The quality of research depends largely on the sources used to support the discussion. The selection process may be complicated, but its results will have a direct impact on the outcome of the study. List et al. distinguish between two approaches to the academic source selection (22). The epistemic approach focuses on the credibility and reliability of the material, whereas the non-epistemic one lays emphasis on the accessibility of a resource and its relevance to the study. As the research shows, undergraduate students lean toward the second type of selection (List et al. 22). However, the Major Multimodal Research Project would benefit more from an epistemic model, which is justified by the importance and the scale of this assignment. Therefore, the criteria presented below prioritize the principles of epistemic research.
First of all, when selecting particular sources from the initial variety, credibility will be a matter of great importance. This point concerns both the publisher and the author of a study. If the source comes from a well-respected journal and is written by an author whose expertise in the area of study is unquestionable, it meets the first criteria. In fact, the author’s personality plays an important role in research credibility, and each source will be examined to detect any personal bias, which may alter the findings. Secondly, as today’s disciplines evolve at a quick pace, sources must be up-to-date. Entries, which are older than five years, will not pass the initial selection, and credible, more recent research will be prioritized during the following stage. Finally, the degree of relevance of each source will be evaluated in order to make sure that their findings directly correspond with the Major Multimodal Research Project topic. This way, it will be possible to select a limited number of resources, which will be utilized in the most effective manner.
Works Cited
List, Alexandra, et al. “Undergraduate Students’ Justifications for Source Selection in a Digital Academic Context.” Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 51, no. 1, 2016, pp. 22-61.