Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
W. Ian O’Byrne
University of Connecticut
Storrs, CT 06269
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation: Results from a Pilot Study
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 2
No technology has impacted literacy and learning with the scope and speed of the
Internet (Coiro, Knobel, Lankshear & Leu, 2007). The Internet has quickly become this
generation’s defining technology for reading. This reliance on the Internet as a dominant
text has also been shown in the habits of adolescents; students now report spending 48
minutes a day reading online compared to 43 minutes offline (Kaiser Family Foundation,
2005). Similarly adolescents read online at a rate far greater than other segments of the
This rate of online reading applies to a variety of academic tasks. More than 90%
of adolescent students in the U.S with home access to the Internet, report using the
Internet for homework (Lenhart, Simon, & Graziano, 2001). Over 70% of these students
used the Internet as the primary source for information on their most recent school report
or project (Lenhart, Simon, & Graziano, 2001). Only 24% of these students reported
using the library for the same task (Lenhart, Simon, & Graziano, 2001). More recent
research paints a clearer picture of teens and their relationship to information searching.
Individuals aged 18-30 stated that they valued the resources, especially a connection to
the internet that libraries provided (Lenhart, Simon, & Graziano, 2001). If they need to
find solutions to a problem, they would use the Internet first, or the library in conjunction
with the Internet to find the answers they needed (Estabrook, Witt, & Rainie, 2007). The
respondents, which included adults, stated that they used and trusted the Internet as a
means to find answers and advice, far more than they would consult a friend or an expert
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 3
(Estabrook, Witt, & Rainie, 2007). Our youth are increasingly online and consulting the
Internet as an expert in their daily lives. However, they frequently do not have the skills
Increasingly, students are using the Internet to obtain information about both
general and academic topics (Lubans, 1999; Jones & Madden, 2002; Shackleford,
Thompson & James, 1999). Along with this trend there is a growing concern about the
dubious nature of online information, and users’ ability to validate or evaluate this
information (Alexander & Tate, 1999; Flanagin & Metzger, 2000; Browne, Freeman &
Williamson, 2000). Research shows that students are frequently deceived when viewing
online content (Leu et al., 2007; Johnson & Kaye, 1998; Rieh & Belkin, 1998).
Particularly, students are not able to judge the validity of a website, even when given
procedures to do so (Lubans, 1998, 1999). There is still little known about building the
healthy skepticism needed by students while reading online information. Because of the
reliance of students to use the Internet to find information it is even more paramount to
their success as online readers to be able to evaluate the validity and reliability of
websites (Leu et al., 2008). This paper reports on the results of a pilot study that
techniques authors use to make websites more credible (Britt & Gabrys, 2002; Fogg,
Marshall, Laraki, Osipovich, Varma, Fang, et al., 2001) and then having students build
their own hoax websites by using these techniques. Hoax websites are defined as website
“fabrications” that have been created for entertainment purposes, usually invoking the
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 4
Theoretical Perspective
communication technologies (ICTs) as they affect the way in which individuals learn this
study needed to be framed by using multiple theoretical perspectives (Labbo & Reinking,
1999). Theoretical perspectives from critical literacy, new literacies, critical evaluation,
and multimodal design were used to frame the work presented in this paper.
Critical Literacy
use literacy and learning to “build access to literate practices and discourse resources”
(Luke, 2000, p. 449) for use as social capital in the community (Freebody & Luke, 1990;
Lankshear & Knobel, 1998). Critical literacy moves away from the “self” in critical
reading to understand how texts interact in different contexts (Luke, 2000). Texts are
analyzed to determine the purpose, which ideologies are represented, and how students
can “reject them or reconstruct them” (Cervetti, Pardales, Damico, 2001, p. 8) to support
their own experiences (Luke, 2000). Analysis of the lexical and mechanical operations of
text can be refined to the ideological representations, social relations, and textual
formations of the information (Halliday, 1994). Viewed within a classroom context this is
seen as examining text by analyzing: the field, or contexts; the tenor, or social functions;
and the mode, or technical characteristics (Luke, 2000). The four social practices
identified by Freebody & Luke (2000) within critical literacy impact the design and
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 5
revisions of this study. These practices take place at while students are at work critiquing
texts: code-breaker, meaning maker, text user, and text critic (Freebody & Luke, 2000).
