Group items tagged

from slide 4

morgan - the effects internet reading skills (85/100) (3 stars) A&C - 18 C&C - 10 C&B - 19 C&L - 20 N&C - 18 This was a great article for team B to use in support of their statement. I found the article credible. The author is stated with a link to their Google Plus page. I could not find any history about the company. The article does not have any dates for when it was written or revised. The article can be searched for and found on the site easily. The content is concise and interesting. It is bias - but in a good way. They are trying to convince the reader that the inter is negatively impacting our young readers and they make very good points. There are several sources listed with links to related and additional articles. Pictures enhance the content and do not obstruct the flow of the copy. There is no clear copyright information for the article.

This is the most credible article for The Refutables points to be put on Prezi - The article ttys to convince readers the the internet is negatively effecting reading skills. - Several links are linseed for the reader to continue reading more about the subject. - Pictures enhance the article without taking away from its readability.

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 article was cited by Team B on slide 1

coles - negative effect of the internet and technology (58/100) (2 stars) A&C - 12 C&C - 15 C&B - 18 C&L - 0 N&C - 13 Again, I did not find this article credible. The author was stated clearly and it had a link on it that you you to a bio page, but it was mostly blank. He is a freelance write that has only been writing a few years.There was a publish date and a revision date. The company has not been around long. The article only appears online. It is biased, but supports the statement the team is making. However the author does not give any examples, sources or citations. The article was easy to read but did not give an copyright information.

This is the least credible article for The Refutables Points be added to Prezi - The bio page for the author was blank. - There are no sources or links provided. - The site is a younger site. - Only a small portion of the entire article covered the negative effects of technology.

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.

This source is not accurate information to go by, it was last updated on Thursday, Aug. 23 2012

howard - too much screen time (84/100) A&C - 15 C&C - 14 C&B - 18 C&L - 19 N&C - 18 I loved this article and found it highly credible. The author was clearly stated, but there was no bio or contact information. It is a recent article. the company who published the article has been around for many years and covers a lot of topics concerning children. The focus of the article was on screen time and it's negative effects not just the negative effects of the internet. The sources that were quoted are quite well known and therefore add to the credibility of the article. The article is very easy to navigate and read. There is a copyright displayed for the website but not exclusively for the article.

Nope, no bookmark.

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.

Screen 3 - Team B

howard - too much screen time (86/100) A&C - 15 C&C - 16 C&B - 18 C&L - 19 N&C - 18 I loved this article and found it highly credible. The author was clearly stated, but there was no bio or contact information. It is a recent article. the company who published the article has been around for many years and covers a lot of topics concerning children. The focus of the article was on screen time and it's negative effects not just the negative effects of the internet. The sources that were quoted are quite well known and therefore add to the credibility of the article. The article is very easy to navigate and read. There is a copyright displayed for the website but not exclusively for the article.

About page for first resource of Team A.

team b slide 5

UCLA - decline in critical thinking (77/100) (3stars) A&C - 10 C&C - 16 C&B - 18 C&L - 15 N&C - 18 The author is not identified but the source of the article is cited. The page origiantes from UCLA - a highly reputable university. The article was written in 2009. It is a little old. A revision date is not displayed. The site is also found reputable. The article has a clear focus, is easy to read and navigate, and filled filled great content. The article is biased, but not overly. There are several quotes from the source, a distinguished professor at UCLA. The are not any links to any other resources, but there is one back to the university itself. There is not a copyright shown for the article. Overall, I found this article credible.