The Internet is Like a Box of Chocolates, You Never Know What You re Going to Get

1. The Internet is Like a Box of Chocolates, You Never Know What You�re Going to Get Stacey Potter Action Research: Information Literacy 2005-2006 Hi, I�m Stacey Potter and I teach 9th grade speech and English at Lake City High School. My action research took place in my 9th grade speech classes.Hi, I�m Stacey Potter and I teach 9th grade speech and English at Lake City High School. My action research took place in my 9th grade speech classes.

2. How Can We Tell What�s Good from What�s Not? Instructional Problem & Purpose Description of the project Problem: I had noticed that many of my students in the past had horrible researching techniques, and for the most part, chose to use the first piece of research they came upon. Students were not taking the time, nor were they concerned with finding out if their research was accurate. In addition, I realized that many of my students relied solely on the internet as their research tool. Hardly any of my students made a common practice of locating research for their projects (in any class) through the library. My concern was that students believed anything posted to the internet was quality, truthful information. Purpose: My reasoning behind this action research project was to help my students increase the quality of information they researched and used for their speeches in speech class. The purpose of my project was to help students become more critical of Web research and have the proper techniques and tools to do so. Project: I conducted my research in all of my speech classes, but used only one class to analyze my data with. The first semester served as my pilot study. I was able to work through the kinks in the project by doing a pilot study. Several things changed from the course of the pilot study to the actual research project (survey layouts, teaching techniques, etc.). The bases for my project was to use a variety of teaching techniques and strategies to help motivate student learning and increase understanding. I used collaborative learning, hands-on activities, real-world problems and examples, and a variety of other strategies. Lesson basics: -discussions on how this applies to real life (in/out of school) -I discussed and gave examples of techniques and strategies to use to evaluate Web sites. -Peer collaboration activities: dhmo.org site, partner speech (research, outline, works cited pages were all done together) -Persuasive speech: students were expected to apply their skills and knowledge to an individual persuasive speech that also had to be researched, outlined, and a works cited page was created Teaching Tools: www.dhmo.org Web evaluation forms Works cited pages *I used all of the evaluation forms and works cited pages to go back and check into the validity of the sites they used. This was a very helpful tool for data analysis.Problem: I had noticed that many of my students in the past had horrible researching techniques, and for the most part, chose to use the first piece of research they came upon. Students were not taking the time, nor were they concerned with finding out if their research was accurate. In addition, I realized that many of my students relied solely on the internet as their research tool. Hardly any of my students made a common practice of locating research for their projects (in any class) through the library. My concern was that students believed anything posted to the internet was quality, truthful information. Purpose: My reasoning behind this action research project was to help my students increase the quality of information they researched and used for their speeches in speech class. The purpose of my project was to help students become more critical of Web research and have the proper techniques and tools to do so. Project: I conducted my research in all of my speech classes, but used only one class to analyze my data with. The first semester served as my pilot study. I was able to work through the kinks in the project by doing a pilot study. Several things changed from the course of the pilot study to the actual research project (survey layouts, teaching techniques, etc.). The bases for my project was to use a variety of teaching techniques and strategies to help motivate student learning and increase understanding. I used collaborative learning, hands-on activities, real-world problems and examples, and a variety of other strategies. Lesson basics: -discussions on how this applies to real life (in/out of school) -I discussed and gave examples of techniques and strategies to use to evaluate Web sites. -Peer collaboration activities: dhmo.org site, partner speech (research, outline, works cited pages were all done together) -Persuasive speech: students were expected to apply their skills and knowledge to an individual persuasive speech that also had to be researched, outlined, and a works cited page was created Teaching Tools: www.dhmo.org Web evaluation forms Works cited pages *I used all of the evaluation forms and works cited pages to go back and check into the validity of the sites they used. This was a very helpful tool for data analysis.

3. The Gooey Center Problems & Issues: Scheduling the lab Time constraints with curriculum Inconsistency of techniques Lab: Many times I had to work around an already busy lab. If the lab was open for one class, it may have been full for the other. This caused me to have to shuffle my lessons around a bit at times. Time constraints: When something this big gets added to the curriculum usually something else has to go. I had to eliminate a couple of other types of speeches I generally had my students do in previous semesters. While this was a minor issue, it was a worthy project to do that with. Incongruity of techniques: I taught Boolean operators and they weren�t consistent. Other techniques also had glitches and inconsistencies. This made it difficult to teach the most effective ways to evaluate web sites, especially since there is no concrete process for Web evaluations. Many educators have begun to create methods and techniques, but they aren�t foolproof.Lab: Many times I had to work around an already busy lab. If the lab was open for one class, it may have been full for the other. This caused me to have to shuffle my lessons around a bit at times. Time constraints: When something this big gets added to the curriculum usually something else has to go. I had to eliminate a couple of other types of speeches I generally had my students do in previous semesters. While this was a minor issue, it was a worthy project to do that with. Incongruity of techniques: I taught Boolean operators and they weren�t consistent. Other techniques also had glitches and inconsistencies. This made it difficult to teach the most effective ways to evaluate web sites, especially since there is no concrete process for Web evaluations. Many educators have begun to create methods and techniques, but they aren�t foolproof.

