Evaluate - Psychology 2301 - Katakalos, David - PsycARTICLES

Authority is Constructed and Contextual

SCHOLARLY ARTICLE AUTOPSY ACTIVITY:

Purpose: Students will understand that authority is constructed and contextual.

Student Learning Activity: Evaluate a variety of sources for the ethical and logical uses of evidence.

Skills: The purpose of this activity is to help you practice the following skills essential to your success in school and beyond.

In this activity you will:

S. 1. Define types of authority such as subject expertise, social position, or special experience;

S. 2. Understand that many disciplines have acknowledged authorities and some scholars may challenge these authorities;

S. 3. Recognize that authoritative content may be packaged formally or informally and may include sources of all media types.

Knowledge: This activity will also help you become familiar with the following important content knowledge:

K.1. Motivation to find authoritative sources, recognizing that authority may be conferred or manifested in unexpected ways;

K.2. Develop awareness of the importance of assessing content with a skeptical stance.

The Scholarly Article Autopsy

This lesson is intended as a single session within a major’s research methods course. Rather than using a shorter “scholarly vs. non-scholarly” comparison worksheet, this activity asks students to work in groups to systematically examine a scholarly article in depth, identify and evaluate its various components visually and in writing, and then compare it to a non-scholarly article on the same topic. Groups then report back to the entire class. Discussion is guided so as to touch on the processes by which sources are created, what these methods say about their authority, and to consider contextually appropriate uses for them.

Lesson Outline/Procedure:

Time	Activity
5 minutes	Set up Arrange room to encourage pairs or groups of three Distribute the following: Each participant gets a copy of the worksheet. Each pair/group gets a print copy of one of the scholarly articles to mark up. Try not to give adjacent groups the same article. Each group gets a highlighter. On the presenter screen, bring up the LibGuide for the session as well as a PDF of each sample article for the students to use when they are presenting
5 minutes	Introduce the process Guide students to the session LibGuide page with article links so they may bring up the PDF version of their assigned article. Review the worksheet together so that all understand what to do. Tell students to assign a recorder and presenter(s).

30-40 minutes	Scholarly Autopsy Activity Allow students to complete the worksheet, frequently checking in with each pair/group to judge progress. When the students reach questions 8-11 they may either work from a printed copy of the comparison article or an online PDF as linked from the LibGuide.
20-30 minutes	Report Back Bring group back together and have students present. Guide the discussion so as to frame each element from the scholarly articles in terms of the research process and to emphasize the contexts in which scholarly and non-scholarly sources may be appropriate. Possible discussion structure: Bring up the PDF of article 1 up on screen. Ask all of the presenters with article 1 to come to the front and discuss questions 1-3, showing what they found on screen. Have presenters for article 2 come up, bring up the PDF, and talk about questions 4-5, citations. Make sure they show the link between a citation and its bibliography entry. Discuss how using sources is part of the research process and construction of authority. Talk about literature reviews and how they may or may not be explicitly named. Have presenters for article 3 talk about the research question. Display it on screen, talk about what a research question is and what role it plays in the creation of information. Have presenters for article 4 talk about methods used and their role in information creation and authority construction. Finally, have presenters for article 5 talk about the comparison to non- scholarly. Make sure they show the visible differences on-screen. Note: The above process must be adapted to fit with the number of groups constituted and the example articles used.

Assessment:

The librarian and the teacher of record will evaluate students’ learning about elements of scholarly articles, the differences between scholarly and non-scholarly sources, and the selection of contextually-appropriate sources based on the verbal reports of their groups as well as the resulting discussion between groups.
Additional assessment will take place after the session by examining the written and marked-up articles.

Credit: Krista Bowers Sharpe Western Illinois University Libraries 4/26/2017

Lesson Plan and Student Worksheet

SOURCE LAB ACTIVITY:

Purpose: Students will understand that authority is constructed and contextual.

Student Learning Activity: Evaluate a variety of sources for the ethical and logical uses of evidence.

Skills: The purpose of this activity is to help you practice the following skills essential to your success in school and beyond.

In this activity you will:

S. 1. Define types of authority such as subject expertise, social position, or special experience;

S. 2. Use research tools to determine the credibility of the author;

S. 3. Recognize that information may be packaged formally or informally and may include sources of all media types.

Knowledge: This activity will also help you become familiar with the following important content knowledge:

K.1 Motivation to find authoritative sources, recognizing that authority may be conferred or manifested in unexpected ways;

K.2. Develop awareness of the importance of assessing content with a skeptical stance.

Source Lab Activity

Remember: Evaluation is a process. No single question is enough to determine a source's usefulness. You need to take them all into consideration.

Student Learning Activity: Evaluate a variety of sources for the ethical and logical uses of evidence.

