Social Media, the Public Sphere, and the Rhetoric of Information Evaluation

LOEX

May 6, 2022

Lane Wilkinson

​

Director of Research & Instruction

The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga

Vanessa Bell, Conversation. (1913-16)

Prelude: Degrees of Belief

David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (1748)

Guiding Principles

• Our beliefs are only as good as the reasons (evidence) we have to back them up.
• When our beliefs are under scrutiny, there are three primary loci of evaluation:
• Are the beliefs true? (i.e., do they correspond to reality?)
• Are the beliefs justified? (i.e., is the evidence credible?)
• Are the beliefs convincing? (i.e., what is the rhetorical context in which those beliefs are presented?)

​

​

​

​

Run of Show

• The original activity
• Authentic learning
• Adopting rhetorical analysis
• In the classroom
• Wrap-up

​

Core Concepts

• authentic learning; ethos; pathos; logos

​

Act I: The Gunman

So, is there a problem with gun violence in this country?

Act II: �Authenticity

Significant Learning

• Learning takes place on a continuum of meaning (Rogers, 1969)
• Meaningless learning at one end; significant learning at the other

Does not add to one’s sense of self.

Enhances one’s sense of self.

Significant Learning

• Evidentiary standards vary depending on meaningfulness.

Basic reference sources

Value neutral

Common knowledge?

Authenticity of source irrelevant

Trusted sources

Shared values

Not-so-common knowledge

Authenticity matters

Authentic Learning

• To achieve significant learning, a teacher must make an authentic connection with students’ interests.

​

• Authenticity increases motivation and meaningfulness.

​

• Instead of choosing a generic topic or keyword string to use in a demonstration, try modeling an authentic narrative (Klipfel, 2015).

​

Authentic Learning

• Social media can provide our instruction with authentic narratives. (cf., Klipfel, 2015)
• Arguments in Facebook comments
• Commentary from sub-Reddits
• Duets on Tik Tok
• Twitter threads
• YouTube callouts

​

​

Tik Tok

Twitter

Instagram

Authentic Learning

• “If we hope to graduate students with high information literacy skills across the curriculum and the capacity for lifelong learning, it is necessary to teach students information literacy in the environments in which they are most likely to need and use information literacy skills” (Burclaff & Johnson, 2017)

​

​

But, social media is better for some aspects of information evaluation than others…

​

​

Act III: �The (Aristotelian) Framework

Traditional Approaches to Evaluation

Checklists

​

​

Heuristics

​

​

Traditional Approaches to Evaluation

• Let’s call traditional approaches descriptive information evaluation.
• Descriptive information evaluation focuses on criteria that answer the questions “is this true?” and “is this justified?”
• Expertise, currency, publisher, bias, etc.
• We examine a text and try to determine if it is trustworthy based on external clues.

​

​

Descriptive vs. Rhetorical

• In contrast, rhetorical information evaluation focuses on criteria that answer the question “will this be convincing to my reader?”
• Context, audience attitudes/biases, emotional appeal, authority

​

• Some rhetorical clues overlap with descriptive evaluation
• Authority, currency, bias, etc. all have a rhetorical aspect.
• The difference is in framing: “is this article credible?” versus “will my audience be convinced by this article?”

Descriptive vs. Rhetorical (reframed)

Descriptive approach

• Is it trustworthy?
• Can I use this source in my paper?

Rhetorical approach

• Will my reader think it is trustworthy?
• Will this source improve my audience’s acceptance of my position?

The Rhetoric of Research

• Fister (1993)
• “it is important to prompt students to choose evidence for their own rhetorical purposes—to ground their argument in a context appropriate for their audience and to provide evidence that supports what they have to say.)”

​

• Brannon (2017)
• “(Rhetorical information evaluation) requires us to abandon the notion that certain sources and certain characteristics of sources are good or bad in and of themselves. Instead, we have to approach sources and their use from the perspective of the writer’s purpose and audience”

​

The Aristotelian Framework

The Aristotelian Framework is a familiar concept that allows librarians to introduce rhetorical analysis into the research process.

​

But, since we’re talking about research rather than writing we need to talk about the rhetorical value of the evidence we encounter.

​

Students need to ask,

“what is the rhetorical value of this source?”

​

​

​

ETHOS

PATHOS

LOGOS

The

Aristotelian

Triangle

The Aristotelian Framework

• Ethos: how does this person use evidence to establish authority and trust?

​

• Pathos: does the evidence capture your imagination and emotions?

​

• Logos: is this presentation of the evidence logical and convincing?

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

The Aristotelian Framework

Descriptive Evaluation

• What is the author’s expertise?

​

• Is this source biased?

​

• Does the article cite its sources?

Rhetorical Analysis

• Will my reader trust this author?

​

• Does this source share similar values with my reader?

​

• How do the cited sources connect with the reader? How are the sources presented in the text?

The Aristotelian Framework

​

It’s not about rhetorical analysis in general;

it’s about rhetorical analysis of the use of evidence.

​

​

By analyzing how other people use evidence, students can learn to improve their own information evaluation skills.

