Group items tagged

Regarding Open Source/Access, good article on whether students consider Wikipedia a good source for information. Since its introduction in 2001, Wikipedia has grown to host more than 19 million articles with 82,000 contributors in more than 270 languages. Wikipedia has 400 million unique viewers each month as of March 2011, According to ComScore, an Internet marketing research company that provides marketing data to large Internet businesses.

Citizen journalism refers to a wide range of activities in which everyday people contribute information or commentary about news events. People behind the citizen journalism can range from News Company to a normal citizen writing about anything they wish to share with the world. How they wish share it is up to them. They may use blogs, videos, among other social medias. The significance of citizen journalism is that they may share things that people may not know about or may share things that other "professional" sources are not willing to talk about. However, there are downsides to citizen journalism, such as reliability and validity. This site has everything you need to know about Citizen Journalism.

The resource is good. Citizen journalism is a resource that everyone can join and contribute to. However, not everyone can and is willing to join it. This is a pity of citizen journalism. on the other hand, like what is above, there are problems about reliability and validity

The competencies discussed by Dr. Jenkins in the Module 3 video, for those who are interested, are: "Play - the capacity to experiment with your surroundings as a form of problem-solving Performance - the ability to adopt alternative identities for the purpose of improvisation and discovery Simulation - the ability to interpret and construct dynamic models of real world processes Appropriation - the ability to meaningfully sample and remix media content Multitasking - the ability to scan one's environment and shift focus as needed to salient details. Distributed Cognition - the ability to interact meaningfully with tools that expand mental capacities Collective Intelligence - the ability to pool knowledge and compare notes with others toward a common goal Judgment - the ability to evaluate the reliability and credibility of different information sources Transmedia Navigation - the ability to follow the flow of stories and information across multiple modalities Networking - the ability to search for, synthesize, and disseminate information Negotiation - the ability to travel across diverse communities, discerning and respecting multiple perspectives, and grasping and following alternative norms."

It's unquestionable that Research4Life has had a significant impact in improving access to research information for communities in developing countries. I do have a number of criticisms about how the program is organized and delivered, however. 1. Publisher participation in the program is 'entirely voluntary', without 'a single contract (being) signed between any of the partners' (Aaronson, 2004), meaning that publishers can opt out at any point. This issue was highlighted in 2011 when Elsevier, Lipincott Williams & Wilkins, Springer and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS, publisher of Science Magazine) withdrew access to over 2500 journals through the HINARI system. Following international attention, and widespread condemnation, publishers restored access, with Elsevier announcing that they were in discussions with the government in Bangladesh to transition towards a paid licensing scheme (Wise, 2011). 2. Countries that meet the eligibility criteria of the program (which are based on the World Bank's listing of Lower and Lower Middle Income Countries) are sometimes excluded. Take for example India or Pakistan- although these countries are in the lists of eligible countries, the publishers deliberately exclude participation to protect whatever business they may have in these countries. So although hundreds of institutions could benefit, they exclude access to protect the business they receive from a handful of institutions. 3. Access to content is delivered through a single username and password for each institution. This is problematic for librarians, as they are unable to ensure the security of the password (a well-meaning researcher may share the password with a colleague in another institution, violating the license agreement). Abuse of institutional accounts has severe consequences, and librarians are sent messages from Research4Life threatening to not only cut off the institution, but all institutions in their country if they

Research4life is a great program by committed government and non-government organizations dedicated to produce valuable researches that will improve the life of people. Librarians play an important role in assisting researchers find valid, current, relevant information in order to produce a reliable output or results that will help humankind's betterment of living.

