A500.3.4.RB_HaganJason

A500.3.4.RB – Explore the Hunt Library

What makes a resource “scholarly” in nature?

How is the scholarly information you found in the library different from the typical information you find when you Google a leadership concept?

Scholarly work is scrutinized by others in the field who have extensive knowledge and skills also referred to as a “peer review” (Nosich, 2012, pg. 120). The resource is normally an expert within the discipline that the work is produced. It is reasonable to assert that the work produced can be trusted. To produce a resource that is scholarly in nature the work has to go through the stringent peer review process. The peer review process validates the sources, the scholar who did the work, and of course the final produced resource. It is the most professional way to verify and validate someone’s work within the discipline. Such is not true when conducting a standard google search. The majority of resources found via a google search are from open sources that are unchallenged claims, findings, statements, opinions, emotions, or even data. The author, if revealed may not be a vetted professional in the discipline itself. The work that was done and produced did not pass through the peer review process. Most likely, depending on the source, it passed through a publishing editor. Without the resource passing through a scholarly peer review, the resource will not be free of interpretations, assumptions, opinion, or point of view. Without the scholarly review, one must first consider the source, second consider the author or publisher before committing full trust in the resource its self. It is not to say that a resource scholarly in nature is free from those shortcomings as well, but confidence is to be had when reading a resource that is scholarly in nature because it has been through peer reviews.

Best Regards,

Jason

Nosich, G. M. (2012). Learning to Think Things Through: A Guide to Critical Thinking Across the Curriculum (4^th Ed.) Pearson.