Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Research on the Web

725 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Design
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Research on the Web

  1. 1. Using the WWW to Build Community A guide to resources and safe surfing
  2. 2. The Tools <ul><li>Ways of connecting individuals in such a way that they can share knowledge about the things they care about. </li></ul><ul><li>Disproportionate advantage for people who are away from urban centers -- information becomes accessible through the web. </li></ul>
  3. 3. User-generated Content <ul><li>The web allows the creation of knowledge in a bottom-up, rather than top-down direction. </li></ul><ul><li>Experts are not determined by degrees or credentials. Experts are the people who have the knowledge, no matter who or where they are. </li></ul>
  4. 4. Collective Knowledge <ul><li>Wikipedia </li></ul><ul><li>Fluther </li></ul>
  5. 5. Bookmark Tools <ul><li>Delicious </li></ul>
  6. 6. Event & Scheduling Tools <ul><li>Google Calendar </li></ul><ul><li>Doodle </li></ul>
  7. 7. Video Tools <ul><li>YouTube </li></ul><ul><li>Google Video </li></ul><ul><li>Blip </li></ul><ul><li>Leak </li></ul>
  8. 8. Photography Tools <ul><li>Flickr ! </li></ul>
  9. 9. Survey Tools <ul><li>Survey Monkey </li></ul>
  10. 10. Writing Tools <ul><li>Writely </li></ul><ul><li>Google Docs (Also offers spreadsheet) </li></ul>
  11. 11. Graphical Tools <ul><li>Frappr (Mapping Tool) </li></ul><ul><li>Wayfaring (Mapping Tool) </li></ul>
  12. 12. Filtering Tools <ul><li>Newstrust </li></ul><ul><li>Digg </li></ul>
  13. 13. Critical Evaluation of Web Content <ul><li>Why Evaluate What You Find on the Web? </li></ul><ul><li>Anyone can put up a Web page </li></ul><ul><ul><li>about anything </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Many pages not kept up-to-date </li></ul><ul><li>No quality control </li></ul><ul><ul><li>most sites not “peer-reviewed” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>less trustworthy than scholarly publications </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>no selection guidelines for search engines </li></ul></ul>
  14. 14. Before you click to view the page... <ul><li>Look at the URL - personal page or site ? ~ or % or users or members </li></ul><ul><li>Domain name appropriate for the content ? edu, com, org, net, gov, ca.us, uk, etc. </li></ul><ul><li>Published by an entity that makes sense ? </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>News from its source? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>www.nytimes.com </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Advice from valid agency? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>www.nih.gov/ </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>www.nlm.nih.gov/ </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>www.nimh.nih.gov/ </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul>
  15. 15. Scan the perimeter of the page <ul><li>Can you tell who wrote it ? </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>name of page author </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>organization, institution, agency you recognize </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>e-mail contact by itself not enough </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Credentials for the subject matter ? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Look for links to: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ About us” “Philosophy” “Background” “Biography” </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Is it recent or current enough ? </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Look for “last updated” date - usually at bottom </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>If no links or other clues... </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>truncate back the URL </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>http: //hs . houstonisd . org/hspva/academic/Science/Thinkquest/gail/text/ethics .html </li></ul></ul>
  16. 16. Indicators of quality <ul><li>Sources documented </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>links, footnotes, etc. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>As detailed as you expect in print publications ? </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>do the links work ? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Information retyped or forged </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>why not a link to published version instead ? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Links to other resources </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>biased, slanted ? </li></ul></ul></ul>
  17. 17. What Do Others Say ? <ul><li>Search the URL in alexa.com </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Who links to the site? Who owns the domain? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Type or paste the URL into the basic search box </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Traffic for top 100,000 sites </li></ul></ul><ul><li>See what links are in Google’s Similar pages </li></ul><ul><li>Look up the page author in Google </li></ul>
  18. 18. Does it all add up? <ul><li>Why was the page put on the Web ? </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>inform with facts and data? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>explain, persuade? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>sell, entice? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>share, disclose? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>as a parody or satire? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Is it appropriate for your purpose? </li></ul>
  19. 19. Might it be ironic? Satire or parody? <ul><li>Think about the &quot;tone&quot; of the page. </li></ul><ul><li>Humorous? Parody? Exaggerated? Overblown arguments? </li></ul><ul><li>Outrageous photographs or juxtaposition of unlikely images? </li></ul><ul><li>Arguing a viewpoint with examples that suggest that what is argued is ultimately not possible. </li></ul>
  20. 20. Kayak Attack <ul><li>GoogleVideo: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Kayak Attack </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Snoops: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>The Truth </li></ul></ul>
  21. 21. Try evaluating some sites... <ul><li>Search a controversial topic in Google: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>&quot;nuclear armageddon&quot; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>prions danger </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ stem cells” abortion </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Scan the first two pages of results </li></ul><ul><li>Visit one or two sites </li></ul><ul><ul><li>try to evaluate their quality and reliability </li></ul></ul>
  22. 22. Citations <ul><li>Citations ad credibility to a work (whether on the the web or not). </li></ul><ul><li>They help readers to find source material. </li></ul><ul><li>They indicate original research. </li></ul><ul><li>They protect against any claim of plagiarism. </li></ul>
  23. 23. How to cite web content <ul><li>Reference List: </li></ul><ul><li>Author or Editor. Date. Title of work. Edition. [Type of medium]: <Protocol/Site/Path/File> Additional: retrieval information [Access date]. </li></ul><ul><li>or </li></ul><ul><li>Author or Editor. Date. Title of work. Edition. [Type of medium]: Supplier/Database identifier or number/Item name or number [Access date]. </li></ul>
  24. 24. Examples <ul><li>Crouse, Maurice. 4 August 2006. Citing electronic information in history papers. <http://history.memphis.edu/mcrouse/ elcite.html> [4 August 2006]. </li></ul><ul><li>Online Book Initiative [Public-domain electronic texts]. No date. <gopher://ftp.std.com/11/obi> [3 December 1996]. </li></ul><ul><li>Kehoe, Brian P. 1992. Zen and the art of the Internet. 2d ed. <ftp://quake.think.com/pub /etext/1992/zen10.txt> [25 March 1995]. </li></ul>
  25. 25. MLA: Books <ul><li>Lastname, Firstname. Title of Book. Place of Publication: Publisher, Year of Publication. </li></ul>
  26. 26. Examples <ul><li>Gleick, James. Chaos: Making a New Science. New York: Penguin Books, 1987. </li></ul><ul><li>Henley, Patricia. The Hummingbird House. Denver: MacMurray, 1999. </li></ul>
  27. 27. Periodicals <ul><li>Author(s). &quot;Title of Article.&quot; Title of Periodical Day Month Year: pages. </li></ul>
  28. 28. Examples <ul><li>Poniewozik, James. &quot;TV Makes a Too-Close Call.&quot; Time 20 Nov. 2000: 70-71. </li></ul><ul><li>Trembacki, Paul. &quot;Brees Hopes to Win Heisman for Team.&quot; Purdue Exponent 5 Dec. 2000: 20. </li></ul>

×