Skip to main content

Home/ Classroom 2.0/ Group items tagged credibility

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Steve Ransom

Strictly business? Personal tweets make profs more "credible" - 10 views

  • At least among the young.
  • The researchers found that older students tended to rate the professors lower in credibility after having viewed their Twitter accounts. These students were also more likely to think it was a bad idea for professors to have Twitter accounts at all, citing the potential for revealing too much personal information and creating an awkward student/teacher relationship.
  •  
    students perceive instructors who make social tweets as more credible than instructors who remain strictly business, lending support to the idea that knowing a real human is behind the Twitter stream helps people feel more confident about that person's abilities.
Russell D. Jones

Credibility and Digital Media @ UCSB - Past Research - 0 views

  • traditional notions of credibility as coming from a centralized authority (e.g., a teacher, expert, or author) and individualized appraisal processes are challenged by digital technologies.
    • Russell D. Jones
       
      Here is the break down of traditional modernist classroom.
  • Credibility assessments as constructed through collective or community efforts (e.g., wikis, text messaging via cell phones, or social networking applications) emerge as a major theme in recent discussions, and phrases like "distributed" and "decentralized" credibility, the "democratization of information," and "collectively versus institutionally-derived credibility" are common.
  • At core is the belief that digital media allow for the uncoupling of credibility and authority in a way never before possible.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • Digital media thus call into question our conceptions of authority as centralized, impenetrable, and singularly accurate and move information consumers from a model of single authority based on hierarchy to a model of multiple authorities based on networks of peers.
  •  
    much of the information on the Web at the time (and still today) was not subject to the same types of credibility standards as most traditional mainstream media.
Dennis OConnor

Wikipedia:Notability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - 0 views

  • This page in a nutshell: If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article.
  • General notability guideline Shortcut: WP:GNG If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article. "Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail, and no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than trivial but may be less than exclusive.[1] "Reliable" means sources need editorial integrity to allow verifiable evaluation of notability, per the reliable source guideline. Sources may encompass published works in all forms and media. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability.[2] "Sources,"[3] defined on Wikipedia as secondary sources, provide the most objective evidence of notability. The number and nature of reliable sources needed varies depending on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally preferred.[4] "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject including (but not limited to): self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, autobiographies, press releases, etc.[5] "Presumed" means that substantive coverage in reliable sources establishes a presumption, not a guarantee, of notability. Editors may reach a consensus that although a topic meets this criterion, it is not suitable for inclusion. For example, it may violate what Wikipedia is not.[6] A topic for which this criterion is deemed to have been met by consensus, is usually worthy of notice, and satisfies one of the criteria for a stand-alone article in the encyclopedia. Verifiable facts and content not supported by multiple independent sources may be appropriate for inclusion within another article.
1 - 3 of 3
Showing 20 items per page