Group items tagged

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.

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.

This is the fifth article in the Team A Prezi. The author is Elizabeth Nuttall, a teacher who writes as a pastime. The article originates from Knoji. The date of the article is not listed, but a comment was posted about the article in May 2011. Knoji is developed by zipfworks, a data platform that makes millions of products. It was founded by Michael Quoc, the former Director of Products at Yahoo!'s media Lab. He holds a Bachelor's in Business Administration. The article is about free Internet literacy resources. The article is accurate, but it does not list any examples of the sites the author is describing. It does not seem biased or persuasive. However, the article does not cite a single source. On the plus side, the article has links to different articles of the same nature. This gives the reader the opportunity to find out more information about the topic. Most of the links still work. The article does not have any navigation tools. It is short, but navigation tools would still be appreciated. Given that the article is already broken up into four parts, it would be fairly easy to add a navigation bar. The information here is so general that information from the article can be found very many places and in more detail. The article is copyrighted zipfworks 2014 This article adds little new information to Team A's presentation. Most of the information can be found at http://www.ldonline.org/article/35792#comprehension and in more detail. This is more of an article to get a general overview of a topic. The article is not thorough, does not cite any information and offers no navigation tools. The article did not harm the presentation in any way, but it did not particularly help it, either. 60/100

Yes this can be used as the least creditable. The article has only one link, that takes you to another article she wrote. Also, her BS is in Childhood and Youth Studies not in journalism so that could be a reason to knock down the credibility a bit. And I do agree with Gavin, its just a general overview of how one can use the internet for literacy skills.

Okay great. You can add this to the Prezi just like you did the other one. P.S. Kelvin is having the same problem you did this morning and I don't know what is going on.

This is the bio for the author of the fifth article in the Team A Prezi

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.