Citations are out of context, or don’t seem to contribute to the rest of the work

Does it seem like citations were added to the project as an afterthought, or don’t appear to be connected to the writing?  The purposes of citation beyond avoiding punishment for plagiarism are often overlooked. Exploring the SCHOLARSHIP AS CONVERSATION and RESEARCH AS INQUIRY frames can lend some insight into the purposes of citation.

Materials cited are a mismatch with disciplinary conventions or other expectations for the type of information being created

Are you finding that popular or social media sources are being used when a scholarly source is needed, or are obscure scholarly articles being used when a personal narrative would be more appropriate? The INFORMATION CREATION AS A PROCESS, RESEARCH AS INQUIRY, and SEARCHING AS STRATEGIC EXPLORATION frames can lend some insight into this issue.

Integrity or plagiarism concerns 

The framing of plagiarism as intentional dishonesty often glosses over the concept of why intellectual property has value, for whom and what purposes it has value, and who can be disadvantaged when value is unrecognized or misappropriated. Exploring the INFORMATION HAS VALUE frame can lend some insight into the value of intellectual property beyond avoiding cheating, as well as how citation practice is related to integrity. 

Citation formatting 

Standardized citation formats provide a clear trail for researchers to explore the sources which impacted a writer more deeply. This back-and-forth nature of scholarship can be opaque to learners. Exploring the SCHOLARSHIP AS CONVERSATION and SEARCHING AS STRATEGIC EXPLORATION frames can lend some insight into why including clear, standardized citations is important to a writer’s audience and future conversations based on their work.

Issues of “credibility”  

Credibility can be a confusing concept, and has many dimensions such as accuracy, trustworthiness, believability, factuality, etc. Sometimes a source can be credible for one purpose and not credible for another, and can also vary by discipline. Often what is meant by credible is “authoritative.” Exploring the AUTHORITY IS CONSTRUCTED AND CONTEXTUAL frame can be a place to start to lend some insight into issues of credibility.

Appropriate source for appropriate purpose

Mismatches between a source and its intended purpose are common. A scholarly article is not always the most appropriate source for a broad overview of a topic. A social media post from a conspiracy theorist may be a great primary source for researching the psychology of conspiracists, but would probably not reflect scientific consensus on the related issue. Exploring the INFORMATION CREATION AS A PURPOSE, RESEARCH AS INQUIRY, and AUTHORITY IS CONSTRUCTED AND CONTEXTUAL frames can lend some insight into these issues.

Identifying red flags

Often the experienced eye will notice red flags such as scholarly studies funded and published by industry groups, websites with subtle political agendas, or background details of authors. These characteristics may not always be obvious to novice learners. Exploring the INFORMATION CREATION AS A PURPOSE, INFORMATION HAS VALUE, and AUTHORITY IS CONSTRUCTED AND CONTEXTUAL frames can lend some insight into these issues.

Taking time to research the origins of sources (lateral reading)

Persistence in digging into the background of sources, or at least looking for other sources on a topic through lateral reading, can be a new task for many learners. The INFORMATION CREATION AS A PROCESS and INFORMATION HAS VALUE frames can help students consider the purposes behind the information’s origin and spur additional questions.

Recognizing misinformation or disinformation

This multifaceted topic can involve issues such as cognitive bias, search strategy, affective response, the ways in which information is created and disseminated, and the motivations behind mis- and disinformation, just to name a few. To explore why this type of information exists in the first place, the INFORMATION HAS VALUE frame may be helpful. To look more closely at how the information is created and disseminated, the INFORMATION CREATION AS A PROCESS frame may be helpful. For ways to build a habit of questioning into source evaluation, the AUTHORITY IS CONSTRUCTED AND CONTEXTUAL frame may be helpful as a starting point.

Patchwriting in a final draft

Patchwriting (paraphrasing which is very similar to the original text) can be an intermediate step between a direct quotation and a synthesized idea. The SCHOLARSHIP AS CONVERSATION frame can provide insight into scholars’ “methods and modes of discourse” with emphasis on how voices in the conversation fit together.

Using outside sources as an afterthought

Does it seem like citations were added to the project as an afterthought, or don’t appear to be connected to the rest of the work? The purposes of using outside sources to inform research or writing is not always clear apart from being a requirement of the assignment. The SCHOLARSHIP AS CONVERSATION, SEARCHING AS STRATEGIC EXPLORATION, and RESEARCH AS INQUIRY frames can lend some insight into the purposes of using and synthesizing outside sources.

Not clear how sources impacted writing

The purposes of using outside sources to inform research or writing is not always clear apart from being a requirement of the assignment. Intentionally exploring how sources impact an author’s thought processes, reasoning, or ideas can be addressed through ideas in the SCHOLARSHIP AS CONVERSATION frame. Additionally, the RESEARCH AS INQUIRY frame addresses the iterative process of research, exploring the back-and-forth between questioning and outside sources.

