How I failed an Information Literacy Assessment

 I often "check out the competition" so to speak. This time it was NorthStar, a St. Paul, MN-based literacy company that offers assessments covering a range of topics from information literacy to operating systems, software packages and career search skills.

Their information literacy assessment consists of 32 performance-based and multiple choice items woven around the stories of three individuals involved in information literacy tasks. It's quite easy to take the assessment, assisted by audio storytelling. I thought I did pretty well and then I got a report at the end informing me I had failed with a 74% accuracy rate.

So I took the assessment again.

Not all the items seem specifically linked to what I'd call information literacy. Several depend on having lived circumstances similar to the case studies.  I did fine on these, having experienced financial deprivation, for example. Nonetheless, answers that might make sense are counted wrong if they violate an implicit principle such as 'don't go deeper into debt by taking out a loan if you are already in debt.' That lesson has to be learned by reading or listening to sage advice or the hard way, by accumulating debts. It's not an information literacy skill, yet it is assessed as one.

Another item resembles an information literacy skill, knowing for what to search. Provided with a list of criteria for finding a job, the task essentially is to click synonyms that match the criteria. Research demonstrates that this is one of the key failures that students make when searching: knowing what to search for. However, the assessment uses these as indicators to tell if and when one finds matching information. Knowing how to find answers in the first place is usually the real challenge and where students tend to stumble.

Among other items that seem removed from information literacy are project management, reading, a basic understanding of careers in healthcare.  Without a doubt information literacy depends on fundamental skills like knowing a language well enough to use it, thinking methodologically, being persistent, learning from failures and a host of others. But these are all primary skills and dispositions. Information literacy is a secondary skill that builds on them. If a student fails in such primary tasks, the solution is not information literacy training.

The assessment does contain some good examples of information literacy:

• identifying optimal keywords that match one's search criteria
• Distinguishing between ads and other content
• How to use search engine filters
• Knowing how to read results
• Knowing how to navigate a Web page
• Knowing where to search for relevant information
• Evaluating the "fit" of information found
  

The second time I took the assessment I was more careful and I passed. I still missed three items, though I don't consider them fundamental to information literacy.

Questions that remain:

• Is knowing how to create a spreadsheet or how to bookmark a page an information literacy skill?
• In what ways are information literacy or fluency skills distinct from computer or software proficiencies? One answer to this is the Digital Information Model found here.
• What is a passing score for information literacy? When I failed with a 74% the first time and passed the second time with 87% it reminds me that a numerical cutoff for this cluster of secondary skills is really hard to justify. No one performs at 100% all the time as an effective, efficient, accurate and ethical consumer of online information. We strive to be better than 50%, however. That's why the threshold is set low on our assessments and 75% is considered mastery. That number is borne out in search results from our studies. Being right 3 out of 4 times is a pretty decent accomplishment in the online Wild West.
  

Beyond Information Literacy?

 

The differences between illiteracy, literacy and fluency are fuzzy, at best, when it comes to digital information competencies.

The Spring 2022 Feature article in the Full Circle Kit examines the lines between incompetence and fluency using the results of a study conducted by 21cif at Northwestern University's Center for Talent Development. 

The data suggests that a minimum competency for someone to be identified as 'literate' is a 60% success rate on search and retrieval tasks. The point at which fluency starts is less clear.

Read the whole article here

Recommended reading: Why we need information literacy classes By VICTOR SHI Chicago Tribune

 

The following article by Victor Shi, an eloquent Gen Z'er appeared recently in the Chicago Tribune (May 2, 2022). He makes a good argument for the need for information literacy instruction.

Fifty years ago, the national networks CBS, ABC and NBC dominated television screens in America and were the primary way voters obtained information. Each network, along with newspapers and radio, told its audience facts first, and all agreed on what the facts were. That meant Americans had a shared understanding of the truth — which is what led to the erosion of both Democratic and Republican public support for then-President Richard Nixon during the Watergate investigation.