New Literacies
The study is framed within both the larger definition of New Literacies, emerging
from a variety of disciplines, as well as the more specific definition of the new literacies
Cacopardo, 2009). In an analysis of new literacy theory, Coiro, Knobel, Lankshear, &
Leu (2008) note four principles, common to the broader definition of New Literacies that
Wittel, 2000), semiotics (e.g. Kress, 2003; Lemke, 2002), media literacy (e.g.
2. new literacies are central to full civic, economic, and personal participation in a
globalized community;
Within this broader definition of New Literacies, this study is framed within the more
specific theory of the new literacies of online reading comprehension. This perspective
requires new skills, strategies and dispositions (Leu, Kinzer, Cammack, & Coiro, 2004;
Leu, et. al, 2008). One important skill identified within online reading comprehension is
the ability to evaluate critically the information that an individual encounters online.
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 6
Because students cannot be assured of the reliable or reputable nature of online texts as
they would traditional print texts, this skill is essential (Brandt, 1997; Henry, 2006).
Work conducted in the new literacies of online reading comprehension informed and
generated questions about the manner in which students critically evaluate online
Critical Evaluation
perspectives (Coiro, 2007). In order to represent the varying viewpoints and research
involved, a review of the literature indicated several pieces of research that helped inform
the specific task of critically evaluating websites. A value added model of judging
comprehensiveness, currency, reliability, and validity (Taylor, 1986). Tate & Alexander
(1996) identified five criteria in an analysis of print texts as applied to web pages:
specific elements of a text to determine authority and credibility, research determined that
information, and construct their own meaning (Hannafin & Land, 1997; Hannafin &
Land, 2000). Extending from this, models called for readers to construct a two level
model while evaluating sources: integration (the text based, or internal model) and
situational (text mixed with prior knowledge and inter-text with other sources) (Britt,
Perfetti, Sandak & Rouet, 1999). These criteria began to boil down into two main factors
with credibility (expertise and trustworthiness) and relevance (importance and currency)
being used by undergraduates to evaluate information on web pages (Judd, Farrow &
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 7
Tims, 2006). Graesser et al. (2007) maintained that readers are to evaluate truth and
and claims made, and ask how information is linked to learner’s goals. Metzger’s (2007)
review of the literature on elements of credibility and identified five values: believability,
evaluation was defined as critical thinking abilities used to: 1) question, analyze and
opinion with evidence form multiple sources and prior knowledge (Coiro, 2008). Kiili,
Laurinen & Marttunen (2008) identified critical thinking skills used by students when
of information).
Multimodal Design
When working with or comparing two digital texts, the “argumentative” nature of
the work is often times in the visual elements and temporal arrangements, more than the
verbal (Wysocki, 2001). Originating as an extension from multimodalities (Kress & van
Leeuwen, 2001; Jewitt, 2008), design specifies the interchange between the linguistic,
visual, audio, gestural, spatial and multimodal (New London Group, 2000). When
integrated with a New Literacies framework, students operate as “designers” and “apply
& Wyatt-Smith, 2006, p. 26). In multimediating (Doneman, 1997; O’Brien, 2003), the
p. 26) and communicates this with the intention of engaging their audience. As a
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 8
pedagogical tool, design holds together “process and product” (New London Group,
2000), and allows students to consider how literacy practices shape truth (Street, 1984;
Method
from a middle school in the Northeast. Instruction was delivered by the researcher, a
teacher with experience working with IRT in a one-to-one laptop classroom (Leu,
Reinking et al., 2008), and a student teacher. The intervention took place two times a
week during the students’ regular English language arts ninety-minute class time.
