I admit I don't get the . . . ummm . . . logistics of if it all, but, hey, I don't understand airplanes either. But whatever. If it's in print, then it must be true, right?
A: Wrong.
Today, I want to introduce you to an easy test you can use to evaluate information, whether it's in a textbook, a newspaper, or online. It's called the CRAAP Test, and it was created by a group of librarians from California State University at Chico. Nice acronym, huh? As in, if the information you've found doesn't meet these criteria, then it's crap, so don't use it. The extra "A" is for extra crappiness.
Try applying the CRAAP test to the male pregnancy site, and let me know what you determine.
(Oh, by the way, if you can do this simple test, you meet Standard #3 of the ACRL's Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education, which is pretty awesome and academic of you.)
Posts
2 comments:
So, I recognize this post is geared toward getting readers to think about evaluating their sources, but... I can't help but point out that once readers figure out the Male Pregnancy site is bogus--though kudos to the creators for the bog-alicio-us blog entries by "Dr. Liu"!!--they can find the real pregnant man story published in The Advocate: the LGBT news magazine. You can read the story on The Advocate website, or through the library's catalog.
I just read that story earlier this week, and *that's* what reminded me about the fake-y male pregnancy site. Good call!
Post a Comment