But the time of Democrats and Republicans agreeing on facts is no more. In the early 1980s, cable news networks emerged. The late ‘80s and early ‘90s brought the internet, and Six Degrees became the first social media platform later in the ‘90s. With each development, avenues for information grew more abundant. People weren’t confined to newspapers and the three news stations for information. Instead, we gained the ability to access information anywhere — and with less and less scrutiny.

Read the whole article here

Twitter fooled by Fake Candidate

A few election cycles ago, there was the story of Susie Flynn running for President. It was a hoax published by a media company to attract attention. It made for a pretty good fact checking evaluation challenge. Here's an archived reminder of the story.

In today's news is a story about a 17-year old who fabricated a Senate candidate named Andrew Walz and managed to get Twitter to verify the fake as legitimate.  Here's some of the story from CNN:

"Earlier this month, Walz's account received a coveted blue check mark from Twitter as part of the company's broader push to verify the authenticity of many Senate, House and gubernatorial candidates currently running for office. Twitter has framed this effort as key to helping Americans find reliable information about politicians in the lead up to the 2020 election."

Not until the 17-year old's parents came forward with the story did anyone notice the problem.

One takeaway is that if a bored teen can exploit Twitter's election integrity efforts, what else is that publisher missing?

We are foolish if we allow others to think for us, assuring us what to believe, what to trust. There is really no substitute for honing our skills and taking time to do our own vetting.

The story of Andrew Walz is another wake up call to practice fact checking.  What details in Andrew Walz's campaign can't be verified? Post your answers below.

More on fact checking here.

Elementary Workshop Refreshed

Especially for those who teach younger students, the Elementary Workshop is a user-guided resource that may be used to introduce and reinforce concepts and skills in information fluency in the elementary grades.

An assortment of hands-on learning activities and games, with and without computers, is included in the workshop:

Speculative Searching

• ways to search
• queries
• homing in
• search challenges

Investigative Searching

• find the author
• find the date
• fact checking

Citing the Source

There's enough material to insert into mini-lessons throughout the school year. Check it out here: https://21cif.com/rkitp/course/elementaryworkshop/index.php

Introducing the 15 Challenges

Confused by where or how to get started on the path to Information Fluency?

Introducing the 15 Challenges, a new portal to Information Fluency. By completing these fifteen challenges, users are introduced to essential digital searching and evaluation tasks that include:

• browsing
• truncation
• effective keyword queries
• basic operators
• finding better keywords in snippets
• database selection
• evaluating an author
• evaluating a publisher
• detecting bias
• checking online reputation
• fact checking
• freshness checking
• creating proper citations

Try it for yourself here: https://21cif.com/INTERNETSEARCHCHALLENGE/

Read more about the 15 Challenges in the Spring 2019 Full Circle Resource Kit

New LEGO Challenge

Improvements in Google algorithm have made the Lego History Challenge too easy to solve as a Level 2 Challenge.

Consequently, a new challenge has replaced it: https://21cif.com/tutorials/challenge/search/legovault.html

This is one of six free search challenges on the Information Fluency site and is intended to help diagnose novice problems with querying. Failure to answer this challenge indicates one or more of the following:

1. Not understanding the question
2. Using more than a minimum of keywords
3. Not browsing effectively--skimming too fast

The answer does not appear in the snippets/abstracts if too many keywords are used, in which case browsing the results is necessary.

See how you do. It's a Level 2 (out of 6).

Finding and Fact-checking Information

Here is the third and final free preview in this series of WSI (Website Investigator) tutorials. The Fact Checking tutorial is a useful how-to for finding embedded info to evaluate.

Much has been said about information in a post-truth age. To some extent, truth is what you want to believe. However, there may be solid reasons to back up that belief, or none at all. When the information has value to pass along, it's a good idea to make sure the facts about it are consistent. Otherwise you risk looking like a fool, which unfortunately still has a tendency to mar one's reputation.

