English 102 - Spring 2009

This athor of the article talks about some ways in which the achievment gap can be closed. they discussed how having school year round could help, but by doing studies it has not increased the students knowledge. There are more practical solutions that need to evolve. The author suggests that if the student is taught reading strategies from their home life, then it will impact the students literacy greatly.

This study focuses on the improvement of Birch Middle School, which is an urban school. This school was known as the worst in the district. Before one knew it the new principal made signifigant improvement in this school. he stressed to teachers to creat a strong academic culture. He overall created a better school for the children to come and learn and that by the help of one person, they can change alot and many lives.

The author examines differences between data they have collected of 13 urban schools. They collected this data by using test scores, surverys, and case studies, in which other people cmae into schools and watched them. They found very inconsistent information because of the small sample size they had. The only assessed low and high scoring students, which may have caused problems. The teachers use assesment in the classroom to see what students needs are and to have them achieve the goals.

The author discusses the difference of a number of federated and public search engines including MetaLib, WebFeat, Google, and Google Scholar. It explains how MetaLab and WebFeat are more accurate in their searches and more objective in the way they display their results. It also describes that educational literacy is still apart of federate search engines, while Google lacks this ability. The author makes important points about the unreliability of Google; however, he/she discusses the use of Google shopping and other Google additions that do not pertain to research on Google reliability.

This article tries to determine if Google Scholar meets the ACRL Information Literacy Standards, which is a measure of a sites ability to meet the informational needs of students and researchers. It discusses Google Scholars inability to create an advance search option that limits types of sources and sort hundreds of articles. The authors later go on to recommend different approaches to researching the same material. This article effectively discusses how Google works to meet researchers' needs as well as ACRL Information Literacy Standards.

The authors of this article tried to generate search technology to view library resources; however, they found a number of problems. Because of these struggles, they conducted an experiment comparing Organ State University Libraries design to Google Scholar. They use volunteers to conduct research in an efficient and effective way to discover the reliability of each student. They used both qualitative and quantitative data to determine how Google compares to other search engines. This article also presents charts and tables that make understanding the experimental result with more ease.

This article transcribes a debate between individuals that believe Google is a benefit to society and individuals who feel that Google restrains society. They discuss the ease of Google, the reliability of Google, and censorship and commerce that affects Google. This article gives me both sides of the article; however, it gives personal opinions of both sides.

This article talks about a number of the factors that have started controversy in the library world. It considers the challenges that face library websites and the impact of Google Scholar on informational literacy. It discusses how many students are driven away from the libraries because of internet resources, hence making them less literate. The authors then go on to discuss whether Google Scholar can or should be ignored by researchers. It discusses both how Google Scholar both prohibits and encourages information literacy in college students. This article discusses both sides of the argument on Google Scholar and literacy, while presenting solid facts.

This article recounts a librarians experience during a blackout when students needed to perform research without power. It shows how dependent students are of the internet and have no idea how to use the library as a source. It shows how students depend on the internet and Google to do their research and have very little library knowledge.

These authors examine the trust students have with both library search websites and other search engines such as Google. They discuss the attempt of colleges and universities to push students away from Google to Google Scholar. The authors then go on to explain how Google Scholar works and what one can accomplish from the main search page. The article explains how one can find the title of the book, book reviews, and a place to retrieve the book. It gives a number of examples of different searches that were conducted making it easier to see how to operate Google Scholar and its benefits. This article describes the reliance of students on Google and states that the only way to wean this Google reliance is Google Scholar.

These authors discuss a few studies of how the UK's national academic sector services and projects are affected by different search engines. It discusses the first search engine for the volunteers and explains how many of them start with the same search engine. It describes the common uses of internet search engines, whether it be for hours or for just minutes. They followed the search with a questionnaire that asked the volunteers the ease of their research and the reliability of their findings. Hence, this article describes both how easy it is to use Google and how reliable the findings are; however, it studies students just in the UK.

