Evaluating Websites. Standards for the 21st-Century Learner. Published on AASL Learning4Life Lesson Plan Database

Transcription

1 Published on AASL Learning4Life Lesson Plan Database Evaluating Websites Created by: Julie Ricker Title/Role: School Librarian Organization/School Name: Portsmouth High School Location: New Hampshire Grade Level: 12 Type of Lesson: Lesson in a unit Type of Schedule: Combination Collaboration Continuum: Limited Content Area: Language Arts Content Topic: Web Site Evaluation. Standards for the 21st-Century Learner Skills Indicator(s): Evaluate information found in selected sources on the basis of accuracy, validity, appropriateness for needs, importance, and social and cultural context Use information and technology ethically and responsibly. Dispositions Indicator(s): Maintain a critical stance by questioning the validity and accuracy of all information. Responsibilities Indicator(s): Follow ethical and legal guidelines in gathering and using information Use valid information and reasoned conclusions to make ethical decisions. Self-Assessment Strategies Indicator(s): Assess the quality and effectiveness of the learning product Evaluate own ability to select resources that are engaging and appropriate for personal interests and needs. Scenario: Evaluating web sites is part of the English curriculum for Research Skills writing a research paper. After instruction from the librarian on web site evaluation and guided practice, students will write a ten page research paper on a topic of their choice. The paper requires 10 resources, three must be print and any web site sources must be evaluated. Students do an annotated bibliography for their research papers and students are required to hand in web site evaluations for the web site sources used in their papers. Some topics students have chosen in the past are golf, animal therapy,and music education. These topics are personal to the student and are usually something they want to learn more about. Students learn web site evaluation to build on their prior knowledge of navigating the web. Flexible scheduling in the library allows for the class to come to the library for instruction and time in the library to work on evaluating web sites. The librarian gives the instruction and the teacher and librarian help with the guided instruction. The assessment is done by the teacher when grading. Individual instruction occurs for students who need extra guidance with web site evaluation. Overview: The concept of this lesson is to teach students the factors and indicators of what makes a web site credible or not credible and for the students to understand why it is important to use credible web sites

2 when researching for papers. The essential question that students will explore is "what are the differences between a credible web site and a non-credible web site?" Final Product: 10-page research paper. Library Lesson: The goal of the lesson is for students to learn how to evaluate web sites. In doing so, students will learn how to use different factors such as author, copyright date, updated date, and contact information to decide if a web site is credible and reliable. This will assist students in writing a well-rounded and trustworthy research paper. Estimated Lesson Time: 90 minutes Assessment Product: The product itself will be the paper graded by the English teacher. Part of the grade is having reliable web sites which will be checked by the English teacher with the Librarian's assistance if needed. Process: The English teacher will assess the students' process. For example, the annotated bibliography is due before the paper writing even begins. With the annotated bibliography of the 10 plus sources, the students are also required to hand in a written or digital web evaluation for each web site they plan on using in their papers. The web site evaluation formats are given during the presentation. The teacher is able to assess how the students are using and evaluating credible websites in the beginning of the research process, when the rough draft of the paper is due and when the final paper is due. Student self-questioning: Did I choose credible web sites? Did I fill out a web site evaluation for each web site I want to use in my paper? Did I evaluate the web sites based on all the criteria I learned in the library presentation? Instructional Plan Resources students will use: Interactive Resource (i.e. webpages, multimedia learning objects, chat services) Text (books, letters, poems, newspapers, etc.) Interactive Resource URL: Resources instructor will use: Projector Laptop Instruction/Activities Direct instruction: Students watch a PowerPoint presented by the librarian about the ways in which one can evaluate websites; what factors to look for when deciding if a website is credible or not. Students also learn about Wikipedia and the "battle" between credible web sites and Wikipedia. The presentation also demonstrates two different formats of website evaluation--students can write or type the 5 W's of website evaluation of the web sites they are choosing to use for their papers or they can use the link given above in the "Interactive Resource URL" ( electronically or print and fill it out for evaluating their web sites.

