Here is an overall evaluation of each site. Included in the evaluation is reasons why or why not I would use the site in my classroom. If I think I would use the site, I include how I envision utilizing it.
FAIR: This site looked very professional and was set up nicely. It was organized and labeled for easy navigation. However, this site is an organization. This means right away that there may be some biased present. After reading through this site, it is clear that there is explicit bias. This does affect the usefulness of the information, especially for students who are searching for accurate and clear information. Also, as my classmate Michelle pointed out, this site is out of date. I may use this site in my classroom, simply to go over what bias is. I would have an unbiased site picked out, and then possibly this one. My students would have to pick out parts they think highlight the bias.
Immigration Blog: By being a blog, this site is naturally going to be filled with biased. It is written by an individual who is voicing his "obsessed" opinions on immigration. For this reason, I do not see this site as a good way for students to learn about immigration as a whole. However, this site does provide links to credible sources such as CNN and The Washington Post, so students could possibly use those resources to gain more information they can trust. Also, I agree with my classmate Brittany that this site is nice in the face that it is very current. I may use this site in order teach about blogs and show what one looks like. I may also let students pull resources from the articles and links the blogger provides in order to check the credibility of those resources.
America.gov: I feel like this was the best site we had to evaluate, especially for the purposes of education. As my classmate Caitlin said very well--it is important to know both sides of every story, but it is also important to know the story as a whole--which is why this site is great. It gives an extended history, just as it promised in the title. I would trust this site to be credible based on its ".gov" address. I would use this site in my classroom simply for the great background information it gives. I would have them explore this site before starting a unit on immigration or before writing an argumentative paper. Students need that basic information in order to form any opinions of their own.
US Citizenship and Immigration Service: Along with the site above, this site is also a ".gov" address--giving it a sense of immediate credibility of some kind. This site is an excellent resource if a student is searching for something specific. It is set up in sections and sub-sections, so it is very accessible. Like my classmate, Jill, pointed out, the "how to" section on the far left is very helpful. I could see a project being done where students are put in groups and assigned a certain section. They could then be in charge of presenting that "how to" information to the rest of the class.
News from the Onions: This site was a tricky one. Its humor and set up makes me question the credibility and reliability of the authors and the information. My classmate Nathan commented that he thought older high school students may be able to grasp and analyze the information and its humor. At first, I agreed with him; however, after looking at the privacy section of the site and seeing the quote: "The Onion is not intended for readers under 18 years of age," I changed my mind. I do not think a teacher should ignore a claim like this and a vast majority of high school students are under 18, so that part alone takes this site out of the running for me. I would not use this site.
No comments:
Post a Comment