​

Act IV:�In the classroom

Curricular Overview

• University of Tennessee at Chattanooga (AY 2021-2022)
• ~11,500 students
• 5 Research & Instruction librarians
• 432 one-shot library instruction classes (my department only)
• Embedded in 98% of Composition I & II classes (134 one-shots)
• Most students have at least four library sessions by graduation

​

ENGL 1010 & 1020

• Rhetoric & Composition I & II
• Library instruction embedded in all sections, both classes
• ENGL 1010 learning concepts:
• Library services, information types, basic source evaluation, basic database navigation (i.e., PQ Central), getting help
• ENGL 1020 learning concepts:
• Narrowing a topic, advanced web searching, evaluating for credibility, database selection, advanced database navigation

​

​

​

ENGL 1020: Research and Rhetoric

• The following slides were taken from my Fall 2021 ENGL 1020 slides and are used regularly in class.

​

​

​

Today’s Agenda

1. Your assignment
2. Selecting the right topic
3. Finding credible websites
1. Evaluating credibility
2. Google tips
4. Searching for scholarly articles
1. ProQuest Central
2. Taylor & Francis
3. ScienceDirect
6. Getting help

​

​

Finding credible websites

• To be credible is to be believable.
• Not just believable to you; your audience has to believe it too.
• What makes something believable to your audience?

What makes a website credible?

• Ethos: is the argument from an authority the audience will trust?

​

• Pathos: will the argument capture your audience’s attention?

​

• Logos: is the argumentation logical and convincing?

​

• Corroboration: is the information backed-up by other sources?
• Links to research? Links to other reports?
• Have other sources picked up the story?

​

Example 1

• How does the anti-vaccine guy try to establish his credibility?

​

• How does the bearded dude try to establish his credibility?

​

• Who comes across as more credible?

​

​

Example 2

• How does the guy on television use evidence to make his point?

​

• How does the registered nurse interpret that evidence?

​

• Who comes across as more credible?

​

​

Example 3

• I Googled mask effectiveness and picked some of the top results…

​

​

​

​

​

​

• Whether you agree or disagree, how would you describe the rhetorical value of these articles?

What makes a website credible?

• Remember:

​

• If the information is true, you can probably find it in multiple sources. Make sure you choose sources that will resonate best with your reader.
• If you like what you’re reading but worry your reader won’t trust it…find a better source!

In the classroom

• The recipe is simple:
• Identify social media interactions involving the use of evidence.
• Share and discuss those interactions with students.
• Focus on the rhetorical analysis of how people use evidence (sources)
• Use these as a springboard to evaluating other sources.
• Introduce additional concepts of information evaluation as needed.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Student takeaways (paraphrased):

• “Just because you have a source you like doesn’t mean your professor will like it.”
• “If someone quotes something you don’t agree with, find a source with more authority. If you can’t find one, you should probably think about changing your mind.”
• “Just because someone has sources doesn’t mean they have good reasons for what they’re saying. They have to be good sources.”
• “I’m more likely to use New York Times now.”

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Student takeaways (overview):

• Increased consideration of their reader’s attitude towards the evidence they intend to present.
• More favorable attitude towards “established” news sources.
• Increased acknowledgement that belief ought to be proportional to evidence.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

In the classroom

• Advantages
• Students are already familiar with rhetorical analysis.
• Meshes well with pedagogical aims of writing classes, especially persuasive essays.
• Authentic examples lead to better student engagement.
• Information evaluation is made familiar and becomes easily transferable.

​

• Connections
• Meshes well with BEAM model.

​

​

​

​

​

​

In the classroom

• Disadvantages
• Takes time away from teaching more traditional approaches.
• Not suited for scientific writing, more intensive research papers, etc.
• Some faculty won’t buy-in to anything other than database demonstrations or traditional BI.

​

• Disconnections
• Rhetorical analysis is complementary; you still need to address other aspects of information evaluation.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Conclusion

Conclusion

• When information is going to be used as evidence, its evaluation should include a rhetorical dimension.
• The Aristotelian model (ethos, pathos, and logos) is simple and familiar for students.
• Social media provides myriad choices for authentic rhetorical analysis of how evidence is used.

Evidence

• Angell, K., & Tewell, E. (2017). Teaching and un-teaching source evaluation: Questioning authority in information literacy instruction. Communications in Information Literacy, 11(1).
• Brannon, B. (2017). The Service implications of a rhetorical approach to information literacy. Public Services Quarterly, 13(2), 124-133.
• Burclaff, N., & Johnson, C. R. (2016). Teaching information literacy via social media: An exploration of connectivism. Library Philosophy & Practice. 1476.
• Chen, S., Xiao, L., & Mao, J. (2021). Persuasion strategies of misinformation-containing posts in the social media. Information Processing & Management, 58(5), 102665.
• Fister, B. (1993). Teaching the rhetorical dimensions of research. Research Strategies, 11(4), 211-219.
• Garsten, B. (2011). The rhetoric revival in political theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 14, 159-180.
• Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. Vintage.
• Klipfel, K. M. (2015). Authenticity and learning: implications for reference librarianship and information literacy instruction. College & Research Libraries, 76(1), 19-30.
• Rogers, C. (1969) Freedom to learn. C. E. Merrill Co.
• Stucki, I., & Sager, F. (2018). Aristotelian framing: logos, ethos, pathos and the use of evidence in policy frames. Policy sciences, 51(3), 373-385.
• Wineburg, S., Breakstone, J., Ziv, N., & Smith, M. (2020). Educating for misunderstanding: How approaches to teaching digital literacy make students susceptible to scammers, rogues, bad actors, and hate mongers. Stanford History Education Group. https://purl.stanford.edu/mf412bt5333