Examines media literacy impact on credibility evaluation in animal science students, indicating enhanced critical thinking skills.
Media literacy is increasingly vital in animal science education, where students face widespread misinformation about production practices, nutrition, and animal health and welfare. Students often overestimate their ability to discern credible sources from misinformation which can create barriers to learning when misconceptions interfere with integration of new knowledge. This study examined how an assignment grounded in principles of the critical media literacy framework influenced students’ evaluation of credibility and perceptions of misinformation. This assignment was implemented in two semesters of an undergraduate Animal Nutrition course (n = 42) and required students to critically evaluate media related to course content. Student assignments and reflections were analyzed using qualitative open coding to identify emerging themes. Students indicated that prior to engaging in the assignment, they relied on superficial indicators of credibility like perceived author expertise, presentation style, or popularity. After completing the project, students reported greater awareness of bias and misinformation and commitment to deeper evaluation strategies when consuming media. Many indicated intentions to research claims more thoroughly, approach popular media about animal science with increased skepticism, and assess the credibility of authors before accepting their claims. These findings suggest that integration of media literacy activities in animal science curricula can support critical reflection practices on students’ evaluation of information. This provides conditions consistent with transformative learning by prompting students to challenge existing assumptions and adopt a more reflective approach when navigating digital media. Developing these skills is essential for future animal science professionals to critically evaluate information and engage credibly in scientific discourse within a rapidly evolving digital landscape.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ciana Bowhay (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: