Category:Evaluating Resources (NCSU Libraries Instruction)

From WolfWikis

The following is Kawanna Bright's review of the Evaluating Resources Section of LOBO (September 2007)

Student Perspective

1. Does the section flow from page to page (is there a natural order of steps to be followed)?

There is the sense of flowing but no real flow between the four sections. Section 4: Select Useful Information seems as if it would be in the right place based on what it should cover, but the information provided does not actually cover the topic in a way that makes it a natural connection to evaluating resources. The “Continue to Next Section” and next and rprevious links also provide a sense of flowing but do not really connect the user to the sections. You don’t have a sense of what was before or after so you are not sure what the link will do for you. Where will it take you? What section did you just do? Will it take you to a completely separate section or just the next page?

I would also reconsider the order in which things are presented. Some things could be grouped together as they naturally go together, such as Author/Authority and Publisher.

2. Do the questions the students have to answe in that section of the tutorial make sense?

The questions do make sense though they do not appear to actually get at what students should really be getting from this section. What if students don’t have a book title but still want to complete the section for the practice? The fact that we refer them back to the top of the page to see their questions is also an issue. It would likely be better if the questions were closer to the input boxes. A couple of questions could be added or reworded to aid in the learning process.

3. Visually are there things about the tutorial that do and do not work?

The clip art does not work for me. Sometimes I’m not sure if the image selected is right for the page. It just seems random in some cases, as if we couldn’t find anything that worked for the topic so we just chose a picture with a computer in it. The real images used on the scholarly vs. popular intro page works well – I wish we could have real pictures in all sections. The Continue to Next Section and Previous and Next buttons are confusing to me. I don’t see how they connect and am never sure where to click sometimes. The large wording used to ask the questions in the Evaluating Web Sites section is good in the sense that it stands out but bad in the sense that it does not match what the other sections look like in terms of how we asked our questions.

Perspective of an instructor or librarian

1. Are there things that need to be updated or changed fairly quickly? (outdated information or examples)

The Evaluating Articles section is missing 4 important things: Bias, Purpose, Timeliness/Currency and Breadth/Depth. It touches on these things in some sections (like audience and author/authority) but it does not truly cover them and we mention them in our objectives. There is nothing else immediate that needs to be done to this section.

2. Take a look at the objectives outlined for parts of your section. Does your section actually meet these objectives?

Objective 3

The information literate student will evaluate information critically. (Section in LOBO: Evaluating Resources) – YES, covered

Outcome 3.1

The student will apply criteria to analyze information, including authority, content, purpose, timeliness, and point of view or bias, to information and its source (ACRL 3.2.a, 3.2.c; LOBO: Evaluating Resources) – Partially covered by this section. Not all resources include information on purpose, timeliness, point of view or bias.

3.1.1 The student will articulate established evaluation criteria. (ACRL 3.2.a) I, P LOBO: Evaluating Resources: Evaluate Books page 1 – Partially covered – the books section lists out the criteria on the first page but none of the other sections do ths.

3.1.2 The student will investigate an author’s qualifications and reputation. (ACRL 3.2.a) I, P LOBO: Evaluating Resources: Evaluate Books page 2; Evaluate Articles page 2; Evaluate Web Sites page 2 - YES, covered

3.1.3 The student will investigate a publisher or issuing agency’s qualifications and reputation. (ACRL 3.2.a, 3.4.e) I, P LOBO: Evaluating Resources: Evaluate Books page 5; Evaluate Web Sites page 2 – Partially covered by books and websites sections. Needs to be articulated in articles section.

3.1.4 The student will describe the content of an information source. I, P LOBO: Evaluating Resources: Evaluate Books page 4; Evaluate Articles page 3; Evaluate Web Sites page 5 - YES, covered

3.1.5 The student will describe the purpose for which information was created. (ACRL 3.2.d) I, P LOBO: Evaluating Resources: Evaluate Books page 3; Evaluate Articles page 4; Evaluate Web Sites page 3 – Partially covered if you include page 4 of the articles section that includes information on audience which can fit under purpose. But term purpose is not articulated in the articles section and needs to be.