3 Modeling and guided practice: The librarian evaluates a web site for the class using the criteria presented in the PowerPoint Presentation before students are asked to do so on their own. An example of each of the two web site evaluation formats taught are explained by the librarian to the students. Students then have time in the library to look at web sites and look at the criteria for web sites on the library computers. The students have time to ask questions while they are evaluating web sites for clarification on any factors they are not sure about. Independent practice: Students then must evaluate any websites using the methods learned from the direct instruction and guided practice and show the results in one of those formats if the student chooses to use that resource for their paper. Sharing and reflecting: After finishing researching and writing the paper they must make sure all their web site resources are evaluated for web site credibility and that they check the credibility of classmate's papers when peer conferencing on the papers. Students will share ideas with other students on how they evaluated their web site resources and their process in that task. Have you taught this lesson before: Yes Strategies for differentiation: This lesson could be taught in a more simplistic format, such as using just the basic criteria outlined in the PowerPoint as well as the student viewing the PowerPoint one-on-one with the para, librarian or teacher. Students requiring differentiated instruction could have assistance by their paraprofessional, librarian or teacher in the actual evaluation process by having the student pick the topic, the web sites and the assistance of the para, librarian or teacher running the computer for them and using the High School Web Site Evaluation Form created by the librarian. The student can state the criteria after looking through the website with the help of the para, librarian or teacher and that person can then type in the criteria the student gives in the evaluation form. AASL/Common Core State Standards Crosswalk English Language Arts: CC W.7» English Language Arts» Research to Build and Present Knowledge» 7. Conduct short as well as more sustained research projects to answer a question (including a self-generated question) or solve a problem; narrow or broaden the inquiry when appropriate; synthesize multiple sources on the subject, demonstrating understanding of the subject under investigation. (11,12) CC11-12RS/TS8» Reading Standards for Literacy in Sci Tech» 8. Evaluate the hypotheses, data, analysis, and conclusions in a science or technical text, verifying the data when possible and corroborating or challenging conclusions with other sources of information. (11,12) CC W.9» English Language Arts» Research to Build and Present Knowledge» 9. Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research. (11,12) CC R.I.7» English Language Arts» Integration of Knowledge and Ideas» 7. Integrate and evaluate multiple sources of information presented in different media or formats (e.g., visually, quantitatively) as well as in words in order to address a question or solve a problem. (11,12)

4 CC SL.2» English Language Arts» Comprehension and Collaboration» 2. Integrate multiple sources of information presented in diverse formats and media (e.g., visually, quantitatively, orally) in order to make informed decisions and solve problems, evaluating the credibility and accuracy of each source and noting any discrepancies among the data. (11,12) CC W.8» English Language Arts» Research to Build and Present Knowledge» 8. Gather relevant information from multiple authoritative print and digital sources, using advanced searches effectively; assess the strengths and limitations of each source in terms of the task, purpose, and audience; integrate information into the text selectively to maintain the flow of ideas, avoiding plagiarism and overreliance on any one source and following a standard format for citation. (11,12) CC11-12WH/SS/S/TS1b» Writing Standards» b. Develop claim(s) and counterclaims fairly and thoroughly, supplying the most relevant data and evidence for each while pointing out the strengths and limitations of both claim(s) and counterclaims in a discipline-appropriate form that anticipates the audience's knowledge level, concerns, values, and possible biases. (11,12) CC W.2.b» English Language Arts» Text Types and Purposes» b. Develop the topic thoroughly by selecting the most significant and relevant facts, extended definitions, concrete details, quotations, or other information and examples appropriate to the audience's knowledge of the topic. (11,12) CC11-12RH/SS6» Reading Standards for History» 6. Evaluate authors' differing points of view on the same historical event or issue by assessing the authors' claims, reasoning, and evidence. (11,12) CC11-12RH/SS8» Reading Standards for History» 8. Evaluate an author's premises, claims, and evidence by corroborating or challenging them with other information. (11,12) CC11-12WH/SS/S/TS1e» Writing Standards» e. Provide a concluding statement or section that follows from or supports the argument presented. (11,12) CC W.2.f» English Language Arts» Text Types and Purposes» f. Provide a concluding statement or section that follows from and supports the information or explanation presented (e.g., articulating implications or the significance of the topic). (11,12) CC11-12WH/SS/S/TS2e» Writing Standards» e. Provide a concluding statement or section that follows from and supports the information or explanation provided (e.g., articulating implications or the significance of the topic). (11,12) CC SL.1.c» English Language Arts» Comprehension and Collaboration» c. Propel conversations by posing and responding to questions that probe reasoning and evidence; ensure a hearing for a full range of positions on a topic or issue; clarify, verify, or challenge ideas and conclusions; and promote divergent and creative perspectives. (11,12)

