Play-based learning activity asking students to intentionally create "fake news" and engage with their emotional reactions in coming across information. 

The literature review design (LRD) tool helps design a traditional review nested in the dissertation or thesis. It was created based on the interactive Hopscotch research design framework (Jorrin-Abellan, 2020). 

This is part of an introductory first-year class to the university where students are introduced to the library and asked to think critically about how information is organized using the framework of critical cataloging. After watching a short video on the idea of classification and its problems with fixing identity categories, students analyze and categorize selected book from the collection, and then reflect on how knowledge is organized and their choices as authors.

This learning session, led by a librarian, is for first-year community college students in an academic library setting. The intention of this session is to scaffold onto existing research writing skills acquired in previous education, as well as use of popular video sharing platforms to obtain information, like TikTok. Informative videos produced by everyday people are a growing form of intellectual connection between all audiences and scholarly sources based on relatability, as well as visibility of marginalized issues larger news organizations do not address. When the information messenger is familiar yet dynamic in their presentation and provides information that the public is not informed on, viewers are more inclined to listen than if it were just a research paper or a scholarly representative of a research community. There are, however, citation issues and basic research principles missing in several of these videos, based solely on most video sharing platform’s intention to obtain engagement, not to responsibly inform/educate its users. As researchers, it is crucial to discern engagement-intended, incendiary content with informative, well-researched content that our neighbors are making, even if their intentions are good.

The SIFT* & PICK approach to evaluating sources adapts and builds on Mike Caulfield's SIFT method to help students select quality sources by practicing:

• Lateral Reading (SIFT): fact-checking by examining other sources and internet fact-checking tools; and
• Vertical Reading (PICK): examining the source itself to decide whether it is the best choice for their needs.

*The SIFT method was created by Mike Caulfield under a CC BY 4.0 International License.

How do you detmerine whether your research has had an impact? This lesson plan covers journal and author metrics such as Journal Impact Factors, H-index, citation counts, and altmetrics. After a mini-lecture of the definitions of these metrics and how to find them using Journal Citation Reports and Google Scholar Metrics, students create a researcher profile to position themselves as scholars. 

Supplies needed: Printed researcher profile handouts.

This activity takes approxiately 30 minutes.  

Directions: Identify a university or research center you’d want to be affiliated with, and make up a title of an article you’d be interested in writing. Then, find a real journal that would publish that article. Use Google Scholar to look up the journal’s h-index and Ulrich’s to determine if it’s open access. Make up a number for how many times you think the article would be cited!

This lesson actively engages learners in the process of evaluating an information source using the SIFT technique, designed by Mike Caufield. The approach uses lateral reading techniques and the lesson encourages learners to apply and reflect on the technique as it pertains to a specific information need.

To practice thinking about what sources work well together, instead of choosing sources, students will choose who to invite to a small dinner party. The goal is to put together a group of guests that will be able to find enough common ground to have interesting conversations.

In this scenario based activity, students are asked to help 4 of their classmates evaluate 3 sources they are considering using for their paper. Students can read the entirety of each source, then write a 2 to 3 sentence explanation of why their classmate should or shouldn’t use the source and why. Based on the concept of Calibrated Peer Review, there is one exemplar source, one substandard source and one bubble source.