Source Analysis
  • Source Analysis Home
  • Can We Research in a "Better Way"?
  • Who Created This Message?
  • Who is the Audience for this Message?
  • What is the Purpose of this Message?
  • What is the Message?
  • What is NOT Being Said in this Message?
  • HOW is the Message VISUALLY Presented?
  • How Can I Know that this Message is Factually Accurate?
    • Google
    • Academic Journals
    • Wikipedia
    • Blogs
    • Corporate Publications
    • Non-Profits
    • Educational Institutions
  • Assignments
  • Resources for Teachers
  • About

Are our Beliefs about Using the Internet for Research "Wrong"? Can we Research in a
​"Better" Way??

Picture

1. Just Google it!

Eli Pariser explains the algorithms that control and limit your Google search results.


2. Wikipedia is a "bad source."

Picture
The Top 10 Reasons Students Cannot Cite or Rely on Wikipedia
Picture
10 Reasons Why Wikipedia Doesn't Suck
top_10_reasons_students_cannot_cite_or_rely_on_wikipedia.pdf
File Size: 357 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

10_reasons_why_wikipedia_doesnt_suck.pdf
File Size: 314 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File


3. Academic Journals are always the "best option."
Picture
CLICK PHOTO for explanation of Academic Journals.
    CODE of ETHICS for ACADEMIC  JOURNALS    
What is a PREDATORY PUBLISHER?
Beall's List of Potential Predatory Publishers

PictureCLICK PHOTO to read a blog post arguing that BIAS is something we should look for, not avoid.
4. We must look for information "without bias."


​


5. ".org" and ".edu" are guaranteed domains of good information, whereas ".com" is trying to sell you something.
How is a .org different from a .com or a .net?
Is a .edu or .gov guaranteed to be reliable and unbiased?


Fake versus False: A website could be "real", but still be a "bad source." What does this mean?

 
REAL WEBSITES. BAD SOURCES?
  • Republic of Molossia Official Website
  • Dihydrogen Monoxide Research Division

What is the story they are telling?

You should always consider:

Background knowledge: Does their information line up with what you already know about the topic?
Appearance: Does this LOOK like a reliable source? Does it LOOK like other organizations or websites? Does the appearance distract from the content, or does it support the content?
What do they want you to believe? Why?

CAN YOU SPOT THE DECEPTION? 
  • NY TIMES Interactive Article

Additional information about sources that will help you formulate answers to the questions:
Google
Journals
Wikipedia
Blogs
.coms
.orgs
.edus

THINGS FOR YOU TO THINK ABOUT...
1. Why do people like to use Google when searching for information?
2. What problems exist in using Google for searches?
3. Why do teachers often say that Wikipedia is a bad source?
4. What makes Wikipedia a good source?
5. What problems are still inherent in the Wikipedia model?
6. Why are academic journals supposed to be excellent sources of information?
7. What problems may exist in using academic journals?
8. Why is it a bad idea to insist that sources must be "without bias" or "unbiased"?
9. Why are .org and .edu often viewed as bette
r than .com domains for reliable information?
10. Why are .org and .edu not necessarily any more reliable than .coms?



NEXT PAGE
Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.