily Mail, etc.). This recipe can be flavored to meet specific tastes. For example, you can use media sources specific to STEM, ethnic studies, etc. (e.g., The Root, IFL Science, WebMD, etc.). A suggested pairing for this activity includes student self-reflections on their own media diets using Vanessa Otero’s media chart.

NOTES

William H. Hannon Library (@lmulibrary). 2017. “Students are debating the reliability of various media outlets like Occupy Democrats, The Blaze, and Buzzfeed. #LMUTeachIn.” Instagram photo, January 20, 2017. https://www.instagram.com/p/BPf-rv_Bg9L/.

ALLERGY WARNING

Remind students to critically look at the source’s authority and format, instead of political leanings, to promote civil discourse (and avoid discussion going up in flames).

Mandalios, Jane. “RADAR: An Approach for Helping Students Evaluate Internet Sources,” Journal of Information Science 39, no. 4 (2013): 470–78. https://doi. org/10.1177/0165551513478889. Otero, Vanessa. “High Resolution File Formats for Full Chart and Blank Versions of News Quality Chart.” All Generalizations Are False (blog). January 23, 2017. https:// web.archive.org/web/20180129080206/ http://www.allgeneralizationsarefalse. com/high-resolution-file-formats-forfull-chart-and-blank-versions-of-newsquality-chart/.

CHEF’S NOTES

• •

Time management is crucial for this recipe. Provide the same media sources to different student pairs for comparative tasting. 146

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION

Morris

Mindfulness and Information Consumption Sarah E. Morris, Head of Instruction, Emory University Libraries, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

Consuming information online can often be an emotionally draining experience. From rumors to cable talk shows that rely on shouting to misinformation to what can feel like a relentless barrage of negative news, navigating modern media ecosystems can be exhausting. In this activity, students are introduced to mindfulness concepts that can help them build up the skills they need to be savvier consumers of information online. This activity connects information and media literacy education with mindfulness principles and metacognition, and this activity can be used to discuss the emotional impact and toll things like misinformation can take on all of us.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to do the following: Identify characteristics of misinformation. Discuss elements of metacognition and mindfulness. Develop information consumption strategies. Recognize the emotionally manipulative tactics that misinformation can deploy.

• • • •

COOKING TIME

50 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

For an in-person lesson, I have done this activity with up to 30 students. I have also

adapted this lesson for use online with asynchronous learners.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This activity uses concepts from the ACRL Framework, such as the frame Authority is Constructed and Contextual, as well as concepts and ideas from mindfulness education and ideas of metacognition.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • •

Computer with projector Slideshow Worksheets for students ◊ For sample slides and worksheets, see https://bit.ly/2TcVS4m.

PREPARATION

•

Find misinformation and otherwise inflammatory or emotionally loaded media examples to use in class. Try to include a mix of topics and a mix of types. ◊ Topics to consider: „ politics „ science and health „ celebrity gossip „ business and finance „ tech industry ◊ Types to consider: „ misinformation or false information „ rumors and gossip „ clickbait „ negative news „ positive news 147

„ „

satire advertisements

COOKING METHOD

1. Set up the activity and make sure students know that there will be discussions of emotions and that they will be looking at material designed, in some cases, to provoke emotions like outrage or anger. Consider introducing community participation guidelines to set expectations and ensure that students feel safe participating. Consider issuing trigger warnings as you feel is appropriate. 2. Show students your examples of misinformation and other types of more inflammatory media. 3. Have students write down how each example makes them feel. 4. Discuss how misinformation and other types of media are often designed to trigger an emotional response in a reader, whether the goal is to get you to buy something, to share something, or to stay on the page and generate ad revenue for a site. 5. Share out tips for handling the emotional aspects of media consumption and the perils of misinformation and see what suggestions students have. a. Pause and take stock of what you feel and what you already know. Are you having an emotional reaction? Take a beat and ask yourself why. Do you know anything about this source or

SECTION I. CONSUMING INFORMATION author or the subject being covered here? If not, try to find out more. b. Read horizontally and pay attention to things like ads, links, references, and the context in which you are consuming this information. 6. Discuss ideas of mindfulness and metacognition and how self and emotional awareness can be powerful tools when dealing with media overload effects and misinformation. 7. Pass out the media consumption log worksheets (see Ingredients and Equipment). 8. Have students fill out the worksheet, which asks them to consider where they get information and news, what sites and social media apps they use frequently, when they tend to consume media, and how they tend to feel after being on a site or app. 9. Then have students develop a media habits plan and think about things they might like to change or new habits they might like to develop. 10. Have students consider what they can do if they come across something online that inspires a strong reaction. 11. Ask for volunteers to share out some of their ideas from their worksheets. Sample section of a media consumption log worksheet (see more at https://bit.ly/2TcVS4m).

ALLERGY WARNING

•

The goal here is for students to focus on the emotional impact of misinformation or predatory content like clickbait and to discover ways that they can empower

•

Morris

themselves with things like mindfulness Part I. Media Diet Overview techniques and information literacy skills. In a given day, what types of media do you With that in mind, use your best judgtypically consume? This can be specific websites, social media accounts, newspapers, blogs, etc. ment with regard to what examples of Be as specific as you like here media you choose to show. For instance, I have used political examples for this activity, but I chose to avoid certain topics, based on my knowledge of my audience, that I felt might be overly upsetting or counterproductive to the activity. Students felt empowered by the media consumption log and were often surprised at trends they noticed or how stressed out they were feeling by their media habits.

CHEF’S NOTES

•

•

This activity evolved from a lesson I created for younger students (middle and high school students) that introPart II. Media Diet Log duced ideas of emotional manipulation For one day, map the types of media you consume in media. This activity also grew out of at a given time. discussions I had with colleagues that Time Media consumed Note any observations focused on the emotional side of misinor trends here formation, and much of modern media 5AM more generally, and how that emotional aspect can sometimes get left out of conversations and lessons. What I found 6AM intriguing to explore here is how much of the media we consume can be emo7AM tionally draining or even manipulative, even aside from misinformation itself. I did a variation of this activity (the media 8AM consumption log portion) with adult educators and found it to a rewarding 9AM training exercise. I feel like any audience can benefit from reflecting on and taking stock of their media consumption habits. 148

Section II. Producing and Distributing Information

149

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Wright and Diamond

Why Can’t Intellectual Freedom and Copyright Get Along? Alyssa Wright, West Virginia University Libraries; Kelly Diamond, West Virginia University Libraries NUTRITION INFORMATION

This lesson was initially developed as part of our one-credit course, ULIB 101: Introduction to Library Research. It is taught near the end of the course as a prelude to students assigning a Creative Commons license to their final assignment, an infographic. While designed as part of a scaffolded course, this lesson can stand by itself, be added to an information literacy course, or used in a multi-day information literacy session. In this lesson, students work through Bloom’s cognitive domains of application, analysis, and evaluation by applying what they have learned about copyright, analyzing the case studies presented to them, and evaluating the merits of each case.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

•

•

Students will be able to articulate issues surrounding intellectual property, including use of citation as well as the economic value of creative and intellectual work and apply this knowledge in the creation of information. Students will be able to articulate issues surrounding intellectual freedom, including the principle of fair use and artistic re-use, and apply this knowledge in the creation of information.

COOKING TIME

45 minutes–1 hour

NUMBER SERVED

Serves small or large classes.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

One course outcome for our one-credit-hour course is that students will “recognize that all information, personal and published, has ethical and economic value which affects its production and dissemination.” While these issues are touched upon throughout the class, this lesson specifically focuses on the knowledge practice from the Frame Information Has Value: “[L]earners who are developing their information literate abilities articulate the purpose and distinguishing characteristics of copyright, fair use, open access, and the public domain.” This lesson concentrates on these levels of ownership and access through examples with which students have familiarity. Students also engage with the “ownership” of their intellectual work by assigning a Creative Commons license.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

•

Presentation slides with 3–5 case studies of alleged violations of copyright and/ or instances of creative fair use. Slides should contain images or sound clips comparing original works and their 150

•

• •

copies, quotations, or remixes. Use the suggested cases below or create your own to taste. Cases should be somewhat ambiguous in that good arguments could be made for either side. Cases that are the cause of real-life lawsuits for copyright infringement work well. Online mobile poll for each case study asking if students see the case as fair use or copyright violation. Use your preferred online polling software. Poll Everywhere or Mentimeter are good choices. Yes/no voting cards or a show of hands could be used for more intimate gatherings. Presentation slides with a simplistic outline of basic copyright and fair use rules. Presentation slides with basic descriptions of Creative Commons licenses.

PREPARATION

Ask students to read/watch readings and videos on the tensions between copyright, fair use, and artistic re-use. Suggested texts: Stanford University Libraries. “What is Fair Use?” Copyright & Fair Use. Accessed September 27, 2018. http://fairuse. stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-isfair-use/. CGP Gray. “Copyright: Forever Less One Day.” YouTube video, 6:27. August 23, 2011. https://www.youtube.com/watc h?v=tk862BbjWx4&index=6&list=RDC Jn_jC4FNDo.

• •

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Wright and Diamond

•

Wikimedia Foundation. “What is Creative Commons?” YouTube video, 1:23. February 7, 2017. https://www.youtube.com/wa tch?v=dPZTh2NKTm4&feature=youtu.be.

COOKING METHOD

1. Short lecture (5 minutes): a. Give a short lecture discussing copyright rules and fair use using slides. b. Clear up any questions that students have from the readings and video on copyright and fair use. 2. In-class activity (30 minutes): a. Explain that students will be presented with some contested cases of fair

use. Each slide will give a comparison of an original work and an alleged copy. Many of them are the cause of real-life lawsuits for copyright infringement. b. After the evidence for each case is presented, tell students they will be asked to vote on, using their phones or computer, whether they think the case represented fair use. c. Present the first case to the class using the slide with images or sound clips. After presenting each case, ask the students to vote, in the online poll, on whether the case is fair use

or not. d. Display the poll results after a minute of voting. Ask one or two students from each side of the argument to state their case. e. After discussion winds down, give them more background on the reallife case. If there is a court ruling on the case, tell them who won. f. Repeat with 2–4 more cases depending on time. Cases should represent a variety of outcomes. 3. Activity wrap-up and short lecture on Creative Commons alternative licenses (10 minutes):

Table 1. Suggested Cases Case 1: Francesca’s v. Show slide with images of designer pins from independent Background and photos here: Lorraine, A. “What Happens Independent Designers designers next to images of very similar pins sold in FrancWhen Big Companies Rip Off Indie Designers?” Highlark. Octoesca’s stores without permission or payment to the designers. ber 19, 2016. https://highlark.com/fast-fashion-theft/. Case 2: Blurred Lines, Thicke and Williams v. Marvin Gaye Estate

Play short clips of both Blurred Lines by Thicke and Williams Background here: Grow, C. “Robin Thicke, Pharrell Lose Multiand Got to Give It Up by Gaye. There are comparison videos on Million Dollar ‘Blurred Lines’ Lawsuit.” Rolling Stone. March 10, YouTube to do this for you. 2015. http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/robin-thickeand-pharrell-lose-blurred-lines-lawsuit-20150310.

Case 3: Pound Cake, Drake v. James Smith Estate

Play clips of Pound Cake by Drake and Jimmy Smith Rap by Smith found on WhoSampled.com. This is a unique case in that Drake won the lawsuit on the grounds that his use of the sample was transformative.

Background here: Gardner, E. “Drake Beats Lawsuit Over Sampling with Winning ‘Fair Use’ Argument.” The Hollywood Reporter. May 31, 2017. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ thr-esq/drake-beats-lawsuit-sampling-winning-fair-useargument-1008935.

Case 4: Hard Knock Life, Play the first 1–2 minutes of Hard Knock Life by Jay-Z where he Background here: “Jay Z: The Fresh Air Interview.” NPR. June Jay-Z v. Charles Strouse sampled the Annie soundtrack. This is a trick case. No lawsuit 16, 2017. http://www.npr.org/2017/06/16/533216823/jay-z-thewas filed. Jay-Z got the rights and paid for them. After stufresh-air-interview. dents vote, play the NPR interview with Jay-Z where he tells the colorful story of how he got the rights. Case 5: Hope, Shepard Fairey v. Associated Press & Mannie Garcia

Show slide with Obama Hope poster by Shepard Fairey next to the AP photograph of Barck Obama by Mannie Garcia. This case involved a three-way lawsuit between Fairey, the AP, and Garcia. 151

Background here: Dunlap, D. “Obama Image Copyright Case is Settled.” Lens (blog) New York Times. January 12, 2011. https:// lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/12/obama-image-copyrightcase-is-settled/?_r=0.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION a. Recap the arguments for both sides: copyright protects authors’ and artists’ ability to make money off of their works versus copyright prevents remixing, and new ideas and current laws benefit corporations more than authors/artists. b. Use slides to introduce students to Creative Commons licensing as an alternative to copyright. Briefly review the different Creative Commons licenses. 4. Homework to be completed for next week: a. Students will choose either copyright protection or a Creative Commons license to apply to their own creative work and write a short explanation of why they chose that license.

CHEF’S NOTE

Popular culture examples can grow stale quickly. To keep students’ attention, update the case examples every few years.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

See Table 1. Suggested Cases.

152

Wright and Diamond

Wozniak, Kelley, and Bem

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Open Source and Royalty-Free:

Beyond the Frontier in Scholarly Research Sue Wozniak, Faculty Librarian, Lake Washington Institute of Technology; Katherine Kelley, Library Technician, Lake Washington Institute of Technology; Greg Bem, Faculty Librarian, Lake Washington Institute of Technology NUTRITION INFORMATION

This lesson plan explores the evaluation and use of open source journals for scholarly research. This lesson has been designed for an academic environment of community college students, and the authors believe the lesson can be adapted for other audiences as appropriate. The lesson was designed with strong values of open educational resources (OER) in mind, with the authors having helped to develop full courses in psychology, chemistry, biology, art, and math. It is the authors’ intention to increase student awareness of open materials and encourage critical-thinking skills through their evaluation, regardless of the topic of interest. Librarians and library workers in the twenty-first century explore and promote open source databases, as encouraged by an ever-evolving global culture of openness. Librarians and library workers regularly evaluate open source databases, facilitate their availability through systems such as Ex Libris’s Primo Central Index, and demonstrate open source searching through information literacy instruction.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Through this activity, students will

1. understand typical terms for the traditional publishing process including copyright ownership and payment to author(s); 2. understand concepts of limited financial benefit and limited control of content through the traditional publishing process; 3. understand the benefits of access, remixing materials to increase relevance, the capacity to share materials in multiple formats, and the retaining control of copyright for authors through the creation of open source materials; 4. explore a key open source database and a major subscription database and evaluate for the following: a. breadth and depth of material in relation to a topic of interest, b. relevance to undergraduate research in the context of student awareness of typical research topics, c. the currency of coverage of a topic, d. availability of tools to search, save, and cite, and e. ease of access to publications of interest; and 5. compare the research experience in the open source database to the subscription database, and evaluate the following: a. relevance and quality of materials, 153

b. ease of access to the full text, and c. the quality of experience with the search system/platform.

COOKING TIME

This activity is intended for a one-hour class period, though it could be extended to 1.5 hours for more search time.

NUMBER SERVED

This activity is not limited by the number of participating students.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

We relate this activity to the Information Has Value Frame of the ACRL Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. This activity is intended to teach the value of access to resources restricted by paywalls regarding the benefit to the students, and implications for the creator in terms of payment and control of publications. The comparison to open source resources, where creators maintain copyright to their publication while having control over access, will help students make decisions about their use of information as well as where they decide to publish their own materials as they develop research skills and engagement.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

Participating students will need computers with online access and a web browser. The instructor should be able to provide access to at least one subscription database. Each participating student will ideally have their own computer work station; however, if necessary, students may be grouped into pairs or small groups.

PREPARATION

The instructor will research open databases prior to class to find relevant sources to search regarding demographics and learning styles of the class population and to prepare example topics relevant to class. Students will use this Database Evaluation Worksheet (https://docs.google.com/ spreadsheets/d/1BJyqprHDpHh0BtwHl5rY45 jFja6Bx3sQAW7NaUba8i0/edit?usp=sharing) to record data collected to discuss.

COOKING METHOD

1. Participating students will be paired in groups and assigned one open source database and one subscription database appropriate to a research topic to explore and evaluate. They will develop search terms to use consistently in both databases to facilitate comparison. For each database, they will record and evaluate the following criteria: a. Number of records in results b. Access to full text c. Relevance of titles to topic/search terms

Wozniak, Kelley, and Bem

Database Evaluation Worksheet Database name Subscription database: Open source database: Number of titles that result from your search term(s) Subscription database: Open source database: Access to full text Subscription database: Open source database: Relevance of titles to search terms for topic Subscription database: Open source database: Peer-review content available? Subscription database: Open source database: Currency of materials Subscription database: Open source database:

d. Presence of peer-reviewed content in search results e. Currency of materials f. Relevance of materials to current events in relation to topic g. Presence of tools to save, email, and print h. Quality of research experience 2. Students will tabulate this information in the Database Evaluation Worksheet, followed by writing a summary of their research findings and analysis. See section 10 for the worksheet. Each pair will share 154

Relevance of materials to current events in relation to topic Subscription database: Open source database: Have tools to save, email, and print? Subscription database: Open source database: Please describe the quality of your experience searching in this database. Subscription database: Open source database: Critical Thinking Describe if you think the quality of the databases was effected by whether the database was open source or not and way. “Database Evaluation Worksheet” by Lake Washington Institute of Technology is in the Public Domain, CC0: https://www.lwtech.edu/ campus-life/library/

their findings with the class, followed by a discussion of the control of rights to published material of the authors and how this varies for open source versus traditional publishing models.

ALLERGY WARNING

It is important to be aware of your student population and their level of information literacy. Open source information may be a completely new topic to students. It is recommended to begin with a basic discussion of

Wozniak, Kelley, and Bem

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

what open source means and what barriers people encounter to academic information, including paywalls, subscription logins, and library patron status. It is also important to understand your own knowledge of the subject matter. You may need to brush up on your understanding of copyright and how to ethically and legally use as well as produce information. Finally, when choosing databases for students to evaluate, be sure to set up comparisons that represent similar topic ranges in order to have a fair evaluation.