Students remained in their class groups throughout the intervention. The intervention
lasted twelve weeks and consisted of three phases. The data collected during the pilot
study consisted of results from focus groups and content analysis coding of student
storyboards and hoax websites. The study was directed at answering three research
questions: 1) What are the themes and patterns present as students construct online
content? 2) What are the themes and patterns that emerge as students critically evaluate
online information? 3) What are the changes that take place as the content construction
Phase One
specifically evaluation of online information and initial use of the online content
ORC had students focus on seven websites of varying credibility and relevance. The
topic for all seven websites was Asthma due to the fact that some prior knowledge
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 9
because the students had covered it in their health class. The seven websites were
selected because they fell into two of the categories typical of web environments: weaker
sincere sites & stronger sincere sites (Brem, Russel, & Weems, 2003). Weaker sincere
sites are identified as more “balanced between reputability and disreputability” (Brem,
Russel, & Weems, 2003, p. 198) than hoax websites or stronger sincere sites. The claims
made are believable, and backed up by supporting data found online, but do not stand up
organization, more credible experts, and an “air of precision and authority. (Brem,
________________
_________________
Students were asked to view the webpages via hyperlinks from a website set up
asked to select websites that would help a peer learn more about asthma. The students
were to view the seven websites and rank order them in terms of credibility and
relevance. Students completed a section defining the two criteria (credibility &
relevance), and the seven websites. Students were given 45 minutes to look through and
rank order the websites. The students were allowed to view any of the pages within each
of the sites, and could use any ORC strategy they felt would help them in reviewing the
websites.
The Brem, Russel & Weems study included hoax websites in their investigation
of the varying levels of credibility and relevance of online information. To attend to the
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 10
presence of hoax websites, as part of the instructional model in phase one the students
were presented with five websites and asked to provide support for the credibility and
________________
_________________
The instructors did not tell students that the five websites were hoaxes. Students
presented their findings about the hoax websites as part of a whole-group discussion with
the class. At the conclusion of the discussion, the instructors revealed to the class that all
five websites were hoaxes. This activity expanded students’ understanding of the
presence of sites with varying levels of sincerity, but also websites whose purpose is to
Focus Groups. After the pretest, the instructor and researcher delivered four days
of instruction in critical evaluation of websites. Focus groups (Krueger & Casey, 2008)
were conducted to determine criteria students used while evaluating online content. The
main research question of the focus groups was: What features of a website make it more
credible and relevant? The focus groups consisted of four meetings of 12-15 students.
The classroom teacher or student teacher served as the moderator, while the researcher
took notes. The role of the moderator was that of a “seeker of knowledge” (Krueger &
Casey, 2008). The focus group met for a half-hour, three times over the course of two
weeks. The focus groups constructed student-derived criteria using exemplars from the
seven asthma websites and the five hoax websites that would be used to guide OCC
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 11
(Orsmond, Merry, Reiling, 2000; 2002). The students used these criteria as guides in the
OCC Tools. The final element of phase one was the initial instruction in the use of
the OCC tools. Online content was constructed using several tools that came as part of
________________
_________________
additional tools were demonstrated to each group that expressed a need for creation of
Phase Two
Phase two included the planning, construction and revision of the student created
spoof websites. The students were allowed to select their own groups to work in while
constructing their websites. The groups consisted of from two to four students, with the
classroom teacher giving final approval for each group. The classroom teacher and the
researcher, following the IRT instructional model (Leu, Coiro, Castek, Hartman, Henry,
& Reinking, 2008; Leu et al., 2008), delivered classroom instruction with modifications
noted for future iterations of the model. To scaffold student and group progress from
beginning to end of the process, hardcopy worksheets of student work were kept in-group
portfolios. Some of these worksheets required teacher signature to signify that the student
or group had completed a stage sufficiently and could move on to the next step of the
The OCC process initiated with groups brainstorming to determine topics that
could be used for each hoax website. Students were to select an initial pool of five
potential topics for their website, and then meet with an instructor to discuss the rationale
for selecting each of the topics. Discussions between the instructors and groups ensured
that each group selected a topic that the students were interested in, and could effectively
After agreeing upon the topic for the hoax website, each group worked together
using paper graphic organizers and colored pencils to storyboard (Bailey & Blythe, 1998)
plans for their website. Upon teacher approval noted by a signature, students were
The groups created online content two to three times per week for six weeks. The
researcher and classroom teacher met with each group several times during each class to
ensure on task behavior, high rigor of work, and collaboration by all group members.
Extended use of the content construction tools was taught to students on an “on demand”
basis (Gee, 2003). After the initial instruction of usage of a tool, these students became
experts of the tool, and were expected to share this expertise with other students.
Three times during the OCC process the instructors conducted a whole class
outlined elements of credibility and relevance in a website. The student derived marking
criteria were used to direct students, as well as exemplars selected by the instructors
(Orsmond, Merry, & Reiling, 2000; 2002). In addition to these whole-group discussions,
instructors conducted meetings with each group focused on formative feedback using the
exemplar websites shared as a group (Orsmond, Merry, & Reiling, 2002). The exemplar
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 13
websites were often viewed as “competition” for their site to model future design choices
and changes (e.g., the gaming site group consulted other websites selling video games).