4. Sweet Rewards Benefits: Peer collaboration Real-life value Eye opening experience for everyone involved Peer collaboration: Students benefited from being able to research together on the first speech. They were able to evaluate sites together and come to a common conclusion about the validity of each Web site they planned to use in their speech. I truly believe this helped them achieve better understanding for when they ventured out on their own. I first started, in the pilot study, with a group speech. I didn�t think this was as effective. Students working in groups didn�t benefit from the individual skills they needed when they had to work independently on the next speech. As with most group work, one student had the tendency to take on the bulk of the work while the others sat back and relied on that individual to get the work done. Real-life value: I really tried to impress upon my students the value of Web site evaluation for, not only school/educational use, but more importantly for their own personal use. We discussed areas where Web evaluation would be important in everyday life (outside of school). Making the connection to their personal lives seemed to help spark interest in the importance of the project. Eye opening experience: Students realized how much junk is posted to the WWW. While many were aware of it being out there, many had no idea how easy it was to be fooled or misled by what looked like credible information. I became even more aware of how prevalent this form of research is for students in this generation. This is, for many, the only resource students use to find information for school or personal research. With this understanding, I realized how important it is to help students better understand the tool they are using. In the pre- survey I asked how many students already question the validity of the internet sources they relied on and only 3 of the 16 students studied did this. In the end, half the class said they would continue to evaluate Web sites on their own. An additional four students said they would for some research. Two said they would for school-based research, but not for personal research. These results solidified my reasoning for conducting this research project. Peer collaboration: Students benefited from being able to research together on the first speech. They were able to evaluate sites together and come to a common conclusion about the validity of each Web site they planned to use in their speech. I truly believe this helped them achieve better understanding for when they ventured out on their own. I first started, in the pilot study, with a group speech. I didn�t think this was as effective. Students working in groups didn�t benefit from the individual skills they needed when they had to work independently on the next speech. As with most group work, one student had the tendency to take on the bulk of the work while the others sat back and relied on that individual to get the work done. Real-life value: I really tried to impress upon my students the value of Web site evaluation for, not only school/educational use, but more importantly for their own personal use. We discussed areas where Web evaluation would be important in everyday life (outside of school). Making the connection to their personal lives seemed to help spark interest in the importance of the project. Eye opening experience: Students realized how much junk is posted to the WWW. While many were aware of it being out there, many had no idea how easy it was to be fooled or misled by what looked like credible information. I became even more aware of how prevalent this form of research is for students in this generation. This is, for many, the only resource students use to find information for school or personal research. With this understanding, I realized how important it is to help students better understand the tool they are using. In the pre- survey I asked how many students already question the validity of the internet sources they relied on and only 3 of the 16 students studied did this. In the end, half the class said they would continue to evaluate Web sites on their own. An additional four students said they would for some research. Two said they would for school-based research, but not for personal research. These results solidified my reasoning for conducting this research project.

5. The Sticky Residue Did it work? Was it worth it in the end? What is next? Did it work? For the most part my students learned the value and importance of checking into the validity of web sites. In the end many of my students revealed that they would continue to evaluate Web sites after this unit. I know many of them won�t go to the extent of evaluation that they have been taught, but they will be a little more critical of the sites they come across. Was it worth it in the end? Absolutely�despite all of the hard work and elimination of other units I typically would have done, this lesson was extremely valuable. I don�t think every student saw the value of the lesson right away, and for some they won�t until later in life; however, many are now going to be more cautious of what they look for on the internet. What next? I plan to use this lesson each semester with my speech students. I feel it is important for someone to instruct students on the value of evaluating sites for reliability. If I don�t do it, who will? I plan on continuing to improve my lessons and techniques for instructing this particular unit. I hope to find even more techniques and tools that aid in evaluating Web sites for my students to use. I know that if the tools aren�t simple and applicable to everyday use students will not use them. The process needs to be one that students can easily incorporate into their everyday life.Did it work? For the most part my students learned the value and importance of checking into the validity of web sites. In the end many of my students revealed that they would continue to evaluate Web sites after this unit. I know many of them won�t go to the extent of evaluation that they have been taught, but they will be a little more critical of the sites they come across. Was it worth it in the end? Absolutely�despite all of the hard work and elimination of other units I typically would have done, this lesson was extremely valuable. I don�t think every student saw the value of the lesson right away, and for some they won�t until later in life; however, many are now going to be more cautious of what they look for on the internet. What next? I plan to use this lesson each semester with my speech students. I feel it is important for someone to instruct students on the value of evaluating sites for reliability. If I don�t do it, who will? I plan on continuing to improve my lessons and techniques for instructing this particular unit. I hope to find even more techniques and tools that aid in evaluating Web sites for my students to use. I know that if the tools aren�t simple and applicable to everyday use students will not use them. The process needs to be one that students can easily incorporate into their everyday life.