对网络阅读障碍信息的批判性评价

IF 1.4 2区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Literacy Research Pub Date : 2021-03-01 DOI:10.1177/1086296X20986921
J. Worthy, Anne Daly-Lesch, Susan Tily, V. Godfrey, Cori Salmerón
{"title":"对网络阅读障碍信息的批判性评价","authors":"J. Worthy, Anne Daly-Lesch, Susan Tily, V. Godfrey, Cori Salmerón","doi":"10.1177/1086296X20986921","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The internet is a common source of information for parents, educators, and the general public. However, researchers who analyze the quality of internet sources have found they often contain inaccurate and misleading information. Here, we present an analysis of dyslexia on the internet. Employing disability studies in education (DSE), disability critical race studies (DisCrit), and Bakhtin’s construct of ideological becoming, we examined the credibility of sources, the quality of information, and the discourse in which the information is presented. We found the majority of webpages do not meet basic source credibility criteria, much of the content contradicts or is unsupported by research, and most pages convey information in an authoritative discourse, making it seem irreproachable. Building on the findings, we offer criteria for evaluating dyslexia information and suggestions for research and practice. We focus on the need for less divisive, more collaborative dialogue, along with research among stakeholders with multiple perspectives.","PeriodicalId":47294,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Literacy Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1086296X20986921","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Critical Evaluation of Dyslexia Information on the Internet\",\"authors\":\"J. Worthy, Anne Daly-Lesch, Susan Tily, V. Godfrey, Cori Salmerón\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1086296X20986921\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The internet is a common source of information for parents, educators, and the general public. However, researchers who analyze the quality of internet sources have found they often contain inaccurate and misleading information. Here, we present an analysis of dyslexia on the internet. Employing disability studies in education (DSE), disability critical race studies (DisCrit), and Bakhtin’s construct of ideological becoming, we examined the credibility of sources, the quality of information, and the discourse in which the information is presented. We found the majority of webpages do not meet basic source credibility criteria, much of the content contradicts or is unsupported by research, and most pages convey information in an authoritative discourse, making it seem irreproachable. Building on the findings, we offer criteria for evaluating dyslexia information and suggestions for research and practice. We focus on the need for less divisive, more collaborative dialogue, along with research among stakeholders with multiple perspectives.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47294,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Literacy Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1086296X20986921\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Literacy Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X20986921\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Literacy Research","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X20986921","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

对于家长、教育工作者和公众来说,互联网是一个常见的信息来源。然而,分析互联网资源质量的研究人员发现,它们经常包含不准确和误导性的信息。在这里,我们提出了一个在互联网上阅读障碍的分析。我们利用教育中的残疾研究(DSE)、残疾批判种族研究(DisCrit)和巴赫金的意识形态形成结构,考察了信息来源的可信度、信息的质量以及信息呈现的话语。我们发现大多数网页不符合基本的来源可信度标准,许多内容相互矛盾或没有研究支持,大多数网页以权威话语传达信息,使其看起来无可指责。基于这些发现,我们提供了评估阅读障碍信息的标准,并为研究和实践提供了建议。我们关注减少分歧、加强合作对话的必要性,以及多方视角的利益攸关方之间的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Critical Evaluation of Dyslexia Information on the Internet
The internet is a common source of information for parents, educators, and the general public. However, researchers who analyze the quality of internet sources have found they often contain inaccurate and misleading information. Here, we present an analysis of dyslexia on the internet. Employing disability studies in education (DSE), disability critical race studies (DisCrit), and Bakhtin’s construct of ideological becoming, we examined the credibility of sources, the quality of information, and the discourse in which the information is presented. We found the majority of webpages do not meet basic source credibility criteria, much of the content contradicts or is unsupported by research, and most pages convey information in an authoritative discourse, making it seem irreproachable. Building on the findings, we offer criteria for evaluating dyslexia information and suggestions for research and practice. We focus on the need for less divisive, more collaborative dialogue, along with research among stakeholders with multiple perspectives.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: The Journal of Literacy Research (JLR) is a peer-reviewed journal contributes to the advancement research related to literacy and literacy education. Current focuses include, but are not limited to: -Literacies from preschool to adulthood -Evolving and expanding definitions of ‘literacy’ -Innovative applications of theory, pedagogy and instruction -Methodological developments in literacy and language research
期刊最新文献
“What's Unexpected?” Interventionist Explanations of Dyslexia I’m Still Nigerian: Navigating Race Through Digital Literacies Literacy as Bearing Witness: Teachers Expanding Literacy Through Authentic and Hybrid Student Narratives From Silence to Testimonio: Latina Adolescents’ Agency in Writing Squeezed in: Writing Instruction Over Time
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1