The groups were asked to review the competition site, and their site and agree upon
Phase Three
Phase three consisted of a final review of each website with the instructors, as
well as a showcase of the websites with members of the students’ class. Several of the
best websites constructed within a class were also showcased to students in the other
class. In class discussions, students were asked to present their site, along with major
decision choices and changes made during the online content construction process.
Students were asked to critique the work from other groups according to the class rubrics.
Finally, students were to take the critical evaluation instrument again as a posttest.
Analysis
Qualitative analysis for the pilot study focused on results from the two sources of
data: focus group interviews; and student-constructed storyboards and hoax websites. The
results from the focus group interviews were used to triangulate (Jick, 1979) the results
from the coding of the storyboards and hoax websites to establish more consistent themes
and patterns.
Focus Groups
The researcher analyzed the notes from the focus groups and the criteria
developed by the students to identify themes. The classic approach (Krueger & Casey,
2008) to the analysis of focus group data was employed to find themes. An initial read of
the researcher notes and criteria identified essential themes. The themes were then
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 14
compared to the main research question of the focus groups to ensure the themes
answered the question of: What features of a website make it more credible and relevant?
During a second examination of the materials, the notes and criteria were then assigned a
code according to the theme they most closely suited. At the conclusion of coding, the
comments (Krueger & Casey, 2008). Frequency refers to how often an element of a
the frequency of comments, but identifies the many different ways in which numerous
At the conclusion of the intervention the storyboards and hoax websites from
groups that completed all work of the intervention were collected. Six groups of students
completed all aspects of work on their storyboards and hoax websites. The decision was
made to focus the analysis on the work from these groups that had completed all phases
of the work. The analysis focused intensively on a smaller number of groups to develop
an understanding of the themes and patterns shown by students that successfully finish all
aspects of the OCC process. A rigorous content analysis (Mayring, 2000) was conducted
(Patton, 2002) and find common themes. Preliminary inductive categories were created
as the documents were read through. After half of the documents of the groups had been
read, the researcher checked to see if the categories remained consistent with the
identified constructs of credibility and relevance. The check to address concerns of the
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 15
inductive categories was conducted again after all of the studies had been reviewed. After
the final reliability check, the categories and their subcategories were: credibility and
relevance. Credibility refers to text, images or video that builds the expertise,
trustworthiness or reliability of a website. This includes content that describes the source
of the site, products or services offered, or testimonials from individuals that support the
website. Relevance refers to text, images or video that builds the importance, currency, or
essential nature of the website. This includes content that addresses or persuades the
audience; or tries to negotiate the value of a product or service with the audience. Once
the categories had been created through analysis of all the student work, codes were
Results
Focus Groups
The purpose of the focus groups was to identify elements of web page design that
students examine while judging the credibility or relevance of a website. These results
were coded and organized into criteria that students also used while engaged in the OCC
process. The results were collected as students reviewed the seven asthma websites, and
the five hoax websites. The results identify the major elements of web design that most
effectively adjust the audience’s view of the materials presented. The most popular
response (23 responses) was that students were influenced by the web address (e.g., .com,
.org, .edu) when viewing a website. A second important element in the evaluation of a
web page was the belief that the web site contained “enough information” (17 responses),
significantly affected the viewing of a web site by adolescents as students valued the
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 16
presence of images (12 responses) or videos (11 responses). Surprisingly, a larger number
of students valued the aesthetics of a webpage, but did not know the terminology of how
this is illustrated by the differences in color, organization and style shown by WebMD
and KidsHealth.org. A relatively small portion of the students identified the inclusion of a
“about us”, “contact us”, or “author” page (5 responses) as being a necessary element of a
website. Finally a small portion of students (4 responses) valued links to other sites
The coding of the storyboards and hoax websites created by the students included
a content analysis (Mayring, 2000) that identified markers of credibility and relevance
across the two student works. The analysis sought to identify the themes and patterns
identified in student created storyboards and hoax websites, and then triangulate this data
with results from the focus group interviews to ensure reliability. Finally the analysis
sought to measure the increased presence of markers of credibility and relevance across
OCC process, as documented by student work. The results of the coding will be
Pulchritude. (http://newliteracies.uconn.edu/projects/hoaxsites/pulchritude
/Site/Welcome.html) This website was created by two students and the audience was
identified by the students as “middle aged women”. The purpose of the site was to sell
jewelry that offered supposed health benefits to the individual that wore it. The
markers of relevance. The final website constructed by this group contained 21 markers
/Site/Welcome.html) This website was constructed by two students and the targeted
audience was identified as “anyone that wanted to purchase an exotic animal”. The
purpose of the site was to sell exotic fish and pets from an island identified as Tikistar
relevance. The final version of the hoax website contained 75 markers of relevance.