CHEF’S NOTES

This activity is a good opportunity to connect open databases to the broader use of open educational resources (OER) at your institution.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

The Community College Consortium for Open Educational Resources Listserv is excellent for working in community with other educators and sharing experiences. We are currently undergoing a comprehensive evaluation of open source databases. Please contact us ([email protected]) for more information. Suggested open databases to use: HaitiTrust Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) JSTOR Books Public Library of Science (PLoS) Smithsonian Research Online

• • • • •

155

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Vong

Communicating Research Three Ways: Critically Reflecting on Access and Privilege

Silvia Vong, Head of Public Services, University of St. Michael’s College in the University of Toronto NUTRITION INFORMATION

Instructional librarians are often tasked with demonstrating a successful search in a database or a search for a course. This may skew students’ perspective on access to research and diminish the issues libraries face with the lack of resources to maintain access. This recipe was designed to engage undergraduate students in a critical conversation around access to peer-reviewed journals and introduce the concept of open access as well as issues they may come across as a current student or future graduate student at other institutions.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

Students will be able to identify features of three different types of sources (subscription, open access, and blog/ website). Students will be able to compare access and cost to three different types of sources.

COOKING TIME

75 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

The ideal serving size is a maximum of 40 students.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This activity addresses the Frame, Information Has Value, with specific reference to the knowledge ability of “recognizing issues of access or lack of access to information sources.” It helps to identify issues around access and privilege to research using a critical reflective approach. This exercise will introduce a series of critical reflective prompts that students should consider when accessing information. It is an introductory activity before you showcase a database since students will continually reflect on access and cost as you demonstrate a search. In addition, once students understand their access privileges, they tend to engage or focus more intently during the database demonstrations. A critical reflective approach to the issues around access can help introduce issues around access as well as introduce the topic from the perspective of more vulnerable groups or omitted voices. For example, students may attribute the issues around the increases to cost of access to their student fees; however, a critical prompt encourages students to ask questions about inequality, privilege, and omitted voices.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

•

A peer-reviewed article on a relevant topic from journal where your institution 156

• • •

does not have a subscription A peer-reviewed article on the same topic from an open access journal A blog post by a researcher on the same topic A series of informational and critical reflective prompts for discussion

PREPARATION

• • •

Examples of a restricted article, an OA article, and an online blog post Handout with the critical reflective prompts for the exercise Slides or handout identifying issues to access as well as ways to troubleshoot the issues (interlibrary loan, research help services, and etc.)

COOKING METHOD

1. Provide citation information and ask students to search and find the three different resources. 2. Ask students to gather basic information, including a comparison of the three different resources. 3. Discuss and take up answers with students so that everyone in the class has accurate information about the sources’ characteristics. 4. Introduce the critical reflective prompts and ask students to discuss their answers as a small group.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Vong Informational Questions • Which sources are considered formal publications? • Describe the steps you took to access the full-text article. • What search tools did you use to find the full-text article? • Who can access the articles (e.g., students, faculty, high school student, etc.)? • What labor and costs contribute to the publication and access to the source? Critical Reflective Prompts • Who loses or does not have access to this research? How? • Who benefits from “pay per view” articles? Why? • What impact does lack of access to research have on a researcher? The public? The field of study? • Do all colleges and universities have access to all three of these sources? Why?

5. Introduce different funding models and discuss the answers as a class. 6. Leave 10 minutes to introduce students to different perspectives on the issue of access and cost to research, namely, academic piracy via Sci-Hub, #ICanHazPDF, and other movements where researchers have posted their research freely on sites.

ALLERGY WARNING

•

Students in their first or second year of study may find it challenging if they have never written a research paper or have no basic understanding of research articles. The first set of informational

•

questions is meant to educate and provide a background. Once students understand that they may not be able to access a journal, they may ask questions about how they can troubleshoot. Interlibrary loan services can be introduced at this point, but it is important to also explain how the library is able to obtain materials elsewhere and at what cost.

CHEF’S NOTES

This exercise is best suited for a computer classroom environment; however, if the resources or space are limited to a classroom, the exercise can be completed as a class with discussion in between each item. In addition, if you have extra time, a pre and post questionnaire on their views regarding access to journals will provide great insight on how students’ perspectives have shifted, and some may note that they will aim to publish in open access journals or submit to institutional repositories.

NOTES

Adapted from David Tripp. Critical Incidents in Teaching: Developing Professional Judgement. New York, NY: Routledge, 2012. Association of College and Research Libraries. Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. Last modified February 9, 2015. http://www.ala.org/acrl/ standards/ilframework, p. 6.

157

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Weeg and Rod-Welch

7-Layer Citation Salad—The Joy of Identifying Distinct Ingredients and Assembling a Glorious Delight: Students as Information and Citation Creators

Barbara E. Weeg, Rod Library, University of Northern Iowa, [email protected]; Leila June Rod-Welch, Rod Library, University of Northern Iowa, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

In the 7-Layer Citation Salad critical-thinking exercise, students become apprentice chefs as they learn to create journal article citations adhering to the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. The library instruction chef draws parallels to mise en place (“everything in its place”) and to assembling a structured salad as the apprentices discover the rewards of identifying each citation ingredient from articles and assembling the ingredients in the proper order. The library chef discusses the need to credit other authors for their ideas. The standard recipe may be adapted to any citation style and the number of layers modified.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will create knowledge; assume responsibility for acknowledging others’ ideas and avoiding plagiarism; identify discrete citation elements from journal articles; and assemble citation elements in proper order to form a complete citation.

• • • •

COOKING TIME

50 minutes for library-chef-led group creation of demonstration citation and student-pair creation of second journal article citation

•

NUMBER SERVED

2 to 50, with larger classes several library instruction chefs recommended

DIETARY GUIDELINES

• •

Information Has Value Scholarship as Conversation

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

Ingredients: Demonstration journal article: sufficient copies of the first page of one journal article so the library chef, course professor, and each apprentice chef have copies; needs all American Psychological Association (APA) journal citation elements, 2 authors, and continuous pagination Practice journal article: prepare 1 copy of the first page of a second article for each student pair and 1 for course professor (for a class of 25, make 13 copies of article’s first page + 1); expand learning by

•

•

158

• • • • •

using article from individually paginated journal APA Template Handout: containing at least 3 copies of a fill-in-the-blank APA journal article citation template with label beneath each element; one handout per participant 7-Layer Salad image Tossed green salad image Mise en place image Additional food images as desired Optional: prizes

Equipment: Networked document camera Projection screen System to display library chef’s networked computer images Workstation for each apprentice pair

• • • •

PREPARATION

•

Library chef creates fill-in-the-blank APA citation template; identifies, photocopies, and assembles into handout packets sufficient copies of the first page of 2 journal articles and the APA template; prepares the 2 completed APA citations; and identifies food images.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Weeg and Rod-Welch

•

Whet students’ visual and auditory taste-buds and prepare them to become apprentice chefs by showing the first 2:12 minutes of Julia Child Remixed or other movie or still images showcasing structured food.

4. 5.

COOKING METHOD

1. Introduce the class session as learning together how to cite others’ ideas, the 7 key ingredients of an American Psychological Association citation, how to identify the ingredients from a journal article, and how to assemble the ingredients into a properly formatted APA citation. 2. Explain that identifying citation elements and putting them in the correct order is much like chefs preparing components of a 7-Layer Salad and assembling them in the proper order. Show the 7-Layer Salad image; point out each distinct layer and how the layers together create a complete salad, a full citation assembled in its proper order. Show the image of a tossed salad and contrast its mixed-up ingredients with the easy-to-find ingredients of the structured 7-Layer Salad. 3. Explain that all authors are responsible for crediting others’ ideas, words, and other works they use in their own work and that formatting and using proper citations is part of acknowledging others’ contributions. Refer to university plagiarism policy. Spark interest: as authors, we add value to our work by citing excellent authors; as chefs, we add value by citing the source of our high-quality ingredi-

6.

7.

8.

9.

ents (“5 Star Farm” tomatoes, not just tomatoes). Show mise en place image with each ingredient “in its place”; orderly preparation makes proper assembly easier. Identify and describe the seven ingredients of an APA journal article citation—author name, publication date, article title, journal name, volume and issue numbers, page range, and Digital Object Identifier (DOI). Refer to the fill-in-the-blank APA citation template. Display the demonstration journal article’s first page. Lead the apprentice chefs in identifying author names; circle the names. Print the authors’ names in the correct order on the fill-in-blank author spot as you explain name order and punctuation. Continue identifying each ingredient, circling it, explaining its characteristics, and transferring it to the fill-in-the-blank APA template. Once the full citation is assembled, call attention to its neat appearance. Ask the apprentice chefs to pair with an apprentice next to them. Instruct the pairs to identify the seven ingredients from the first page of the second article and to complete a second APA citation template. The library chef circulates, providing cooking tips as needed. Display the second article’s correct APA citation so student pairs can evaluate their salads’ appearance and taste. Prepare apprentices for recipe variations by noting there are specific citation standards for each information source type and that the 159

Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association contains recipes for most. Summarize learning.

ALLERGY WARNING

While this recipe ignites most students’ quest for citation elements and their proper assembly, learning outcomes are achievable without cooking or food references.

CHEF’S NOTES

• • • •

During planning, consult course professors to ascertain whether students will enjoy and benefit from a cooking approach and whether students have been cautioned against plagiarism. The recipe works well with English as a Second Language learners; they gain a greater understanding of the need to cite information sources. This recipe engages auditory, visual, and tactile senses. Spices (prizes) add zest: cups, pizza cutters, notepads, or other library promotional items.

NOTES

American Psychological Association. Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. 6th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2010. Boswell, John D. [melodysheep]. Julia Child Remixed—Keep on Cooking. PBS Digital Studios. August 13, 2012. https://www. pbs.org/video/pbs-digital-studios-juliachild-remixed-keep-cooking/.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Anderson and Crosby

A Pinch of Peer Review Megan L. Anderson, Research & Curriculum Librarian, Fanshawe College; Linda L. Crosby, Research & Curriculum Librarian, Fanshawe College NUTRITION INFORMATION

This recipe is intended to provide students with an in-depth understanding of peer review by having them participate in a mock peer-review process. By participating in the process, students will learn first-hand how scholarly information reaches the point of publication and how that process affects the information that is published.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• • • • • •

Understand different types of authority. Gain awareness of how scholarly information is created. Gain familiarity with the academic/research publishing process. Understand the structure of a scholarly article. Identify and apply criteria to critically evaluate information. Understand why peer-reviewed information is respected.

COOKING TIME

understand why professors frequently insist they use scholarly and peer-reviewed sources. Another purpose is to help students understand the time and effort involved in the creation and publication of research. In this way, the value and significance of the process can be learned. A final purpose is to inform students about this aspect of a community of scholars and associated discourse. The peer-review process connects to the following frames: ACRL Frames referenced: Authority is Constructed and Contextual Information Creation as a Process Information Has Value Scholarship as Conversation

• • • •

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • •

Cooking time is 50 minutes.

NUMBER SERVED

Serves a minimum of ten students to a maximum of approximately 25–30 students.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

One of the purposes is to help students

•

Instructor workstation Whiteboard, blackboard, or computer with projector for whole group discussion notes Print copies of articles to be reviewed. Alternatively, the article could be shared via learning management software or other tools such as Google Docs if technology is available. Notepaper or other tool for writing down information about questions, decisions, etc. These notes could be taken electronically if technology is available. 160

•

A “cheat sheet” of the review/editing process.

PREPARATION

•

• •

Locate and/or create a short (1- or 2-page) article to be used for the review. The content of the article should relate to the course content and be a topic with which students have some familiarity. A discussion with the regular instructor can inform this process. Develop a “cheat sheet” of the review/ editing process. Develop an outline for a brief lecture about the peer-review process.

COOKING TECHNIQUE

This recipe combines small-group work with larger group discussion. Students take on roles to mimic the peer-review process. Main cooking techniques are brief lecture, small-group work, peer support, larger group discussion.

COOKING METHOD

1. Introduction (10 minutes) a. Provide a brief lecture about the peer-review process. b. Discuss the various roles involved in the peer-review process. c. Discuss how to edit a paper based on consideration of content and review

Anderson and Crosby of writing style, grammar, etc. 2. Activity (30 minutes) a. Explain the rules and divide the class into groups of 4–6 students. Instruct students to decide on which role they will take in their group given the options of chief editor, subject expert, or reviewer (5 minutes). b. Hand out articles to be reviewed and notepaper or provide access to electronic copies. c. Students read the articles individually, making note of possible edits (10 minutes). d. Groups discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the article as well as editing recommendations. Students make notes as a group about this discussion (15 minutes). 3. Discussion (10 minutes) a. Bringing all groups back together, the librarian asks each group to share at least one aspect of their discussion involving an editing recommendation or a point of concern. b. The librarian records these aspects on the whiteboard, blackboard, or computer. c. The librarian summarizes what has been discovered and ensures that any additional key points are discussed.

ALLERGY WARNING

Students may take too much time to determine roles themselves. Consider assigning roles or have them draw roles from a card set or other such mechanism. Students may have difficulties knowing what to look for when

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION reviewing the article. Providing examples during the lecture should alleviate this issue to some degree. Otherwise, encourage students to listen to each other and provide prompts to each group as needed for their consideration.

CHEF’S NOTE

Emily Ford notes that “professors require students to find peer-reviewed articles and laud peer review as a marker of trustworthiness and quality. In our current era of alternative facts, engaging students in peer review may help them to think more critically about research and evidence.” This recipe invites students to become more aware of these issues and gain necessary skills. Other options for this exercise include: 1. Providing more than one article to be reviewed so that each small group is not going over the same content. 2. Using a flipped classroom approach, in consultation with the professor, which broadens the scope of the exercise. Students could be asked to: a. Read or review materials outlining the peer-review process and peerreview class. b. Read a short “informational” article about the topic of the article(s) so that students have a reasonable understanding of the topic. This could be incorporated into the session if it is longer than 50 minutes or assigned ahead of time. c. Research a topic and write a short (approximately 500-word) “article” to 161

be submitted to the librarian prior to class. These articles are distributed in class for the review session. The addition of the second option makes the planning and instruction process more complex but allows students to have the opportunity to gain experience with other aspects of the Framework, such as Research as Inquiry and Searching as Strategic Exploration, and to be potentially more invested in the process. This second option could also be run as a first instruction session if it is possible to attend the same class more than once. If “articles” written by students are to be used, it is important to assure them anonymity since there is a critical aspect of this exercise.

NOTES

Ford, Emily. “Demystifying Peer Review: Using Open Peer Review in Information Literacy Instruction.” Library Faculty Publications and Presentations (2018): 258. Portland State University Library. https:// pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/ulib_fac/258.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Dye-Reeves

Mind Shapers:

Participating in The Peer-Review Process Amy Dye-Reeves, Associate Education Librarian, Texas Tech University NUTRITION INFORMATION

COOKING TIME

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This lesson focuses on two incorporated forms of mapping activities used for a oneshot or a semester-long instructional session. The program is broken down into three sections: mini-lecture, concept-building, and a re-teaching section. The first section contains the lecture or mini-lecture providing but not limited to the terminology of a peer, single, and double-blind reviews. The concept-building section provides students with reinforced, hands-on activities directly related to the lectures. The re-teaching section provides students with an opportunity to use the knowledge gained from the lecture and the first learning activity.

For semester courses: The lecture on peer review would take place the previous day. Part 2, 20 minutes and Part 3, 30 minutes. Student presentation, 10 minutes. Total: 60 minutes.

Targeted ACRL Frames: Information Creation as Process Information Has Value Scholarship as Conversation

One-shot instruction: Mini-lecture: take 10 minutes to discuss briefly the concepts of peer review (include single-blind and double-blind). Part 2, 20 minutes and Part 3, 30 minutes. Student presentations, 10 minutes. Total: 70 minutes

Continuing Education: Publons Academy peer-review instruction

Technology alternative: The alternative would involve using a digital mapping tool like Mindomo, a brainstorm application, and Linolt, a virtual bulletin board application for student questioning.

Question Example List:

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

Defining peer review (instructor perspective and self-defined student definition) Using print or digital technology to interact with peers concerning the participation within the holistic process

NUMBERS SERVED

Groups of 4 students

• • •

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • • •

8 pieces of chart paper (used in Parts 2 and 4) Markers Laptops (optional for technology alternative) Participation prizes (optional)

What is peer review?

Everyone needs to answer in groups, placing textual evidence on chart paper.

Where can you find a peer-reviewed article? Provide examples.

Place question on side 2 of the chart.

What makes that particular article peer-reviewed? Provide examples.

Place question on side 2 of the chart.

Who reviews that particular article? Provide examples.

Place question on side 2 of the chart.

What are the steps to getting something peer reviewed? Provide examples.

Place question on side 2 of the chart.

Pick one of the four concepts of peer review to discuss: Authoritative, Collaborative, Interpretative and Probing. What does that particular term mean within the concepts of peer-review scholarship?

Place question on side 2 of the chart.

162

Dye-Reeves

COOKING METHODS

Part 1 1. Presentation on peer review 2. Create a list of peer-review questions from the lecture. Part 2 1. Place these questions on a large chart paper. Draw a line down the middle. a. On one side, ask the question, “What is Peer Review?” Everyone must answer this question. b. On the other side of the chart paper, denote the detailed questions concerning peer review. Pick any two of the questions from the chart image. 2. Each group will need to provide examples from the expanded lecture or mini-lecture. Part 3 1. Students lead discussion on findings from Step 2. Part 4 1. Place four more chart paper sheets around the room. This time, each student will need to create their own mind map outline (they can use any format). 2. Students can choose to either draw corresponding images with textual information on paper or create a PowerPoint presentation instead.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION Technology alternative Part 1 1. Students are encouraged to create a mind map outlining the concepts form the lecture. The students can use the LinoIt application (http://en.linoit.com/; free basic account available). 2. Students are paired up into four groups. The students begin with the question of “What is peer review? Students would use digital sticky notes describing the concepts of peer review. They will need to create an outline for discussion. Sample questions include: a. What is peer review? b. Where can you find a peer-reviewed article? c. What makes that particular article peer-reviewed? d. Who reviews that particular article? e. What are the steps to getting something peer-reviewed? 3. Each group will work within the sticky notes, answering one of the assigned

Part 5 1. Students lead discussion on findings from Step 4.

163

questions from the list. Each student will need to reflect on the peer-review process. Students will need to stick with just the text-only features within Linolt. The Part 2 section will contain steps on merging imagery with text. The section will take 20 minutes total (including a short student lead discussion). Part 2 1. The students are broken down into the same four groups. Students use Mindomo (https://www.mindomo.com/; basic free account available). 2. This application allows students to create an outline with graphics associated with the subject matter. The assignment dictates that students need to teach the topic to someone who is unfamiliar with the concept. a. For example, ask them, “What images or texts would you use to describe this process?” The student would include the known concepts of blind

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION and double-blind processes. The example images would be two animals sitting on a branch, a blindfolded person, etc. b. A probing question for students would be: “What do these images mean in relation to peer review?” How would you explain this in your own words?

