Evidence Summary
Secondary School Students Ascribe Value to
Presentation, Accuracy, and Currency in their Evaluation of Web-Based
Information
A Review of:
Pickard, A. J., Shenton, A. K., & Johnson, A. (2014). Young people
and the evaluation of information on the World Wide Web: Principles, practice
and beliefs. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 46(1),
3-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0961000612467813
Reviewed by:
Kimberly Miller
Learning Technologies Librarian
Albert S. Cook Library
Towson University
Towson, Maryland, United States of America
Email: kimberlymiller@towson.edu
Received: 20 Nov. 2015 Accepted: 10 Feb.
2016
2016 Miller.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons‐Attribution‐Noncommercial‐Share Alike License 4.0
International (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial
purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the
same or similar license to this one.
Abstract
Objective – To measure the importance students
place on criteria used to evaluate Web-based information.
Design – Online, self-report questionnaire.
Setting – Secondary school in the United
Kingdom.
Subjects – 149 students aged 13-18 years,
representing a response rate of approximately 21% of the 713 students sampled.
Methods – The authors used themes generated in
a previous study of Web-based information evaluation (Pickard, Gannon-Leary,
& Coventry, 2010) to create a 10-item questionnaire about the importance of
criteria used to evaluate Web-based information. Criteria represented in the
questionnaire included accuracy, authority (2 statements), currency (2
statements), coverage, presentation, affiliation, source motivation, and
citations. Students used a four-point scale from “Very important” to “Not at
all important” to indicate how significant they considered each criteria to be
when they evaluated websites.
Students received an email invitation to participate
in the study, with a link to the questionnaire in the school’s SharePoint
environment. Two subsequent email reminders were sent approximately 8-10 weeks
after the initial invitation to participate. Teachers at the school were also asked
to promote the questionnaire in their classes.
Main Results – Over 75% of the 149 student
respondents rated statements about presentation (n=116), accuracy (n=114), and
currency (n=116) as “Very important” or “Quite important.” A majority of
students (over 50%) rated the two statements about website authorship as being
only “A little important” or “Not at all important” (n=92, and n=86). However,
62% of students (n=92) indicated that a website’s sponsoring organization is
“Very important” or “Quite important.” The authors suggest there were some
differences between responses from older and younger students, with older
students more likely to rate statements about coverage, citations, organization
sponsorship, and source motivation as “Very important” or “Quite important.”
Conclusion – The authors recommend that
instruction about information evaluation for teenagers does not need to take a
“back to basics” approach (p. 16), as most questionnaire respondents indicated
they already find several criteria to be important when evaluating information.
Instead, instruction should address student opinions and misconceptions about
Web-based information in the context of their school assignments or other
information needs. For example, students may be more motivated to learn about
and apply evaluative criteria that are generated through discussion with their
peers. Students may also be more receptive to expanding information evaluation
criteria when they are researching topics they find interesting or important. Finally,
the authors recommend that instruction should take into account the context or
situations in which various evaluation criteria may be most important.
Commentary
Evaluating Web-based information remains a key skill
in today's technology-saturated world. Documents such as the Association of
College and Research Libraries’ Framework for Information Literacy for
Higher Education and the American Association of School Librarians’ Standards
for the 21st Century Learner place evaluation skills at the heart of modern
information literacy education and practice.
This study begins with an engaging literature review that describes the challenges
underlying contemporary information evaluation. This review includes the
historical significance of evaluation, the complex cognitive abilities required
to formulate complete evaluations, and the centrality of evaluation in critical
thinking and information literacy. The review provides insights into the
complicated nature of studying, measuring, and teaching information evaluation
skills.
Material design, data collection, and data analysis
methods are described in a clear and replicable manner, but questionnaire
validity, data reporting, and result analysis are more difficult to evaluate
when reviewed against Glynn’s (2006) critical appraisal checklist. The data
collection instrument was constructed using findings from a previous study of
information evaluation criteria in higher education (Pickard et al., 2010).
Constructing a questionnaire based on themes from a previous study signals
instrument validity and allows the current study’s results to be compared to
previous research results. There is less discussion about why teenagers’
“internal cues” (p. 9) are expected to match those of higher education users’
aside from the authors’ observation that existing information literacy instruction
usually targets similar criteria.
The study results are presented in a table of
descriptive statistics per questionnaire item and response option, while the
narrative outlines underlying patterns in evaluation cues students deemed more
or less important. A visual representation of other results, such as a list of
the top three most and least important internal cues, or a table summarizing
results by cue, would have helped the reader quickly interpret trends. Sample
size limitations restrict the study's ability to detect differences between
students’ grade levels. This means the influence of confounding factors, like
students’ developmental and ability differences, is unclear in the analysis.
The study authors acknowledge these limitations and do not overextend their
interpretation of the evidence.
Librarians should find the study’s themes useful when
designing information evaluation instruction. In particular, a study
observation about how the classroom curriculum may influence information
evaluation is worth further consideration in practice. For example, the study
authors hypothesize that students value evaluation criteria presented in their
regular course work, such as the emphasis teachers place on attention to
grammar and presentation. More often than not, library or information literacy
instruction takes place embedded within existing classes. This means
understanding the greater curricular context in which students develop and
internalize information skills and attitudes is essential for coherent,
meaningful information literacy instruction.
References
Glynn, L. (2006). A critical appraisal tool
for library and information research. Library Hi Tech, 24(3),
387-399. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/07378830610692154
Pickard, A. J., Gannon-Leary, P., &
Coventry, L. (2010). Users’ trust in information resources in the web
environment: A status report. Retrieved from http://ie-repository.jisc.ac.uk/470/2/JISC_User_Trust_final_report.pdf