Toething. (http://newliteracies.uconn.edu/projects/hoaxsites/toething
/Site/_welcome.html) This website was constructed by three students and the targeted
audience was any one that wanted to purchase their product. The purpose of the site was
to market and sell toething, or “clothes for your toes”. The storyboard contained 20
markers of credibility and 1 marker of relevance. The hoax website constructed contained
DAT-a-Way. (http://newliteracies.uconn.edu/projects/hoaxsites/dat%20a%20way
/Site/Welcome.html) This site was constructed by two students and the identified
audience was described as “teenagers with acne problems”. The purpose of the site was
to market their product, an acne treatment formula that was made from the cleanest
substance on the face of the earth, dog slobber. The storyboard contained 25 markers of
credibility and 9 markers of relevance. The final draft of the hoax website contained 65
Pillow3. (http://newliteracies.uconn.edu/projects/hoaxsites/Pillow3/Site
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 18
/Home.html) This site was constructed by three students and the targeted audience was
identified as “teenage boys”. The purpose of the site was to market the newest installment
of the Pillow game series, a videogame in which not only the game characters went to
sleep, but many times the game players slept as well. The major advance of Pillow3 was
that is was now a massively multiplayer online game. The storyboard contained 41
Fruitilicious. (http://newliteracies.uconn.edu/projects/hoaxsites/fruitiilicious
/Site/VVellcome.html) This site was constructed by two students. The targeted audience
was identified as “women of all ages”. The purpose was to market a new hair color
product that loosely was marketed as “scratch and sniff hair”. The storyboard contained 4
markers of credibility and no markers of relevance. The final draft of the hoax website
Discussion
The purpose of this pilot study was to identify patterns and themes that exist as
students evaluate online information in conjunction with creation of online content. The
results inform future iterations of not only the intervention design, but also the feasibility
of facilitating the critical evaluation skills of adolescents. The results suggest that with
the aid of instructors, and providing time to examine the methods with which credibility
and relevance are created through online content, adolescents can build awareness of the
questionable nature of online content. The coding of storyboards and hoax websites
within the OCC process showed that increased construction and presence of credibility
The patterns and themes recognized by students as they construct online content
revealed interesting details about not only the manner in which students work, but how
teachers work with them. The instructors negotiated a subtle balance between getting the
students excited about the construction process, but also reminding students to focus on
the content and final draft of their work. Attempts were made early in the intervention to
instruct the entire class as to the affordances and operation of each OCC tool, but students
would rather receive “just-in-time” (Gee, 2003) lessons. Additionally, student strategy
exchange was difficult to foster within the classroom. When a student was struggling and
wanted to learn a strategy, they would instantly call upon the instructors without seeking
help from members of the group, or classmates. Many times a student sitting right next to
The patterns and themes identify as students critically evaluate online information
suggest that as students spend increased time with direct instruction on the presence of
online information with varying levels of sincerity their healthy skepticism grows. What
is not known at this point is whether these skills and behaviors follow the students after
the intervention concludes. Additionally, it is not known whether all students understand
and employ the strategies, or merely the more vocal students. Finally, the extent to which
students employ these skills is unknown. It is not known whether these students knew
classroom. Additional skills and strategies were needed to scaffold students as they work
on construction of online texts. The six groups whose work was coded outlined the
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 20
benchmark for success in constructing online content. Scaffolding measures (e. g.,
storyboards, criteria) were extremely successful in keeping students cognizant of the path
this study, more scaffolding, and time working with OCC tools ahead of the intervention
is needed.
