Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Workshop 3: Becoming a critical searcher
Similar to Workshop 3: Becoming a critical searcher (20)
More from EISLibrarian
More from EISLibrarian (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Workshop 3: Becoming a critical searcher
- 1. • Identify • Evaluate • Select https://www.lisalanierconsulting.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/LLC-Evaluation.png AO2: Evidence of detailed research involving the selection and evaluation of a wide range of relevant resources. Critical analysis and application of the resources with clear links made to appropriate theories and concepts. Becoming a critical searcher
- 2. Reliable and trustworthy information
- 4. Evaluating information Imagine you are writing an EPQ on the ‘English/London Riots of 2011’. Go to: https://libguides.mdx.ac.uk/Riots Have a look at the 5 items and consider the following: • Which items are the most relevant to your EPQ? • Which items would be no use? • Which items have the most authority? • Which items might have bias? • Which item is the most current?
- 5. • Relevance • Expertise • Viewpoint • Intended audience • Evidence • When Published REVIEW your information
Editor's Notes
- Librarians will need: What if Evaluating resources cards 14 black cards, 16 red cards. Evaluation worksheet Sources of information print outs x 5 In this workshop we are going to discover how to be a critical searcher, so we will be: Learn how to identify reliable information sources Develop the skills needed to evaluate information for authority, relevance and quality Be able to select quality information to use in their EPQ. By the end of the workshop you will have: Developed skills needed to evaluate and select the best information sources for your EPQ. This will enable you to meet Assessment Object 2 (AO2) by selecting and critically evaluating a wide range of relevant information sources to ensure that you are using the best possible resources appropriately.
- Good research requires sources of reliability and authority, and for you to demonstrate a critical capacity when selecting sources for your research. To get you thinking about this, we are going to do a quick exercise: Ask for two volunteers. Give them the 14 black type cards and ask them arrange them in order of reliability and trustworthiness. Or give a black type card to 14 students and ask them to put themselves in order of reliability ad trustworthiness. Hold up various red cards to see if the order changes. Approx 5-10 mins. Once completed use the red cards to see if the order changes (16 to choose from). For example: Blog post - written by Published academic or Political Activist Eyewitness testimony – from research active expert or member of the public Tweet – by Influencer or leading author Website - British Sociological Association or Wikipedia etc. Approx 5-10 mins. **************************************************** Black cards: Blog post TV documentary Book Magazine article Conference paper Newspaper article Website Encyclopaedia YouTube Movie Eyewitness testimony TV news report Tweet Journal article Red cards: Fox news (right wing viewpoint) The Sun newspaper (sensationalist/controversial) Published academic Oscar winning director Teacher Member of the public Influencer Leading author Research active expert Political activist e.g. campaigner, politician, councillor, member of political party etc. Charity The Guardian newspaper (left wing) British Sociological Association Wikipedia www.Gov.UK Community group e.g. religious, ethnicity, age group etc. ************************************************* Discuss as a class: What effects the reliability of sources of info? authority/expertise i.e. why should we trust the authors/creators? context e.g. information about riots in another country may or may not be relevant etc why it has been written – political gain/persuasion, spread misinformation, financial gain, share facts/knowledge etc publication date Are there instances when something might be made more reliable? – a blog post on a science topic might not be considered the most reliable source of information, but if it is written by Professor Brian Cox or Stephen Hawking then does this change things? What do you want to know about any of these sources when you are making a judgement? Its back to what effects the reliability of sources as already discussed i.e. authority, publication date, context etc.
- Watch Goldacre video to 2:50 http://www.ted.com/talks/ben_goldacre_battling_bad_science.html Then discuss or get feedback from the class in relation to authorship, authority, publication expertise etc. What did you find interesting in Goldacre’s talk? How would we apply this to being a critical researcher?
- Divide class into group Hand out worksheet and 5 x items. Discuss. No right or wrong answers. All items found by doing a search on Network Security. Which items are most relevant: Academic journal and Wiki most relevant. Newspaper article is sensationalist and trade journal is a review of software. Which items would be no use: Newspaper article useless, and trade journal probably not unless needed to know about software packages. Which item has the most academic authority: Academic journal. It has biography of authors, references, in-text citations and uses academic language. Article has been peer reviewed. Wikipedia has refs, but don’t know who has added information. Are any of the items bias: Newspaper Trade journal is reviewing software and may be swayed by advertisers. Which item is the most current: Wikipedia Academic journal is very out-of-date 2004 Would not use any of them and would continue search. Discuss the importance of evaluating the information that you find.
- •Relevance - Is this what I need? Will it answer my question? Is it at the right level? •Expertise - Who is the author? What is their knowledge base/qualifications? How have they carried out their research? Where are they working, can they be contacted? Is there any Peer Review? •Viewpoint - Is it a balanced view? Are opposing views represented? Are there links to supporting information? •Intended audience - What is the purpose of information e.g. financial gain, propaganda, entertainment, academic? •Evidence - Is it peer reviewed? Are there references which can be checked to support the information or theories discussed? •When published - How old is this information? Does it need to be up-to-date? When was it last updated and by whom? Do you know what was updated. There is often an explanation of what has been updated in new edition of a book.