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES:

Clarivate Analytics. “Publons Academy.” Accessed June 20, 2018. https://publons.com/ community/academy/. Expert Software Applications. Mindomo. Accessed June 12, 2018. https://www.mindomo. com/. Infoteria Corporation. Linolt. Accessed June 12, 2018. http://en.linoit.com/.

3. The entire process will take around 30 minutes in total. This process includes time for a short 5-minute presentation by each group.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

Add new questions and make updates each semester. It’s important to pay attention to what works and what did not work during that particular session.

CHEF’S NOTES

Short on time? Provide a PowerPoint presentation on peer review highlighting needed concepts to reinforce instruction.

164

Dye-Reeves

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Eshbach

Replicating Research on a Small Scale Using a Scholarly Journal Article as the Main Ingredient Barbara Eshbach, Head Librarian, Penn State York, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

College students are often asked to use scholarly journal articles as sources for assignments, but many are unfamiliar with what they are, how to find them, and how to read and understand them. This recipe provides an opportunity for students to explore an article in depth in order to develop a critical understanding of this type of source.

•

explain how researchers use information obtained from their studies to either support or refute their hypotheses.

•

COOKING TIME

50 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

We conducted this workshop with groups of six, but it could be adapted for larger groups.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

ACRL Framework addressed: Authority is Constructed and Contextual Information Creation as a Process Research as Inquiry Scholarship as Conversation

• • • •

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to recognize the differences between peerreviewed scholarly research articles and popular sources; identify and describe the purpose of each section found in a research article; and

• •

•

This lesson focuses on helping students think critically about scholarly journal research articles, sources they are often required to use to complete college assignments. Choosing the right article for this lesson also provides a way to spark their curiosity and open their eyes to how interesting research can be. With that in mind, the key to using this strategy is to carefully choose your main ingredient—the article. The goal is to find an article that 165

deals with an interesting or unique topic—hopefully, something they can relate to (such as curiosity, creativity, multi-tasking) and includes something they can do (build an IKEA cabinet, construct something out of LEGO bricks, or answer trivia questions).

Substitute any scholarly journal research article as the main ingredient, as long as you keep the dietary guidelines in mind. The following ingredients are specific to replicating parts of studies from the following article: Moreau, C. Page, and Marit Gundersen Engeset. “The Downstream Consequences of Problem-Solving Mindsets: How Playing with LEGO Influences Creativity.” Journal of Marketing Research 53 (1) (2016): 18–30. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.13.0499. Students will need access to the above article, either searching for it in a library database or viewing a projected version. LEGO set for each participant. The LEGO Classic Creativity Boxes contain pieces and instructions to build three different objects. A box of each color will allow a group of 12 students to each make something different. If funding allows, students could keep their creation, which really appealed to our group!

•

• •

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

• •

Large pieces of poster board to act as dividers between participants Handout at each station welcoming them to the event, informing them the LEGO company is interested in understanding how adult consumers react to their products. One version of the handout informs students they have 15 minutes to follow the instructions to build the pictured LEGO creation. Other students, who don’t receive any LEGO instructions, receive a handout asking them to spend 15 minutes building something with their pieces.

HANDOUT 1 Moreau, C. Page, and Marit Gundersen Engeset. 2016. “The Downstream Consequences of Problem-Solving Mindsets: How Playing with LEGO Influences Creativity.” Journal of Marketing Research 53 (1): 18-30. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.13.0499. STUDY 1 (found on pages 20-24) COVER STORY: 1. _____

• • • • •

PREPARATION

Using the poster board, set up the room with a private area for each student to build their LEGO creation. All stations will have a LEGO set and a folder with handouts for later discussion. Some stations will have LEGO building directions for their set with the version of the handout instructing them to spend the next 15 minutes following these directions

Well-defined problem-solving mindset

First task: Participants were given a LEGO® kit with instructions on how to build something and spent 15 minutes working before moving on to the second task. Second task: Participants completed the Torrance® Tests of Creative Thinking incomplete figures task worksheet (ill-defined creative task). 2. _____

Folder for each participant containing the following: Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking incomplete figures task worksheet (available as Web Appendix C in the article) Handout with descriptions of all 6 conditions possible in Study 1 Sample questions from the Miller Analogies Test (available from the article’s Web Appendix D) Handout showing hypotheses for Study 1 Evaluation forms

The LEGO company is interested in understanding how adult consumers react to their products.

Well-defined problem-solving mindset

First task: Participants were given a LEGO® kit with instructions on how to build something and spent 15 minutes working before moving on to the second task. Second task: Participants completed questions from the Miller Analogies Test (well-defined task). 3. _____

Ill-defined problem-solving mindset

First task: Participants were given a bag of LEGO® bricks and spent 15 minutes “building something” before moving on to the second task. Second task: Participants completed the Torrance® Tests of Creative Thinking incomplete figures task worksheet (ill-defined creative task). 4. _____

Ill-defined problem-solving mindset

First task: Participants were given a bag of LEGO® bricks and spent 15 minutes “building something” before moving on to the second task. Second task: Participants completed questions from the Miller Analogies Test (well-defined task). COVER STORY: 5. _____

Participants were told that the study related to college students’ thoughts and opinions.

Control group

Participants completed the Torrance® Tests of Creative Thinking incomplete figures task worksheet (illdefined creative task). 6. _____

Control group

Participants completed questions from the Miller Analogies Test (well-defined task).

166

Eshbach

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Eshbach HANDOUT 2

Moreau, C. Page, and Marit Gundersen Engeset. 2016. “The Downstream Consequences of Problem-Solving Mindsets: How Playing with LEGO Influences Creativity.” Journal of Marketing Research 53 (1): 18-30. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.13.0499. Hypotheses for Study 1 (found on page 20) Put a checkmark in front of the problem-solving mindset you chose on HANDOUT 1. H1a

_____

A well-defined problem-solving mindset decreases performance on a subsequent illdefined (creative) task. A well-defined problem-solving mindset has little influence on performance in a subsequent well-defined task.

H1b

_____

An ill-defined problem-solving mindset decreases performance on a subsequent welldefined task. An ill-defined problem-solving mindset has little influence on performance in a subsequent ill-defined (creative) task.

to build the pictured creation. Other stations will have the handout version instructing them to spend 15 minutes building something with their pieces.

COOKING METHOD

1. When students arrive, direct them to sit at one of the stations and follow the instructions. We asked students to refrain from talking during this 15-minute period so they would not realize they did not all have the same set of instructions. 2. The next four minutes will be spent completing one drawing from the incomplete figures task from the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. 3. Tell participants they just replicated a part of the study the authors conducted for their research.

4. Spend the bulk of the remaining time looking at the different sections of the article (title, abstract, introduction, method, results, and discussion) for the purposes of (1) familiarizing students with the components of a research article and (2) exploring how information from the tasks the students just completed was used by the authors to help them support or refute their hypotheses. 5. Discuss some of the vocabulary used in the article’s introduction so students have an understanding of terms, such as ill-defined and well-defined problems, as well as the different types of thinking needed to solve these problems. 6. When discussing the methods, have students identify which of the six possible research conditions describe what they did. 167

7. Use the handout in figure 2 when discussing the results section. Reviewing the discussion section will help students put all the pieces together. 8. Assessment. Have students answer the following open-ended questions: a. What did you find interesting about this article and activity? b. Did this program help your understanding of a scholarly journal article?

ALLERGY WARNING

Make sure you take the time to thoroughly read your chosen article, replicating just enough of the study to engage the students, spark their curiosity, and give them an understanding of the components of a research article without overwhelming them.

CHEF’S NOTES

There was a lot of great interaction during this event. Attendees were surprised to find out that they were not all given the same instructions for using their LEGO pieces and were interested in talking about what, if any, effect this had on their subsequent task.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Costello and Showers

Evaluating and Selecting Library Resources as Ingredients in Individual Professional Development: Student-Driven Acquisitions

Michelle Costello, Education and Community Engagement Librarian; Dennis Showers, Distinguished Service Professor, SUNY Geneseo, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

For most undergraduate students, the idea that they could or should have a say in library collection development would not enter their thinking. In general, most material purchased for library collections comes from either librarian or faculty member suggestions. In this lesson, we invited students to take part in evaluating and building a subsection of the library’s general collection. This exercise gives students a voice in collection development and allows them to practice recognizing and selecting relevant and appropriate materials for use in preservice educational coursework. This is also practice for how they can participate in professional development in their careers. Undergraduate students in the SUNY Geneseo Adolescence Education Program take EDUC 204: Dimensions of Teaching as part of their program. This course focuses on the design, delivery, and assessment of effective instruction and gives students the opportunity to practice, analyze, and reflect on effective teaching practice. In addition, as part of their coursework, students explore and research professional development opportunities for teachers. This supports them as active participants in their education. Dr.

Showers uses an assignment in all methods courses requiring students to self-assess, plan for, and carry out a personalized professional development project. To prepare his students, he recognized the need for instruction in accessing and selecting library materials and evaluating their sources. Ms. Costello proposed this activity in which she models an exploratory approach to locating and selecting library material. This lesson could easily be adapted for undergraduates at any level or in any subject area.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to contribute to the scholarly conversation by recommending material to add to the library collection; explore various resources to locate material to fill gaps in the library collection; evaluate the library collection to identify gaps; and critically analyze potential material to be added to the library collection.

• • • •

COOKING TIME

Prep time: 30 minutes Lesson delivery: 50–75 minutes 168

NUMBER SERVED

10–30 students (could be used for larger classes if students are broken into larger groups)

DIETARY GUIDELINES

Giving students a voice in library acquisitions illustrates the ACRL Framework concepts of Scholarship as Conversation and Searching as Strategic Exploration. Students critically think about their knowledge gaps, find appropriate content to fill the gaps, and then add to the conversation by suggesting items to be added to a shared collection of materials.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• •

Computers for students with internet access Online recording sheet (Google Doc)

PREPARATION

• • •

Creation of a class Google Doc to record material choices List of themes/topics/concepts as a focus for the lesson Assignment directions for students (can be added to class Google Doc) ◊ See sample directions at https://drive. google.com/file/d/1l3eGI39osgrArFHljv mNETgT7BzFSSpR/view?usp=sharing

Costello and Showers

COOKING METHOD

1. Activate prior knowledge. a. Explain the class assignment. Draw parallels to the process students will take locating and evaluating their own professional development opportunities. b. Give students (who are working in small groups or pairs) a topic that would be relevant to new teachers (diversity, technology, differentiation, literacy, etc.). c. Ask students to use this topic to explore the Teacher Education Resource Center (an instructional resource center that provides education students and faculty with materials) of the library to locate titles that address the topic (or whatever collection students will evaluate). d. Simultaneously, ask students to evaluate the collection by identifying gaps (based on the topic). e. Have students note the areas that need to be enhanced in the collection. 2. Explore resources. a. Ask students to explore various resources (library databases, catalogs, and websites) to look for titles that cover their topic or concept. b. Have students record the information they find in the class Google Doc. 3. Evaluate sources. a. Give students a list of suggested review and book list websites and database to browse. b. Explain that students are also free to search on their own for appropriate sites.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION c. Ask students to record in the class Google Doc any helpful sites they find so that their classmates can use them as well. d. Have students evaluate the titles they discovered by reading reviews and browsing available content (abstracts, table of contents, etc.). e. Ask them to compose a justification as to why these items would be a good fit for the collection and record this information in the class Google Doc. 4. Peer review/assessment a. Have students take part in a peerreview process where they explore and evaluate their classmates’ suggestions. Because we have students record their suggestions in a collaborative Google Doc, all suggestions are accessible to the entire class. Each group gets a chance to look over the suggestions from the other groups, specifically focusing on the justification for purchasing, and offer feedback. This also gives students a chance to offer their own suggestions on material that falls outside of the topic area they were given. b. After students have taken part in the peer-review process, we ask them to prioritize their suggestions. This mirrors the process used by the library’s collection management department. We ask them to use the following categories: i. essential (high priority) ii. highly recommended (moderate priority) 169

iii. recommended (low priority) c. Review students’ final lists and either approve, modify, or reject their suggestions. 5. Wrap-up. a. Show students how to submit purchase requests.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

In the event that items students have suggested are rejected, provide justification for the rejections and discuss your decision with the students. Give students a chance to defend their choices if they feel strongly about their selections.

CHEF’S NOTE

As a follow-up to the lesson, I notify students as their purchase requests are added to the collection. This way, the students can see the benefits of their hard work and can use these items to contribute to their professional development.

CLEAN UP

Assessment is integrated throughout the lesson. Students share the results of their searches and the evaluation and selection of items they find. Students also take part in a peer-review process to refine their work. The final assessment, although done by the professor and librarian, gives students the opportunity to understand why their items may not be purchased and to present an argument for reconsideration of the rejections.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Hart

Creating and Using Infographics: Introduction to Best Practices

Olga Hart, University of Cincinnati, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

The ACRL Framework recognizes the role of students as creators of information. The products of students’ creative work may appear in various formats, including visual/graphical. Librarians can and should help students recognize the power of visual information, find or create infographics using best practices, and publish or share their work. The instruction plan described in this chapter was originally developed for service-learning courses focused on educating communities about safer sex and pregnancy and later modified for other courses. It can be used for the popular assignment in English composition courses, where students are asked to “recast” their paper in a different genre.

• •

best practices in presenting information visually; and free online tools for creating infographics.

COOKING TIME

ently based on the format in which it is packaged and to see themselves as contributors to the information marketplace.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

60–90 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

25–30 people per class. The size of the audience could be even bigger, but it would be more difficult to monitor and moderate hands-on activities.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This session will help students to recognize that information may be perceived differ-

• • • •

Computer, projector, and screen for the instructor Students’ own or library-supplied computers or laptops PowerPoint presentation Files to be used for class activities

PREPARATION

• •

Prepare a PowerPoint presentation. Prepare activities to accompany the lecture.

September 3: lnfographics

LEARNING OUTCOMES

After participating in the session the students will be able to articulate the power of visual information; charts, graphs, and infographics for their research topic; and create simple infographics using MS Office tools.

• • •

Students will become familiar with appropriate use of charts, graphs, and infographics found on the Web and in print;

•

Attached Files:

MS tools.pptx (85.217 KB) FreshSem_PregnancyBirthHealth.docx (24.604 KB} FreshSem_PregnancyBirthHealthFS14.pptx (8.383 MB)

Library session on September 2

Find infographics

Do a Google Images search for infographic* and your term, e.g. infographic* fertility Search or browse http://www.tableausoftware.com/public/gallery StatWorld - Interactive Maps of Open Data http://www.statsilk.com/maps/world-stats-open-data

Find images

UC libraries home page http: //www.libraries.uc.edu/ Media online guide See specific resources in the attached handout (Word document).

Present your findings

See links to tools and best practices at http://guides.libraries.uc.edu/content.php?pid=545733&sid =4490558

Library assistance: Olga Hart ([email protected], 556-1850)

170

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Hart

• •

Publish images, URLs, search tips, etc. for class activities and follow-up to the course in the Learning Management System (LMS). Alternative: Create a folder in the cloud containing files for use in class or on the workstations. Create a mini-guide or handout with links and tips on finding and creating infographics.

COOKING METHOD

1. Show a series of exhibits demonstrating various ways to present the same or similar information or idea. The exhibits may include text, text and image, a table, a chart or graph, or an infographic. Ask the students to rate the exhibits on the impact they made (1–lowest, 5–highest) and comment on the characteristics of the exhibits that received the highest/lowest ranking. ◊ Typically, infographics and well-selected photographs, especially those accompanied by text, get the highest rankings.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7. 8.

tion of information and talk about good uses for infographics. Talk about using existing infographics versus creating original ones. ◊ Activity: Students search for or browse infographics using the tools and techniques suggested by the librarian. Discuss copyright issues related to using existing infographics. Show how to find public domain/creative commons images and talk about getting permission. Emphasize that solid research should precede the creation of an infographic. Highlight resources for researching the topics. Point students to relevant databases and search tips (available on the LMS or in a handout). Show simple infographics created with Microsoft Office SmartArt. ◊ Activity: Students edit an infographic and/or create their own using images pre-selected by the librarian. Talk about best practices for graphs, charts, and infographics using slides to illustrate the points. Point students to 2–3 free online tools for creating infographics and show examples of work created with each tool.

ALLERGY WARNING

We spend hardly any time on the how-to of MS Office editing. Students easily follow along and do a good job playing and experimenting. Once we had a non-traditional student who needed more support and we followed up with a personal appointment.

CHEF’S NOTES

If your students are working in teams, peer review will naturally occur as infographics to be used in the final project, such as a flyer or presentation, are selected and improved. Otherwise, you may ask students to post their infographics on LMS for peer review and/or your feedback. In our instructional situation, students were creating infographics for community education on topics including emergency contraception and infant death prevention. The students were very proud to apply their newly acquired skills and reported that knowing the techniques of information presentation allowed them to capture the audience’s attention and convey the information more effectively.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Douglas Karr. “Infographic: Do-It-Yourself Guide to Infographics.” Stephen’s Lighthouse. Posted on July 9, 2011. http:// stephenslighthouse.com/2011/07/09/doit-yourself-guide-to-infographics/. Rick Mans. “Why Infographics?” Visually. Accessed September 23, 2018. https://visual.ly/ community/infographic/business/whyinfographics.

2. Discuss the power of visual information. Compare infographics to textual presenta171

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Donnelly

Cookies or Cake?

It Depends on the Process! Madeline Donnelly, Learning and Curriculum Support Librarian, University of Guelph NUTRITION INFORMATION

The purpose of this activity is to encourage students to think critically about how the information creation process affects the credibility, depth of analysis, and timeliness of information packaged in different formats. Exploring these themes through active engagement with the creation process helps students unpack what it is about the creation process that constructs credibility. The activity should also help to highlight the benefits and limitations of a variety of information formats and get students thinking about how and when they may consult and/or use information in different formats.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• • •

Students should be able to describe the process that goes into creating an information source. Students should be able to identify the benefits and limitations of the creation process, specifically in relation to the variables of credibility, time, and depth of analysis. Students should be able to identify the range of information sources they might consult for a given research question.