Their work presents results that an intervention designed after this model would
be successful in building OCC skills, and critical evaluation skills in these students. What
is probably the more interesting question is the other half of the sample that did not finish
all aspects of the work involved, and what steps are necessary to bring all students up to
the benchmark of completion. In future iterations of this study more scaffolding of skills
and strategies may be necessary to assist these learners. In addition, the other factors that
technological tool use, and academic ability need to be investigated in relation to this
work.
multimodal content. Research suggests that in many cases students do not evaluate online
content at all, and if they do, the evaluation of content is cursory at best. The focus
groups identified a multitude of elements of web design that students use while
evaluating online content. What is not known is whether student knowledge and
application of these skills extends beyond the length of the intervention. Additionally,
one of the most used strategies for evaluating the credibility or relevance of a website
was to look at the URL of the website, or search for more information of the creator of, or
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 21
the subject of the website (Bråten, Strømsø, & Britt, 2009). Because the websites created
by students were HTML files, or contained a web address that included university
markers, it was difficult for them to test the veracity of peers’ constructions.
The results from the coding of the storyboards and websites present an interesting
conclusion. With extended time working with OCC tools, the markers of credibility rose
in the websites as opposed to the storyboards. What is not known, is whether or not the
added markers is a result of affordances of the OCC tools, or prowess of the students in
recognizing the need for and the ability to construct these markers. In addition there was
a relatively low use of markers of relevance in the storyboards and hoax websites created
by students. It is not known if this is a reflection of the students not having studied
persuasive writing up until this point in their schooling, or that the instructors did not
explore the lack of placement of markers of relevance, and the justification for the high
Given the work conducted and limited results obtained it is highly important that
continued work investigates ways to build the healthy skepticism of online learners. The
skilled critical evaluation skills of students as they sift through online information are
paramount as the Internet becomes more of a dominant text in their lives. Online content
creation proves to be a popular habit in the lives of students outside of the classroom;
research like this suggests that it may be feasible to conduct this construction in a one-to-
one laptop classroom. Finally, the attitudes and aptitudes of adolescents skilled in online
environments need to be studied and given a place in the traditional classroom context.
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 22
References
Alexander, J. E., & Tate, M. A. (1999). Web wisdom: how to evaluate and create
Alvermann, D. & Hagood, M. (2000) Fandom and critical media literacy. Journal of
Bennet, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The digital natives debate: A critical review
Bråten, I., Strømsø, H.I., & Britt, M.A. (2009). Trust matters: Examining the role of
Brem, S. K., Russell, J., & Weems, L. (2001). Science on the Web: Student evaluations
Britt, M., Perfetti, C., Sandak, R., & Rouet, J. (1999). Content integration and source
Britt, M. & Gabrys, G. (2002). Implications of document-level literacy skills for Web site
Browne, M. N., Freeman, K. E., & Williamson, C. L. (2000). The importance of critical
thinking for student use of the Internet. College Student Journal, 34(3), 391–398.
Cervetti, G., Pardales, M., & Damico, J. (2001, April). A tale of differences: Comparing
the traditions, perspectives and educational goals of critical reading and critical
http://readingonline.org/articles/art_index.asp?HREF/articles/cervetti/index.html
reading online. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Reading
Coiro, J., Knobel, M., Lankshear, C. & Leu, D. (Eds.) (2008). Handbook of research on
Eagleton, M. B., Guinee, K. & Langlais, K. (2003). Teaching Internet literacy strategies:
the hero inquiry project. Voices from the Middle, 10, 3, 28–35
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 24
Eagleton, M., & Dobler, E. (2007). Reading the Web: Strategies for Internet inquiry.
Estabrook, L., Witt, E., Rainie, L. (2007). Information Searches That Solve Problems.
Pew Internet & American Life Project: Washington, DC. Retrieved December 20,
Fogg, B.J., J. Marshall, O. Laraki, A. Osipovich, C. Varma, N. Fang, et al. (2001). What
makes web sites credible? A report on a large quantitative study. Presented to the
Fogg, B. J., Soohoo, C., Danielson, D. R., Marable, L., Stanford, J., & Tauber, E. R.
(2003). How do users evaluate the credibility of Web sites? A study with over
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=997097&coll=ACM&dl=ACM&CFID=362
36037&CFTOKEN=18606069
Freebody, P. & Luke, A. (1990) Literacies programs: Debates and demands in cultural
Gee, J. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy.