Consider an annual subscription to the entire Information Fluency site. All your students can access the WSI cases plus many more helpful resources for one calendar year. More info.

98% Gullibility?

"Only 2 per cent of children and young people can tell if a news story is real or fake, according to a survey published today."

The survey is from the  All-Party Parliamentary Group on Literacy and the National Literacy Trust.

Read more here: https://www.tes.com/news/pupils-lack-literacy-skills-spot-fake-news 

For resources to help students identify Fake News, visit https://21cif.com/fullcircle/fall2017/index.php (requires an annual membership). Free resources, start here: https://21cif.com/tutorials/micro/index.php

Summer Full Circle Resource Kit

Bias Detection is the newest Kit in the Full Circle series.

One of the most popular MicroModules on the Information Fluency site is Bias. Becoming sensitive to bias and knowing that not everything in print or images is neutral or objective is one way to prevent unguarded consumption of fake or distorted news. Bias can be hard to detect, especially when a reader finds it agreeable.

The Feature article examines a front page case where bias was overlooked, resulting in shooting up a pizzeria thought to be a front for pedophile sex abuse in Washington DC.

Curricular Connections provides a helpful checklist for identifying and discussing incidents of bias in non-fiction and images.

Six interactive examples of biased and unbiased articles and one image are packaged in the Assessment section to help students evaluate bias. A score of 80% accuracy indicates fluency in detecting bias.

The Kit requires a subscription, but for a limited time, the feature article is free.

https://21cif.com//fullcircle/summer2018/index.php

Out of the Library, Into the Classroom

What's happening in Kansas isn't unique.

Wichita Public Radio's feature,  "The School Librarian is Expendable in many Kansas School Districts" documents a large scale shift in responsibility for information literacy instruction. As the number of school librarians dwindles, information literacy is being integrated into classroom curriculum to be addressed by teachers. How effective this will be, time will tell. Another case of teachers being asked to do more.

Neighboring Colorado is similarly affected, with a nine percent decline in the number of school librarians between 2007 and 2011.

In Illinois, Chicago Public Schools reduced its librarian staff by 44 percent in just two years. Librarians are being reassigned to classrooms as teachers. Faced with a teacher shortage, it's a move that makes sense. But part of the problem of considering librarians a luxury comes down to this:

"There's no required amount of minutes for library instruction (in Illinois), so schools won't face any repercussions if they don't have a librarian or a school library." Source

For the time being, other things are just more important. It's hard to make the argument that digital research skills are as important as learning how to learn when there is no reason to learn them other than they are good skills to have. When they are considered essential skills, the tide may start to change.

In the meantime, policy makers should see how proficient students in Elementary through High School are. This means assessment. The Information Fluency assessments we've tested show that students can't research challenging assignments and consistently make poor choices in the selection of information that is inaccurate, irrelevant, out of date, biased and is not held in high regard by trusted sources. If you are a librarian concerned about your job or a classroom teacher who just doesn't have the time to teach one more thing, request a free test for your students. The results could be eye-opening.

Trends in Information Literacy

Our friends at EasyBib have produced a new Infographic that confirms our findings that the majority of instruction depends on one-shot instruction or is still being built.

How does this match with your experience?  Full size image

If you aren't satisfied with one-shot instruction or need resources for developing instruction, the Information Fluency website is full of ideas! Consider our self-paced tutorial modules as a way to supplement your library instruction.

Searching Myth Exposed (again)

source

It's not true: growing up digital makes one an effective digital searcher.

We've stated this before in our book, Teaching Information Fluency, and now it comes from another source: Google.

Here's an article covering Dan Russell's (senior researcher at Google) talk at Strathclyde University: http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/education/great-internet-age-divide-is-a-myth.25672713

The solution starts with teachers.

Research needs to be included in the curriculum.

"Knowing how to frame a question, pose a query, how to interpret the texts you find, how to organize and use the information you discover are all critical parts of being literate...."

