Group items tagged

This is the first article in Group A's Prezi. It has not been revised. It is about, appropriately, how technology impacts literacy. There is no apparent bias, although it does appear to attempt to convince the reader that technology is beneficial to literacy. It does briefly cite opposing arguments that are not refuted or discredited, giving the article some sense of impartiality. The authors cite multiple sources, and most of them are credible. The credibility of some is hard to determine because the links to some of the articles are broken. The links that do work lead to credible sources. Multiple print articles were also used. These all seem to be credible as well. The article also has multiple links to various webpages on the website. These appear to work as well. The article has a navigation bar at the top that makes it easy for users to navigate throughout the article. The information in the article is obviously found on other sites since the article cites these other sites. Main issues here are the date of publication and the broken links. The date is a huge problem, as Jennifer says. 65/100

Gavin, with all that you said I would score this one a little lower. maybe a fourteen. I have a huge issue with the age of this article. Think about how much has changed since. Maybe 13/20....

Gavin, the only thing I can agree with you on this article is the navigation bar for the various topics covered. The website is just overloaded with multiple sources and links that are very old. The site hasn't been updated since 2001, so most of the information in this article could be invalid to present day use. This could be used as one of their least creditable sources, in my opinion.

This is the third article in the Team A Prezi. The author is unknown, but this is from Dictionary.com. It was written in 2014, and it has not been revised. The website has won many awards for its apps. The focus of the article is the definition of technology. The article is accurate and thorough, and there are few ways one can make a dictionary definition biased or persuasive. The publisher sites many print dictionaries, which gives the website more authority. On top of the various related words, phrases and questions links, there are links for every word used in the dictionary definition. This is an extremely useful feature and adds accessibility to the article. Most, if not all, of the links are still active. Seeing how this article is just a dictionary definition, the only navigation features needed is that to other pages. The article is copyrighted 2014 Dictionary.com Again, the only issue is the lack of authors, but it is hard to see how that would be applicable to a dictionary definition. After all, how many print dictionaries have authors listed? 90/100

I think this could be used as their least creditable article.

After talking to some of the team mates, I decided that this is how we are going to handle this "article". We don't treat it as an article. We can deduct some points in the overall presentation score for using it. They could have used it just for a jumping off point, but shouldn't have quoted whole definition. Do you agree?

This is the article Team B used on slide 1

sz - The internet's effect on literacy (60/100) (2 stars) A&C - 15 C&C - 10 C&B - 18 C&L - 12 N&C - 5 Did not find this article credible. Although the author was clearly defined with a detailed job description, the article did not list the date it was written or when it was copyrighted. It was hard to read because of the jumbled information - not relating to the article - intermingled throughout the copy. This article also remarked on both sides of the argument. This is a case where you want bias to be support your statement. They also cited what a source was saying in the article and did not give credit to the original source.

Authority and Credibility - 20 Currency and Continuity - 20 Content and Bias - 15 Citations and Links - 10 Navigation and Copyright - 15 Total - 80 The author of this article is Katie Ash, who is a writer for Education Week and Digital Directions. Her beats include charter schools, school choice, and educational technology. The article originates from the Education Week magazine; Vol. 04, Issue 02. The article was published online on February 4, 2011, and in print on February 9, 2011. The article has not been revised since its original publication date, and it has a solid standing and history for accessibility because all issues are available in digital form online. The focus of the article is to inform readers of how a fourth grade teacher uses technology to enhance the teaching, and learning experience. Specific pieces of technology such as iPods, digital voice recorders, Power Point presentations, and DVD's are throughly listed. The article stays away from a bias point of view, however Gail Lovely, a former K-8 teacher is quoted "My bias is that a caring adult will always read a book aloud better than a computer can," she says. "We have to be thoughtful about where the technologies fit best." The story does not try to convince readers of anything. There are no sources or citations listed, and the links in the writing take you to the tools that are being utilized by teachers, and they are still active. There is no evidence that the article has been copyrighted, and it is accessible through alternative sources such as printed media. Overall I find this writing to be highly credible, and great for academic research.

About page for first resource of Team A.

Authority and Credibility - 10 Currency and Continuity - 10 Content and Bias - 20 Citations and Links - 20 Navigation and Copyright - 15 Total - 75 I find this article to be credible, however there are some issues. The writer of this article is listed as The Alberta Teachers' Association. While this may be a known organization, it would have been better if the names of the contributors were listed. The date is listed as 2010, even though it was only four years ago, the opinion of social networking has changed a lot since then. The focus of the article is to challenge whether or not social networking harms literacy development. The article is developed thoroughly from multiple studies using students, but it remains from being biased, and does not try to convince readers one way or another. There are several citations listed which appear to be the studies or research that was done. None of the links are active which prevents readers from determining if they support or enhance the article.