COOKING TIME

30–45 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

This activity is best suited to undergraduate classes with an enrollment of 25–75.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This activity closely aligns with the frame of Information Creation as a Process. This frame highlights the need to consider the process that goes into the creation of an information source when assessing factors such as credibility (learning outcome b). Learners who engage with this frame should be able to articulate the constraints and limitations of different creation processes (learning outcome a). Last, this frame states that learners should consider the creation process when determining if a source will suit their information need (learning outcome c).

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • •

Slide deck for introduction and conclusion Student access to laptops are encouraged Packages for each small group that include: 1. One pre-selected information source (should all center around the same topic) 2. Source evaluation worksheet. The worksheet should prompt the following: a. What is the format of your information source? (Example: newspaper) 172

b. What is the process that this source went through to be published? (Example: journalist researches subject, journalist writes article, article is reviewed by an editor, article is published). If you are unsure, use your laptops to try and find the answer. c. What about the information creation process makes this source credible? What makes it less credible? d. How long does this process take? How does this affect the timeliness of the information? e. What are some common characteristics of this type of format? Structure, depth of analysis?

Donnelly

PREPARATION

Choose a current news topic that aligns with the course subject (example: NYC divestment from fossil fuels for a Corporate Social Responsibility class). Find information related to the topic in the following formats: social media post (a tweet for example), newspaper article, industry report (if applicable to course), government document, scholarly article, and a scholarly book.

COOKING METHOD

1. Introduce the students to the idea that the sources we choose to consult depends on the type of information need that we have. 2. Divide the students into groups of about 5 and provide each group a package containing an information source and worksheet. Give the students approximately 15 minutes to complete the worksheet, encouraging them to use their computers to look up information that they are unsure of. 3. Take-up the activity by asking the class, “What information sources could help us answer the following question….” Follow up with the question, “What are some limitations that the sources have in helping us answer our question?” ◊ The purpose of this discussion is to help the students contextualize how they may use the sources that they were provided with. It should also highlight the importance of looking beyond format when deciding whether to consult a source and the

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION value of reading broadly (consulting multiple sources). 4. Conclude the activity by highlighting that all information sources that belong to one format category are not created equal. Summarize with the idea that all information formats have benefits and disadvantages, but considering the creation process helps us understand what those are and how we might use them depending on our information needs.

ALLERGY WARNING

This lesson works best in classes where students are able (or required) to engage with a variety of information formats for their assignments.

CHEF’S NOTES

Ensure that the scenarios that you use align with the topic you have provided them. This allows students to piece together their sources effectively to answer the question(s) that you have provided.

173

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Hallerduff

Excavating the Conversation on a Research Topic Martinique Hallerduff, Associate Professor of Library Services, Oakton Community College, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

This recipe teaches students that a research topic/question is part of a larger conversation that involves many different types of people, publications, and language. It’s especially well-suited for controversial topics that undergrads may think of as uniquely current. The librarian provides students with a short article, podcast, or video on a topic related loosely to course themes or contemporary events (examples here include gentrification, consent/sexual assault, and racist language). After skimming the article, students work in groups to mine the article for one of the following: people involved in the conversation, publications, government/legal events, specialized language/keywords, and general events/dates. The librarian can open up a discussion about Scholarship as Conversation and discuss unique contributions of source formats, the information timeline, and authority.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• • •

Students will identify assigned elements of a common resource in order to recognize the variety of contributions to a topic. Students will describe the different contributions to a topic in order to explain how research is like a conversation. Students will describe an overarching topic for a single resource in order to

identify the conversation the topic exists within.

COOKING TIME

This activity can be completed in 15 minutes minimally, but 20–25 minutes is ideal. This activity will require more time if students did not read the article before class.

NUMBER SERVED

This activity works well in groups 15–25. If you have larger groups, simply have two groups assigned to each category.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This lesson addresses Scholarship as Conversation from ACRL’s Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education using popular (rather than disciplinary) conversation as an entry point. Students are given an example of the “conversation” around a topic and discover the variety of contributions to and the vocabulary of the topic. Students notice the significance of the contributions and begin to make connections between tracing a conversation and eventually to citing as a way of tracking it. This lesson also presents an effective method of keyword discovery that students can employ in the future.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

1. Poster-size Post-it paper 174

2. Markers 3. A popular article that references publications and events. Examples: Bevan, Robert. “From Ruth Glass to Spike Lee: 50 Years of Gentrification.” The Guardian. February 27, 2014, sec. Cities. https://www.theguardian. com/cities/2014/feb/27/ruthglass-spike-lee-gentrification-50years. Donella, Leah. “Why Is It Still OK To ‘Trash’ Poor White People?” Codeswitch. Produced by NPR, podcast, MP3 audio, 3:49. Accessed September 6, 2018. https:// www.npr.org/sections/codeswit ch/2018/08/01/605084163/​whyits-still-ok-to-trash-poor-whitepeople. West, Lindy. “Aziz, We Tried To Warn You.” The New York Times, January 17, 2018. https://www.nytimes. com/2018/01/17/opinion/azizansari-metoo-sex.html.

PREPARATION

Choosing the article: Locating a suitable article is key to the success of the activity. The popular article should examine a topic with historical perspective and mention several publications, people, and events. I suggest the following search

Hallerduff strategy in a newspaper database or Google: the name of a person that coined a term foundational to the topic or a foundational person to a topic along with that topic, for example, “Ruth Glass gentrification” or “Rachel Carson vegetarian.” Setting up the classroom: Place 4–5 Post-it posters in the classroom and write a heading on each one describing what students will locate and contribute, i.e., publications, events, keywords, events/dates, people.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION especially where it is more subtle. 6. After about 10 minutes, bring the students back together. 7. Help students make connections about the conversation through open-ended questions: a. What is the general topic of this conversation? b. What would you research next if this were your starting point? c. What kinds of people have been involved in this conversation? This might include scholars, reporters,

COOKING METHOD

1. Make the article available on the course management site and hand out print copies. If you’re using a video or podcast, play it at the beginning of class. 2. Introduce the idea of Scholarship as Conversation. Explain that people have been discussing their topic for a long time. Before they can join the conversation, it’s important to learn what has already been and to become familiar with the vocabulary, major thinkers, people affected, and publications. Eventually, they will contribute to the conversation. 3. Divide students into four or five groups depending on the number of poster papers you have decided to use in the class. 4. Explain that each group is going to work through the article to find as many mentions of their item as possible. 5. Spend several minutes with each group, discovering along with them and guiding them to notice their item in the article, 175

activists, landlords, higher-ed administrators, the public, etc. d. Notice that we couldn’t have generated these keywords without the article. You can use many of these to start a database search.

ALLERGY WARNING

Students may need help getting started, which should happen in groups rather than with a demonstration. When you’re stopping in with the groups, become an active

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION group member/facilitator. Students need help conceiving of what kinds of words make keywords which can be a great opportunity to talk about and define keywords. Similarly, students often have difficulty picking out minor or unnamed events like “protests after legislation.” You’ll find some items on more than one list that enrich understanding; don’t dissuade it.

REFERENCES

Burke, Kenneth. The Philosophy of Literary Form. 3rd ed. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1941), 110.

CHEF’S NOTES

I had been struggling both with helping students understand that their projects were part of a larger conversation and helping them discover keywords. I’ve explained the Burkean parlor and encouraged students to develop keywords using synonyms, pair-andshare, and by consulting reference materials, but I sought more active discovery. I was struck with Lindy West’s article and the narrative arc it took on the conversation around consent. I used that to great success in a class where the content connected. Once I was able to find resources with other themes, the assignment took off in our composition program. I have followed this activity with an investigation of scholarly and news sources, which allows students to make new connections after they’ve seen the way these contribute to a conversation. While this is ideal for undergraduate students doing general research, it could work well for upper-level students excavating a scholarly conversation within their discipline.

176

Hallerduff

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Hasse

Mixing Up an “Authority Matters” Batter Jen Hasse, Student Success and Outreach Librarian, J. W. England Library, University of the Sciences NUTRITION INFORMATION

Centered around the threshold concept Authority is Constructed and Contextual, this lesson asks students to consider “who knows the most about” a given topic. At the outset, a majority of students will most likely value personal experience; the most common response to the question being, “No one understands what it’s like . . . more than someone who has been through it.” As this question is unpacked, students will start to articulate and recognize different forms of authority or “knowing” and, in doing so, might also question the validity of how the initial question is framed. At the conclusion of the lesson, they will be able to apply the terms “scholarly/popular” and “primary/secondary” to the work of source evaluation and recognize strengths and limitations inherent to different manifestations of authority.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• • •

Students will be able to articulate multiple ways in which authority can be ascribed. Students will be able to identify primary/ secondary sources and scholarly/popular sources and understand different processes through which information is produced and presented. Students will seek a variety of source formats appropriate to their information need in order to negotiate meaning

through exposure to multiple and possibly conflicting perspectives.

COOKING TIME

This activity fits well within a 50-minute class period but can easily be scaled upward or downward.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

• • •

Authority is Constructed and Contextual Information Creation as a Process Scholarship is Conversation

PREPARATION

Select a social justice issue or current news story relevant to course themes or a research assignment. Very briefly discuss this topic, having students bring up any knowledge or connections they may have. The goal is to stir up a little conversation and see what bubbles up.

COOKING METHOD

1. Ask, “Who knows the most about [the topic you have selected]?” As students answer, organize their responses into categories (those who live/have lived it, those who work in it, those who write about it, those who study and teach it). After a brief discussion period and possibly some prompting to flesh out the categories, ask students to vote on which category 177

“knows the most.” Tally the votes for each column. a. Note: This portion of the recipe can be prepared ahead of time by asking students to complete the question as a writing prompt before class. Create a chart of their responses and begin the lesson with part 2. b. Note: This next portion of the recipe can be completed in two ways, depending on preference and time. i. Option 1: Go through each category asking students who voted for that category to share their reasoning. Ask, “Why did you identify this category as having the most or best knowledge on the topic?” Record their responses. Once this is complete, go back through and identify downsides in each category. As points are made, you may wish to apply them across all categories. For example, when someone raises the issue of bias, take time to explore how bias factors into each category. Also, consider how something might be both a strength and a weakness, asking, for example, “Is detachment from an issue a good or bad thing, how so?” ii. Option 2: Pre-identify a resource that can serve as an example for

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION each category, such as a primary source like a blog post or YouTube video, a professional organization website, a news article, and a scholarly article. Divide the class into four groups, giving each group one of the sources. Using the source for context, ask

Hasse

each group what the source has to offer on the topic and what are the strengths of this source, including potential downsides or limitations. Ask each group to report on what they found. Compare and contrast the source types as described above.

2. Name and identify types of sources and appropriate uses. Introduce the concepts of primary sources, secondary sources, popular sources, and scholarly sources. Ask students to apply these terms to each category, clarifying or redefining as necessary and highlighting how primary sources are the raw materials of secondary

Part 1: “Who understands the most what it means to be in the foster care system?”

Person with “lived” experience • Child in the system • Parent in the system

Person with professional experience • Social/case worker • Doctors and mental health professionals • Educators

Person who has written or reported on the issue • Journalist • Activist • Policy maker

Person who does research on this topic or studies it in some way • College professor • Researcher • Sociologist • Psychologist

Part 2: Strengths and weaknesses of each source type

Deep, personal experience (drill down) • Eyewitness • Walked the walk” • Insider perspective

Exposure to a wider variety of experiences • Greater detachment • Education of the subject “expert”

Detached from situation; potentially unbiased • Able to “tell the story” • Able to bring together different pieces of the puzzle

Education • Unbiased • Broad view (big picture) • “Experts” ability to offer analysis

Part 3: “How can we understand this type of source?”

• Primary • Popular (usually)

• Primary or secondary • Popular or scholarly

• Secondary • Popular

• Primary or secondary • Scholarly

Optional: “Where does authority come from?” What is an appropriate way to critique or assess this manner of authority?

Personal authority: Assess • Accuracy • Evidence • How, where, and why is the story being told?

Expert authority: Assess • Credentials • Employer • Education • Body of work • Affiliations

Journalistic authority: Assess • Author: credentials, body of work, quality of reporting, evidence-based • Source: reputation, purpose, accuracy

Academic authority: Assess • Author: credentials, education/ background, body of work, references • Publisher: reputation, purpose, accuracy

• One person’s experience is not everyone’s experience • Potentially unreliable • Hard to be impartial

Might see more of the problems and less of what’s working • Potential for bias • May have an agenda • Narrow focus

178

Not experts on the issue • Reliant on their sources • May have an agenda • Potential for bias

Potential to miss the human side of the story • Potential for error, poor analysis • May have an agenda • Narrow focus

Hasse sources. Discuss how more than one label might be appropriate. Finally, ask questions which help students to see links and relationships across categories of sources. a. Sample questions: i. How does a secondary source use primary information? (A researcher collects data from people who have first-hand experience; reporters use sources to tell a story.) ii. How might a journalist use a scholarly source? (Repackage research findings for popular consumption.) iii. How do they influence each other? (Professionals change their practices based on research findings.) iv. Which sources are the most immediate? (First-hand events can lead to reporting, then to scholarly investigation, and then to policy and procedure changes.) 3. Wrap-up and debrief. Return to the idea of choosing a “best” type of source. How has their thinking changed? Does a “best” type of source exist? Ask students to complete a one-minute written reflection. How will each category of sources be reflected (or not reflected) in their upcoming research paper?

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION ALLERGY WARNING

This lesson is largely dependent on student participation and conversation. Expect to do some steering, but also be prepared to follow students’ responses in new directions as long as they are productive. One direction that the class may go in is to critique or question the validity of how the initial question is framed. Embrace that line of thinking and explore why “Who knows the most?” is a problematic question. If students do not arrive at this place on their own, you may want to end the activity with a brief discussion of the initial question or ask them to consider it in a written reflection.

CHEF’S NOTES

This recipe pairs well with source evaluation, specifically applying criteria to assess credibility and authority. If time permits, as you are discussing each category, take time to consider the foundation of authority for that particular type of source. Ask, “What do we look for when selecting this type of source?”

179

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Grevatt

Plan Your Shopping:

Using the 5 Ws to Map the Business Information Economy Heather Grevatt, Instruction and Research Librarian, Boise State University, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

This recipe employs a simple method to help students understand and map the business information economy—that is, the way business information is created, disseminated, and used. The activity was created as means of guided brainstorming but can be ramped up or down to be as interactive or self-guided as needed.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to do the following: Articulate their information need Formulate a search strategy Evaluate their proposed strategy by assessing the usefulness and availability of identified sources

• • •

COOKING TIME

60–90 minutes

NUMBERS SERVED

This activity will work with most class sizes, but they need enough room to work. Lecture halls are not ideal, but if you must work with a class this size, try moving to a conference setting with multiple group tables or wall space.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

The purpose of this recipe is for students

to think critically about the way business information, especially company information, is created, disseminated, and used. They will recognize the value and commodification of information and information access. Related to this, students will see that limitations on dissemination and use necessitate creativity in information seeking. In longer sessions, students can also work on synthesizing resources to answer questions for which data is not easily available.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • • • •

Easel paper, at least one page per group 3-inch sticky notes in five colors for each group. (If the easel paper will be hanging on walls, make sure to use quality sticky notes or they will fall right off!) Pens or pencils Timer Computers/laptops for student use

PREPARATION

• •

Create a handout with an overview of the activity to help students follow along. Create a handout of suggested resources. This should include a variety of online and print sources, subscription and open source, reflecting your library’s holdings and the focus of the class (i.e., 180

marketing, entrepreneurship, human resources, etc.).

COOKING METHOD

1. Divide students into groups of no more than ten. Give each group a copy both handouts, a piece of easel paper, and a stack of each of the 5 color sticky notes. Ask groups to write their general topic, no more than one sentence, at the top of the easel paper. 2. Let groups know how long they will have for each section, roughly 5–10 minutes, depending on the length of the class. Have groups choose which color sticky notes they will use for “What.” As a group, students write down “What” information they need to support their topic, one item per sticky note. Help students by providing several examples, such as company financial records, average income data for the city, consumer spending habits, etc. 3. When time is up, ask groups to choose a sticky note color for “Why.” Now revisit the “What” items they have created and analyze “Why” they need that information. For each “What” item, “Why” do they think that particular piece of information will support their topic. They can create additional “What” items if they realize something is missing.

Grevatt 4. Based on their “Why” analysis, ask students to select no more than 5 “What” items that will best support their topic. 5. Have groups choose a color for “When.” For each selected “What” item, students identify “When” the information should come from. Then ask them to analyze “Why” the information needs to come from this timeframe. 6. Now groups choose a color for “Who.” For each “What” item, have students try to identify “Who” would create it and, if they think it is different, who would disseminate the information. Then repeat the “Why” process, analyzing “Why” these people, companies, organizations, governments, etc. would create and/or disseminate the information. Students can change their answers if they decide a “Who” is incorrect. 7. Last, have students use all the information they have developed, as well as the suggested resources handout, and their last color notes to identify “Where” they can access the information and “Why” they think those locations are correct. 8. Allow at least 10–30 minutes for students to try searching for the information they have outlined. Ask them to separate out “What” items that are not where they expected or that they cannot find. 9. Use the last minutes of the class to talk about problem “What” items. Does anyone else in the class know where they can be found? Does anyone know why they might really be unavailable or only available for a fee? Support the discussion with

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION a mini-lecture about issues in the business information economy, such as private versus public companies or market research firms.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

This activity relies heavily on student participation, so you’ll need to build rapport quickly. Lower-division students may not have enough general business knowledge to participate fully. In these instances, it may be helpful to provide pre-class readings or partner this activity with another session that provides a more substantial lecture on business information creation and dissemination.

CHEF’S NOTE

This activity works especially well with marketing and case study assignments where students need a wide variety of sources. Traditional academic research papers will also work, but the emphasis will likely shift to information timelines and a discussion of why peer-reviewed research may not be available for their topic. Repeating “Why” can seem tedious, but using a forward logic model like this forces students to confront their assumptions about modern information access. In an “everything is available” world, it can be hard for students to establish reasonable expectations for their business research.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

The RUSA Business Reference and Services Section (BRASS) LibGuides can help develop the suggested resources handout: http:// brass.libguides.com. 181

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Becker

Audience a la Carte:

Understanding Information Production through Storytelling Sam Becker, Campus Engagement University, Drake University, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

This activity starts students in a role they are generally quite comfortable understanding themselves in: an audience. Students usually have an understanding of what media is communicating to them, even if they don’t realize it. Students go from this low-barrier starting activity to deeper thinking about the role of audiences.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will consider their own roles as audiences and producers in order to better understand how the audience plays a role in content, presentation, and visual/word choice.