Directions for activity:

Around the room you will find multiple source documents or what we will call 'artifacts'.
You will be divided into groups and provided with a worksheet.
As a group you will move from one artifact to another and evaluate each artifact using the 'Five W's' Method, write notes about each artifact on your worksheet.
One member of the group may need to use the computer to check links and to research an author's credentials.
After evaluating each artifact, as a group, decide whether you would feel confident in using the source for an academic research paper? Explain why or why not?
Each group will report back to the class their opinions on each artifact and whether they would feel confident using it as a source for an academic research paper.
Then, each group, will discuss which one artifact would be the "best choice" as a source for using in an academic research paper.
Share with class, through voting, which artifact was the best source material.

Wrap Up: Based on today's activity, individually, write a paragraph explaining to another student some of the elements to consider when evaluating a source for their research needs.

Zooming in on Research
EDUC 1300 worksheet to help you figure out the anatomy of a peer-reviewed research article.

Evaluating Sources: Ask Yourself...

1. Who is the author?

What credentials does the author have? If an individual author is not named who is the editor or sponsor? If the source is a web site, is there a link to a "home page" to see who is sponsoring the page?

2. What date was the information published and/or updated?

Is your topic time-sensitive so that you can only use the most updated information or is your topic more historically oriented?

3. Are there any special features such as a "works cited" to back up the information?

If there's not an actual "works cited," are there any internal references to other sources? If yes, what kind of sources are they? Do these sources supplement the information given? If links are provided, do the links work?

4. What is the overall purpose and tone?

Who is the intended audience? If the source is a web site, you can check the domain name for clues (.edu, .org, .com, .mil, .net) to determine what type of page this might be. Is there an "about" or "what is" link from either the information page or the "home page" that outlines the purpose of the pages? Are they trying to sell something?

5. What type of actual content are you getting?

Does it seem to offer opinions only? Is the author only offering their biased view of the topic or do they present multiple sides of the issue? To what depth does the source cover the topic? Does it seem to be a "surface" treatment? Are you getting a background overview, thorough coverage or an in-depth analysis for specific aspects of your topic?

6. Based on your answers to questions 1-5, do you still feel confident in using the source for your research needs? Why or why not?

Scholarly v. Popular Articles

CHARACTERISTICS	SCHOLARLY	POPULAR
*How can I tell the difference?*
Length	Longer articles, providing in-depth analysis of topics	Shorter articles, providing broader overviews of topics
Authorship	Author usually an expert or specialist in the field, name and credentials always provided	Author usually a staff writer or a journalist, name and credentials may be provided
Language/Audience	Written in the jargon of the field for scholarly readers (professors, researchers or students)	Written in non-technical language for anyone to understand
Format/Structure	Articles usually more structured, may include these sections: abstract, literature review, methodology, results, conclusion, bibliography	Articles do not necessarily follow a specific format or structure
Special Features	Illustrations that support the text, such as tables of statistics, graphs, maps, or photographs	Illustrations with glossy or color photographs, usually for advertising purposes
Editors	Articles usually reviewed and critically evaluated by a board of experts in the field (refereed)	Articles are not evaluated by experts in the field, but by editors on staff
Credits	A bibliography (works cited) and/or footnotes are always provided to document research thoroughly	A bibliography (works cited) is usually not provided, although names of reports or references may be mentioned in the text

Using Wikipedia

Did you find a good article for your topic on Wikipedia?

FABULOUS!

Use the dates, names, and keywords in the article to help you create a search strategy for other resources.
Browse the References at the bottom of the article.
Do a title search for any books in the Library Discovery (Books & Media) to find, see, and cite from the Real Deal.
Do a title search for any magazines, newspapers, or journals in the Journal Locator to find, see, and cite from the Real Deal.
Look for links to web sites that may contain information from more authoritative sites.

Remember:

Wikipedia has this DISCLAIMER linked at the bottom of every article.

Psychology 2301 - Katakalos, David - PsycARTICLES: Evaluate

Authority is Constructed and Contextual

SCHOLARLY ARTICLE AUTOPSY ACTIVITY:

Purpose: Students will understand that authority is constructed and contextual.

S. 1. Define types of authority such as subject expertise, social position, or special experience;

The Scholarly Article Autopsy

SOURCE LAB ACTIVITY:

Purpose: Students will understand that authority is constructed and contextual.

S. 1. Define types of authority such as subject expertise, social position, or special experience;

Source Lab Activity

Remember: Evaluation is a process. No single question is enough to determine a source's usefulness. You need to take them all into consideration.

Wrap Up: Based on today's activity, individually, write a paragraph explaining to another student some of the elements to consider when evaluating a source for their research needs.

Evaluating Sources: Ask Yourself...

Scholarly v. Popular Articles

Using Wikipedia