Glossary of Terms

Resource Kit Indices

Just Added

Teacher's Guide: Using Bad Apple Classroom Edition

The new Bad Apple Classroom Edition (CE) enables greater interaction among students centered around web page evaluation. Whenever there is an opportunity to discuss the merits of information, students stand to benefit from sharing their perspectives and hearing those of others.

Deciding whether the source and content of some information is reliable requires objectivity. When students begin to evaluate information they probably do so with limited objectivity. The more perspectives they are exposed to--this includes different points of view--the more likely they will approach information knowing that there are multiple ways to view it. Among the dangers of evaluating web pages without having experienced multiple perspectives is that 1) all information seems equal and 2) personal biases may influence the evaluation.

Personal biases influence evaluation. Everyone develops biases and it's very difficult to set biases aside without training. The danger here is that when a biased individual encounters information that agrees with an individual's biased views, it appears to be normal. Uncontested bias can be particularly troubling; a healthy society needs to expose and discuss insular views. That's a strong reason why evaluating credibilty should be practiced as a group exercise in school.

Fostering Group Discussion

The evaluation choices and procedures are the same for the classroom edition as they are for the individual edition. In the latter, a student's choices are compared to our Search Wizard's choices or a Wizard's Apprentice (whose judgments can be suspect). In the classroom edition, a student's choices are displayed next to a blank column. In the blank column go the choices for the rest of the class, or at least a small group.

You can be creative with how the information is gathered and gets shared, but the idea is that students share their views, and on the basis of the group, determine whether information, such as the author's background, is reliable.

• In cases where views are unanimous there may be less opportunity for discussion, but it is still valuable to hear individuals explain why they made their decision. There could be really good or bad reasons why a choice was made. The valuable activity here is to make the underlying thinking visible.

• Where there are mixed opinions, have students explain why they thought the information was credible or not. Let opposing views be heard. Does any of this reasoning help move the group toward consensus? Allow time for discussion, explanation, rebuttal. This can be a critical moment for teaching students to become more articulate in their views, listen to one another's arguments, and in the long run, become more objective.

• If it is easier for the class to share views anonymously, students may write down their decisions and rationales on cards that are turned in and selected at random, read and discussed. This places less pressure on a particular student to defend his or her views. For another variation, create two groups at random and have students in one group prepare arguments in favor of credibility; the other group prepare arguments against credibility. This works best with web pages, such as Golf Cross and Silly String, that are not clearly hoaxes.

Go to Bad Apple CE