Forum Moderators: open
"Students have this idea that there is no difference between searching on the Web and searching in the library,"
I think his reservations are valid - I have found that friends and relatives forward "news articles" to me of very dubious origins and veracity. I guess it's the old, "If it's in print, it must be true" syndrome.
I think the prof's approach is misguided, though. Instead of trying to restrict his students to "approved" resources, examining and discussing their Googled results would be a great chance to teach the kids critical thinking and analysis skills. Many adults lack the skills to analyze information they are given - Who is the source? Are they credible? Are they likely to have a bias? Are statements supported by facts? Are the facts well-referenced so that the reader can do further checking? This class could be a great tool to develop these skills in the students that lack them, and those skills would probably be of more lasting value than the history lessons.
I get extremely biased news stories from California all the time.
They just don't get how naive they are.
If they would just use their brains and common sense, it would be very easy for them to figure out.
I'm 54 and have just (December 21, 2002) graduated from Penn State University with a Bs in Criminology and I can tell you first-hand that nearly all my Instructors (in one form or another) required you do to online research utilizing publicly accessible information...and for exactly the same reasons you've pointed out.
As an 'oldster' who is more than familiar with the Dewey Decimal System (and yet somewhat Internet savvy), I can tell you (with confidence) that many, many of our younger students have no clue as to applying critical thinking skills to anything, let alone valid research. They'll Google (or other Engine) everything and believe whatever the results are. While some would say, "If it's in print, it must be true" there is also that younger segment of our culture who say precisely the same thing about Internet searches. :)
With the advent of online paper mills (sites that allow downloading of, uhmm, 'academic' papers), unilateral increases in cheating and the rapid increase in plagiarism many faculty members use public SEs as a vehicle of comparison to pit public SEs against those in true academic databases available (only to registered students/faculty/staff of Colleges and Universities) to show just how rampant plagiarism is on the Internet.
At the same time, I need to stress the importance of bots such as Npbot (et.al.) that peruse the Internet looking for plagiarized material. I know and understand why many Webmasters ban them, but none-the-less these bots are essential in stemming the tides of plagiarism. Same applies to 'image bots' and the like.
Some Instructors wanted papers turned in via print form (from which you'd get your grade) and floppy that they would use (in conjunction with software developed with the assist of these bots) to check those papers for plagiarism. I should point out that this mainly applies to younger Professors who may not have the longevity (in their given fields) to spot plagiarism on sight like 'old-school' Professors can.
Make no mistake, there are some very good young students out there who do the leg-work, draw the comparisons and make appropriate decisions...but, sad to say, they are not the majority.
Let me close by saying this particular Professor is not alone. He may have the limelight, but there is a strong undercurrent (at least from my experience) of other professors who do their best to develope critical thinking skills in our young students of today.
Pendanticist.
pendanticist, your point about youngsters is well taken. As a "youngster" myself (I'm only 24), I don't even take offense. But the problem is a lot more widespread than that. I've known a lot of highly "educated" people who really should have known better who are still completely unable to discern a credible source from the garbage.
I think we'd get *FAR* better results teaching that skill than preventing students from using Google.
Source Documents.
Before considering ANY information, consider the source. Online or offline, this is still true.
The fact that it has been published in print in a library does not authenticate the information.
My point of view is that the technology exists, learn to use it. If a professor thinks that doing it the old fashioned way will somehow give the students a "leg up" in the world, fine that is one opinion. I would rather students learn the absolute basics first, then get on with current technology immediately thereafter. AND, learning to distinguish sources, agendas, and possible skews of information.
I remember Gopher saving my butt with an international marketing term paper, providing me with information that had only been released 2 days prior to my report. The professor was stunned. As was I. I had never used email, and the report needed to be emailed, since no printer was handy. In the course of 10 minutes, I found the information, signed up for a college email account, and based much of my paper on that information - from a trusted source of course.
I broke no plagiarism rules, and got the deserved "A" for my resourcefulness.
Learning to distinquish "true" information from false is as important as where to find it.
There are intangibles, like the quality of the text, but are there other aspects of the site that you look at.
Tangibles for my decision:
- A Header on the material including date and author is a big plus.
- Whether the material cites other material (not always feasible)
Intagibles:
- Is the site of good "quality" and does the article fit the site, that is, is the content and layout of the site consitent with someone who would actually know or care about the article topic (sort of common sense)
- An about us page that actually has some work put into it and has the same characteristics as a quality site.
The other day I had to learn a concept from one of my textbooks and then write an essay about that concept. I read and re-read the damned chapter about 5 times and STILL did not understand it (it was really poorly written!). I Googled the topic and the first 3 results all helped clear up the textbook mud.
Heh heh. So for that purpose (not pure research, just more definitional stuff) a search engine worked really well!
Of course, as someone said earlier in the thread, consider the source. I was looking up scientific information, and the top 3 sources were research, .edu and .gov sites ... all were fairly credible for my purposes.
In general, here are the criteria that I look for - in order of importance:
1) If applicable, does the information draw on good sources for its premises?
2) Does the information follow a sound logical argument?
3) If the topic is dynamic or time sensitive, when was the information last updated?
4) How does this information fit with everything else I already know about the subject? Is it consistent? Inconsistent?
5) Is the source a known expert on this subject?
In the case of number four, if it doesn't fit with what I know, that might mean that the information is wrong or that what I already "know" is wrong - and sometimes it's hard to tell. Numbers one and two are far and away the most important.