3.1.6 The student will identify where to look for a source’s publication date and, if possible, determine when the information was published. (ACRL 3.2.a) I, P LOBO: Evaluating Resources: Evaluate Books page 6; Evaluate Web Sites page 4 – Partially covered in book and websites pages. Not covered in articles section.

3.1.7 The student will articulate the importance of timeliness or currency and/or describe the impact of the age of a source or the qualities characteristic of the time in which it was created. (ACRL 3.2.a, 3.2.d) I, P LOBO: Evaluating Resources: Evaluate Books page 6; Evaluate Web Sites page 4 - Partially covered in book and websites pages. Not covered in articles section.

3.1.8 The student will recognize prejudice, deception, or manipulation. (ACRL 3.2.c) I, P LOBO: Evaluating Resources: Evaluate Web Sites page 6 – Not covered in the books or articles sections.

3.1.9 The student will articulate the impact of an author’s, sponsor’s, and/or publisher’s point of view. (ACRL 3.2.c) I, P LOBO: Evaluating Resources: Evaluate Web Sites page 6 - Not covered in the books or articles sections.

3.1.10 The student will describe how cultural, geographic, or other contexts within which the information was created may bias information. (ACRL 3.2.d) I, P LOBO: Evaluating Resources: Evaluate Web Sites page 6 - Not covered in the books or articles sections.

3.1.11 The student will recognize the presence of one-sided views, opinions, emotional triggers, stereotypes, etc. (ACRL 3.2.c) I, P LOBO: Evaluating Resources: Evaluate Web Sites page 6 - Not covered in the books or articles sections.

3.1.12 The student will consider the impact of his/her own biases on his/her interpretation of information. I, P LOBO: Evaluating Resources: Evaluate Web Sites page 6 - Not covered in the books or articles sections.

3.1.13 The student will investigate a source’s point of view or bias through comparison with other sources, including links, citations found in the source, or other similar sources. (ACRL 3.2.a, 3.7.c) TBD – not covered

3.1.14 The student will distinguish scholarly from popular sources. I, P LOBO: Evaluating Resources: Evaluate Articles pages 1-7 – Yes, covered

Outcome 3.2

The student will evaluate sources (e.g., article, web site, book, journal, database, catalog) for use. (ACRL 3.4.g) – should be covered by select useful information section but is not.

• 3.2.1 The student will determine whether or not various information sources (e.g. web sites, popular magazines, scholarly journals, books) are appropriate for the purpose at hand, based on established evaluation criteria (see LOBO 3.1), and provide a rationale for that decision. (ACRL 3.4.g, 2.2.a) I, P

LOBO: Evaluating Resources: Select Useful Information pages 1-3 – should be covered by Select Useful Information section but is not. The descriptions and information given do not meet this objective.

• 3.2.2 The student will indicate whether or not a specific, individual source (e.g., a particular web site, article, book) is appropriate for the purpose at hand and provide a rationale for that decision based on established evaluation criteria (see LOBO 3.1). (ACRL 3.2.c) I, P

LOBO: Evaluating Resources: Select Useful Information pages 1-3 - should be covered by Select Useful Information section but is not. The descriptions and information given do not meet this objective.

3. Are there objectives missing from your section (things that we should be teaching students but are not)?

Issues of validity, accuracy and credibility need to be covered.

4. All other thoughts.

This section is truly important as it would help us bridge students from the use of Google to find resources over to using library resources to locate their information sources. Unfortunately this section does not actually do that well enough and needs work to make it fit the objectives that have been set.

Summary

What is Working Well in the Section

• I think the chart used to do scholarly vs. popular comparisons is the right method to use for this section.
• The real images of Time and the academic journals are affective in showing students what to look for.
• The order the information is presented in, in terms of the books to periodicals to websites works well.
• The amount of information works well.
• Putting important terms in bold is very helpful to indicate to students that the term is important and likely something they should know.

