[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-590589-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":80,"doc-detail-590589-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":73,"head_meta":75,"extra_data":77,"updated_unix":79},105,"en","the-challenge-thats-bigger-than-fake-news-civic-reasoning-in-a-social-media-environment","The Challenge That’s Bigger Than Fake News - Civic Reasoning in a Social Media Environment","","“The Challenge That’s Bigger Than Fake News” explores how social media creates complex credibility problems beyond simple “fake vs real” labeling. It argues that citizens must understand who is behind information and how evidence is presented, since sources may be disguised front groups. Research with 56 tasks across 12 states and 7,804 student responses shows consistent weaknesses in students’ civic online reasoning at middle school, high school, and college levels. The article outlines assessment competencies and evidence types used in these evaluations.",{"@graph":14,"@context":72},[15,34,55],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/exam/","Exam",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/the-challenge-thats-bigger-than-fake-news-civic-reasoning-in-a-social-media-environment/590589/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/the-challenge-thats-bigger-than-fake-news-civic-reasoning-in-a-social-media-environment/590589.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Stanley","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-09","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":26},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",{"@type":56,"mainEntity":57},"FAQPage",[58,64,68],{"name":59,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":61},"Why is identifying “fake news” not enough for evaluating online information?","Question",{"text":62,"@type":63},"Because much online content cannot be cleanly labeled “fake” or “real,” and credibility depends on more than a true/false distinction. Determining who is behind the information and whether it is trustworthy is essential for making informed judgments.","Answer",{"name":65,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":66},"What skills do the civic online reasoning assessments measure?",{"text":67,"@type":63},"The tasks measure three competencies: identifying who is behind the information, evaluating the evidence presented, and investigating what other sources say.",{"name":69,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":70},"What do the study results show about students’ ability to reason online?",{"text":71,"@type":63},"Across middle school, high school, and college, students showed a troubling consistency of underperformance, falling far below the reasonable bar for evaluating online content.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":74,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":76,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":78,"site_id":7},590589,1792251684,{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":82},"success",[83,87,91,94,99,104,109,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":84,"show_sort_weight":85,"slug":86},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":88,"show_sort_weight":89,"slug":90},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":92,"slug":93},70,"exam",{"id":95,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":96,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":98},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":100,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":101,"show_sort_weight":102,"slug":103},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":105,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":106,"show_sort_weight":107,"slug":108},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":110,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":111,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":95,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":131},{"doc_id":78,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":33,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":26,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":105,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},2336477405376,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_29158cc5080c5b710cf443261637dec0","The Challenge That’s  \nBigger Than  \nFake News  \nCivic Reasoning in a Social Media Environment  \nILLUSTRAT IONS BY VIKTOR KOEN  \nBy Sarah McGrew, Teresa Ortega, Joel Breakstone, and Sam Wineburg  \nS  \nince the November 2016 presidential election, coverage of“fake news” has been everywhere. It’shard to turn on the TV without  \nhearing the term. Google and Facebook have pitched plans for fighting the menace.1 State legislators have even introduced bills to mandate K–12  \ninstruction on the topic.2  \nFake news is certainly a problem. Sadly, however, it’s not our biggest. Fact-checking organizations like Snopes and PolitiFact can help us detect canards invented by enterprising Macedonian teenagers,3 but the Internet is filled with content that defies labels like “fake” or “real.” Determining who’s behind information and whether it’s worthy of our trust is more complex than a true/false dichotomy.  \nFor every social issue, there are websites that blast half-true headlines, manipulate data, and advance partisan agendas. Some of these sites are transparent about who runs them and whom they represent. Others conceal their backing, portraying themselves as grassroots efforts  \nSarah McGrew co-directs the Civic Online Reasoning project atthe Stanford History Education Group, where Teresa Ortega serves asthe project manager. Joel Breakstone directs the Stanford History Education Group, where his research focuses on how teachers use assessment data to inform instruction. Sam Wineburg is the Margaret Jacks Professor of Education at Stanford University and thefounder and executive director of the Stanford History Education Group.  \n4 AMERICAN EDUCATOR | FALL 2017  \nwhen, in reality, they’re front groups for commercial or political interests. This doesn’t necessarily mean their information is false. But citizens trying to make decisions about, say, genetically modified foods should know whether a biotechnology company is behind the information they’re reading. Understanding where information comes from and who’s responsible for it are essential in making judgments of credibility.  \nThe Internet dominates young people’s lives. According to one study, teenagers spend nearly nine hours a day online.4 With optimism, trepidation, and, at times, annoyance, we’ve witnessed young people’s digital dexterity and astonishing screen stamina. Today’s students are more likely to learn about the world through social media than through traditional sources like print newspapers.5 It’s critical that students know how to evaluate the content that flashes on their screens.  \nUnfortunately, our research atthe Stanford History Education Group demonstrates they don’t.* Between January 2015 and June 2016, we administered 56 tasks to students across 12 states.(To see sample items, go to [http://sheg](http://sheg). [stanford.edu](stanford.edu).) We collected and analyzed 7,804 student responses. Our sites for field-testing included middle and high schools in inner-city Los Angeles and suburban schools outside of Minneapolis. We also administered tasks to college-level students at six different universities that ranged from Stanford University, a school that rejects 94 percent of its applicants, to large state universities that admit the majority of students who apply.  \nWhen thousands of students respond to dozens oftasks, we can expect many variations. That was certainly the case in our experience. However, at each level—middle school, high school, and college—these variations paledin comparison to a stunning and dismaying consistency. Overall, young people’s ability to reason about information on the Internet can be summed up in two words: needs improvement.  \n*The Stanford History Education Group offers free curriculum materials to teachers at [http://sheg.stanford](http://sheg.stanford). edu. Our curriculum and assessments have more than 4 million downloads. We initiated a research program about students’ civic online reasoning when we became distressed by studen","cbCairxVT73n7BhC","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCairxVT73n7BhC","pdf",354439,"English","# Assessments of Civic Online Reasoning\n## Competencies measured\n## Task formats and materials\n# Who’s Behind the Information?","[{\"question\":\"Why is identifying “fake news” not enough for evaluating online information?\",\"answer\":\"Because much online content cannot be cleanly labeled “fake” or “real,” and credibility depends on more than a true/false distinction. Determining who is behind the information and whether it is trustworthy is essential for making informed judgments.\"},{\"question\":\"What skills do the civic online reasoning assessments measure?\",\"answer\":\"The tasks measure three competencies: identifying who is behind the information, evaluating the evidence presented, and investigating what other sources say.\"},{\"question\":\"What do the study results show about students’ ability to reason online?\",\"answer\":\"Across middle school, high school, and college, students showed a troubling consistency of underperformance, falling far below the reasonable bar for evaluating online content.\"}]","The Challenge That’s Bigger Than Fake News - Civic Reasoning in a Social Media Environment | PDF",1792069972,18]