A New Framework for Fluency?

This article caught my eye today:

Reimagining Information Literacy Competencies 
by Barbie E. Keiser
Posted On July 29, 2014





'The task force was charged with updating the information literacy competency standards for higher education “so that they reflect the current thinking on such things as the creation and dissemination of knowledge, the changing global higher education and learning environment, the shift from information literacy to information fluency, and the expanding definition of information literacy to include multiple literacies, e.g., transliteracy, media literacy, digital literacy, etc.”'

Full article

The higher education community has always been at the forefront of the information "literacy" movement. This new thinking represents new challenges for high schools, middle schools and elementary schools to redefine how they prepare students for college and personally motivated research.

One wonders if it will renew interest in information preparedness in primary and secondary schools, and how.

 

The Death of Information Literacy

According to the blog Infonatives, information literacy is dead. Indeed, Google trends for the past five years shows a consistent decline in queries for "information literacy."

But does that means it is dead?

Actually, the last two years shows the trend has flattened (if a trend may be accurately judged from a single query).  There may have been more interest in 2004 than today. The blog traffic at http://21cif.com/index.html has slowed down some as well (if a trend may accurately be judged from visits to one page).*

Saying information literacy is dead is a bit like saying keyboarding is dead. Maybe there's less interest in it, but it still matters. In fairness to Infonatives, the point is not the actual demise of information literacy, but a necessary paradigm shift:

"The idea that it is possible to teach localization, evaluation and use of information without reference to a subject-specific set of skill is ridiculous..."

I alluded to this point in my last blog.  Having content-specific knowledge is certainly a big help when evaluating possible scams--e.g., knowledge related to organizations promising humanitarian aid to Haiti.

I firmly believe there are some basic skills that underlie all locating, evaluating and using information ethically--things like interpreting urls, truncation, fact-checking, etc.--and these remain skills we wish to instill in K-12 students--students who may not think much of information literacy, but who, nonetheless, lack the skills to find, evaluate and ethically use digital information.

Subject-specific information literacy becomes more critical when it comes to identifying optimal databases to search and evaluation of content. Finding subject-specific databases is actually not all that challenging--a deep Web search skill that I still consider pretty basic stuff.  But accruing sufficient knowledge to ascertain the accuracy and reliability of subject-specific information--that is challenging.

For me, this points out the need to integrate subject-matter training with information literacy activities such as, for example, research leading to a science fair project. What does the student need to know about the subject? How does the student know if information is credible? Teachers support information literacy by helping students ask incisive questions. Those who leave students to find their own way, which includes leaving student evaluation of Internet sources unexamined, are doing little to prevent the death of information literacy. Put another way, helping students evaluate online sources promotes good subject-specific thinking while engaging in information literacy.

The challenge is to find subject-specific ways to help students find credible information online and keep moving in the direction of fluency.  Expect to hear more about this. Your thoughts are always welcome.


*At the same time, traffic to this blog has consistently increased since I started tracking it.

Yes, There's a Need - Part 3

When people aren't sure what else to do, they resort to browsing.

While using a query or truncating a url might be a faster solution to a search problem, if a person isn't sure what else to do, he or she will browse. Even the best searchers do this. (And almost every search ends by browsing.)

Browsing is typically the least efficient of the three main search methods. Using a search engine is the quickest and using a subject directory (0r menu) can get one closer to the target in fewer clicks. But there's something fundamentally satisfying or comforting about browsing that makes it a preferred method.

In terms of satisfaction, browsing provides immediate feedback. You still have to scan the surroundings to determine what the feedback says about getting closer or not to your objective, but it's a bit like low stakes gambling and pretty addictive.

