Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Assessing Educational Resources (Purpose
Purpose…
Assessing Educational Resources
Purpose
- Purpose clearly stated?
- Viewpoint presented (objective, author's bias)
Article 1: The author writing was somewhat biased in the fact that she is a partner at The Learning Accelerator, which is a non-profit that supports blended and personalized learning models. She was writing from HER viewpoint both from her research at TLA and also her own work.
Article 2: The purpose of the article was stated in the sub heading of the article as a question, “Can we bring the advantages of an elementary school strategy for building a classroom community to the higher grades.” The article provided an objective standpoint in that it stated not what the author thought to be true, rather, from an educators standpoint.
Article 3: The purpose of the article was clearly stated in the first line, “Let's teach students how to be skeptical - but not dismissive - of the media.” From there, the article provided citations from his personal books, as well as other journals and forms of media; all of which provided further insight into the purpose of the article
Accuracy
- Match understanding of topic?
- Verify claims on other sources?
- Bibliography
- What types and how many sources are cited?
-
Article 2: I found numerous articles stating how morning meetings are relevant and beneficial to elementary students, but not specifically stating the benefits it would have at the secondary level. The article is stating facts regarding what morning meetings are and how they are beneficial to its reader audience. There are no other sources cited, making it appear to be her own understanding of the concept at hand.
-
Authority
- Authors and/or editors credential
- Approval from other experts in same/similar field?
- Books: published by scholarly or popular presses or self-published?
Article 1: The author of the article is Juliana Finegan; she was an America alumna, a former classroom teacher for 10 years as a title 1 teacher, an adjunct professor, curriculum designer for a graduate school of education and currently a partner at The Learning Accelerator who is a non-profit that supports blended and personalized learning models
Article 2: The author of the article is Laura Thomas who is currently a director of the Center for School Renewal of which is after she was a teacher for 10 years in various states, as well as school coaching and professional development for schools across the country. She has her own blog, The Critical Skills Classroom, where she posts on various critical skills that are affected in classrooms.
Article 3: The author of the article is Erik Palme whos is currently an education consultant and an author of two books with a focus on helping students research online and listening and speaking skills. Being an education consultant, he seems to have a good background in the field of education and with a publish book on working with the internet; he is a valuable source of information.
Currency
- Publish date? Updated? Revised?
- Information out-of-date for the topic?
Article 1: The article was published on May 24, 2018, so it is very new. The information is very relevant due to its nature in teaching in the 21st century.
Article 2: The article was published on May 23, 2018 making it a very new article. The information is relevant in serving its purpose to identify a strategy to help strengthen educators’ abilities to teach successfully in the 21st century.
Article 3: The article was published in November 2017 in the Educational Leadership magazine. The information is relevant and served its purpose to help educators teach and convince students how to “read” information on the internet successfully.
Relevance/Intended audience - Plenty of information?
- Superficial treatment or detailed analysis?
- Information relevant to topic?
Article 1: The article had about 2 pages of information that was concise, and somewhat lacking some specific evidence regarding the topic. It gave a good foundational start. It was geared for teachers and the article succeeded in meeting its goal in coming across as a way to provide teachers with an alternative approach to teacher training.
Article 2: The articles audience was intended for middle and high school teachers. It gave detailed information on what a morning meeting was and how teachers can use those ideas to utilize them in a middle and high school setting. The wording was appropriate for the audiences readership level in that it used words all educators know and use.
Article 3: The articles audience was intended for educators who are teaching students in the classroom, specifically to those using the internet as a source of information. This was a detailed analysis of how students are perceiving the news and, in general, information on the web and different forms of media.
-