Graesser, A.C., Wiley, J., Goldman, S.R., O’Reilly, T., Jeon, M., & McDaniel, B. (2007).
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 25
SEEK Web Tutor: Fostering a critical stance while exploring the causes of
Doi:10.1007/s11409-007-9013-x
Edward Arnold.
Hannafin, M. J., & Land, S. M. (1997). The foundations and assumptions of technology-
202.
Hannafin, M., & Land, S. (2000). Technology and student-centered learning in higher
Henry, L. (2006). SEARCHing for an answer: The critical role of new literacies while
Johnson, T., & Kaye, B. (1998). Cruising is believing? Comparing Internet and
Jones, S. & Madden, M. (2002). The Internet goes to college: How students are living in
the future with today's technology. Washington DC: Pew Internet & American
http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_College_Report.pdf.
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 26
Judd, V. C., L. I. Farrow and B. J. Tims. 2006. 'Evaluating public web site information: a
Kaiser Family Foundation. (2005). Generation M: Media in the lives of 8-18 year olds.
http://www.kff.org/entmedia/entmedia030905pkg.cfm
Kiili, C., Laurinen, L., & Marttunen, M. (2008). Students evaluating Internet sources:
Kimber, K. & Wyatt-Smith, C. (2006). Using and creating knowledge with new
31(1), 19-34.
Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of
Krueger, R. & Casey, M. (2008). Focus Groups: A practical guide for applied research.
Lankshear, C. & Knobel, M. (1998). Critical literacies and new technologies. Paper
Diego, CA.
Lenhart, A., Simon, M., & Graziano, M. (2001). The Internet and education:
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 27
Findings of the Pew Internet & American Life Project. Washington, DC: Pew
Lenhart, A., Madden, M. & Hitlin, P. (2005). Teens and technology: Youth are leading
the transition to a fully wired and mobile nation. Washington DC: Pew Internet &
Leu, D. J. (2000). Literacy and technology: Deictic consequences for literacy education
Erlbaum.
Leu, D.J., Jr., Kinzer, C.K., Coiro, J., Cammack, D. (2004). Toward a theory of new
literacies emerging from the Internet and other information and communication
http://www.readingonline.org/newliteracies/lit_index.asp?HREF=/newliteracies
/leu
Leu, D. J., Zawilinski, L., Castek, J., Banerjee, M., Housand, B., Liu, Y., et al. (2007).
Rush, J. Eakle, & A. Berger, (Eds.). Secondary school literacy: What research
Teachers of English.
Leu, D., Coiro, J., Castek, J., Hartman, D., Henry, L., & Reinking, D. (2008). Research
Facilitating Critical Thinking Skills through Content Creation 28
Press.
Leu, D. J., Reinking, D., Hutchinson, A., McVerry, J. G., Robbins, K., Rogers, A.,
Malloy, J., O’Byrne, W. I., Zawilinski, L. (2008). The TICA Project: Teaching the
38(4), 264-269.
Livingstone, S. (2004). Media literacy and the challenge of new information and
Livingstone, S., & Bober, M. (2005). UK children go online: Final report of key
Lubans, J. (1998, April). How first-year university students use and regard Internet
2000).
Lubans, J. (1999, May). Students and the Internet. Available from Duke University
Metzger, M. (2007). Making sense of credibility on the web: Models for evaluating
The New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures.
Orsmond, P., Merry, S. & Reiling, K. (2000) The use of student driven marking criteria
in peer and self assessment, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(1),
23–38.
Orsmond, P., Merry, S. & Reiling, K. (2002) The use of exemplars and formative
feedback when using student derived marking criteria in peer and self-assessment,
Rieh, S., & Belkin, N. (1998). Understanding judgment of information quality and
cognitive authority in the WWW. Proceedings of the ASIS Annual Meeting, 35,
279–289.
Shackleford, J., Thompson, D., & James, M. (1999). Teaching strategy and assignment
design: assessing the quality and validity of information via the Web. Social
Press.
15.
Tate, M., & Alexander, J. (1996). Teaching critical evaluation skills for World Wide Web
Publishing.
Wittel, A. (2000). Ethnography on the move: From field to net to Internet. Forum:
http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/1-00/1-00wittel-e.htm
KidsHealth.org allergy/asthma.html
action=detail&ref=1031
/permalink/computer_tan/
CLONES – R - US http://www.d-b.net/dti/