COOKING TIME

75 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

25–30 students

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This activity connects to the ACRL Frame of Information Creation as a Process, which asks us to consider how context impacts product. It asks students to slow and think about the characteristics of a visual media that communicates something about audience and purpose. It also asks them to think of themselves

as information producers who make choices about how they will produce, present, and modify information to fit their own needs.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

Fliers, posters, or marketing posts for different student organizations, offices, or units on campus—at least 3 per group of 3–4 students One flier with an intentionally drastically mismatched message and visual to model. Think: scarecrow and fall leaves imagery with a message about Black History Month programming or confetti and party imagery with a very formal and serious academic event.

PREPARATION

Each group of students will require one set of three or more fliers. They can be any event type, but best results will come from including one purely social event, one academic event, and one professional or job-seeking event. Activity instructions and guiding questions are best as a slideshow.

COOKING METHOD

1. Introduce the outcomes and topic. 2. Activity 1: 15 minutes a. Break students up into groups of 3–4 182

and distribute fliers. b. Model the activity using the mismatched flier. c. In groups, students should identify specific features of the text that indicate audience and communication by considering: i. What are you supposed to take from this? ii. How does it try to connect with you or communicate a feeling? iii. What does it communicate about the event or organization? d. Each group should go around and briefly introduce one flier to the rest of the class. 3. Activity 2: 30 minutes a. Transition students to next activity by connecting the audience analysis with a time they have also been strategic about information production and audience. b. Each student should tell one short story about a time that they have had to tell a story to multiple audiences. i. (This is my story; you can take it if you’re not comfortable modeling one of your own.) When I was in high school, I bumped a car in front of me at a red light. When the person in the car in front of me got out, I said something like,

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Becker “Oh man! I’m so sorry! I don’t even know what I was looking at. I’m so sorry.” A cop showed up and when she asked me to tell her what happened, I said something like, “Yes, ma’am. I’m driving back to my house from a friend’s house. I saw the light was red, but I think I must have misjudged the distance between the next car and mine because I hit their bumper.” When I got home, I had to tell my dad what happened and I said something like, “I was at Kate’s house and I was so sleepy, so I figured it would be responsible to drive home before I got more tired. It was really dark, and I couldn’t see how far up the car in front of me was and I accidentally grazed their bumper a little bit. It was barely a touch, really. But anyway, they took my insurance information. I’m really tired. I should probably go to bed.” c. Once you’ve thought of your story, share it with your group. When everyone has shared their stories, pick one or two and analyze how the audience impacted their communication. 4. Activity 3: 25 minutes a. The last portion of the activity is to compose a written message to three different audiences. b. Imagine that you’re sick. The kind of sick that means that you’re feeling just gross enough that you’d be willing to use an excused absence if

your class has them but not so sick that you couldn’t rally given a good enough reason from your best friend. As a group, compose a message, email, text, letter, carrier pigeon, what have you, to your mom, your best friend, and your professor letting them know you’re ill. Be creative where appropriate. c. Share at least one with the class. How does the audience of this message impact the content, tone, and diction of how you communicate? 5. Exit essay: 5 minutes a. Ask students to take out pen and paper. Exit essays are an example of “writing to think.” Set a 2-minute timer and ask students to write the entire time, even if they feel like they run out of things to say. b. How did this activity change or enforce how you think about audiences for different types of communication? How do you think this might relate to this class’s work and also the work of other classes?

ALLERGY WARNING

•

•

Multicultural offices, Greek organizations, and TRIO programs tend to have the different types of events needed for this activity. Also, this is a great time to help your friendly neighborhood student success services market by featuring their marketing materials. Activity 1 is intended as a low-barrier warm-up activity. Analysis may be somewhat shallow as students try to figure 183

out what the instructor wants to hear. Activity 2 can get long, so be strict on time.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Mills

Restaurant Confidential:

Authority and Information Creation in a Crowd-Sourced World Jenny Mills, Coordinator of Research Services, Belmont University, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

Librarians at Belmont University teach one in-class session for First-Year Seminar, a course taken by all freshmen during their first semester that is organized around the theme of “ways of knowing” and which requires students to explore “the nature of knowledge, how it differs from mere belief, and the various ways in which human beings construct and evaluate knowledge claims.” Focusing on the common argumentative research paper in which all students are required to use at least “5 substantial sources,” the goal of library instruction is for students to become critical consumers of information.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Evaluate information in order to determine if a source is substantial and appropriate for college-level research assignments.

COOKING TIME

• • •

Pre-assignment: 20 minutes In-class activity: 50–75 minutes Follow-up assignment after class: 60 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

20 students

DIETARY GUIDELINES

After years of teaching lists of evaluative criteria and then asking students to apply them to different source types, the advent of the ACRL Framework helped the authors articulate more complex goals for information evaluation that were more in line with the larger goals of the course. Focusing on two frames, Authority is Constructed and Contextual, and Information Creation as a Process, students were asked to reflect on who creates information and for what purpose.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

A LibGuide (https://belmont.libguides.com/ fys2016) was created in order to deliver the pre-assignment activities and the in-class activity. Students were also provided with a sheet of paper with the in-class activity questions and plenty of room for them to take notes on the sources they analyzed. Prior to the class, students were asked to listen to a podcast, “Why Does Wikipedia Work?,” an interview with Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales about the founding and mission of Wikipedia as a crowd-sourced repository of the world’s knowledge. After listening to the podcast, students were asked to answer an open-ended question: “Who should be able to edit Wikipedia and why?” Having reflected 184

on the podcast and this question, students arrived at class ready for a vibrant discussion.

COOKING METHOD

Marinate. 1. Kick-off the discussion by asking if anyone had ever edited a Wikipedia article. Of the few students who raised their hands, most had made minor edits as part of a school assignment, or they snickered and declined to share what they edited. A quick think-pair-share followed, with students sharing their answers to the open-ended question with their neighbors. The discussion activated the class and revealed that students were pretty evenly divided among those who thought that Wikipedia should be completely open to anyone to edit, that it should be restricted to those with some sort of expertise on the topics, or that it should fall somewhere in between. 2. We followed with a discussion about authority and information creation. First, different types of authority were discussed, from subject expertise to societal position to special experience. We showed the Wikipedia Recent Changes Map to emphasize the amazing global reach of Wikipedia.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Mills Bake. 3. Introduce a concept new to most students, that of information creation, and ask students to consider some questions, including: a. How was the information created? b. Is it original? Does it contribute new knowledge on a topic? c. How is it produced and packaged? d. How long is it? 4. Wikipedia was a great example to use to illuminate this new and difficult concept. We explored the core content policies that govern Wikipedia’s content: a. neutral point of view b. verifiability c. no original research 5. We discussed the value of using original information or something that contributes new knowledge rather than summarized or repackaged information, like encyclopedia articles or brief news items. Let’s eat. 1. The discussion was followed by a criticalthinking activity in which groups of students compared sources and answered the following questions: a. Who wrote it? What expertise or authority do they have? b. Is it original, repackaged, or shared information? c. How much time and effort did it take to create it? d. Was there a review or editing process? 2. Rather than labeling sources, these questions prompted students to think about

how and why they might use an information source, depending on the author and how it was created. Dessert. The lesson was followed by an individual assignment that students completed on their own. They answered the same questions about one or two sources that they selected for their own research.

•

ALLERGY WARNING

As with any flipped approach, the activities are most effective if the students complete them! When the students answered the open-ended question about editing Wikipedia, they had to enter their name and the name of their instructor on the Google form. The librarians were then able to sort the responses accordingly and send them to the instructors for a check on participation. Some even awarded a few points for completion.

CHEF’S NOTES

One benefit of giving students articles to compare is that you can select a variety of examples. A drawback is that students are not always invested in evaluating these preselected sources. We now have students select their own sources for the in-class activity. This small shift has led to more self-directed learning as students “defend” their sources to the class. We also now ask students to describe what they learned from the source and how it might help them address our provided sample research question. Now students are not only evaluating the source for outside 185

markers of quality; they also must evaluate the usefulness of the source.

NOTES

Belmont University. “First-Year Seminar.” BELL Core (Belmont’s General Education) Program Requirements. Accessed Oct. 4, 2018. http://www.belmont.edu/bellcore/ courses.html. TED Radio Hour. “Why Does Wikipedia Work?” NPR. July 12, 2013. https://www.npr. org/2013/10/04/191625835/why-doeswikipedia-work. Wikipedia. “Wikipedia: General Disclaimer.” Accessed Oct. 4, 2018. https:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Wikipedia:General_disclaimer. Wikipedia. “Wikipedia: Risk Disclaimer.” Accessed Oct. 4, 2018. https://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Wikipedia:Risk_disclaimer. Wikipedia. “Wikipedia: Core Content Policies.” Accessed Oct. 4, 2018. https:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Core_ content_policies.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Vong

Sous Vide or Deep-fry?

Teaching Students to Cook Research for Different Tastes Silvia Vong, Head of Public Services, University of St. Michael’s College in the University of Toronto NUTRITION INFORMATION

A common activity for teaching undergraduate students about different resources is comparing peer-reviewed articles with a newspaper article or blog post using the CRAAP test or other guidelines. The comparison can help students observe the different characteristics and elements of each type of source. While this activity is effective as a classroom activity, this recipe elevates the former to engage students through the creation of new sources to better understand the creation process for different types of sources for different audiences.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

Students will be able to identify and compare different features of two to three types of sources. Students will be able to adapt their research paper as a social media post.

COOKING TIME

• • •

Session on creation processes: 30 minutes Re-creating a research paper project: 1 week Review assignments: 15 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This activity addresses the Frame Information Creation as a Process, with specific reference to the knowledge ability of “assessing the fit between an information product’s creation process and a particular information need.” This recipe is a great complement to another recipe that evaluates or compares scholarly and popular sources. This can further prompt students to actively engage in creating new information products and reflect on the differences that emerge from their own creation experience. The purpose is to help students understand that different types of sources serve different purposes and audiences. This cooking technique employs Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy Model—more specifically, the knowledge dimension of “procedural” and the cognitive dimension of “create.” This approach is meant to help students understand the different creation processes and purpose of different sources in a long-lasting way since creation is considered a higher order of thinking versus the dimension, understand (e.g., comparing).

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• •

A final research paper written by the student A free blog platform and twitter account

Maximum of 20 students 186

PREPARATION

Provide an introductory session with a comparative activity on scholarly and popular sources near the beginning of the course. This will help scaffold and build students base knowledge before they attempt the assignment. When students have completed their final research papers, re-introduce the different types of sources and include information about creation processes for a research article, a newspaper article or a blog post, and a tweet in a 15-minute session.

COOKING METHOD

1. Provide an introductory session on scholarly and popular sources at the beginning of the course. 2. Introduce details on creation processes for a research article, newspaper article or blog post, and a social media post. In addition, provide guidelines on the production of each source. 3. Review the assignment description after the final research paper has been completed. 4. Grade the submissions according to the assignment’s guidelines. 5. Review and discuss the assignments with the students via reflective questions.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Vong

PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

Research can be created, re-mixed, and re-interpreted for different media and audiences. For your final assignment, take your final research paper and re-interpret it as a 500-word blog post and a 280-character Tweet. You may not copy and paste paragraphs of your final paper in the post or tweet. The blog is aimed at the general public with the following goals: Engage the audience in the topic. Educate the audience on new terms and ideas related to the topic. Explain the topic using terms anyone can understand.

• • •

The Tweet is aimed at other researchers with the following goals: Promote your research to other researchers in the field. Prompt further discussion on the topic on social media.

• •

Submit links to your final postings along with an 800-word reflection using the following guiding questions: How much effort or time was required to produce the research paper? Blog post? Tweet? Can each media form have the same goals as each other? Please explain your answer. What other media forms should be considered for educating the general public? What media forms are considered inappropriate as an education tool? What challenges did you experience with meeting the goals and translating your research paper into a short blog post? A Tweet? How does each source rank in credibility? Why?

• • • • •

ALLERGY WARNING

•

•

Students may not understand the difference between writing their research paper and writing a magazine article. They may copy and paste selected paragraphs from the research paper rather than re-write it. It is important to note that this is not acceptable in the introduction or make this clear in the assignment description. If there are students who do not want to create a social media account, they can work with a partner. Some students may not feel comfortable creating a Twitter account for personal or private reasons. If they can work with someone, they can benefit from observing Twitter in action.

CHEF’S NOTES

It is important to introduce the creation processes as well as provide a wrap-up session with the reflective questions. These questions will help prompt their critical-thinking skills by drawing on their own experiences with creating the different sources.

NOTES

Association of College and Research Libraries, Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. Last modified February 9, 2015. http://www.ala.org/acrl/ standards/ilframework, p. 5.

187

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Cuthbertson, Frank, and Korber

Using Popular Media to Craft Research Questions William Cuthbertson, Instruction Coordinator and Assistant Professor, California State University, Chico, [email protected]; Dawn Frank, Associate Director, Student Learning Center, California State University, Chico, [email protected]; Irene Korber, Head of Research, Instruction, & Outreach and Assistant Professor, California State University, Chico, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

This activity is served to incoming freshmen who are new to college-level academic research. By drawing on popular media and short videos with which they may already be familiar, students create a bridge between their existing cultural knowledge and viable areas of academic research.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• • • •

Students will be able to dissect short popular media segments (e.g., music videos, film clips, video advertisements) for potential research topics. Students will be able to determine appropriate keywords in order to effectively find sources on a research topic. Students will be able to write a research question based on identified topics within a popular media source. Students will be able to use keywords to explore articles within a discovery tool.

COOKING TIME

Approximately 30–50 minutes total, including 20 minutes to break students into groups, watch a popular media video as a class, and for students to identify themes and ideas within the media for academic research; 10–15 minutes to share topics and brain-

• •

• •

storm a sample research question as a class; and 5–7 minutes for students to write research questions within their group. For the remaining time, students begin searching the discovery tool based on their research question.

COOKING METHOD

NUMBER SERVED

This recipe is scalable to the number of dryerase boards and computers available to students but works best with approximately 4 to 6 groups comprised of 3 to 4 students each.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

• • •

Information Creation as a Process Scholarship as a Conversation Searching as Strategic Exploration

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • •

build a keyword list based on the video and provide a lyric sheet for any music videos used. (At the time of this writing, Childish Gambino’s This Is America is an example of a video that allows for exploration of a number of topics relevant to the contemporary college student.)

Computer projection for the class Computers with internet access and audio playback for each group of students Dry-erase boards, markers, and erasers for each group of students

PREPARATION

Before the session, select a video for discussion that is rich in opportunities for interpretation and that is current and interesting to contemporary students. You may wish to pre188

1. Ask students to divide themselves into groups and ensure that each group has a dry-erase board and markers. 2. Introduce the goals and outcomes of the activity. 3. Play a pre-selected video for the class. Ask that students in their groups take notes on concepts and ideas that come up in the video’s narration, lyrics, and/or visuals. 4. Allow the students, in their groups, to replay segments of the video for further analysis. Because students may be distracted by the format, the instructor should walk the room, speaking to each group to keep them on task with identifying themes and concepts. 5. After approximately 10–15 minutes, have the students report back to the class as a whole on themes they identified, and collect those themes on a central board. Work with the class as a whole to identify a sample research question from these themes.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Cuthbertson, Frank, and Korber 6. Students regroup and practice writing one or two additional research questions based on identified themes. Student groups select a research question and begin preliminary article research within a discovery tool. 7. With the remaining time, have students discuss their research questions and share their findings.

• • •

watch?v=WDZJPJV__bQ. Childish Gambino, This Is America music video, https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=VYOjWnS4cMY. Diego Luna (Dir.), Jarritos - The Journey advertisement, https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=f7NsB9Gnhm8. Janelle Monáe, Django Jane music video, https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=mTjQq5rMlEY.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

Students may need extra guidance when first analyzing a video for content; you may choose to analyze a video as a class instead. Trigger warning: The content of some videos may trigger unexpected reactions regarding students’ lived experiences. Offer students lyric sheets or scripts in place of watching the videos themselves or have alternative videos pre-selected for use.

CHEF’S NOTES

We recommend the questions below for formative assessment: 1. What is one thing from today’s activity that you still have questions about? 2. What are two things you learned during today’s activity? 3. Do you feel more or less confident about your ability to write a research question?

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

At the time of this writing, popular videos that worked well with this recipe included: Beyoncé, Formation music video, https://www.youtube.com/

•

189

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Campbell, Castel, and Faulkner

Crafting Credible Cocktails:

Blending Context, Genre, and a Hint of Pop Culture for the Perfect Libation Sarah Naomi Campbell, Johnson & Wales University, Providence RI, [email protected]; Jenny Castel, Johnson & Wales University, Providence RI, [email protected]; Kelly Faulkner, Johnson & Wales University, Providence RI, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

First-year students have a difficult time both defining context and genre and understanding their crucial role in a balanced research lifestyle. This recipe will provide students with a practical understanding of the ways in which context speaks to genre, through the lens of pop culture. Building on students’ existing knowledge of genre to introduce context and credibility, this recipe encourages students to consider the importance of evaluating both context and genre in choosing information sources. Students will work in teams to identify one main ingredient in a pop-culture video. Each team will conduct an internet or database search to find an additional source related to this main idea. The class will compare the treatment of the idea between media and the ways in which the genre informs the interpretation.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will leave with the skills to identify one main ingredient in a popculture video; locate an information source that addresses the main issue; distinguish the factors that genre con-

• • •

•

tributes to treatment of the subject; and define the impact of context on source creation, authority of the creator, audience, and purpose of use.

COOKING TIME

60 minutes.

NUMBER SERVED

Serves 20–25 students.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

• • •

Scholarship as Conversation Information Creation as a Process Authority is Constructed and Contextual

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • • • • •

Computers (at least one per team of 2–3 students) Projector and screen Pen/pencil Pop-culture music video and video URL Worksheets featuring contextual factors of the item: date of creation, author, intended audience, source type, how their chosen “main idea” is represented, and how it compares to the video Access to specific library databases and Google 190

PREPARATION

Select an appropriately complex and delicious pop-cultural object, such as a music video, that provides a rich variety of interpretations in terms of context and genre, e.g., an object other than an article or book. We chose Childish Gambino’s This Is America, but any recent audio or visual material with which students may be familiar suits. We chose our video not only because of its currency and popularity but also because the sheer variety of topics within the video lends itself well to spirited discussion and diverse points of view on its context and the unique relevancy of its genre.

COOKING METHOD

1. Introduction a. Provide an overview of the many aspects of resource creation and dissemination that ultimately affect its credibility and authority on a topic. Explain that in order to engage and effectively identify credible sources for papers and presentations, an understanding of the genre that a source belongs to, its author and their background, the audience, time of publication, etc., can help inform their selection of evidence.