Overconfidence in conclusions / overreaching or misrepresenting sources / discomfort with uncertainty

There can be many reasons why learners may feel pressured to reach a definitive conclusion as part of their research. The RESEARCH AS INQUIRY frame addresses the nonlinearity and often inconclusive nature of research, as well as its iterative nature which requires returning to a question, possibly revising it, and adjusting inquiry based on new information.

Limited contexts for using sources

Some learners have been trained to use information sources primarily as a bolster for argument in a pro/con setting or as a place for mining relevant facts or quotations. Expanding contexts for source use - inquiring of a primary source, creating one’s own source in the form of an interview or survey, using a source as the subject of analysis - can be new territory for learners. The INFORMATION CREATION AS A PROCESS and RESEARCH AS INQUIRY frames can provide a basis for addressing new contexts for using sources.

Keyword searching

Natural language or sentence or phrase-style searching is the norm for most internet search engines. Expanding a learner’s available contexts for searching, including developing or exploring specific keywords or identifying new or more descriptive search terms for a variety of tools can be addressed through the SEARCHING AS STRATEGIC EXPLORATION frame.

Expanding searches beyond internet search engines

The SEARCHING AS STRATEGIC EXPLORATION frame provides a context for exploring different tools and organizational strategies for information. The INFORMATION CREATION AS A PROCESS frame can help look more closely into different genres of information and their purposes for creation. In turn, this knowledge can foreground the exploration of different search tools and databases based on genre.

Persistence in searching

The SEARCHING AS STRATEGIC EXPLORATION frame emphasizes persistence in searching - going beyond first attempts - as well as consideration of the scope of information needed. It also recognizes that searching is “affected by the cognitive, affective, and social dimensions of the searcher.”

Difficulty finding information of specific genre (i.e. scholarly)

Expanding a learner’s available contexts for searching, including identifying new genres and the variety of tools can be addressed through the SEARCHING AS STRATEGIC EXPLORATION frame. The INFORMATION CREATION AS A PROCESS frame can help look more closely into different genres of information and their purposes for creation, which can foreground the exploration of different search tools and databases based on genre.

“There’s no information on my topic”

Sometimes researchers will express frustration that there are “no sources” which address their question. This frustration can stem from many causes. It could mean that they have not been able to find a “silver bullet” source which exactly matches narrow parameters; it can reflect the fact that there is not openly published or discoverable information which matches a searcher’s expectations; it can also reflect a mismatch in search terms or strategy with the search tool being used. The SEARCHING AS STRATEGIC EXPLORATION frame can help address approaches related to different search tools. The RESEARCH AS INQUIRY frame positions research as “open-ended exploration and engagement with information” which can be a helpful place to think about inferring from sources in addition to hunting for exact quotes.

Too broad or too narrow

While both address the issue of scope, the RESEARCH AS INQUIRY frame addresses scope in relation to an overall research inquiry, while the SEARCHING AS STRATEGIC EXPLORATION frame encourages researchers to consider, more specifically, how search results impact the scope of their research question.

Developing researchable questions (i.e. without easy answers)

The RESEARCH AS INQUIRY frame positions research as “open-ended exploration and engagement with information.” It addresses identifying research gaps and stresses the importance of curiosity in research. The SEARCHING AS STRATEGIC EXPLORATION frame emphasizes persistence in searching as well as consideration of the scope of information needed. The SCHOLARSHIP AS CONVERSATION frame specifically emphasizes that “a query may not have a single uncontested answer.”

Not enough flexibility with question (i.e. ironclad thesis statement)

The RESEARCH AS INQUIRY frame addresses the nonlinearity and often inconclusive nature of research, as well as its iterative nature which requires returning to a question, possibly revising it, and adjusting inquiry based on new information. The SEARCHING AS STRATEGIC EXPLORATION frame specifically addresses flexibility in the relationship of search results to research needs.

Handling uncertainty and ambiguity

There can be many reasons why learners may feel pressured to reach a definitive conclusion as part of their research. The SCHOLARSHIP AS CONVERSATION frame specifically emphasizes that “a query may not have a single uncontested answer.” The RESEARCH AS INQUIRY frame encourages learners to think about a “reasonable” conclusion based on the information that they have found, and addresses returning to a question, possibly revising it, and adjusting inquiry based on new information. The SEARCHING AS STRATEGIC EXPLORATION frame specifically addresses flexibility in the relationship of search results to research needs.

Appropriate source for appropriate purpose / authority mismatch

You may find that a learner selects a source which is a mismatch for its purpose - for example, using a social media post for scientific evidence, using a political site for accurate statistics, or using a scholarly article as an example of a personal viewpoint. Often this use points to a mismatch in the type of authority needed for their purpose. The AUTHORITY IS CONSTRUCTED AND CONTEXTUAL frame can address and help recognize different types of authority, while the INFORMATION HAS VALUE and INFORMATION CREATION AS A PROCESS frames can address who benefits from information such as social media influencers, lobbying groups, or other interests as well as the purposes for which different sources are created.