Nonetheless, browsing is not a good substitute technique much of the time. For example, I got an email recently about a link being changed on one of the pages associated with a particular search challenge. The page to be investigated really didn't call for browsing, but that's what this individual was doing when he or she discovered the changed link (it wasn't dead, it now pointed to something unrelated). The optimal technique is a string search of a statement to see if it is considered truthful by external sources. Following page links will not achieve this. In fact, browsing tends to confirm the truthfulness of the statement because the links provided on the page reflect the bias, not the objectivity, of the author.

Here's my advice: think before you browse. Ask yourself, is there another technique I know that might be more efficient or suited to the task? If not, ask yourself, what keywords am I looking for that will tell me I'm getting closer? You don't need to compile such a list first. Just being sensitive to the question will help you evaluate the keywords in the links you come across. Some will bear a closer relationship to your target than others.

I ended up removing the page with the (misleading) links from the tutorial challenge. It hadn't occurred to me that anyone would try to follow them, so I hadn't vetted them. Some led to objectionable content. Now the page has no links. The only way to answer the question is to use the preferred technique. Of course, if you don't know what that technique is, you're sunk.

Here's the challenge: http://untaughtgeneration.com/obama-quote.html

World's Fastest Animal

"What is the top speed of earth's fastest animal?"

Seems simple enough. But just letting students search for an answer shortcuts an opportunity for learning. In my workshops for elementary teachers and librarians, I hand out half sheets of paper on which is written a different word from the challenge. I have the participants stand and ask them, "which of these words do we need for a query?" Prior to this we've looked at the Question to Query checklist.

With adults, the stop words automatically sit down without any question (what, is, the, of).

The individuals holding earth's and top realize they aren't necessary: where else would one look for an animal except earth (earth's is redundant) and top is redundant because fastest is one of the words.

The last one to sit is often speed. Fastest usually makes the point that speed is unnecessary as long as she's there.

That leaves fastest and animal. These two form the optimal query for the challenge. I should point out that one of these is an adjective--not usually a good "as is" word (nouns and numbers are better).

The exercise appeals to language arts teachers because it reinforces understanding parts of speech and the making of meaning--in this case understanding about redundancy. With younger audiences, it's possible to lead them to these discoveries by the use of questioning. In either case, the activity intersects two valuable lessons: one about language and the other about searching.

Over the course of the last month, the answer to the search challenge has become more interesting. Most people discover that the best answer depends on whether the animal flies, runs or swims. (As I wrote in the previous blog, this points out the inadequacy of the question and the knack some students have for assuming incorrectly they know what the question is about--and why many will say the answer is a cheetah.)

If you think the Peregrine Falcon is the speediest animal, you now need to defend your choice. A faster animal shows up in the results. Again, this points out the inadequacy of the search challenge question, but it forces you to decide what makes something the fastest.

Curious? Try the challenge.

Information Forensics goes to School

Yesterday, Dennis O'Connor and I presented "Information Forensics goes to School" at the NECC conference in Washington, D.C.*

We talked about how the investigative aspects of information fluency, which constitutes part of the missing curriculum at most schools, cuts across all subject matters, 21st Century Skills as well as ethics. The ability to track down and evaluate information about authors, publishers, publication dates, content and references is vital to research in any subject. The techniques used to locate and evaluate such information is integral to ICT literacy and the ability to cite information is definitely an aspect of ethics in scholarship. It's deplorable that the task of helping students develop these skills and attitudes is most often left to the school librarian. The entire faculty should share this responsibility.

We didn't actually rant that much during the session, but it needs to be said.

We also introduced a new resource being used by nearly 1,000 students at the Center for Talent Development at Northwestern University this summer: Investigative Searching 20/10. This is a performance-based assessment and training package designed using Moodle and an array of Websites we created specifically for the purpose of diagnosing students' skills. The focus is on investigative searching and evaluation.

The results are as we predicted: even the most gifted students in middle school and high school, on average, cannot locate critical online information and evaluate it. Without someone to show them effective techniques, they browse hoping to stumble upon information that may be helpful to identify an author, a publisher, the date of publication, etc. Couple this with students' general "need for speed"--which contributes to important information being overlooked--and you have a recipe for failure and poor research.