What Concerns (Problems) Do You See in the Section

The areas that do not work well or that I have concerns with are:

• The navigation scheme – previous/next/continue to next section. This is a very confusing set up and should be changed or streamlined if possible to make it easier for students to use.
• The clipart used does not work and in some cases just doesn’t fit the information on the page.
• Though the popular vs. scholarly information in a chart format works, the lack of lines to set the chart off does not. Also, with the information in the chart, all you get is a list and you actually need a little more information in some cases. Not just “what to look for” but “why is it important” as well.
• The lack of images on the web sites and select useful information makes the pages look too text heavy.
• In the navigation pane, the shortened “Evaluate” instead of “Evaluating” just doesn’t sound quite right to me.
• Though the bold is useful to indicate important terms or phrases, some of them may need to somehow be defined. Just stating them and then not referring back to anything (did they see this term in a different section? Will it be covered later?) is confusing to look at.
• The Select Useful Information seems out of place and needs to be reevaluated. We repeat ourselves in the first page with the same information on the first page of the section. We also do not actually make any connections between evaluation and selection.

What Suggestions Do You Have for the Section

• Consider combining all of the types of resources under each aspect used to evaluate.
• The navigation between and within the section needs to be changed. In its current state it is very confusing.
• Find students to volunteer to be in pictures so that we can have real images. It could be turned into a contest or something where students could volunteer to be immortalized in our online tutorial (we could promise picture credits!)
• The Evaluate Articles section needs to be redone so that there is truly evaluative information presented there. The focus is on scholarly vs. popular right now and though the things used to compare the two types of publications are also those used to evaluate them we don’t every spell this out. The scholarly vs. popular either needs to be moved to the resources section or we need to include evaluation information along with the information on how they are different.
• Find images for the websites section.
• Redo the Select Useful Information section – right now it does not actually tell students how to select useful information nor does it allow them to practice it. There should be some way to make the connection between evaluation and use. Emphasis needs to be placed on how the criteria used to evaluate the resources can also be used to tell them how they can use the information.
• Some of the questions require students to have selected a resource to evaluate but we do not do this with the scholarly vs. popular. Why not? Why not provide to real life examples and have them do a comparison? Would this be possible? For the other sections, why not provide a resource in case the students don’t have one. How many of them will actually already have a book in hand when doing this tutorial or a website on their topic?

Evaluating Resources – Suggested Changes by Page

Page 1: Main Page

• Real Picture

Page 2: Evaluate Books

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Books – will give us more space on the page.
• Real picture.
• Add information for a book if students do not have one for the exercise.

Page 3: Evaluate Books: Author/Authority

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Books
• Make Author/Authority the subtitle
• Add an introduction to the section and move the information already there up. Move the Questions section down to above the section where student will insert their responses.
• Reword the final question: “What, if anything, does the author/authority information you have found indicates that the book is a good resource?”
• Real picture.

Page 4: Evaluate Books: Purpose

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Books
• Make Purpose the subtitle.
• Real picture or a picture that makes more sense.
• Add introductory information to the top of the section and move the other information up. Move the questions down.

Page 5: Evaluate Books: Organization & Content

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Books
• Make Organization & Content the subtitle.
• Real picture or a picture that makes more sense.
• Add introductory information to the top of the section and move the other information up. Move the questions down.

Page 6: Evaluate Books: Publisher

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Books
• Make Publisher the subtitle.
• Real picture or a picture that makes more sense.
• Move the other information up. Move the question down.
• Add question: “What type of publisher would you classify this as?”

Page 7: Evaluate Books: Date of Publication

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Books
• Make Date of Publication the subtitle. Possibly add currency to the subtitle.
• Real picture or a picture that makes more sense.
• Move the other information up. Move the questions down.
• Reword the final overall question for the section – “Based on all 5 criteria, would you consider this book a good resource to use for your assignment? Why or why not?”

