Dr. Lee McGaan  

  Office:  WH 308  (ph. 309-457-2155);  email lee@monmouthcollege.edu
  Home:  418 North Sunny Lane (ph. 309-734-5431, cell 309-333-5447)

Fall 2016 Office Hours:   MWF:  9:30 - 10am, 11am - Noon & 1 -2pm TTh:  2-3pm & by apt.  |  copyright (c) by Lee McGaan, 2006-2016



 

last updated 10/30/2014

News / Information / Media Literacy.

What is Information Literacy?

  • Multiple "literacies" for multiple technologies.

  • The use of texts, tools, and technologies to access news, information and entertainment.

  • Skills for critical thinking - The Critical Thinking Process

  • Abilities to create messages across media

  • Comfort with reflection, evaluation and ethical thinking about messages and information sources.

Key Skills of Information / News / Media Literacy

  1. Judging credibility of authors, sources and messages

    1. Who is the author (and what are his qualifications and reputation and that of the publisher)?

    2. What is the purpose of the message?  (point of view, outcome desired, etc.)

    3. How is the message constructed?  (what is seen and unseen, edited, distorted, etc.)

  2. Using media "codes" for analysis.  (see previous notes on "What is News" and "News as Persuasion" and "Bias"  (See "Critical Media" notes)

  3. Finding and confirming information from multiple and reliable sources

    1. What makes sources more or less reliable?  (the author's sources? information in context?)

    2. What constitutes an appropriate search (for news and information)?

    3. How does new information fit with what we already know and can trust?

  4. Evaluating the "argument."

    1. Does the information source use support material?  of good quality?

    2. Does the information source reason well (e.g. support is relevant and does it actually proves the point)? 

      1. Consider the "warrant," that is how the support/evidence "proves" the point being made.

    3. Does the information source avoid fallacies and biases (e.g. confirmation bias, ad hominem, post hoc, false analogies, anecdotal evidence, etc.)?

    4. Does the information source deal effectively with "counter-arguments?" or even acknowledge them?

    5. Does the message truncate reasoning and reflection (with emotion, fallacies, appeals to in-group/out-groups, mental shortcuts) or facilitate.

    6. Is there a theme that "frames" the message and is it reasonable given the "facts."