5 CC11-12WH/SS/S/TS9» Writing Standards» 9. Draw evidence from informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research. (11,12) CC11-12WH/SS/S/TS8» Writing Standards» 8. Gather relevant information from multiple authoritative print and digital sources, using advanced searches effectively; assess the strengths and limitations of each source in terms of the specific task, purpose, and audience; integrate information into the text selectively to maintain the flow of ideas, avoiding plagiarism and overreliance on any one source and following a standard format for citation. (11,12) CC11-12RS/TS2» Reading Standards for Literacy in Sci Tech» 2. Determine the central ideas or conclusions of a text; summarize complex concepts, processes, or information presented in a text by paraphrasing them in simpler but still accurate terms. (11,12) CC11-12RS/TS5» Reading Standards for Literacy in Sci Tech» 5. Analyze how the text structures information or ideas into categories or hierarchies, demonstrating understanding of the information or ideas. (11,12) CC11-12RS/TS6» Reading Standards for Literacy in Sci Tech» 6. Analyze the author's purpose in providing an explanation, describing a procedure, or discussing an experiment in a text, identifying important issues that remain unresolved. (11,12) CC11-12RS/TS7» Reading Standards for Literacy in Sci Tech» 7. Integrate and evaluate multiple sources of information presented in diverse formats and media (e.g., quantitative data, video, multimedia) in order to address a question or solve a problem. (11,12) CC W.6» English Language Arts» Production and Distribution of Writing» 6. Use technology, including the Internet, to produce, publish, and update individual or shared writing products in response to ongoing feedback, including new arguments or information. (11,12) This lesson plan is subject to copyright by the American Library Association and may be used for the noncommercial purpose of scientific or educational advancement granted by Sections 107 and 108 of the Copyright Revision Act of Address usage requests to the ALA Office of Rights and Permissions.

6 Evaluating Websites by Mrs. Ricker

7 Credible Websites vs. Wikipedia: The Battle Wikipedia s definition of itself from As a consequence of the open structure, Wikipedia "makes no guarantee of validity" of its content, since no one is ultimately responsible for any claims appearing in it. [81] Concerns have been raised regarding the lack of accountability that results from users' anonymity, [82] the insertion of spurious information [83], vandalism, and similar problems.

8 The Battle Continues Why not Wikipedia? The main reason is because it is a website where many contributors have access to it, hence wiki! Wikis are generally user-maintained Despite the fact that much of the information here is considered correct, according to website evaluation it is not the most credible source on the internet we ll go over this more next This information can be changed, updated and added to by multiple users It may be a.org now but it is becoming easier to have.org websites so their credentials may not be up to the standards once considered for.orgs

9 What to look for in a credible website-- Who, What, Where, When & Why? The 5 Ws are a good place to start

10 Who? (Authority) Who is the author? Is the author s address given? Can you contact the author? Who created the page? Is there an organization that the author is affiliated with?

11 What? (Content) What is the website about? What is the purpose of the website? What makes this website user-friendly? What resources are given for further research/interest? Is the information biased? What is the.? (.com,.edu,.org, etc.)

12 Where? (Sources Cited) Where did the information come from (does the author give a works cited)? Where can more information about the sponsor or the site or author be found?

13 When? (Copyright, Updates) When was the website created? When was the site last updated?

14 Why? (Technical Aspects & Purpose) Why is this information useful for my project research? Why should I use this website over another one? Why should I use this information as a resource?