Campbell, Castel, and Faulkner b. Assess prior knowledge (utilize various levels of technology as a mode of assessment): In one sentence, how do you define context? c. Separate students into groups and allocate 10 minutes for students to watch the video as a class and then reflect on their reactions in their groups. 2. Discussion a. Introduce discussion questions as a class. i. What is the main purpose (ingredient) of the video? ii. Who is the intended audience? Does the audience affect the presentation of the message? iii. What do you think the video’s creator is “trying to do”? iv. What are the main issues being raised in the video? v. Is the video’s creator an authority on the main idea? Why or why not? vi. How does the context change depending on the genre? What is possible in some genres that is not possible in others? 3. Research: Google vs. databases a. Break students into small groups to search for at least one information source that is based on the “main idea” of the video as determined by the group. b. Assign groups to Team Google (search internet) or Team Database (search specific databases). c. Teams complete worksheets to identify contextual factors of the item:

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION date of creation, author’s experience and credentials, intended audience, source type, how their chosen “main idea” is represented, and how it compares to the video. 4. Peer teaching a. Groups will present their findings to the class. b. The librarian and/or professor points out key differences in treatment of the topic, specifically when they occur as a result of context and genre. c. Encourage groups to engage in discussion with each other’s discoveries. 5. Reflection a. Have students define context, using the sources as examples.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

Music videos or other pop-culture media objects which have gone viral contain ingredients widely acknowledged to be addictive. However, the ingredients which make pop culture so deliciously entertaining can also be unsettling. Childish Gambino’s video This Is America contains gun violence and allusions to specific moments in history which are in and of themselves disturbing, including the 2015 Charleston Church shooting and innumerable shootings of African American men by police officers over the past decade. Librarians should provide trigger warnings to students who themselves may have been impacted by interpersonal or police violence and provide ways (such as stepping out of class and rejoining after video has been screened) for students to opt-out if needed. Discussing the choice of material with the 191

professor ahead of the class will be useful in determining their perception of the appropriateness of the material to be viewed.

CHEF’S NOTE

One-shot instruction sessions can make it difficult to engage students in the material, particularly if it’s not related to a specific assignment (and their grade). Choosing an engaging, controversial, or otherwise entertaining pop-culture object can create excitement and provide the shock factor useful in garnering attention. Additionally, letting students know that they will be peer teaching enhances motivation to find interesting and relevant sources while increasing their own enjoyment of the material as they search for sources their peers would find intriguing rather than what they imagine the professor would grade well.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Morris

Stop the Presses! Sarah E. Morris, Head of Instruction, Emory University Libraries, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

This activity takes its inspiration from Model UN and uses a scenarios-based game to introduce learners to the complexity of the news creation process and helps them work through a “breaking news” situation in a hands-on, interactive, and engaging way. This activity not only gives students more insight into how journalism works but also exposes them to the vastness of our modern media ecosystems by encouraging them to think about all the potential stakeholders in a given news scenario.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • •

PREPARATION

• •

Students will be able to do the following: Identify characteristics of misinformation. Discuss and explore the news cycle and information production process. Develop critical-thinking and problemsolving skills.

• • •

COOKING TIME

75 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

Up to 20 students

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This activity draws upon the ACRL Frames of Information Creation as a Process and Scholarship as Communication.

Media scenarios Role-playing cards, either for individuals or small groups depending on your class size See game directions, scenarios, and role-playing cards here: https://bit. ly/2TcVS4m.

•

This activity requires work up-front, but the session itself is largely run by students. You will need to first develop a media scenario to use in the class. You can use suggested scenarios at https://bit. ly/2TcVS4m or develop your own. Try to develop a scenario that involves a number of different “roles.” For instance, you can use a scenario involving a leak which sets off a political scandal. This scenario could involve politicians, media, law enforcement, tech companies, lobbyists, etc. Develop role-playing cards that students will use to learn who they are in the scenario. These cards will guide students and their decisions during the scenario game. Some roles you might consider assigning include the following: ◊ journalists at a reputable outlet, like The Washington Post ◊ journalists at a less-reputable or more 192

•

tabloid-like outlet, like The Daily Mirror ◊ people working for a misinformation site ◊ journalists at an online magazine, like Slate ◊ TV news journalists ◊ journalists at a local news outlet, such as your local newspaper ◊ a politician and their staff ◊ law enforcement officials ◊ lobbyists ◊ tech companies ◊ citizen journalists ◊ individuals on social media ◊ academics Develop a few interventions to toss out during the scenario game. For example, if you go with a scenario involving a hack, you can tell everyone half-way through the game that another dump of hacked documents has occurred online to see how they respond.

COOKING METHOD

1. Divide everyone into groups and give them their roles and introduce the scenario. 2. Explain this will be similar to Model UN, where they will work through a challenging scenario in character, so to speak, as their assigned role. They will need to strategize with their group and then approach other groups to see how to work

Morris

3. 4. 5.

6.

together. For example, a politician in a political scandal scenario might try to set up spots on political talk shows to do damage control. Let students really take the lead with this and see where their ideas take them! Have everyone work through the scenario together. At the end of the session, have the groups reflect on the experience, what they found challenging, what surprised them, and what they learned about how complicated our media ecosystem can be. You can share out a real-world scenario similar to the ones students just worked through to demonstrate what happened, whether or not their responses were close to what actually occurred and to reiterate how complex these situations and our media environment, can be. a. For example, if you run a scenario that involves a hack of political materials, you can share information about the fall-out from media publishing hacked materials or an incident like Buzzfeed’s publishing of the Steele Dossier.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION CHEF’S NOTES

This activity evolved from a game I developed for high school students that used an online quiz format and had student groups pretend to be journalists at a media outlet. The groups had to respond to various situations that journalists encounter, and groups earned points for prestige or money depending on how they responded. You can see the original activity at www.missioninfo.net.

ALLERGY WARNING

Make sure that you go over the directions carefully so that everyone feels confident participating in the scenario. Encourage everyone to have fun and note that this is a thought experiment; there are no right or wrong responses here.

193

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Matson and Shelley

Writing Buffet Joseph Matson, Illinois State University, [email protected]; Anne Shelley, Illinois State University, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

Students identify and articulate differences between three contrasting writing styles, then apply their knowledge in their own brief writing examples. This activity can be used to prepare students for an upcoming writing assignment, such as program notes or a research paper.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

The goal of this activity is for students to recognize different styles of presenting information, including popular versus scholarly style.

COOKING TIME

2. Inform groups that they will each receive a different prompt and that their task is to craft three brief written responses to the prompt in the style of (1) a tweet, (2) an email to a friend from high school, and (3) a scholarly journal article. They have 10 minutes to work. 3. Let them know they will be asked to share what they wrote with the rest of the class. 4. After groups have responded to the prompt in all three styles, ask each group to share what they wrote. Discuss the distinctive stylistic qualities of each style with the class.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

•

•

When you write the prompts, consider making the content relevant to topics you have recently covered in class. (This is what we’ve done with the example prompts in Figure 1.) By doing so, the new activity doubles as an opportunity for review. Depending on the prompts and groups, student responses can be on the silly side. To keep students on track, you might need to remind them of the purpose of the activity (see Chef’s Note). Students might enter the activity believing that one style is “right” and another “wrong,” but the goal of the activity is to

25 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

20 students

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

Topic prompts

PREPARATION

Write enough prompts for your class (one prompt for every two to four students). Print prompts.

COOKING METHOD

1. Organize students into groups of two to four. Make sure at least one student in each group has something to write/type with.

Examples of recommended prompts for graduate students in a music research class: Group 1: Congratulations! You have just discovered the only surviving early printing of PDQ Bach’s Potato Chip Mass. Tell the world about your finding in … (1) a tweet, (2) an email to a friend from high school, and (3) a scholarly journal article. Group 2: Congratulations! You clicked on the uniform title for The Rite of Spring and discovered a recording titled Ritus des Frühlings, an arrangement for a German polka band. Tell the world about your finding in … (1) a tweet, (2) an email to a friend from high school, and (3) a scholarly journal article. Group 3: Congratulations! While flipping through the Grove Dictionary of Musical Instruments, you discover that Robert Moog’s original purpose in inventing the synthesizer was to mimic beagle howls with great accuracy. Tell the world about your finding in … (1) a tweet, (2) an email to a friend from high school, and (3) a scholarly journal article. Group 4: Congratulations! You saw the movie Florence Foster Jenkins and loved it. So, you searched the library catalog for the singer’s autobiography. You loved the book even more than the movie! Tell the world about your finding in … (1) a tweet, (2) an email to a friend from high school, and (3) a scholarly journal article.

• • •

•

194

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Matson and Shelley help students gain a more nuanced view of how to use writing style to convey meaning. In other words, the “right” style might be any of the three used for this activity (or any number of other styles), depending on the author’s intended audience, medium, and purpose.

CHEF’S NOTES

•

•

Students will probably be aware of surface-level elements of each writing style but might need guidance identifying deeper-level elements. For instance, they will probably know that Twitter has strict guidelines for length (280 characters, formerly 140), but they might not realize that email and scholarly articles also have expectations for length. (Which one is a better medium for 30,000 words?) Similarly, they might recognize that tweets and email use specialized vocabulary or abbreviations that might be baffling to novices but are obvious to expert users (RT, yolo, tbt, smh, bff, ttyl); they might, however, be surprised to realize that scholarly sources do the same thing (ibid., op. cit., idem, et al., JAMS). Still another point of comparison involves references. Students might resist the idea that footnotes are important but acknowledge the value of effective hashtags. It might even be worthwhile to discuss in some detail Twitter’s version of metadata (user names, replies, retweets, favorites) as well as something analogous to cross references (hashtags

•

and tagging individual Twitter users). Get students to think about audience and the purpose for each of the three styles in this activity. Be prepared to talk about why these styles are different and how they are used in different situations. Emphasize that each style has its purpose—no one style is better or worse than another—and that by understanding the purpose of each style, they can become better researchers and writers. Some questions to help generate discussion might include the following: If you heard about a controversial performance that took place in 2015, which source would you use to find the artist’s official statement? Which source would you use to find your friend’s personal, private thoughts about the performance? Which source would you use to find a long-form analysis of the controversy, including references to specific authors on all sides of the issue? A good discussion will help them see that each style has its own purpose, and in a given situation, one style/source might be more appropriate to use than another.

195

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Opdahl and Kane

Poached Barrier Reef:

Evaluating Articles on the Web Judy Opdahl, Instruction and Reference Librarian, CSU San Marcos ([email protected]); Denise Kane, Instruction and Reference Librarian, CSU San Marcos ([email protected]) NUTRITION INFORMATION

First-year undergraduate students are novices at consuming web information due to a lack of critical information literacy skills. This recipe is designed to satisfy first-year students’ thirst for knowledge by demonstrating web article evaluation and allowing students to savor the experience of the internet buffet.

web article creators’ expertise and credibility. It demonstrates the Frame of Information Creation as a Process by allowing students to assess the “implications of information formats.” This recipe also demonstrates the Frame of Research as Inquiry by allowing students to analyze and interpret the credibility and usability of web articles.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

COOKING TIME

• • • • •

NUMBER SERVED

•

After this lesson, students will be able to understand the importance of evaluating web information sources and evaluate and select web sources based on evaluation criteria.

• •

Cooking time is 60–75 minutes

Serves a small to large quantity of students with slight modifications to the cooking instructions

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This recipe adheres to several frames within the ACRL Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. The recipe demonstrates the Frame of Authority is Constructed and Contextual by having students assess the

Colored 3×5 index cards for grouping students and final assessment Computer lab (ability to access web articles on the Internet) Student worksheets Instructor worksheet 2 articles for assessment; we chose articles on the Great Barrier Reef. See Additional Resources. 3-2-1 assessment questions

PREPARATION

•

Preheat oven. ◊ Arrange 3×5 index cards so that multiple groups are formed. ◊ Print handouts for class session. ◊ Ensure that the instructor outline and worksheet are ready. ◊ Ensure that computer(s) are ready for the class session. 196

COOKING METHOD

1. Brief introduction (5–10 minutes) a. Students receive a colored index card and worksheet when they enter the lab. b. The librarian provides a brief introduction to evaluating web articles. 2. Students evaluate web articles. a. Article 1 evaluation (10 minutes) „ In pairs, students evaluate the first article and fill out the worksheet while discussing the merits of the web article. b. Article 2 evaluation (10 minutes) „ In pairs, students evaluate the second article and fill out the worksheet while discussing the merits of the web article. c. Worksheet evaluation criteria „ Author(s) expertise: Do they have the “right to write” on the topic? „ Source: What is the mission or purpose of the publication? Why was this source produced? „ What if any evidence or support is provided about the author’s statements? „ What is the main message of the article(s)? „ Emotional appeal: How does this article make you feel? Would you use this article in your paper?

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Opdahl and Kane 3. Students move into larger groups to discuss findings. (10 minutes) a. Students move into color-coded larger groups to collaboratively discuss their findings. 4. Class discussion (10 minutes) a. Students, librarian, and instructor engage in class discussion about how students evaluated the articles. The librarian may need to clarify or correct students’ findings. b. Librarian works through criteria in worksheet through this discussion. c. Librarian may need to use this time to highlight evaluation criteria that students may have overlooked. d. Class discusses which article may be “poached” or which article seems the least credible for use on their assignment. 5. Recap (5 minutes) a. Librarian summarizes the evaluation of web articles and encourages students to seek help on future assignments b. Librarian has students fill out a 3-2-1 assessment on colored index card anonymously: „ 3 tips for identifying appropriate sources „ 2 questions you still have about evaluating sources „ 1 thing that surprised you about today’s session

ALLERGY WARNING

Due to the reliance on the internet for this activity, be prepared in case the internet is

down or the web article in question disappears. Librarians may have to facilitate group discussion among students so that quiet voices are heard as much as dominant voices. The class instructor should help facilitate group challenges.

CHEF’S NOTES

•

This is one of our favorite activities for web article evaluations. It allows the students to actively engage with the article and each other while learning about the purpose, appeal, why or how sources are produced, and the emotional pull behind certain web articles.

197

• • •

This recipe can be altered for various student class levels (freshman, etc.) and class topics (disciplines, etc.) by selecting alternate web articles to evaluate. Additionally, this recipe can be altered to meet specific class learning outcomes, such as a specific assignment or research project. Joanna Kimmitt, user services coordinator, CSU Dominguez Hills, assisted in the initial planning for this recipe.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

For activity tools and suggested resources, see: http://bit.ly/PoachedBarrierReefRecipe.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Heidecker and Metz

Using Wikipedia to Critically Evaluate Information Kathleen Heidecker, Librarian at HACC, Central Pennsylvania’s Community College, [email protected]; Andrea Metz, Adjunct Librarian at HACC, Central Pennsylvania’s Community College, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

Students are told throughout their academic careers that they are not permitted to use Wikipedia as a source in their research. But do they understand the objections and reasoning behind this prohibition? As academic librarians, our job has evolved beyond helping connect students with appropriate scholarly resources to include encouraging students to evaluate all of the information sources they find and enabling them to sort the wheat from the chaff. We created a class activity that not only allows students to use Wikipedia but has them compare the content in a Wikipedia article with another source of known and approved quality. We hoped to get students thinking about where the information in Wikipedia comes from by looking at the various elements of a Wikipedia page, including the list of references and edit/talk history. This lesson also works for classes that ask for library instruction but have no assignment or particular requests, usually introductory or developmental-level classes. Our goal was to have the students evaluate a topic about which they are already familiar but perhaps have some gaps concerning specific facts or details.

Since we are a community college campus located in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, we decided to use Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address as our topic.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

Students will be able to locate, integrate, and evaluate appropriate sources for a given research task. Students will leave the classroom with a better understanding of the value of Wikipedia and how to use the information found therein.

COOKING TIME

Cooking time is 50–75 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

This activity can be modified to serve between 6–20 students.

DIETARY STANDARDS

• • •

Authority is Constructed and Contextual Information Creation as a Process Scholarship as Conversation

COOKING TECHNIQUE

Jigsaw activity with small group work followed by group discussion

198

INGREDIENTS AN EQUIPMENT

• • • • • •

Computer with internet access for each group Instructor computer with projector Worksheet for each student in the class Whiteboard or large flipcharts to write notes Stephen Colbert video about “Wikiality” Snopes article about “Student Bloopers”

PREPARATION

Select some reliable web sources for the selected topic. Prepare the lab by pulling up the Colbert video, the Snopes article, and the comparison websites to be used on the instructor computer. Have a copy of the handout for each student in the class.

COOKING METHOD

1. Ask students how many of them have previously been told they are not allowed to use Wikipedia as a source and what reason(s) they were given. 2. Ask students how many of them actually use Wikipedia for course work or for personal use/research. 3. Show the Colbert video about “Wikiality.” 4. Explain that we are going to be discussing the topic of the Gettysburg Address. Ask students what we already know about this topic and write down their comments on the whiteboard.

Heidecker and Metz 5. Review the Snopes article about “student bloopers,” focusing on the section about the Civil War and Gettysburg Address. What do we not know about it or what details are we unsure of? 6. Do an internet search for “Gettysburg Address.” The Wikipedia entry should be the first thing that comes up. Discuss

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION the elements of a Wikipedia article: blue links to other Wikipedia articles, citations (including those still needed), History, and Talk sections. 7. Divide students up into 3 groups, asking each group to look at one of the credible sources about the Gettysburg Address: Encyclopedia Britannica, History Chan-

nel, and Library of Congress. Pass out the worksheets and ask each group to answer the questions comparing their source with the Wikipedia page. Give them some time to work and discuss in their groups. 8. Come back together as a class to discuss and analyze their sources, allowing time for questions and comments.

ALLERGY WARNING

YOUR SOURCE NAME: Can you find information about the company or organization that published it? What does the domain name stand for? Does the site have any advertising? Do you recognize the advertisements? What is the date of the article/site?

Carefully consider the topic you select. Connecting to a local event is a significant component of the activity. You want to choose something that prompts easy recognition but still excites interest. Controversial topics may add spice, but be prepared!

