MCA Practice Test

Here is the online practice for the MCA Reading test. 

AVReading Newsletter April-- Evaluating Sources

            Since the 2016 elections, and the ensuing investigations over the proliferation of fake news, we have seen a renewed interest in teaching students how to evaluate the information they access online.  This month’s Reading Research Quarterly (Spring 2019) included a study that looked at how students process the credibility of information on the internet.  

            I found the study to be insightful for a number of reasons.  First, getting students to read their source materials with a critical eye is extremely important, and I wanted to know if there was something new (or if I had forgotten something important) on the topic.  Second, the study used a mixed methodology which means it had both quantitative and qualitative measures to collect and interpret data.  Finally, it examined the habits across both middle school and high school-- which I found to be interesting.

            Essentially the study looked at the ability of students to evaluate information they were to use for a presentation on climate change.  They were offered four pieces of evidence (each about 150 words in length), and they were prompted to examine the relevance of the material for the topic, the readability of the information (how easy or complex it was), the credibility of the author, and the currency (or timeliness) of the text.  In one version of the experiment, they had students read the texts and respond in written form. They were asked to both numerically rate the texts  and write free responses in the various categories mentioned above.  In a second experiment, students were asked to first read the texts, then answer questions orally with an interviewer, and then take the written survey.  For the second experiment, the data was also segregated by age group (middle school versus high school students).

            The findings  indicate that students probably do not examine texts as deeply as what they should.  In the first experiment, it showed that even though one of the texts clearly was not related to the topic, students typically rated it about equally credible as the other sources within the study, which were topically relevant.  This is a problem because means that students weren’t discerning whether the material truly applied to the topic at hand.  In the second study, examiners found that students were actually much more accurate with their evaluations of text when they completed the interviews before they did the surveys.  They also indicated that in three of the four categories of evaluation, high school participants were no better at evaluating texts.  However, older students were more likely to evaluate an author’s competence, by discussing when the credentials of the author did not match the field for which they were writing.

            Here is the lesson that I think we can learn from this research.  We should continue to challenge students to read their texts more critically, looking specifically at whether the material they are reading is truly relevant to the topic at hand, the general readability of the text, the credentials of the author, and its timeliness or currency.  But beyond that, the study misses a key component.

            The study is framed by the argument that people today are more likely to spread fake online news.   That argument assumes that these people spread the fake news because that news item is convincingly real.  However, I don’t think that’s the problem.  Fake news spreads when it strikes a chord with people.  It seems to confirm or support something they already believe.  In that sense, the problem isn’t the news story.  It’s our willingness to so readily believe something that isn’t true.  And when confronted with facts or details that clearly contradict or disprove our beliefs, we are much more likely to double down on our original position, than we are to change it.  So I’m wondering if we should be teaching students both how to detect less credible news items and how to confront their own confirmation biases.  Finding fake news is only a valid lesson plan if we are willing to admit that some of the news we are reading. . .is in fact fake. 

            I also would like to point out that adolescents might be more critical news consumers than their older counterparts.  A study published in Science Advances (January 2019) found that people over 65 where seven times more likely to pass along fake news items than teenagers.  It just reinforces the idea that as a community, our need for education never truly ends. 

Find the entire newsletter here.