Reluctance to consider nontraditional source types

Learners may have strong value associations with different source types, such as scholarly = good, trustworthy, or credible. These associations may cause a student to be reluctant in venturing outside this paradigm to consider a nontraditional source such as social media or a crowdsourced wiki, or other non-academic piece even when such a source would be most appropriate for their purposes. The RESEARCH AS INQUIRY frame provides a basis for considering information sources based on one’s need. The SCHOLARSHIP AS CONVERSATION frame invites learners to consider how different voices are represented (or not) within information sources.

Selecting source types not generally used in the discipline

Learners may come to your course with a paradigm for information source use which may be very different from how your discipline approaches source use. Research can mean a wide variety of activities across disciplines which a learner may or may not have experienced. The AUTHORITY IS CONSTRUCTED AND CONTEXTUAL frame can be useful for addressing what types of sources are considered authoritative and appropriate in your field. The SCHOLARSHIP AS CONVERSATION frame can help paint a picture of how knowledge is created in your discipline.

Oversimplified or reductive selection criteria

Learners may have been previously taught a checklist-type approach for selecting or evaluating sources, or been trained to categorize sources as “good” or “bad” leaving little room for interpretation. For example, a student might categorize a .edu or .gov website as “good” based on its domain, while a .com site would be “bad.” Addressing this type of nuance involves all the frames, but a good place to start would be the INFORMATION CREATION AS A PROCESS frame.

Identifying genre of source (i.e. scholarly, popular, etc.)

Genres can be addressed through several different frames, but often the INFORMATION CREATION AS A PROCESS frame can help shed light on the purpose, audience, and aims behind the creation of a source. The SCHOLARSHIP AS CONVERSATION frame can help in looking more closely what the ecosystem of scholarly contribution looks like and how/why it is differentiated from other common information types.

Differentiating between primary and secondary sources

The definition of what are considered primary and secondary sources varies greatly across and sometimes within disciplines. The INFORMATION CREATION AS A PROCESS and AUTHORITY IS CONSTRUCTED AND CONTEXTUAL frames can help address the context of primary sources within disciplinary research. Sources can sometimes be used in either a primary or secondary capacity depending on the type of research need; the RESEARCH AS INQUIRY frame can help provide a focus on the relationship of the source to the research question.

Recognizing misinformation or disinformation

This multifaceted topic can involve issues such as cognitive bias, search strategy, affective response, the ways in which information is created and disseminated, and the motivations behind mis- and disinformation, just to name a few. For ways to build a habit of questioning into source evaluation, the AUTHORITY IS CONSTRUCTED AND CONTEXTUAL frame may be helpful as a starting point. To explore why this type of information exists in the first place, the INFORMATION HAS VALUE frame may be helpful. To look more closely at how the information is created and disseminated, the INFORMATION CREATION AS A PROCESS frame may be helpful.

Unbalanced sources

When someone primarily chooses sources that align with deeply held beliefs in a situation where a more balanced approach is called for, several factors can be at work. The willingness to seek out and consider alternate approaches can be connected to issues of personal identity, risk, and safety as well as academic practices such as critical thinking. The AUTHORITY IS CONSTRUCTED AND CONTEXTUAL frame can help learners think about how they ways that they tend to assign authority to certain types of sources and see others as less authoritative can be impacted by personal bias. The RESEARCH AS INQUIRY frame can address including curiosity in research processes and address the strengths that multiple perspectives bring to research. In addition, the SCHOLARSHIP AS CONVERSATION frame can emphasize how certain voices are privileged over others.

Automatically accepting certain sources as authoritative or non-authoritative without questioning or evaluation

The types of sources which are considered “authoritative” and which are not vary greatly by discipline. Learners may be using a different paradigm for determining authority than one that is common to your discipline. Intentional reflection on how authority is established as well as how different types of authority - personal experience, dedicated study, credentials, etc. - are used and misused can be facilitated by the AUTHORITY IS CONSTRUCTED AND CONTEXTUAL frame. In addition, the SCHOLARSHIP AS CONVERSATION frame can emphasize how certain voices are privileged over others.

Using misinformation or disinformation

This multifaceted topic can involve issues such as cognitive bias, search strategy, affective response, the ways in which information is created and disseminated, and the motivations behind mis- and disinformation, just to name a few. For ways to build a habit of questioning into source evaluation, the AUTHORITY IS CONSTRUCTED AND CONTEXTUAL frame may be helpful as a starting point. To explore why this type of information exists in the first place, the INFORMATION HAS VALUE frame may be helpful. To look more closely at how the information is created and disseminated, the INFORMATION CREATION AS A PROCESS frame may be helpful.