Following a pretest which requires students to demonstrate techniques like querying and truncation, a series of self-paced tutorials steps through 5 main techniques, each followed by a mastery check activity. The 6-8 hour experience is capped off with a posttest of items comparable to the pretest. Students, on average, improve 15 to 20 percentage points. Not bad for a few hours work. The improvement would be even greater with continued use.

Sound like something you could use?

We are offering educators a chance to experience this package starting July 7. You may enroll up to July 28. We'll leave this section just for educators open for 4 weeks, although it takes less than a week to complete it. Our hope is that you will mine it and discover ways to use it with students as part of a systematic approach to online research or as part of an instructional unit. The full preview is available for a modest fee ($25); 8 CPDUs are awarded for completion.

To learn more about Investigative Searching 20/10, visit this link. (log in as guest)

From the tutorial on finding the author, here's a taste of what you'll get.

Find the first and last name of the author whose initials appear at the bottom of this article: http://www.spacestaking.com/about/mission/greenvision.html

As you will discover from the associated tutorials, there are several ways you might try to solve this: browsing, querying and truncation. One of these is the most effective given the circumstances. See if you can do it.



*Our NECC presentation was recorded for anyone interested who wasn't there--I'll post the link when Apple publishes it.

Finding the Black Box

Homing in on information online is similar to locating a downed aircraft's black box in one respect: both send out signals. In the case of the black box, the signal gets stronger as you approach. In the case of information online, the contextual evidence (think clues) gets stronger.

Detecting those clues and interpreting them can be very difficult.

Homing in on information online depends on browsing for keyword evidence. Some people have a distinct advantage in this regard. Masterful browsers tend to have fairly developed language skills. This, coupled with a disposition to read carefully, puts them far ahead of otherwise skilled computer users. I know adults often feel inadequate when working with kids with lightning fast computer abilities. But adults, despite their technological shortcomings, tend to outperform prodigious children and teens when it comes to homing in on information.

I witnessed an example of this last evening when my wife pilot tested an assessment that Information Fluency is preparing to use with Center for Talent Development students at Northwestern University. Pat, not a computer user from birth, took about an hour to complete the 10 item pretest, most of which depends on careful reading and browsing--after all, investigative searching relies on being thorough and examining lots of clues. She only missed 2 items, which is typical of an adult who has mastered searching and evaluation. Middle school and high school students will take about half that time and miss the majority of the items.

The major difference boils down to reading and browsing carefully. Sure, there are other techniques in a skilled online investigator's toolkit, but careful reading and browsing can be used to solve most search challenges.

1. See every word as a clue It's really easy to overlook important keywords when skimming. The words and terms that matter most are typically nouns and numbers. Adjectives become important in detecting bias. Spotting these is easier by slowing down. If you have the attitude that words are clues--not just the specific keyword(s) you are looking for--you will probably have to adjust your speed.

2. Recognize and follow possible connections Here is where terms you weren't looking for become important and why it helps to have a good vocabulary. Synonyms and words used in the context of what you are looking for are all possible connections. It may help to think about what some of these other words are before reading. In terms of the Digital Information Fluency Model, this is known as finding better keywords as you search. You can't predict with 100% accuracy what keywords are necessary before you search. You have to pay attention and find them as you search.

An example may help Let's say you're looking for the publisher of this site: http://www.spacetoday.net. First steps are usually to read the header and footer for the name of an organization or copyright information. Not seeing those, what stands out is the About Us link. Let the browsing begin. The name of the publisher is in the text of this page. In this case, it's an individual: "Spacetoday.net was founded by Jeff Foust." This wasn't a particularly difficult challenge, but many students will miss it because the name is embedded in the text. Moreover, Mr. Foust's role is represented with the word "founded" rather than "published." You have to know what these words mean, how they are used and related. Is the founder always the publisher? Not always. To make sure we've got the publisher, another source of information is required.