15 Wikipedia looses the battle Website Credibility Wins! Why are credible websites better than Wikipedia? *No authors are listed on Wikipedia *Updates are often, but it is unknown by whom and their credentials and ability to contact authors *Information is known to be biased on Wikipedia as it is a user-contributed site

16 Fun Tools for Website Evaluation Web Evaluation Wizard- Critical Evaluation of a Web Site Secondary School Level m/schrockguide/pdf/evalhigh.pdf

17 Works Cited Kathy Schrock. All rights reserved. Page may be reproduced for classroom use. ckguide/pdf/evalhigh.pdf Kathy Schrock. All rights reserved. Permission to reproduce for classroom use granted. Permission is not granted for re-posting or derivative works. Linking is permitted.

18

19

20

21

22 Name: Date: CRITICAL EVALUATION OF A WEB SITE SECONDARY SCHOOL LEVEL Kathleen Schrock (kathy@kathyschrock.net) Kathy Schrock's Guide for Educators 1. What type of connection do you have to the Internet? Dial- connection Direct connection: 56K DSL T1 T3 Broadband/cable Other: 2. What Web browser are you using? 3. What is the URL of the Web page you are evaluating? 4. What is the name of the site? Part 1: Technical and visual aspects of the page As you look at the questions below, put an X in the yes or no column for each. Does the page take a long time to load? Do any pictures or photographs on the page add to the information? Is the spelling correct on the page? Are there headings and subheadings on the page? If so, are they helpful? Is the page signed by the author? Is the author's address included? Is there a date on the page that tells you when it was last updated? If so, is it current? Is the format standard and readable with your browser? Is there an image map (large clickable graphic with hyperlinks) on the page? Is there a table (columns of text) on the page? (Check the source code to be sure.) If so, is the table readable with your browser? If you have graphics turned off, is there a text alternate to the images? On supporting pages, is there a link back to the home page? Are the links clearly visible and annotated or explanatory? Are there photographs or sound files on the page? If so, can you be sure that a picture or sound has not been edited? If you're not sure, should you accept the information as valid for your purpose? YES NO Summary of Part One Using the data you have collected above, write a short statement explaining why you would or wouldn't recommend this site to a f for use a project Kathy Schrock. All rights reserved. Permission to reproduce in paper for classroom use granted. Permission is not granted for re-posting or derivative works. Linking is permitted.

23 Part 2: Content As you look at the questions below, put an X in the yes or no column for each. Is the title of the page indicative of the content? Is the purpose of the page indicated on the home page? When was the document created? If there is no date, is the information current? Does up-to-date information matter for your purpose? Is the information useful for your purpose? Would it have been easier to get the information somewhere else? Would information somewhere else have been different? Why or why not? YES NO Did the information lead you to other sources, both print and Web, that were useful? Is a bibliography of print sources included? Does the information appear biased? (One-sided, critical of opposing views, etc.) Does the information contradict something you found somewhere else? Do most of the pictures supplement the content of the page? Part 3: Authority As you look at the questions below, put an X in the yes or no column for each. Who created the page? YES NO What organization is the person affiliated with? Conduct a link: command in a search engine to see who links to this page. Can you tell if other experts in the field think this is a reputable page? Does the domain of the page (k12, edu, com, org, gov) influence your evaluation? Are you positive the information is valid and authoritative? What can you do to validate the information? Are you satisfied the information useful for your purpose? If not, what can you do next? If you do a search in the newsgroups on the creator of the page, do you find additional information that shows the Web page author is an expert in the field? Kathy Schrock. All rights reserved. Permission to reproduce for classroom use granted. Permission is not granted for re-posting or derivative works. Linking is permitted.

24 Narrative Evaluation Looking at all of the data you have collected above while evaluating the site, explain why or why not this site is (or is not) valid for your purpose. Include the aspects of technical content, authenticity, authority, bias, and subject content Kathy Schrock. All rights reserved. Permission to reproduce for classroom use granted. Permission is not granted for re-posting or derivative works. Linking is permitted.