CHEF’S NOTES

Is the information impartial, or does the site try to persuade the reader in a certain direction? How can you tell? Can you find any references or sources of information about this topic? Find an About Us page for your source. See what information you can find about the author(s). This website has information about the Gettysburg Address. Compare the information on this site with the Wikipedia entry on the Gettysburg Address. Can you find consistent, or the same, information about this topic from both sites? Which source do you feel is more credible—your source or Wikipedia? Why? How could you use your source when doing research about the topic of the Gettysburg Address? How could you use Wikipedia when doing research about the topic of the Gettysburg Address? 199

When we began planning this activity, we agreed that investigating the Gettysburg Address would be familiar and easily generate comments. For a number of reasons, this was not completely true. Some students were not from Pennsylvania and some did not remember the level of detail we had expected. The librarian should be prepared with “some things we know” to share. Note from Andrea: “After presenting this lesson for the first time, I actually had a student seek me out after class to thank me for providing a ‘fun and interesting’ library activity. He said he usually found this kind of session to be boring or confusing, but this was the first time he actually really enjoyed himself during library instruction.”

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

The Colbert Report. “Wikiality.” Comedy Central (July 31, 2006). http://www.cc.com/ video-clips/z1aahs/the-colbert-reportthe-word---wikiality. Gettysburg Address. Encyclopedia Britannica. Last modified 2018. https://www.britannica. com/event/Gettysburg-Address. Gettysburg Address. Wikipedia. Last modified April 23, 2018. https://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Gettysburg_Address. The Gettysburg Address. History. Last modified 2018. https://www.history.com/topics/ american-civil-war/gettysburg-address. Primary Documents in American History: Gettysburg Address. Library of Congress Research Guides. Last modified October 26, 2017. https://www.loc.gov/rr/ program/bib/ourdocs/gettysburg.html. Student Bloopers: List of Student Bloopers. Snopes. Last modified January 30, 2009. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ student-bloopers/.

200

Heidecker and Metz

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Garczynski

Asking Questions Quesadillas Joyce Garczynski, Towson University, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

Students often come to research with common misconceptions like, “.com websites are bad sources while .org or .gov are good sources” and “Scholarly articles are always the best sources to use.” This session dispels those myths in an engaging way.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• •

Students will be able to describe which search strategies will yield credible results that meet their information needs. Students will be able to research by asking questions.

• •

PREPARATION

• •

COOKING TIME

60 to 75 minutes

COOKING TECHNIQUE

A short background lecture followed by a small group exercise and then a pair exercise

•

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• •

• •

An instructor station with a computer and a projector Each student will need a personal device (computer, iPad, or larger smartphone can work) with internet access. Access to a search engine such as Google Access to a federated search product (or a scholarly article database can work in a pinch)

Two Google forms that students can use to complete the exercises (substitute paper handouts if Google Forms are unavailable) A sample research topic (see Preparation for details)

•

A day or so before the session, select the sample topic. The librarian should select one that involves finding and presenting statistics. A topic that has worked well is texting and driving. Next, the librarian will develop a question related to that topic, preferably one involving statistics related to the topic. For the texting and driving topic, the question “What percent of teens text and drive?” works well. Then the librarian needs to create three search strategies to find the answer to that question. One can be typing the exact question into Google. A second can be searching for the question’s keywords in Google. A third can be using those same keywords and Boolean operators in a federated search or scholarly article database. The librarian also wants to prepare two Google forms ahead of time. (See the Cooking Method for information about what to include in the forms.)

201

COOKING METHOD

Introduction (10 minutes) 1. Start with a base layer of explaining the idea of research by asking questions. One way to do this is to start with a video clip of someone being interviewed where that person gives a flustered and seemingly nonsensical answer to a question. (Beauty pageants and late-night television programs are good places to locate these clips.) 2. Then the librarian can follow-up with a mention of how the interviewee was probably not anticipating the question and that students can avoid similar awkwardness by anticipating the questions their audiences have about their topics, researching the answers to those questions, and incorporating the answers back into their projects. 3. Next, the librarian introduces the sample topic and the question that students will be researching in the first exercise. Exercise 1 (30 minutes) 1. Students should be divided into groups of three. Each person in each group will be given a different one of the three search strategies the librarian prepared. Each student will individually test the given strategy and answer questions on the first Google form such as, “Did you find the answer to the question from a credible source?”

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION 2. Then the three members in each group will discuss which of the three search methods was the best strategy for answering the question. 3. Finally, the librarian will spend 15 minutes reviewing each of the three strategies by asking students what they found and how they determined what results were credible. This is a delectable opportunity for the librarian to (1) identify those features, such as citations and authorship, that make a source more credible and (2) encourage students to see that the best search strategy to use depends on what information the student needs.

CHEF’S NOTE

If time allows, the librarian may want to garnish the session by asking students what they learned. Typically, novice researchers will mention the search tools and techniques demonstrated in the session, but more seasoned researchers will talk about how their previously learned credibility shortcuts are too simplistic.

Exercise 2 (25 minutes) 1. Divide students into pairs. Then have them apply the technique of researching through answering questions to their own research topics. If students don’t have topics, ask them to do this for topics they would like to research. The students should share their topics with one another, ask each other what questions they have about their topics, and then try to find credible sources that answer their partners’ questions. 2. Students can then record their topics, the questions their partners asked, and the credible resources they found to answer those questions in a second Google form. This exercise provides plenty of leftovers, too. 3. After the session, the librarian can share the Google Form results with the class so that students can use what they found in their assignments. 202

Garczynski

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Lang

Mixing Up a Balanced Research Plan: One Part Google to Two Parts Deep Web

Robin D. Lang, Instructional Services Librarian, Point Loma Nazarene University, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

Like the lack of nutritional value in iceberg lettuce, limiting research to Google yields anemic results. With this lesson plan, freshman students will use critical-thinking skills to navigate Google’s search algorithm. They will go beyond Google and use Google Scholar in conjunction with library databases to mine the deep web for high-quality sources. Many students are not aware that Google searches only access the surface web—the tip of the information iceberg. Google Scholar is a portal into the deep web and library databases that displays sources that are trapped behind paywalls and passwords. Introducing library databases as part of the deep web gives databases an edginess and encourages further exploration.

LEARNING OUTCOME

Students will be able to match information needs and search strategies to appropriate search tools.

COOKING TIME

Cooking time for this recipe is 90 minutes. (Optional: The session can be split into two 45-minute sessions.)

NUMBER SERVED

20 to 30 students

DIETARY GUIDELINES

ACRL Frames: Information Has Value Searching as Strategic Exploration

• •

COOKING TECHNIQUE

Class discussion, mini-demonstrations, and hands-on practice

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • •

Computer lab Instructor’s station Whiteboard

PREPARATION

This activity works well when taught in conjunction with a class research assignment. Ask the professor about students’ topics. Have a couple of example searches ready that work well with the database you will use. When possible, it is best to use students’ topics as research examples.

COOKING METHOD

1. Welcome students and introduce yourself and the session’s learning outcome. (5 minutes) 203

2. The internet iceberg (20 minutes) a. Draw a silhouette of an iceberg on the whiteboard with a waterline toward the very top. b. Ask students what they know about the deep web. This always piques their interest because many students automatically think of the “dark web,” which is a small portion of the massive deep web. Engaging students in a conversation about sources on the dark web (pirated movies, black markets, pornography, etc.) will snap to attention the most reluctant students. c. Toward the bottom of the iceberg, write example dark web sources; circle these so it is obvious they are a subset of the deep web.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION d. The deep web is comprised of encrypted and password-protected content that cannot be found by search engines. Ask students for examples (bank accounts, private blogs, etc.) and write those on the iceberg below the waterline. e. If not already included, write “library databases” in the deep web portion of the iceberg. f. Write “Google” at the very top of the iceberg above the waterline. 3. Library databases (20 minutes) a. Demonstrate searching a library database. Discuss with students how evaluating a source for quality requires thinking critically about who created it and why. b. Discuss the peer-review process and the scholarly publication model, with a quick overview of the open access movement and publishing monopolies, such as Elsevier and subsequent notable boycotts. This is a logical segue into discussing why library databases require university affiliation—a privilege—to access. c. Ask students to email to themselves two peer-reviewed articles. 4. Google search (20 minutes) a. Ask students to use the same keywords in a Google search. b. Asks students what they know about how Google’s search algorithm ranks web pages. Discuss how bots retrieve websites; mobile-friendly sites and sites with the most links to and from it, such as Wikipedia, are favored. Google guesses what a user wants

to see by pulling in results based on a user’s previous searches, location, gender, age, etc. Discuss how this perpetuates the echo chamber. c. Discuss indicators of website quality and trustworthiness, such as timeliness, author expertise, and identity of a website’s publisher or sponsor. d. Ask students to find two quality websites on their topics. 5. Google Scholar (20 minutes) a. Demonstrate how Google Scholar interfaces with library databases if the search is done while on campus. (Some university libraries have set up a way for students to turn on a campus affiliation for searching Google Scholar while off campus.) Show students that a PDF symbol to the right of an article in the results list usually means the article is available in full text either as open access or through a library database. b. Show an example of hitting a paywall and how to find an article in library databases that is not available in full text through Google Scholar. c. Demonstrate how to use interlibrary loan. 6. Wrapping up (5 minutes) a. Ask students to share questions, comments, or concerns they still have.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

•

Many students are overconfident in their Google-searching abilities. This lesson is a good opportunity to realign students’ assumptions about their online search204

Lang

•

ing skills with their real knowledge and abilities. Some students may have already had a library instruction session that covered similar content. Call on these students to help explain how to search in library databases.

CHEF’S NOTE

•

•

Students will leave the research session confident in their new healthy research habits. Not only will students understand the limits of using Google, but they will also earn a greater understanding and respect for sources available on the deep web, including library databases. Students who are initially reluctant to go beyond Google and put effort into searching a library database will come away from this session with intrinsic motivation to take their research a step further. When students learn that searching a library database is searching the deep web, they are often impressed and have made comments such as “I feel like a secret agent!” and “I feel like James Bond!” It may take a bit more planning and effort to search the deep web, but a well-balanced research plan targeting high-quality sources is well worth it.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Lott

Hot Twitter Tips:

Recipe for Social Media Success Haley L. Lott, Student Success and Engagement Librarian, Beloit University NUTRITION INFORMATION

We know that we can’t trust everything we read on the internet, but how do we know what’s real and what’s fake online? In 2017, the Pew Research Center conducted a survey on news use across social media and found that 67 percent of people got at least some of their news on social media (Shearer and Gottfried 2017). With so many people relying on these resources, it is critical that we share strategies to distinguish fact from fiction and protect our students from the dangers of misinformation. This recipe involves two parts. Part 1 shows students how easy it is to make a fake tweet. This activity is designed to show students how easy it is to falsify information so that they can better understand why it is so important to critically evaluate social media posts before sharing. Part 2 shows students how to identify fake tweets using Twitter’s Advanced Search feature.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

By the end of this lesson, students will be able to define false information; understand how false information is made and disseminated;

• •

• •

critically evaluate posts on social media; and identify fake tweets using the advanced search function on Twitter.

COOKING TIME

Cooking time is anywhere between 50–75 minutes.

NUMBER SERVED

This recipe can stretch to serve the entire crowd.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

• • •

Authority is Constructed and Contextual Information Creation as Process Information Has Value

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

•

•

Handouts (Fake Tweet Pre-Test, Advanced Search Activity Instructions, and Worksheet) ◊ Access available at https://www. dropbox.com/sh/sqdin3wxxyx810c/ AACYazRdrOovqLt0u7sS-Zgka?dl=0. Computer with internet access for each student

PREPARATION

Before the instruction session, look through the internet for examples of fake Tweets. I 205

recommend image searching “fake celebrity tweets” or browsing the Snopes Fake Tweets archives. Use your favorite fake Tweets and mix in some examples of real Tweets to create the Fake Tweet Pre-Test. You can also access all of the materials, including the Fake Tweet Pre-Test, the Advanced Search Activity Instructions, and the accompanying worksheet at the URL listed in Ingredients and Equipment.

COOKING METHOD

Introduction (5–10 minutes) 1. Briefly introduce the concept of false information. Ask students if they have ever encountered false information? What did it look like? Where did it originate? Part 1: Generating Fake Tweets (15–20 minutes) 1. Fake Tweet Pre-Test a. Let students test their Twitter evaluation skills by having them take the Fake Tweet pre-test. This test asks students to look at a list of Tweets and determine whether or not they are real. b. Discuss the answers. Ask students if they see a difference between examples of real tweets and the fake tweets. If anyone got an answer

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION wrong, have them explain why they thought a tweet was real or fake. 2. Making a fake Tweet a. Before you begin the activity, briefly explain why misinformation is harmful to our society. b. Ask students to search “fake Tweet generator” on their favorite search engine. Have them pick one, explore, and create a fake Tweet. i. It may be helpful to provide them with a profile image, a user name, and a handle to use. c. Discuss this activity. Everyone on the internet has access to these fake Tweet generators. What do students think about this? How might this affect the way that they use Twitter? If they are active on Twitter, will they be more critical of Tweets before they like and retweet them in the future? Part 2: Identifying Fake Tweets (15–20 minutes) 1. Using the Tweets from the pre-test, have students perform an Advanced Twitter Search by following the provided instructions. Students can fill out the worksheet as they go along. 2. Discuss the results. Were students able to find the exact Tweets using the advanced search? If the Tweets did not show up, is this because they were fake? What happens if a Tweet is deleted by the user?

ALLERGY WARNINGS

• •

The intention of creating a fake Tweet is to demonstrate to students how easy it is for anyone to manipulate and disseminate information. This is strictly for learning purposes. Some students might not have a personal Twitter account, but they can still participate in this activity. They can browse by searching for specific accounts without registering as a user.

CHEF’S NOTE

• •

This activity can work in groups. The internet generates more and more fake Tweets every day. Keep this activity fresh and current by rotating out your older example Tweets. Bonus points are awarded for using examples from popular celebrities!

NOTES

Shearer, Elisa and Jeffrey Gottfried. News Use Across Social Media Platforms 2017: Pew Research Center, 2017.

Wrap-up: (5–10 minutes) 1. End the session by answering student questions and discussing the overall activity. 206

Lott

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Doloresco, Langridge, and Hajrullahu

Repost This, Not That!

Evaluating News Beyond the Headline Bridget Doloresco, State University of New York at Erie Community College; Melissa Langridge, Niagara University; Lirim Hajrullahu, Niagara University NUTRITION INFORMATION

Consumption of news via social media has made evaluation of sources an even more crucial component in information literacy instruction. Often times, consumers do not go beyond the headline and misinformation is shared. This group activity asks students to read and critically evaluate news sources for credibility prior to reposting online.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to evaluate information sources effectively and apply critical-thinking skills to the information vetting process.

• •

COOKING TIME

Approximately 50 minutes.

NUMBER SERVED

This activity would work with a class of any size.

DIETARY GUIDELINES

Frame: Authority Is Constructed and Contextual Knowledge practices: Understand that many disciplines have acknowledged authorities in the sense

•

•

of well-known scholars and publications that are widely considered “standard,” and yet, even in those situations, some scholars would challenge the authority of those sources. Recognize that authoritative content may be packaged formally or informally and may include sources of all media types.

Dispositions: Motivate themselves to find authoritative sources, recognizing that authority may be conferred or manifested in unexpected ways. Develop awareness of the importance of assessing content with a skeptical stance and with a self-awareness of their own biases and worldview.

• •

Frame: Information Has Value Knowledge practices: Decide where and how their information is published. Understand how the commodification of their personal information and online interactions affects the information they receive and the information they produce or disseminate online. Understand how and why some individuals or groups of individuals may be underrepresented or systematically

• • •

207

marginalized within the systems that produce and disseminate information. Dispositions: See themselves as contributors to the information marketplace rather than only consumers of it.

•

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • • • •

Laminated articles Fine point blue dry-erase markers Cloth and dry-erase spray to clean articles after use Presentation CRAAP handout

PREPARATION

•

• •

Find one fake and three factual news articles. It will take time to find appropriate, recent articles that aren’t overtly political. Consider using weird news stories as students naturally do not consider them to be real. Create a presentation to include statistics and recent news stories that have had misleading headlines to prime students about the importance of the day’s lesson. Potential questions to ask in the presentation: ◊ Have you ever shared an article on social media without reading it first?

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

•

◊ What formats do we see fake news and misinformation in? ◊ What are the potential consequences when misinformation goes viral? ◊ Who is responsible for making sure you aren’t fooled by misinformation? Introduce fact-checking tools as an alternative to further investigate questionable sources. Examples of tools include Snopes, AllSides, FactCheck, Hoax-Slayer, and PolitiFact.

COOKING METHOD

1. Provide direct instruction to students on the fake news epidemic using the presentation created. 2. Have class break into small groups of four students. 3. Give students the CRAAP handout and review criteria for evaluating. Model one example to set expectations. Find one internet news example and demonstrate the application of the CRAAP test. 4. Each group is given the same four articles (one fake and three factual). Direct each person in the group to read and review one article and apply the CRAAP method to determine if it’s the truth. Instruct students to use the whiteboard markers to highlight evidence of the CRAAP test on each article that helped them to determine credibility. 5. Return to groups to discuss individual results to determine which of the articles is factual. Students should add a blue checkmark (similar to that of a popular social media site) on the real articles to indicate

they are ready to repost online. 6. Class reconvenes for whole-class discussion. Ask each group to hold up their selection for the fake article. This will allow for observational assessment. Have students explain their responses.

ALLERGY WARNINGS

• •

To keep the lesson fun and enjoyable, select brief news articles so that students have enough time to read, evaluate, and discuss while keeping the momentum going. Print articles in HTML to eliminate obvious clues of legitimacy.

CHEF’S NOTE

•

This activity does not place emphasis on the term fake news. It considers the issue while focusing on relatable social media concerns as this is how many students tend to consume the news. During the presentation, they will freely admit that they often don’t go beyond the headline. Students are actively engaged by highlighting what they question in the articles and group discussion of sources.