Page 8: Evaluate Articles

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Articles
• No subtitle
• Real picture or a picture that makes more sense.
• Rewrite introductory information to include reminder of structure or purpose of journals (reminder back to types of resources). Show how evaluating an article will also help them determine whether it is scholarly or popular and what this means for their research..

Page 9: Evaluate Articles: Author

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Articles
• Make Author the subtitle. Add Authority?
• Add picture?
• Add introductory information to the top of the section
• Put lines in chart for scholarly or popular.

Page 10: Evaluate Articles: Content

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Articles
• Make Content the subtitle
• Add picture?
• Add introductory information to the top of the section
• Put lines in chart for scholarly or popular.

Page 11: Evaluate Articles: Audience

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Articles
• Make Audience the subtitle. Add Purpose?
• Add picture?
• Add introductory information to the top of the section
• Put lines in chart for scholarly or popular.

Page 12: Evaluate Articles: Language

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Articles
• Make Language the subtitle.
• Add picture?
• Add introductory information to the top of the section
• Put lines in chart for scholarly or popular.
• Use title on page – what level… to start the introductory information section.

Page 13: Evaluate Articles: Works Cited/Reference List/Bibliography

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Articles
• Make Works Cited/Reference List/Bibliography the subtitle. Or shorten it and list those in the introductory information.
• Add picture?
• Add introductory information to the top of the section
• Put lines in chart for scholarly or popular.

Page 14: Evaluate Articles: Layout & Organization

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Articles
• Make Layout & Organization the subtitle.
• Add picture?
• Add introductory information to the top of the section
• Put lines in chart for scholarly or popular.
• Add a question – “Describe a time when you might need a popular article rather than a scholarly article to complete your research.”

Page 15: Evaluate Web Sites

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Web Sites
• No Subtitle
• Add picture?
• Make links for the spoof sites mentioned to give them an example.
• Provide a website to use to complete worksheet in case they do not have one available or at least add encouragement to go find one related to their topic.

Page 16: Evaluate Web Sites: Authority

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Web Sites
• Make Authority the subtitle. Add Author?
• Add picture?
• Too text heavy – cut down on the text somehow or decrease the font size.

Page 17: Evaluate Web Sites: Purpose

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Web Sites
• Make Purpose the Subtitle
• Add picture?
• Too text heavy – cut down on the text or decrease the font size to match other sections.

Page 18: Evaluate Web Sites: Currency

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Web Sites
• Make Currency the Subtitle. Add Timeliness?
• Add picture?
• Too text heavy – cut down on the text or decrease the font size to match other sections.

Page 19: Evaluate Web Sites: Content

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Web Sites
• Make Content the Subtitle.
• Add picture?
• Too text heavy – cut down on the text or decrease the font size to match other sections.

Page 20: Evaluate Web Sites: Bias & Point of View

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Web Sites
• Make Bias & Point of View the Subtitle.
• Add picture?
• Too text heavy – cut down on the text or decrease the font size to match other sections.
• Move section up closer to Purpose – would fit more naturally there.

Page 21: Select Useful Information

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Selecting Useful Information
• Page 1 repeats information from first page of section. Either rewrite or get rid of.
• The giant Or… at the end of the page makes no sense and is confusing. If this format is kept then the first letter or word of the next page should be the same size to indicate flow. Might be easier to rewrite.
• Add picture?

Page 22: Select Useful Information: dealing with irrelevant sources

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Selecting Useful Information
• Add picture?
• Not sure if this information actually fits this section. Seems more closely related to conducting the search (things you can do before you search, etc.).

Page 23: Select Useful Information: using TOCs, indexes or site maps

• Change title to Evaluating Resources: Selecting Useful Information
• Not sure if this information actually fits in this section. More “help” info than actually helping them to select useful information (though the hint to use the table of contents, index or site map is a wise one and should be kept).
• Add picture?

This category currently contains no pages or media.