For a performance task/ assignment, students will be expected to find evidence to investigate a pseudoscientific claim or conspiracy theory. They will be submitting a two-page paper to their Chemistry professor in which they make a case that either supports the claim or rejects it. They will be expected to use both library and credible online sources for support. The performance task will follow a full 75-minute library instruction session in which students will learn to:construct various search phrases for use in online and library search tools  use certain evaluation criteria (e.g. CRAAP) to assess the credibility of online sources  examine sources for relevance to their research question and search need (specifically, to determine credibility of claims)Throughout the class, an example claim will be used for searches. Either one of the following is recommended:Feng Shui – or the arrangement of furniture according to Chinese philosophy – can positively or negatively impact your wealth, health, happiness, and prosperity.President John F. Kennedy was not assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald – or his assassination is the result of a conspiracy of various entities and agents. Materials included:The full sequenced instruction outline for the face-to-face library instruction session. The assignment prompt for the performance task. CRAAP handout. 

This is a short, engaging activity suitable for learners of all levels. In it, students evaluate web sources that are provided by an instructor using the acronym CRAAP (currency, relevance, accuracy, authority, and purpose). Students work together in groups and explore evaluation processes aloud, with guidance from the CRAAP cards and the instructor. This is an adaptation of various evaluating sources activities available in LIS literature and professional resources. This activity is ideally implemented as a kind of collaborative game moderated by the instructor. It is highly adaptable.Students are grouped into 5 groups - one for each criterion of CRAAP. Each group will receive a CRAAP card or 3x5 index card/ handout/ other with evaluation questions pertaining to Currency, Relevance, Accuracy, Authority, and Purpose – different for each table. These are the "designated skeptics" of their criterion. They set out as skeptics and they are explicitly challenged to be challenging, and the rest of the class is directed to challenge them as well with probing open-ended questions. A source will be shared with the class on the projector. These sources will include scholarly articles, websites (blogs and orgs), and reference entries. It is essential that the instructor select sources that are relevant to their students (either by course, subject, or level) and that would be likely results on a student Internet search for a research topic/ question.Each group will evaluate the source aloud on the single criterion they’ve been assigned. If it “passes,” then the source gets asked the next question. If it “fails,” the source is dismissed. The criterion can be called out in order - that is, according to CRAAP - but they can also be called out randomly to be evaluated. This activity can be repeated with various websites or web sources.

Following a face-to-face library instruction session, students are assigned a short paper in which they select two [web] sources from a list and evaluate them using specific criteria (i.e. currency, relevance, authority, accuracy, and purpose). A real-life scenario is presented and real sources are provided from the first pages of Google search results. Learning OutcomesStudents will construct various search phrases for use in online search toolsStudents will use certain evaluation criteria (e.g. CRAAP) to assess the credibility of online sourcesStudents will examine sources for relevance to their research question and search need (specifically, to determine credibility of claims)Materials include: Full lesson - description, sequenced instruction (i.e. outline), and performance taskAssignment Assignment with suggested answer keyRubric CRAAP handout