Our world is full of information, much of which is available at our fingertips. However, as the adage says, one must “consider the source.” The challenge area of “Analysis Techniques for Instruction” speaks directly to the meaning behind this adage, confirming the ability to assess and vet sources for reliability and authority. The artifact I selected, created as part of EDCI 513 (Foundations of Learning Design and Technology) that displays this challenge’s criteria is an academic paper, specifically a literature review titled Motivation and Mentoring: The Learning and Development Strategy that Affects Motivation for Mentees and Mentors.

According to the book The Craft of Research (2016), the analysis and evaluation of sources can be broken down into two categories: relevance and reliability. The book goes on to give guidance in several key areas, such as how reputable the publisher is, is the source peer-reviewed, is the source current, does the source itself contain proper citations and references, etc. (Booth et al., 2016). The answers to these questions help us, whether we are researching for an academic paper or to create content for a corporate training course, find sources and content that will be reasonably considered reliable, trustworthy, and accurate. When gathering sources for the literature review, I used Purdue University’s online library to search for academic articles, beginning by limiting my search to specific education and academic journal databases. To further refine the results, I looked at the publication dates and peer-review status of the articles. According to Booth et al., “most reputable presses and journals ask experts to review a book or article before it is published” (2016, p. 78). The peer-review process is important in limiting our exposure to poorly managed or researched articles; as a result, peer-reviewed articles typically are more reliable than non-peer-reviewed articles for references. Similarly, as the body of knowledge evolves and grows, older research may be eclipsed by more recent findings. For this reason, I made efforts to include the most recent articles on the topic, while not sacrificing the relevance of the article content. In my reflection on professional ethics (and the importance of avoiding plagiarism), I showed the importance of using proper citations and references. This idea is not limited to me or my work; citations and references can also be a way to evaluate other sources – does the author properly credit others for their work, is their work cited on a regular basis, etc.?

This is not the first time I had had to “consider the source” when creating a work. When designing and developing instructional products, I have worked on projects for which no independent content existed. In those situations, as the instructional designer, I have had to know how to gather, review, evaluate, and dismiss (if necessary) sources of information on the assigned topic. Admittedly, those situations often differ in that scholarly articles are not always the primary source of content, but still, there are other validation techniques that I can use when reviewing other sources (who sponsored the data/research/website; who is the author and what are their credentials?).

This academic paper showcases my ability to analyze sources in order to validate their content. Multiple criteria were used to assess the sources used in the paper (to review the sources, visit the References list; the DOI links are provided when possible). In the future, I plan to continue to employ sound techniques for evaluating potential sources. One area in which I would like to spend more time validating the content is researching the content author. This area is important, but it has not been the facet of validation that receives the most attention. To round out and complement my skills, I plan to exercise that particular technique more.

Booth, W. C., Colomb, G. G., Williams, J. M., Bizup, J. & Fitzgerald, W. T. (2016). The craft of research (4th ed.). The University of Chicago Press.