Here's your Challenge: Can you find another source of information that confirms that Jeff Foust is actually the publisher? It might take another technique in addition to careful reading and browsing.

Five Keys to Investigative Searching

When it comes right down to it, there aren't a lot of techniques involved in investigative searching. As opposed to speculative searching--what we tend to do most of the time--investigative searching involves clear clues and places to look for information about credibility.

In speculative searching, we're not sure where to look (Google is the default) and what keywords we need to retrieve the information we are looking for.

The goals of investigation are clear: find and evaluate the author, find and evaluate the publisher, find and interpret the meaning of the date, find evidence and evaluate it for accuracy, objectivity and external verification. You don't need to collect all this information unless the stakes for using information are high (like your job depends on it or you'll be punished if you plagiarize or violate fair use). Most of the time, checking a few facts is enough.

It may be helpful to think about investigative search techniques as depending on careful reading and four other keys. Nothing takes the place of reading thoughtfully. Still, the tendency of students is to go as fast as possible, thereby overlooking important information and clues about credibility. I'd say that's the biggest problem and why students trust false information.

The rest of the problem, as I see it, is that students aren't taught some basic techniques. These are the four keys I'm referring to:


Queries [Enter Key]

Using a search engine to track down missing information and check its credibility is the most powerful tool in the investigator’s kit. Depending on the information you need, the database you search will vary. For most queries, Google is preferred. But if you need to look up the registered owner of a website—to find the publisher or someone to contact—that requires a different database: whois.net. If you need to find a list of pages that link to the page you are investigating, then Yahoo is preferred, as it returns more information than Google with the link: command.

There are keyword queries, when you need to check the facts about a person, a publisher or something an author wrote in a web page. If you can’t find information to back up an author’s claim, that lends no support to its credibility. Sometimes, you’ll find that other people have information that contradicts the author you are investigating. This is all part of triangulating: finding information from multiple sources that agrees. When that happens, there’s a better chance the information can be trusted.

There are also string queries. This is when you copy a portion of text and search for the exact phrase in a database. You may place quotes around a passage, but it’s not necessary. Quotes work best around a first and last name or a short phrase. By searching for a string, you will often find other instances of the article or person you are investigating. The other instance may contain additional information you need. You may also discover that the passage you are investigating was plagiarized: copied word for word without being cited.


Truncation [Backspace]

The URL is an important source of information. It can reveal the publisher’s name or whether the site is self-published by the author. Truncation is a good way to navigate toward the root of the site you are investigating. Not all the information you need may be found on a web page, but a directory page may contain important clues such as an author’s name, a publisher or the date an article was written. You truncate by removing parts of the URL with the backspace or delete key, starting from the right and stopping when you reach a folder marker (/).


Browsing [Left Click]

Browsing is a special kind of reading: paying attention to hyperlinks. Normally when you browse you are looking for words or images that stand out. On a web page, browsing is defined by the links you click. Think of successful browsing as a game of HOT and COLD. You are trying to use links to get you closer to information you need, though you’re not exactly sure where that information is hiding. Whenever you click a link you have to scan or read the new page to discover whether you are getting hotter or colder. If you seem to be getting colder, go back and try a different link or technique. If you are getting hotter you will discover keywords and clues that you can use in your investigation.



Page Information [Right Click]

If you are using a browser that provides page information (Firefox does this) you can right-click on a web page to bring up a menu that includes Page Information. Depending on how the web page was coded, information about the last time the page was updated may be provided. If the last updated information is ‘now’ then the coding on the web page doesn’t allow this information to be shown. Knowing the last update of a page can be helpful in determining the age of the material.



This is obviously only an introduction to the techniques, but with them you should be able to solve this challenge:

Who is the author of the Sellafield Zoo? http://www.brookview.karoo.net/Sellafield_Zoo/

Challenge Level: Intermediate (Don't forget careful reading!)