CLDDV 103 - Child Growth & Development - Brennan

Scaffolding Your Research for Deeper Understanding

Level one: Web sites and other familiar, easy-to-understand starting places

• Generate research questions, refine your topic, identify search terms
• Caution: Websites vary wildly in quality and must be valuated thoroughly before including on bibliography

Level two: Specialized encyclopedias and other substantive topic overviews

• Credible sources to answer basic research questions and generate additional questions
• Caution: Topic overviews lack adequate detail...you'll need more

Level three: Newspapers and selected magazines

• Aimed at an educated, non-expert audience, these are great sources for current issues and events
• Caution: all magazines are appropriate for academic work and some assignments require scholarly sources

Level four: Scholarly journals

• Studies, experiments, and systematic reviews produced by scholars for an expert audience.
• Caution: Journal articles are highly specific, specialized, & often challenging for the non-expert.

Why Use Databases?

The MJC Library subscribes to many databases filled with authoritative articles, book chapters, research reports, statistics, and more from thousands of respected publications.

Using the Library's article databases ensures that you're using the academically-appropriate sources your instructors expect you to use. Also, you won't have to cull through millions of unrelated Web pages that will waste your time and energy.

___________________

Top Picks:

All of these resources are free for MJC students, faculty, and staff.

If you're working from off campus, you'll be prompted to log in using your MJC student log-in information.

Search scholarly materials on the Web.

Evaluate Your Sources: The CRAAP Test   

Not every source you find is trustworthy or useful. Before incorporating a source into your work, it’s essential to pause and evaluate it carefully. There are many checklist evaluation methods—ABCs, the SIFT method, the 5 Ws, CARS, and the CRAAP Test.  All serve the same purpose: guiding you through the process of deciding whether a source is reliable.

These models are helpful starting points, especially for newer researchers, but no checklist can capture the full complexity of evaluating information. Think of them as tools—not guarantees—and use them to build good habits as your judgment grows. Choose one you can remember, and apply it consistently to every potential source.

The CRAAP Test offers a simple checklist for determining the suitability of a potential source:

• Currency – Is the information up to date for your topic? Some fields (like medicine or technology) demand recent sources, while others (like history) may rely on older ones.

• Relevance – Does the source support points in your outline? Does it add new information or simply repeat what you already have?

• Authority – Who created the source, and what makes them credible? Look at the author’s background, education, or professional experience.

• Accuracy – Is the information evidence-based? Check for citations, peer review, and whether claims can be confirmed elsewhere.

• Purpose/Point of View – Why was the source created? Is it objective, biased, or persuasive? What’s the author’s agenda?

Using the CRAAP Test helps you spot potential problems, but sometimes you can’t answer these questions from the source alone. That’s where lateral reading comes in.

Lateral Reading: Don't Just Read Down...Read Across! Questions to Guide Your Lateral Reading

The CRAAP Test is a solid starting point, but the site you’re evaluating isn’t always the best place to verify authority, accuracy, or point of view. Authors and organizations can misrepresent themselves, and sites that look professional may be promoting an agenda.

Lateral reading means stepping outside the source. Open a new tab and search for information about the author, organization, or publication. By reading across multiple sources—not just down the page in front of you—you can see what others are saying and gather outside evidence.

This practice strengthens your evaluation, helps confirm credibility, and gives you a clearer sense of whether a source deserves a place in your research.

Questions to Guide Your Lateral Reading

These aren’t a checklist to memorize—just questions to help you think like a fact-checker:

Who is behind this source?

• Who funds or sponsors the site where you found your source?

• What is the mission or stated purpose of the organization?

• Is it affiliated with a political group, advocacy organization, company, or individual with a clear agenda?

What do others say about them?

• Do authoritative or neutral sources treat this site/organization as reputable?

• Have they been involved in controversies, misinformation, or advocacy campaigns?

• How do subject-matter experts or established news outlets describe them?

• Does the organization rate well (or poorly) on independent media-bias or fact-checking sites?

What can you learn about the author?

• What is their background? Are they a journalist, researcher, influencer, activist, or anonymous contributor?

• Have they published in credible, peer-reviewed, or well-edited places before?

• Do you find interviews, bios, or other work that help establish expertise—or raise questions?

How does outside evidence compare with the claims in the original piece?

• Does what you find elsewhere directly contradict the source?

• Does the claim appear only on a handful of sites that all cite each other?

• Are credible news outlets reporting on (or perhaps more important, not reporting on) what you’re reading?

• If it’s a study or statistic, can you trace it back to the original research?

Where to Look While Reading Laterally

These are fast, practical starting points for students:

• Wikipedia — a good place to learn basic background on people, organizations, and controversies. (Don’t cite it; use it.)

• Library databases — look up author names in databases to see if they’ve published credible work.

• Google searches — combine author/sponsor with words like “controversy,” “funding,” or "criticism.”

• Fact-checking sites — such as Snopes, FactCheck.org, or Media Bias/Fact Check to get quick reputational context.

• Official websites — to confirm mission statements, leadership, funding, and affiliations.