Search for relevant information and record its limits · 搜索相关信息并记录其局限
A search result is a lead, not a conclusion
- The materials team searches “best classroom labels” and finds advertisements, design tips and research papers. A result near the top may be popular or promoted; it does not automatically answer whether spacing changes sorting accuracy.
- This original GAC033-aligned lesson develops a search and source record. It introduces preparation for a literature review, not a claim that the fictional label study has already found real supporting research. Read and verify any real source you cite.
搜索结果只是线索，而非结论
- 材料团队搜索“最佳教室标签”，找到广告、设计技巧和研究论文。排名靠前的结果可能受欢迎或被推广，但这并不能自动证明间距变化会影响分拣准确率。
- 本原创GAC033配套课程旨在培养搜索与来源记录能力，引入文献综述准备环节，而非声称虚构的标签研究已发现真实支持性研究。引用的任何真实来源均需阅读并核实。
The first search result automatically provides the strongest evidence for a research question. · 第一个搜索结果自动为研究问题提供最强的证据。
Ranking can reflect popularity or promotion. Examine relevance, authority and evidence. · 排名可能反映受欢迎程度或推广。请检查相关性、权威性和证据。
Build terms around the question
- Start with concepts: instruction layout, spacing, alignment, comprehension and sorting accuracy. Try synonyms and narrower settings. Record the search phrase, tool, date and useful result rather than relying on memory or repeating the same broad phrase.
- If a result is irrelevant, ask which term is too wide. “Sorting” can mean a computer algorithm or household waste; add the task context. Do not hide a lack of relevant results by replacing the question with whatever the first article discusses.
Search-log row: concept = instruction layout; query = “label alignment task comprehension”; result = candidate paper to inspect; decision = not yet included, because only the title has been read.
围绕问题构建术语
- 从概念入手：指令布局、间距、对齐、理解力和分拣准确率。尝试同义词和更具体的场景。记录搜索短语、工具、日期及有用结果，而非依赖记忆或重复宽泛的短语。
- 若结果无关，询问哪个词过于宽泛。“分拣”可能指计算机算法或家庭垃圾分类；需添加任务语境。不要因缺乏相关结果而用第一篇文章讨论的内容替换原问题。
搜索日志行：概念 = 指令布局；查询 = “标签对齐任务理解度”；结果 = 待检论文；决策 = 暂不纳入，因仅阅读了标题。
Why add a task context to the search term sorting? · 为什么要在搜索词排序中添加任务背景？
The same word can refer to different topics. Context improves relevance without deciding the answer. · 同一单词可能指代不同主题。背景提高相关性但不决定答案。
Inspect beyond the title
- Read the abstract for the question, participants, method and result. Then inspect the relevant parts of the full source when available. A title can suggest relevance without revealing whether the task, age group or outcome matches yours.
- If only an abstract is available, record that access limit. You may report what the abstract explicitly says, but do not invent details of the full method or quote a sentence you have not seen. Seek an accessible version or another suitable source.
超越标题进行检查
- 阅读摘要以了解问题、参与者、方法和结果。如有全文，再检查相关部分。标题虽暗示相关性，但不一定反映任务、年龄组或结果是否与你的需求匹配。
- 若仅有摘要可用，记录此访问限制。你可以报告摘要明确陈述的内容，但不得编造完整方法的细节或引用未见过的句子。寻求可获取的版本或其他合适来源。
Order a source-screening process. · Order a source-screening process. (请有序安排来源筛选流程)
A search listing leads to examination; inaccessible details must remain explicitly unknown. · 搜索结果列表引导至审查；不可访问的细节必须保持明确未知。
Evaluate authority and relevance together
- Ask who wrote it, where it appeared, what evidence supports the claims and whether the information is current enough for the purpose. A careful academic paper on a different task may have limited relevance; a relevant advertisement may still be weak evidence of effectiveness.
- Distinguish findings, recommendations and promotion. “We recommend larger labels” is not identical to “participants using larger labels made fewer errors in this task.” Record the measured outcome and conditions before transferring a claim to your project.
Do not invent a citation, author, journal, date or result to fill a source table. If a detail cannot be verified, mark it unknown or exclude the source from claims requiring that detail.
综合评估权威性与相关性
- 询问作者是谁、发表平台、主张的依据以及信息是否足够及时以满足用途。针对不同任务的严谨学术论文可能相关性有限；相关的广告仍可能是效力弱证据。
- 区分发现、建议与宣传。“我们建议使用更大的标签”并不等同于“在本任务中使用更大标签的参与者错误更少”。在将主张应用于你的项目前，先记录测量的结果和条件。
不要为了填满来源表而捏造引用、作者、期刊、日期或结果。若某细节无法核实，标记为未知，或将其从不依赖该细节的主张中排除。
Which TWO details help distinguish a finding from a recommendation? · 哪两个细节有助于区分发现和推荐？
Measured outcomes and conditions explain what evidence supports. Promotional style cannot replace them. · 测量结果和条件解释了证据支持什么。推广风格不能替代它们。
Keep notes linked to their source
- Record author or organisation, title, publication details, link, access date and a short relevance note. Put exact copied wording in quotation marks with its location. Keep your own summary separate so you do not later mistake copied words for your writing.
- A useful note also names a limitation: small sample, a different language or an outcome based on preference rather than accuracy. A limitation does not make a source worthless; it tells you how far you can use it in the proposal.
保持笔记与其来源的关联
- 记录作者或组织、标题、出版详情、链接、访问日期及简短的相关性备注。精确复制的文字加引号并注明出处。保持自己的总结独立，以免日后混淆复制内容与原创写作。
- 有用的笔记还应指出局限性：如小样本、语言不同或以偏好而非准确率为基础的结果。局限性不代表来源无用，它告诉你可在提案中利用的程度。
How should exact copied wording appear in research notes? · 原文复制的文字应在研究笔记中如何呈现？
Mark quotations and keep traceable locations to avoid confusing copied wording with your own summary. · 标记引用并保持可追溯的位置，以避免将复制文字与自己的总结混淆。
Select a small set you can explain
- Choose sources for their contribution: background to the problem, evidence about the design feature, or a suitable measurement method. Keep reasons for rejecting candidates too. Ten unread links are less useful than three verified sources you can accurately discuss.
- Create two source records and explain what each can and cannot support. Use real accessible sources for an actual proposal; the classroom search-log example above is only a procedure model. Unit 5.5 will connect sources instead of listing them one by one.
Search deliberately, inspect the source, separate findings from advice, keep traceable notes and state relevance and access limits before using a claim.
选择你能解释的小集源
- 根据贡献选择来源：关于问题的背景、设计特征的 evidence（证据）或合适的测量方法。同时保留拒绝候选者的理由。十个未读链接不如三个你能准确讨论的核实来源有用。
- 创建两个来源记录并说明每个能及不能支持什么。实际提案请使用真实可获取的来源；上述课堂搜索日志示例仅为程序模型。第5.5单元将连接来源而非逐一列举。
有目的地搜索，检查来源，区分发现与建议，保持可追溯的笔记，在使用主张前阐明相关性和访问限制。