{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020945220193340493, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0010741138560687433, 'mean_word_length': 5.559859154929577, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evaluating On-Line Resources: How Community College Students in STEM Sort and Select Material on the Internet

Research Question: The vast amount of material available on-line has prompted researchers to understand how undergraduate students sort and select, or evaluate, the results that emerge from their searches. Since students depend on on-line material to facilitate their learning of course material, understanding the basis of their process is imperative to how institutions develop more equitable and far-reaching strategies for student success. Given this context, this study asks the following question: When students are faced with several choices that emerge from their on-line search, what are the criteria used to evaluate and select resources that support learning of course content? Methods: To answer the research question, we drew on interview data from 12 students enrolled in a community college district, who offered insights on how they evaluated on-line resources for their science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses. Results: We find that trust and utility were the prominent criteria by which on-line resources were evaluated. Students were skeptical of the accuracy of content in a given resource and used several dimensions of trust to direct their assessment. Students also evaluated with purpose, to search for and sort resources that reflected their goals and preferred conditions for engagement, or what we consider as utility. Conclusion: Understanding how students sort and evaluate on-line resources offers insights into a learning environment increasingly defined by the internet and informs how institutions and instructors might better incorporate these resources into their curriculum and academic supports. Our findings reveal implications for institutional leadership, faculty, and student services.