Skipping the Source and Checking the Contents: An in-Depth Look at Students’ Approaches to Web Evaluation

IF 1.2 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Sarah McGrew
{"title":"Skipping the Source and Checking the Contents: An in-Depth Look at Students’ Approaches to Web Evaluation","authors":"Sarah McGrew","doi":"10.1080/07380569.2021.1912541","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This study investigated how high school students evaluated online information on social and political topics. Eighteen juniors and seniors, at a school that attempts to leverage technology to personalize learning, thought aloud as they completed online reasoning tasks. Three themes emerged from analyses of think-aloud data. First, students assembled ad hoc lists of surface features (e.g., a website’s layout or top-level domain) that they used to render decisions about whether content was trustworthy. Next, they judged the usability of an article as a way to decide whether it was reliable. Finally, they interpreted the presence of data as conferring credibility on online posts, regardless of the quality of the source. These students spent a great deal of the school day in front of computers, yet this study suggests that students relied on evaluation tactics best suited for vetted print information—not the open web.","PeriodicalId":45769,"journal":{"name":"COMPUTERS IN THE SCHOOLS","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/07380569.2021.1912541","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COMPUTERS IN THE SCHOOLS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2021.1912541","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Abstract This study investigated how high school students evaluated online information on social and political topics. Eighteen juniors and seniors, at a school that attempts to leverage technology to personalize learning, thought aloud as they completed online reasoning tasks. Three themes emerged from analyses of think-aloud data. First, students assembled ad hoc lists of surface features (e.g., a website’s layout or top-level domain) that they used to render decisions about whether content was trustworthy. Next, they judged the usability of an article as a way to decide whether it was reliable. Finally, they interpreted the presence of data as conferring credibility on online posts, regardless of the quality of the source. These students spent a great deal of the school day in front of computers, yet this study suggests that students relied on evaluation tactics best suited for vetted print information—not the open web.
跳源查目:学生网络评价方法的深入研究
摘要本研究旨在调查高中生对网络社会政治话题信息的评价。在一所试图利用技术实现个性化学习的学校里,18名大三和大四学生在完成在线推理任务时大声思考。对有声思维数据的分析显示出三个主题。首先,学生们将表面特征(例如,网站的布局或顶级域名)的临时列表集合起来,用来判断内容是否值得信赖。接下来,他们判断一篇文章的可用性,以此来判断它是否可靠。最后,他们将数据的存在解释为赋予在线帖子可信度,而不管来源的质量如何。这些学生在学校里花了大量的时间在电脑前,然而这项研究表明,学生们依赖于最适合经过审查的印刷信息的评估策略,而不是开放的网络。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
COMPUTERS IN THE SCHOOLS
COMPUTERS IN THE SCHOOLS EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
11.10%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: Under the editorship of D. LaMont Johnson, PhD, a nationally recognized leader in the field of educational computing, Computers in the Schools is supported by an editorial review board of prominent specialists in the school and educational setting. Material presented in this highly acclaimed journal goes beyond the “how we did it” magazine article or handbook by offering a rich source of serious discussion for educators, administrators, computer center directors, and special service providers in the school setting. Articles emphasize the practical aspect of any application, but also tie theory to practice, relate present accomplishments to past efforts and future trends, identify conclusions and their implications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信