Oliver, Tony. “Sioux Woman and her Child.” 1 Jun. 2007. Flickr. 30 Mar. 2010.<br /><http://www.flickr.com/photos/48806909@N00/525348256>.<br />
“Pocahontas.” n.d. Disney.com. 30 Mar. 2011.<br /><http://disney.go.com/princess/index.html#/pocahontas/><br />“Lone Ranger. IMDB.com. 30 Mar. 2011.<br /><http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0041038/>.<br />“indians from Peter Pan.”21 Jan. 2008. Nine Most Racist Disney Cartoons.<br />30 Mar. 2011. <http://www.cracked.com/article_15833_the-9-most-racist-disney-characters.html>. <br />
3<br />Code of Best Practices for Fair Use in Media Literacy Education<br />
Curationcomes up when search stops working. But it’s more than a human-powered filter. Curation comes up when people realize that it isn’t just about information seeking, it’s also about synchronizing a community.<br />Part of the reason that human curation is so critical is simply the vast number of people who are now making and sharing media. Everyone is a media outlet. <br />Blogger, author, and NYU professor Clay Shirky, quoted in Mashable<br />http://mashable.com/2010/05/03/content-curation-creation/<br />
Annotated works cited sections require critical research and evaluation skills. Annotations frequently include brief, two-sentence summaries. The following guidelines apply to materials in all formats--books, magazine articles, Web sites, and reference materials, etc.<br />The most challenging task may be locating the credentials of more obscure authors. Consult biographical tools, Contemporary Authors or some of our periodical and reference databases for biographical information. <br />Check with your teacher to see which of the following elements you should include in your annotations:<br />· Author's credentials<br />· Scope and purpose of the work: Is it an overview, persuasive, editorial?<br />· Comparison of the work with others dealing with the same topic or others in your Works Cited list<br />· Intended audience<br />· Summary of contents<br />· Evaluation of research: Is the work logical, clear, well-researched?<br />· Evaluation of scope: Has the topic been adequately covered?<br />· Evaluation of author bias<br />· Relative value of the work to the thesis<br />Example of an evaluative annotation:<br />Katz, Jon. "The Rights of Kids in the Digital Age." Wired July 1996: 120+. Print.<br />Katz, contributing editor of Wired and the author of Geeks, presents a compelling argument for safeguarding the rights of children online. The article is aimed at a general, but computer-savvy, audience. Katz offers a far more liberal perspective than recent pieces in such major news journals as Newsweek, which warned the public of the dangers children face in electronic environments. Katz advocates the idea of preparing the "responsible child" and outlines the rights of such a child. He claims that our new "digital nation" requires a social contract similar to the one proposed by philosopher John Locke and adopted by the founders of our own country to protect the rights of all citizens. This comprehensive, distinctive, liberal view added needed balance to my project.<br />
Are there new questions <br />to ask of <br />new types of sources?<br />
Thinking about wikis as research sources<br /><ul><li>What is the purpose of the collaborative project and who began it?
How rich is the wiki? How many pages does it contain?
How many people appear to be involved in editing the wiki? Does it seem that the information is improved by having a variety of participants? How heavily edited are the pages you plan to use?
Does the project appear to be alive? Are participants continuing to edit it?
Does the information appear to be accurate? Can you validate it?
Can you use other sources to triangulate the information?
How useful is it to your research?</li></li></ul><li>Thinking about Twitter . . .<br />Who is the tweeter?<br />How many voices are you comparing?<br />Have you used hashtags (#) to gather a variety of voices?<br />Can you use other sources to triangulate the information?<br />If you are focusing on one voice:<br /> How many followers does he or she have?<br /> Is the tweeter an individual? <br />Does he or she represent a publication or an organization?<br /> What does the profile reveal?<br /> What type of language or vocabulary does the tweeter use?<br />How useful is it to your research?<br />
Considering also: What is the researcher trying to accomplish?<br />“From this standpoint, we would not ask, "Is the author qualified?", but, "What aspects of the author's background help me accomplish my goal?" Under certain circumstances, a web page published by a neo-nazi organization might actually be appropriate for an assignment, while other resources, produced by people with credential would not. It depends on what the student wants to accomplish. <br />This approach actually serves three interesting purposes. <br /><ul><li>The student is focused on drawing supporting or appropriate information into the project rather than just filtering "bad" information out.
The student gathers information about the information.
As student approaches information with their goals to accomplish, they are less likely to be influenced by the goals of those who generated and published the information, which has interesting implications for media literacy.”</li></ul>David Warlick, Evaluating Internet-based Information, A Goals-Based Approach.<br />
At the end of the dance . . .a panel of three judges, all former dancers and choreographers, offers pointed, tough feedback. <br />Even when a dance is stunning--such as when Alex received a rare standing ovation from the judges for a powerful, emotional contemporary dance—there is pointed critique as well. This is not like "American Idol" where Simon shows off his own macho by being as harsh as possible. This is dance criticism by now-famous dancers and producers but who know both the rigor of professional dance and who want dance, as a form of expression, to be better supported and have more influence and power in the world. . .<br />The critique is offered not by one expert but by three who are strong-minded and <br />feel free to discuss their own disagreements. Their judgment is not always unanimous. <br />And it is not final. In the end, who actually wins or loses that week is not decided <br />by judges but by the general public. The actual vote is crowdsourced to you and me, the Audience, and it is an audience that, one hopes, becomes an intelligent participant in the process, schooled by the clear, concise, pointed critique of these experts. <br />Not only do the dancers learn. So do we.<br />
Songs adapted from . . .<br />The Wizard of OZ. <br />Music and lyrics by <br />Harold Arlen and E.Y. Harburg<br />Arlen, Harold, and E.Y. Harburg. The Wizard of Oz. Victor Fleming. MGM, <br /> 1939. Film. <br />