Learning Outcomes for this Module
- LO1: Define important concepts such as: authority, peer review, bias, point of view, editorial process, purpose, audience, information privilege and more.
- LO2: Critically assess information sources in pursuit of various purposes.
- Ask thoughtful questions.
- LO4: Turn questions into strategies for retrieving a variety of information sources.
- LO6: Reflect upon your own research process.
Tools
| What You’ll Need | What We Used |
|---|---|
| Forum for discussion and reflection posts | Padlet |
| Platform to share an introduction to “Authority is Constructed & Contextual” | Microsoft365/PowerPoint & YouTube |
How to Credit Us
Except where otherwise noted, the lesson plans on this site are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.
To credit us for this module/lesson plan, cite the following:
Newman, J., Ward, S.K.L. (2025, June 11). Authority & expertise module. LIBR 100 OER. https://lib100oer.commons.gc.cuny.edu/2025/06/11/evaluating-sources-part-2-authority-expertise/
Authority & Expertise
Library. The Wistarion, p. 36, 1965, Archives & Special Collections, Hunter College Libraries, Hunter College of the City University of New York, New York City. https://flic.kr/p/rUdf9R
Module Introduction
In this module we continue to evaluate sources. This time, we’re discussing concepts of credibility, authority, and expertise, in an academic context and beyond. At the end of the module, you will evaluate an information source taking into account concepts from this module.
This module consists of the following 4 parts:
- Slideshow presentation on authority and expertise
- Discussion post (Padlet): how authority is constructed (3 points)
- Brainstorming post (Padlet): Who is the expert or authority? (3 points)
- Discussion post (Padlet) Group evaluation of a source (4 points)
1 – Slideshow Presentation on Authority & Expertise
Watch and listen to this presentation. You can access it either on YouTube or PowerPoint online. The following discussion activity will refer back to these slides.
- Link to this presentation on YouTube
- Link to this presentation in PowerPoint (A transcript of the audio comments for each slide can be found in the “notes” section of the PowerPoint)
2 – Discussion post (Padlet): How Authority is Constructed (3 points)
In the slideshow presentation in this module we discussed the concept that “authority is constructed and contextual.” We’ve spent lots of time in this course discussing academic and news sources and how you might evaluate the credibility and authority of those sources and their authors. But the concept applies to other spaces as well. In this space, we ask you to reflect on how authority is constructed in a community that you belong to.
Crate a Padlet post in response to ONE of the following prompts:
- What is something that you consider yourself to be an expert or authority on? Who decides that you are an expert? What criteria do you and others use to determine that a person is an expert or authority on this topic? How is your expertise acknowledged and valued by others?
- Think about a community that you belong to. This could be anything: an academic group, a sports team or gaming club, a faith community, a family unit, an online community dedicated to a specific topic, a fandom, a study group, a workplace, etc. Describe how this group constructs authority. In other words, what are the formal or informal processes or criteria the community uses to decide who within the group is an authority or holds specialized knowledge?
3 – Brainstorming post (Padlet): Who is the Expert or Authority? (3 points)
When beginning research into a topic, it can be useful to think about who you consider to be an expert or authority or topic, and what aspects of the topic you think they are an authority on.
In this discussion post, you will return to the group scenarios from a past module. Check the Assigned Groups page for a reminder about which group you’re in.
Your group scenario has been posted in the column for your group on the Part 3 Padlet below. Add a post in that column discussing who you think is an authority on the topic and on what aspect of the topic (see the last slide in the video/slideshow in Part 1 above for an example). Keep in mind that there could be many different experts or authorities.
4 – Evaluating a source for authority and expertise (4 points)
In this part of the module, you and your group mates will read and evaluate an information source on the topic of your group scenario.
Your group scenario and a source on the scenario topic have been posted in the column for your group on the Part 4 Padlet below. Add a post in that column in which you evaluate that source for authority and expertise. Respond to one or more of the questions below with a substantive comment*
- What can you learn about the author(s) and/or the organization or publisher of this information? How does the information you learned relate to their authority or expertise on this topic? Do you think there are limitations to their expertise or authority?
- What can you learn about the authority or authorities cited or mentioned in the article? Do you consider them an authority or expert on the issue? Do you think there are limitations to their expertise or authority?
- Did the source include information from authorities/experts that you didn’t expect or hadn’t listed in the brainstorm Padlet above (Part 3)?
- Is the source missing the perspective of someone you consider an authority on the topic? Who else would you want to hear from? What would their perspective or expertise add to your understanding of the topic?
*Substantive comments are comments that go beyond one sentence or a simple idea. They should connect with ideas and concepts we’ve covered in class and demonstrate your process and use of different strategies. You may also connect with and build off of classmates’ comments provided you are furthering the discussion and not simply reiterating someone else’s ideas. We expect that your comments will be thorough and specific.