Why it "works" Network Effect Wikipedia benefits tremendously from the network effect. The network effect is when a user of a product benefits more from a product if other people also use the product. Telephones are a textbook example. If only a few dozen consumers have telephones, then the telephones aren't very useful. But if millions of consumers have telephones, they become more useful since each telephone owner can contact many people. The large number of Wikipedia users benefits Wikipedia. First, the more editors there are, the the higher the accuracy and quality of the articles. Secondly, it gives an incentive to users to edit. Since editors know the each article will be read by thousands of users, the sheer influence of each article is a strong enough incentive to edit, even though Wikipedia is free. Openness Wikipedia is free and open for any user to edit, even anonymously. This means there is a very large number of editors. This helps Wikipedia ensure accuracy since each mistake and inaccuracy will have to get by hundreds of editors. With so many writers, the scope of Wikipedia articles is very large, minimizing the amount of missing information. Although the openness of Wikipedia provides a powerful self-correcting method, it also makes Wikipedia vulnerable to vandalism. In addition, editors are anonymous and may have a conflict of interest, or might have inadequate knowledge of the article's subject. Yet, because Wikipedia is open to any edits, it is also likely to be corrected. It operates by a system of checks and balances from many editors. However, it has some guidelines to protect it against misinformation and bias: 1. Verifiability principle. To prevent bias and to protect the encyclopedic quality of its articles, all edits on Wikipedia must in theory be a verifiable fact. Moreover, it must have a reliable source to verify each fact. 2. No Original Research. As an encyclopedia, it is mean to be a secondary source of infor

The social networking site Facebook is large enough to have attracted more than its share of scams, hoaxes, and malware. The same cautions should apply when using Facebook as when reading regular e-mail or outside web sites: Don't believe everything you read.

You are assuming that Facebook is more reliable that hackers and hoaxes, you have to think again. We are already exposed more than you imagine and we can not do anything about it. Your personal data is uploaded and even if you want to stop and delete your self from the net it will remain.

How do I evaluate the quality of websites? How can I teach students to evaluate websites? Where can I find checklists for evaluation? There's lots of good information on the Internet, but you will also find opinions, misconceptions, and inaccurate information. How do you judge the quality of Internet resources?

"Evaluating Internet Resources" has been designed for teachers, but is a good starting point for all who want to enhance their critical skills when using the internet. Three main areas are covered: Instructions on assessing the validity of websites, guidance on educating students in these skills and other website links on the topic. Examples of legitimate and fictitious websites are provided to use for teaching purposes. The website masters should have categorized the different website links into the genuine and bogus sites to facilitate their use for the teacher. Access to some of these websites has been discontinued. Measures to be used for evaluation, including authority, objectivity, authenticity, reliability, timeliness, relevance and efficiency are considered. Indicators to verify the website and exercises to practice student evaluation skills are provided. The layout of this resource is easy to use and well-organised

Useful resources for Citizen Scientists who wish to publish, so sharing valuable data which otherwise may have been lost. Of course, caution should be taken to ensure that all data recorded is done scientifically and is reliable.

Very useful; thank you very much. You can find useful the list made by Prof. Andy Miah on academia and social networks: http://www.andymiah.net/2012/12/30/the-a-to-z-of-social-media-for-academics/

Thanks for sharing both lists of resources. Very useful!

Wikipedia provides Internet users with millions of articles on a broad range of topics, and commonly ranks first in search engines. But its reliability and credibility fall well short of the standards for a school paper.

Me parece que wikipedia sigue siendo un recurso de importancia, y los diez puntos por los que no habria que utilizar o citar Wikipedia, pueden transformarse ne los diez puntos a considerar al consultar y citar Wikipedia. Escritores de la talla de Gabriel Zaid la usan extensivamente y aparece citada en sus artículos y ensayes, sobre todo en Letras Libres; de modo que la vigilancia heurística debería permitirnos usar este recurso.

However, it offers a valuable starting point from which students can go from understanding the topic, to thoroughly researching it in primary sources.

Millions of people use research everyday. From students, medical professionals, to curious hobbyists, we all benefit from being able to access, read, and cite reliable, tested information. But getting the research we need can be hard and costly when it's locked up behind expensive paywalls.