CLEAN UP

•

Collect laminated articles and examine markups at the end of the session. Document accuracy of students’ application of the CRAAP test. Note any identifying clues that markups were altered after discussion. This will provide evidence of confusion and the need for further instruction. 208

Doloresco, Langridge, and Hajrullahu

•

Write a reflection of what did and did not work so that the lesson can be revised for the next use.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Gould

How Social Media Shapes “News”: Thinking Critically about Sources

Michalle Gould, Assistant Librarian, Laguna College of Art + Design, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

Students are exposed to information about current events in a far more piecemeal fashion since the advent of the internet and the explosion of social media. Instead of subscribing to a newspaper or watching a nightly news broadcast, they often encounter the news in real time through links on Twitter, a Facebook status update, or push notifications on their cell phone. This lesson asks students to consider not only how their use of social media influences the way they consume the news but also how social media is shaping the actual creation and content of the news itself.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

• • • •

Examines and compares information from various sources in order to evaluate reliability, validity, accuracy, authority, timeliness, and point of view or bias Recognizes prejudice, deception, or manipulation Recognizes the cultural, physical, or other context within which the information was created and understands the impact of context on interpreting the information Determines probable accuracy by questioning the source of the data, the limitations of the information gathering tools

or strategies, and the reasonableness of the conclusions

COOKING TIME

Cooking time is approximately 50 to 75 minutes

NUMBERS SERVED

Serves undergraduates in classes of 15–30

DIETARY GUIDELINES

• •

Authority is Constructed and Contextual Information Creation is a Process

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • •

Internet access Instructor computer with projector Laptop/iPad/desktop computer for each student

COOKING TECHNIQUE

• • •

Active learning discussion Small-group activity Small-group presentation

COOKING METHOD

1. Open the session with a discussion of how students access the news. How do they find out what is going on in the world? In particular, discuss the difference between 209

“push” versus “pull” technologies—i.e., they are “pushed” to access the news through notifications or emails or links that are posted on social media versus more traditional forms of “pull” access, meaning they go and seek out the news themselves by visiting a news website like CNN or The New York Times homepage or even subscribing to a newspaper. 2. Discuss the factors that influence their decisions about whether or not to interact with a particular news item or news source. What makes them click on a link in a friend’s Facebook post? How do they decide what websites to check? For those that still access print sources or watch a nightly newscast, what motivates them to do that? 3. Next, have students look at the current “news” section in Twitter’s “Moments” feed and discuss what stories most interest them based on their headline and capsule summary. Students should then compare this to the homepage of a more conventional news source like CNN and discuss whether there is a substantive difference between the types of stories that are being emphasized through Twitter versus on CNN. Finally, look at the website of a national newspaper like The New York Times or The Wall Street Journal. What, if

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION any, differences do they see in the kind of content they are being exposed to there versus on Twitter or CNN? 4. In small groups, ask students to locate an article on one of the more traditional news websites that incorporates Tweets in the body of the article. (Come prepared with a few example handouts or links yourself in case they have trouble with this.) They should look for an article that also incorporates straightforward quotations for comparison. 5. Next, students should find the Twitter timeline of the individuals/organizations whose tweets are being quoted and locate the tweets in their original context (or determine that they no longer exist and have been deleted). Have them discuss how the additional information available about the Tweet—the Tweeter’s bio, the Tweeter’s overall timeline, and how the “Retweet” and “Like” count for the Tweet—shapes their evaluation of it when compared to a more traditional quotation. Do they find this additional information useful or distracting? Is it something they would evaluate when reading on their own or are they only doing it now because it is part of the class activity? 6. As a class, have each group briefly present their article, explaining what it was about and how they felt about the article’s use of Tweets to illustrate its subject. Have students answer the following questions: Were the Tweets useful? Did they further add value to the article? Or did the article feel overly dependent

• • •

on the Tweets? Did they feel able to evaluate the credibility of the Tweets? How did their analysis of the Tweets compare to their analysis of the more traditional quotations in the article? Does it make a difference whether the Tweet is coming from a well-known political figure or organization versus an “ordinary person?” 7. Finally, discuss whether the class members feel that the practice of embedding Tweets into news article should be encouraged or discouraged and whether there are any criteria that they would suggest that journalists take into account when deciding whether to incorporate a Tweet into an article.

• • •

ALLERGY WARNINGS

•

• • •

Make sure that students stay on task once they are split up into small groups. If your class has been prone to distraction in the past, it may be a good idea to choose the groups yourself and ensure that there is a natural “leader” in each one. Give them written instructions and project the questions for each segment of the workshop from the instructor’s computer onto a screen to ensure that students don’t stray off-topic. Provide a five-minute and two-minute warning to remind the groups to wrap things up. If you have less time available, do the more directed version of the small group 210

Gould activity, providing articles to the students instead of having them look for the articles themselves, or even working together as a class instead of splitting off into groups.

CHEF’S NOTE

If you have extra time, find an example of a Tweet originating a video clip or image that has gone viral. Show students the interactions in the replies to the Tweet between the person who took the video/image and journalists and news agencies requesting to use that video/image in their news stories. Similarly, you might look at Tweets from individuals affected by breaking news events and the replies to their Tweets by journalists seeking information. This will help students continue to develop their understanding of how profoundly social media is shaping even the news that we consume through more traditional sources.

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Isuster

Make Your Own Mix:

Using Social Media Stories to Explore Primary Sources Marcela Isuster, McGill University NUTRITION INFORMATION

Social media stories are extremely popular among teenagers and young adults. What began with Snapchat has now turned into a fashionable, easy, and effective way to communicate. Social media stories add a new dimension to storytelling by combining many of the elements of broadcasting with the interactivity of social media. They are also easy and inexpensive to create. Social media stories present great opportunities for working with primary sources. By using different types of sources to create and interact with stories, students can exercise their information literacy and critical-thinking skills. It encourages them to rethink how a source may be portrayed and interpreted and what other messages it may convey with the help of text, gifs, emoji, filters, etc. Social media stories can also be a powerful way of developing both narrative and digital literacy. They give students ownership over their library collections as they allow them to curate collections in ways that speak to their own values and priorities.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

This activity gives students the opportunity

to familiarize themselves with primary sources as a concept and as an available source of information in their libraries’ collection. More importantly, it encourages them to think critically about authority, source reliability, bias, and new ways of disseminating information.

COOKING TIME

45 to 75 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

4–40 students in a classroom setting. (Note: No limit if done outside of the classroom. See Chef’s Note.)

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This activity addresses two of the Frames in the ACRL Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education: Authority is Constructed and Contextual Information Creation as a Process

• •

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • • •

1 smartphone per group 1 Instagram/Snapchat/Facebook account per group Wi-Fi A collection of primary sources in different formats (texts, objects, images, etc.) on a particular topic (5 sources every 10 students) 211

• •

Factsheets about each source, including author/creator, date, and provenance Projector and screen to show the stories

PREPARATION

A few days before the workshop: Ask students to bring a smartphone (if they own one) and to download either Snapchat or Instagram. Create class accounts for both platforms and share the details with the students. Come up with a class hashtag. Choose your sources and create factsheets for them. On the day of the workshop: Arrange your sources and their corresponding factsheets in different stations around the classroom. If the room does not allow for that, you can place them around a table.

• • • • •

COOKING METHOD

1. Ask students to form groups of 2–4 people, ensuring that there is at least one smartphone per group. 2. Introduce the assignment, including some background information about primary sources in general and the overarching theme of the sources chosen. 3. Give students 10–20 minutes to interact with the different sources. Ask them to

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

4. 5. 6. 7.

consider the following questions (students are encouraged to use a computer or their smartphone to gather more information): a. What do you notice first? b. What story is this source telling? Can you corroborate it? c. Whose story is this source telling? What does it say about them? d. Who created it? What does that tell you about this source? e. Who was it created for? What does that tell you about this source? f. Why do you think this item is in our collection? g. What questions do you have for this source? Give students 10–20 minutes to plan their stories, including shots, text, emojis, etc. Give students 10–20 minutes to shoot and upload their shots (making sure they include the class hashtag). Have students share their stories with you via email or social media. Show the stories and ask students to explain their choices.

ALLERGY WARNING

Not every student will have a smartphone. For that reason, this activity is better suited for groups. Similarly, there should be available Wi-Fi in the classroom and surrounding areas as to not strain the students’ data plan. Mature students may not be as familiar with social media stories.

• •

promotional activity outside of the classroom. Because of the visual nature of the activity, choose primary sources that are visually interesting. Keep in mind that primary sources do not need to be only things on paper. Feel free to use speech databases to offer speeches that can be reenacted by students, artifacts that can be manipulated, etc.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

•

•

For more information on using social media stories in the classroom and a quick guide the software: https:// www.slideshare.net/infolit_group/ storiestelling-harnessing-the-powerof-social-media-stories-for-teachinglearning-and-outreach-isuster. ACRL Guidelines for Primary Source Literacy: http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ ala.org.acrl/files/content/standards/ Primary%20Source%20Literacy2018.pdf.

NOTES

Weilenmann, Alexandra, Thomas Hillman, and Beata Jungselius. “Instagram at the Museum: Communicating the Museum Experience through Social Photo Sharing.” In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI ’13, 1843. Paris, France: ACM Press, 2013. https://doi. org/10.1145/2470654.2466243.

CHEF’S NOTES

•

This activity works without a research assignment and can even work as a 212

Isuster

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Hutte

Scholarly Journal Evaluation Activity: A Health Sciences Spin-Off Carol Hutte, Chaffey College LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students demonstrate the ability to critically evaluate information and its sources.

COOKING TIME

50 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

Up to 40 students

DIETARY GUIDELINES

Authority is Constructed and Contextual

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• • • • •

Worksheet for each student group Handouts for each student Copies of 2–3 sample articles, one article to each student group Instructor terminal with web access and projector Document camera (optional)

NUTRITION INFORMATION

This activity is based on the Scholarly Journal Evaluation workshop offered at Chaffey College through the Language Success Center. It originated in conversations with Health Science faculty to promote the workshop to their students. Instead, the idea emerged to offer it directly as part of a library orientation

Scholarly Journal Evaluation Worksheet Name:_________________________________ Student ID#:_____________________ Class Name & Section#:_____________________________ Today’s Date:_____________________ Article Title: _____________________________________________________________________________ Author(s): _______________________________________________________________________________ Title of the Journal/Publisher:________________________________________________________________ Article Publication Date: _________________________________

Information to Evaluate:

Circle One:

Currency:​​ Is the information current and up to date?

Yes No Maybe

Reference Sources: ​Does the article list references and/or sources, that tell you where the facts, quotes, or statistics came from?

Yes No Maybe

Publication: ​Is it a ​Scholarly Journal ​article?

Yes No Maybe

Bias: ​Is the article ​biased​​? Does the author(s) or publication have a specific opinion on the topic?

Yes No Maybe

Bias: ​Does it appear that there is any ​financial gain​​ for the author(s), publisher, or corporate sponsor?

Yes No Maybe

Would you use this article as a ​Scholarly Journal source​​ if you were researching this topic?

Yes No Maybe

Notes:

What is one thing you learned today in this session?

How would you rate this activity 1-5 (with 5 being the highest rating)

213

1

2

3

4

5

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION to specific courses, using articles on topics related to the discipline. The activity and integrated lecture/discussion focus on showcasing strategies to the students for quickly analyzing select sections of potential resources to assess for credibility and relevance to upcoming research assignment(s).

PREPARATION

A collection of 2–3 articles were selected from library databases pertaining to the discipline area (nursing/radiologic technology) of the class for students to assess for credibility. Select one article from a core practitioner journal in a discipline and other article(s) with potential deficits in regard to currency/credibility and/or are not a peer-reviewed source. Make sufficient paper copies of article collections to provide one to each student pair.

COOKING METHOD

1. Begin with a short overview of the anatomy of a scholarly journal article with focus on possible locations of more information about author(s) and source, such as the footer of the first page, acknowledgments, conflict of interest statements, etc. Cover sections that are typical for an article presenting original research (such as a literature review, methodology, results, and reference sources). Use an actual article as example via document camera or projector as a visual aid. 2. Have students then break into groups of 2–3 and hand out worksheets. Give each

group article collections to assess as well as a “take away” sheet that describes characteristics to consider when assessing credibility. 3. Instruct the groups to work together to fill out their worksheet sections. The first part of the worksheet involves identifying key pieces needed for citation. The second part addresses specific characteristics used to ultimately assess for reliability: currency, reference sources used, publication/serial source authority, author(s) authority, and bias/financial gain. The last question asks the groups to indicate yes/no/maybe as to whether they would ultimately use the article as a research resource. 4. After groups complete their worksheets, lead a class discussion about each of the assessment questions in relation to each of the articles, using pertinent sections of the articles as needed, either via computer or document camera.

Hutte ence on the issue at hand. In both sessions, when asked, we also encouraged students to search out more information on the author, the author’s degree, and/or the source to help answer some of the questions.

CHEF’S NOTES

•

•

ALLERGY WARNINGS

Give 5- and 2-minute warnings as to when wrapping up and coming back together to assist students in managing time. Be on the lookout for groups that might be stuck on a particular section, such as locating the source/serial title information. Encourage students to ask questions for clarification from either the librarian or instructor, as if this was in a workplace or clinical setting, where they would be working in a team environment and they would be asking for clarification with someone with more background or experi214

•

Upon the advice from a Success Center colleague, and to help better focus the class-wide discussion, the number of articles was deliberately limited to 2–3, instead of having a unique article for each student group, as was the case when held this as a workshop. Proposed articles for the activity were run by the classroom instructor prior to meeting and, in both cases, they gave useful suggestions for choices that more closely aligned with issues relating to upcoming assignments. Encouraging students to perform quick searches when they felt they needed more information to make a determination about reliability of a source, publisher, etc. turned out to be a very successful and empowering strategy for the students. For instance, in the nursing class, one set of students was concerned because they did not recognize either the source or publisher. After Googling it, they discovered that name listed in the footer of the article was the parent company of a major publisher in the allied health sciences field, thereby increasing their trust in the information source. In the first iteration of the activity, the instructor and librarian also included a

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Hutte

• •

•

discussion of how to assess an article for relevance as part of the final discussion. The students in the class had an upcoming assignment requiring them to locate an original research article on a non-medical nursing intervention and its benefit for patients. We stressed the importance of reading through the abstract to assess for relevancy, then checking for a methodology and results section to see if the article was indeed an example of primary research. As to locating potential articles to use, our business databases turned out to be a good source for trade/industry serials that were more questionable in terms of credibility. Both of the classes in question were composed of students at the more experienced end of the community college spectrum. The first class was made up of fourth-semester nursing students who would be receiving their associate’s degree at the end of the term, and the second consisted of firstyear radiologic technology students. Consequently, the articles chosen were deliberately not as clear-cut as articles used in the original workshop iteration of this activity. The completed worksheets were collected at the end of each session. Library staff entered data into a Google Form for analysis and scoring by library faculty. Student ID information was also included on the sheets in hopes that our Institu-

tional Research department would in future be able to analyze for demographic data and success indicators.

215

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Morris

Media Manipulation Sarah E. Morris, Head of Instruction, Emory University Libraries, [email protected] NUTRITION INFORMATION

Most of us have heard about misinformation and how it is a problem. But what exactly is misinformation and, perhaps just as crucially, how is it produced and why is it often so effective? In this activity, you will introduce to students to misinformation through a backward design approach. Students will explore how misinformation is produced and how it can be so effective and damaging by producing misinformation themselves and then voting on the emotional impact of the misinformation examples created by their peers. By working through the process of creating misinformation and critically analyzing the emotional impact misinformation can have as well as the manipulative rhetorical strategies it can employ, students will be able to better recognize how this content is produced, what types of problems this content can pose, and how they can better recognize and combat misinformation in their daily lives.

• •

COOKING TIME

75 minutes

NUMBER SERVED

Anywhere up to about 30 students

DIETARY GUIDELINES

This activity uses concepts from the ACRL Framework, such as metacognition, and focuses on the frame Authority is Constructed and Contextual. This activity also draws on research into information disorder (see Additional Resources) as well as the discipline of rhetoric.

INGREDIENTS AND EQUIPMENT

• •

Computers, at least one per student group of 3–4 students Projector

Worksheets Emoji emotion flashcards ◊ For sample worksheets and flashcards, see https://bit.ly/2TcVS4m.

PREPARATION

Select an article for students to remix in this activity. Consider using something fairly innocuous, like a report on a new local restaurant, a report on a home design trend, or a feel-good story involving animals. Prepare group assignments. Each group will be assigned an emotional goal. You can use these examples or create your own. Make readers laugh (think a satirical Onion-style piece) Make readers afraid Make readers angry Make readers sad

• • • •

COOKING METHOD

1. Begin class with a discussion of what is misinformation. Ask students to share their thoughts and ideas. 2. Show everyone an infographic illustrating some key features of misinformation, including the role intent to harm and the degree of falseness can play in understanding it. (See Additional Resources section.) 3. Note that misinformation, in its various forms, is often emotionally manipulative.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Students will be able to: identify characteristics of misinformation; develop evaluation skills; and discuss and explore the manipulative aspects of misinformation, including emotional and rhetorical strategies.

• • •

216

SECTION II. PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION

Morris Misinformation tends to prey on our emotions and encourage hasty judgments and reactions. 4. Ask students to consider how media and online technology in general might be manipulative. Have them share their ideas. ◊ Examples of media manipulation might include advertising, targeted ads online, online games like Candy Crush that encourage you to stay on the platform, etc. 5. Divide students into groups for the activity and give each student the article they will be remixing, their emotional goal, and a guided worksheet. 6. Tell students they will use the worksheets to guide them as they remix an article to achieve their emotional goal. Students can use a Word document or a PowerPoint slide to create their new article, complete with a new headline, an image, and an opening paragraph. 7. After students have created their pieces, have them complete the reflection section of their worksheet where they will consider the process and the emotional and ethical ramifications of manipulative media and misinformation. 8. Pass out emoji flashcards to students. 9. Have each group share their piece and let students vote on how the pieces made them feel. 10. Discuss the process with the entire class and have them share ways they can be more aware of misinformation and ways they can use evaluation skills to avoid being manipulated by misinformation.

11. For assessment, you can have students share their worksheets and their creations with you.

ALLERGY WARNING

Make sure to spend time discussing why students are doing this activity and how this exercise can give them deeper insights into topics such as misinformation, media manipulation, and rhetorical strategies. I’ve had teachers and faculty in the past go into two camps: either highly enthusiastic or skeptical about the efficacy of having students create “fake news.” I have found it helpful to emphasize to both students and faculty how this activity helps students unpack the emotional impact and the emotional manipulation tactics of misinformation.

CHEF’S NOTES

•

•

This activity is a variation of a lesson I created as part of a broader, grantfunded curriculum project in partnership with the Mozilla Foundation. The original lesson was aimed at high school students, though could be scaled up to college students. I’ve refined the initial activity here to include more time built in for reflection and discussion. I’ve found that using local news examples works well for this activity and opens the door for discussions of issues such as microtargeting of manipulative online content.

217

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Wardle, Claire. “Information Disorder Part 3: Useful Graphics.” FirstDraft. July 9, 2018. https:// medium.com/1st-draft/informationdisorder-part-3-useful-graphics2446c7dbb485. Wardle, Claire, and Hossein Derakhshan. “Information Disorder.” Council of Europe. September 2017. https://www. coe.int/en/web/freedom-expression/ information-disorder.