The author discuses how students researches have begun to diverge from the library for quite some time now and Google Scholar is just more evidence of this. He describes how the lack of student tendency to use the library has struck fear into both university faculty and librarians. He then discusses a number of different approaches that colleges and universities are taking. Some have a strict no Google Scholar, others do not dismiss or endorse it, posting agendas that point users towards the library, and some accept Google Scholar as good enough for student use. This article describes what researchers desire and the ability of Google Scholar to provide this information.

These authors studied a number of popular search engines, including Google, to discover if they can find librarian acceptable information. In order to do this they entered in several key words and looked at the first one hundred results. Once completing these tests the authors discovered what percent of each search engine was librarian acceptable. It also lists the total number of results of each search engines. These authors' research gives a representation of the reliability of a number of search engines including Google, Yahoo, and MSN.

This article discusses the internet habits of college students during the early twenty first century. It discusses how often college student use the internet and internet search engines such as Google on an almost daily basis. It also suggests that different backgrounds and racial groups have different access to the internet. Of the individuals that use the internet it describes what websites they use the most including Yahoo and Google, Library websites, news websites, and online encyclopedias. This article gives an accurate description of how many college students use the internet and what they use it for; however, it does not describe how reliable these websites are.

Conservative activists throughout history have sought to censor thinkers from Karl Marx to Friedrich Nietzsche to John Dewey. Why would Charles Darwin be any different? The religious conservative movement-what Apple deems "authoritarian populism"-is a threat to both education and culture, striking a particularly resonant chord in the evolution/creation debate. Crafting a linguistic façade known as "intelligent design" has allowed conservatives to covertly enter the scientific realm. Scientists, he argues, must assemble themselves, as the authoritarian populists have, in order to uphold the very best of science. Apple does a particularly exceptional job examining the psyche of the conservative alliance and its widespread cultural impact.

Despite the refutation of intelligent design as legitimate science by the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences and the National Academy of Sciences, eighteen states have suggested the introduction of antievolution legislation (as of 2005). In the wake of this movement, librarians, the ultimate guardians of knowledge, may face challenges of censorship by religious conservatives. Suppressing access to information is in direct conflict with democratic ideals. This article contains specific advice for librarians regarding the protection of diverse resources. Although the O'Sullivans write to a specific audience, their message is indicative of the relationship between censorship and literacy.

Although most states include evolution as a essential part of a well-rounded education, legislative action is continually perverting science standards to a point where we must ask the question, "Do state science standards matter?" Between 2005 and 2006, 23 states have modified science curricula, which further obscures the issue. Bandoli surveyed close to 2,500 freshman college students from both Indiana and Ohio regarding their experiences in high school biology. Among the incredible statistical information assembled here, Bandoli found that over 90% of students regarded evolution as a strong scientific theory. Considering the fact that 66% of high school biology teachers either breeze over or snub the teaching of evolution, these results appear to suggest that students may actually be more open-minded and competent than their high school teachers. Not only does this raise the issue of teacher quality and objectivity, it also questions the relevance and validity of the antievolution movement.

Examining a specific legal decision in Pennsylvania regarding high school curriculum, the author examines yet another facet of the evolution debate-the students' voice. All too often, the rights of children are overlooked in the development of or debate over educational curriculum. Grover cites the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) as recognizing children as competent and independent thinkers whose input is not only relevant, but also valuable. The focus of the paper is on children's rights and how they were neglected in Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School District et al, although attention is paid to church state separation and science education. This source is particularly useful for examining the role of the child in the education arena-just because they are on the receiving end of the education continuum does not mean they do not have a role in the discourse. Their voices are perhaps the most important of all.

This article responds to many of the existing creationist arguments by refuting them with scientific evidence, including substantiation from reputable sources. Kessler, chair of the department of physics at Illinois Wesleyan University, discusses his personal experiences with teaching college freshmen, including an astounding case in which a student who had received a 32 on his ACT dropped out of college on the advice of his minister. At the heart of the issue was a belief system that could not be reconciled with Kessler's instruction. The article also focuses on the backgrounds of the students and the ways in which their limited (sometimes nonexistent and often misinformed) research illustrates a lack of understanding of the scientific method and the nature of experimental data. In this way, the creationist student mindset can be examined in context of his/her belief system.