Literacy--Day+2

1. Explain to students that they will be evaluating websites today. Their job will be to determine whether the sites are "factual" or "fictional". 2. Show them the "Aluminum Foil Deflector Beanie" site (http://zapatopi.net/afdb/) and talk them through some of the things you look at on the site to make your determination. However, do not tell them that the site is a hoax. You're just giving them some things to //notice// when they are looking at their own sites. Collect the "Fact or Fiction: Website Investigation" sheet as a "Ticket out the Door". It will be redistributed in 2 days to discuss results.
 * = **LFS Lesson Plan** ||
 * **Unit EQ: Why is it important for you to be "digitally literate"?** ||
 * **LEQ: How do you determine if a website is fact or fiction?** ||
 * **Activating Strategies: (10 min)**
 * **Acceleration/Previewing/Vocabulary: (5 min)**
 * 1) Briefly discuss definitions of and differences between "fact" and "fiction" ||
 * **Teaching Strategies and Distributed Guided Practice/Summarizing Prompts: (20 min)**
 * 1) Distribute "[|Website+Investigation--Literacy+Day+2.doc]" sheet and explain directions.
 * 2) Direct students to website links on [[image:http://moodle.org/theme/moodleorange/moodle.gif link="http://moodle.queensburyschool.org/moodle/"]]
 * 3) Students individually examine each of the sites to determine whether they are fact or fiction. ||
 * **Summarizing Strategies:**
 * **Summarizing Strategies:**

Data summarized from the following website. For greater details please refer to: 1. sample informaton: [|http://mason.gmu.edu/~montecin/web-eval-sites.htm] 2. **__Credibility__** **[|following based on http://www.virtualsalt.com/evalu8it.htm]** 3. __**Accuracy.**__ 4. __**Purpose**__ 5. __**Logical**__ 6. __**Supporting information**__
 * Anonymity, no author listed
 * Lack of Quality Control
 * If all the reviews are critical, be careful. use google link test.
 * Bad grammar or misspelled words.
 * facts are correct
 * timeliness (up to date facts)
 * Completeness. Are all facts present, is it fair and balanced?
 * who is this information written for.
 * what is the purpose of the information. advertising, reporting, to support an idea.
 * is there a hidden agenda?
 * Fairness, offers both sides of argument.
 * Objectivity, does the author seem to take sides.
 * Possibility, is the subject reasonable. Is it likely to be true. Follows existing knowledge.
 * bad language or anger present.
 * ridiculous claims of unbelievable numbers or conspiracy
 * Sweeping statements of truth.
 * Conflict of Interest, coal burning industry talking about lack of environmental impacts for coal burning.
 * Citations
 * Other sources say same thing

code Harris, Robert. "Evaluating Internet Research Sources." //VirtualSalt//. 15 June 2007. Web. 20 Apr. 2009. .♦ code ||