Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

THINKING CRITICALLY ABOUT INFORMATION: “GOOD” AND “BAD” SOURCE TYPES Kevin Klipfel, Information Literacy Coordinator, California State University, Chico.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "THINKING CRITICALLY ABOUT INFORMATION: “GOOD” AND “BAD” SOURCE TYPES Kevin Klipfel, Information Literacy Coordinator, California State University, Chico."— Presentation transcript:

1 THINKING CRITICALLY ABOUT INFORMATION: “GOOD” AND “BAD” SOURCE TYPES Kevin Klipfel, Information Literacy Coordinator, California State University, Chico. kklipfel@csuchico.edu

2 Thinking Critically about Source Types  Is this a “good” source? – Bad question.  Is this the best source for my current purpose(s)? – Great question.  Different types of information serve different purposes.  So, the best resource for you to use really depends on what you’re looking for and where you’re at in the research process.

3 Information Context: What is my purpose?  When thinking about which type of source it’s best for you to use at a given time, ask yourself: What am I trying to do right now?  Build my background knowledge on a particular topic I don’t know a whole lot about?  Narrow down the scope of my topic?  Define what is meant by a particular term?  Provide evidence/support for something I just said in my paper?  Argue for a more abstract, philosophical point?

4 Using Sources is a Process  It’s best to think of using sources as a process: a common beginning research mistake is to jump in to the research process at too specific a point too far down the line.  For example: if you don’t know too much about your topic, it can be hard to start the research process with a peer-reviewed, scholarly article: the source will be technical, narrowly focused, and not the best source for your current purpose (building background knowledge).  In order to better see which type of source you should use when, it’s worth getting clear about how information used in research tends to be packaged.

5 Ways Knowledge is Packaged

6 Knowledge Packaging: Encyclopedias  Encyclopedias contain the most general kind of knowledge.  You can use them to:  Get started with your research.  Build background knowledge by getting an overview of a topic.  Narrow your research question (by seeing the ways the encyclopedia divides up a subject).  Understand scholarly language related to your topic.

7 Knowledge Packaging: Books  Books will contain information that is general, but still more specific than an encyclopedia.  You can use them to:  Build background knowledge or in-depth understanding of a specific issue.  Understand the scholarly or popular issues pertaining to a topic.  Provide evidence for the claims you make in your paper. Note: You do not need to read an entire book to use it in your research! Sometimes just a part of the book, e.g., a particular chapter, will give you the information you need.

8 Knowledge Packaging: “Popular” Articles  Popular articles will be much more specific than encyclopedias or books. They will be aimed to entertain an audience; thus, they will be written in clear, understandable language.  You can use them to:  Build background knowledge on your topic.  Find scholarly articles about recent scientific breakthroughs (e.g., The New York Times Science Section).  Build an argument in your paper and cite them as evidence for your claims.

9 Knowledge Packaging: “Scholarly” Articles  Scholarly articles will be the most narrowly focused type of source: they’ll usually provide a high level of detail about an issue that’s very narrow in scope.  You can use them to:  Cite in your paper when you build an argument. They are the best kind of evidence to use as support for the claims that you make.  Gain the best and most current understanding of your topic.  Understand future research directions related to your topic.

10 Some Rules of Thumb  Encyclopedias:  Good to use when you’re trying to get a broad overview of a topic and figure out the terms scholars use in the scholarly literature, especially at the beginning of the research process. Not a bad source to use as a citation in you’re paper if you want to define a term.  Popular Sources:  Good for building background knowledge about your topic, especially for recent scientific breakthroughs (e.g., The New York Times Science Section) in fairly easy-to-understand language. Also a good way to find more “scholarly” studies. May want to cite sparingly in your research (preferring, instead, to directly cite the scholarly articles on which the popular source is based).  Scholarly Sources:  The best kinds of sources to use as evidence in your paper, since they’re the most “reliable” and trusted kinds of sources. Can be a difficult place to start your research (because they’re written in complicated language) but, once you build your knowledge of a topic, it’s where you want to end up.

11 Information Context: Remember your Purpose  When thinking about which type of source it’s best for you to use at a given time, ask yourself: What am I trying to do right now?  Build my background knowledge on a particular topic I don’t know a whole lot about?  Narrow down the scope of my topic?  Define what is meant by a particular term?  Provide evidence/support for something I just said in my paper?  Argue for a more abstract, philosophical point?  Given your new understanding, when doing research you can now ask yourself: which source-type would best help me accomplish my purpose at this stage of my research?

12 Contact a Librarian  And if you’re having any trouble, don’t forget to contact a librarian: we’re more than happy to help! contact a librarian For questions about this module, or how to incorporate this module into specific courses, contact: Kevin Klipfel, Information Literacy Coordinator, California State University, Chico. Contact: kklipfel@csuchico.edu


Download ppt "THINKING CRITICALLY ABOUT INFORMATION: “GOOD” AND “BAD” SOURCE TYPES Kevin Klipfel, Information Literacy Coordinator, California State University, Chico."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google