Sample CRAAP Analysis & Summary

As I prepared for Friday's class, I wondered if you would find an example helpful as you prepare your own CRAAP analysis? Below you'll find the notes I wrote evaluating Kirk Semple's article "Moving to U.S. and Amassing a Fortune, No English Needed," so you could see my behind-the-scenes work that enabled me to write my actual evaluation. Following my notes is the credibility assessment that resulted from my notes, and it reflects the type of response I want to see in your future blog phases assessing the credibility of sources. And finally, you'll get a chance to read my summary of the article, which could be helpful to you as you approach phase four of the blog assignment.

Hypothetical research topic and audience: Let’s assume I’m researching bilingualism in the US, specifically asking if Pennsylvania should continue to not recognize English as the official language? My specific audience includes ESL program directors who could be affected by a potential change in the status of the language.


My Notes (remember, this is just for your benefit and not what I would actually publish to my blog if I were in your shoes)

1. Currency: November 2011
2. Relevance: The article does relate to my topic because it discusses the lack of bilingualism of three different immigrant entrepreneurs to the US. The article does not specifically answer my research question but it offers a unique perspective of individuals in the US who did not give up their native language but they also did not adopt English as their second language. Published in the New York Times, this article is aimed at mid-life people who are largely college educated and in the upper-middle socio-economic class. The article is easy to read and understand and no prior knowledge is necessarily needed.  I would be comfortable citing this source in my research paper because it comes from a reliable publisher.
3. Authority: The author is Kirk Semple, a seasoned journalist writing for a reputable magazine, who focuses primarily on immigration issues. This makes be believe that he knows what he’s talking about and is qualified to write on the topic. The contact information for either the author or publication should be relatively easy to access via their website.
4. Accuracy: The information comes from a seasoned journalist who writes frequently about immigration issues, which bilingualism clearly falls into that category. The NYT is considered to slant more towards the liberal political side, so I have to wonder how that influences their presentation of this information. The article is largely based on three individual interviews, so the “findings” are limited because we’re not talking about quantified, empirical data. In fact, I think these three examples are the exception, not the rule, and Semple acknowledges that in the article. The liberal perspective would generally support bilingualism in the public service sectors in the U.S., so this article may have a bias towards presenting these cases positively. Semple’s bottom line is that it’s possible – due to modern technology -- to live the American dream without speaking English fluently. The article seems to question the assumption that you “need” English to succeed. Mr. Semple supports his argument with three success stories, that while simply anecdotal, are real and provable examples. He does incorporate some USCB data, which adds credibility to his bottom line. The tone of the article is pretty level headed and albeit positive. It clearly questions the previous assumption: “Advocates for the movement sometimes known as Official English have long pressed for legislation mandating English as the official language of government, arguing that a common language is essential for the country’s cohesion and for immigrant assimilation and success.
5. Purpose: The purpose of this article is to convince readers that the traditional perspective of English as an official language is not necessarily the only perspective to consider. Paragraphs 14 and 15 of the article make that pretty clear. The information is fact-based but, of course, interpretation is involved in what those facts mean. 

CRAAP Evaluation

Mr. Semple’s article is a credible source for my research because it’s current and reliable. Published in The New York Times in 2011, the article offers a contemporary perspective on whether or not mastering the English language is necessary for a non-native speaker to achieve financial success in the US. Semple uses three fact-based anecdotes of successful immigrants as primary evidence to argue that it may not be necessary to know English to achieve the American entrepreneurial dream. He also cites the U.S. Census Bureau and a CUNY sociology professor to further his argument, both reputable sources for evidence. Though his general interest magazine article does not carry the same weight as an empirical academic research study might, he fairly acknowledges the limitations of isolated story-based evidence and the other, sometimes negative ramifications (social embarrassment, for example) that can affect a non-English speaking immigrant in the United States. This seasoned immigration journalist, writing for a magazine tagged as having a liberal political slant, provides a logical, supported perspective to consider in the “Official English” debate.

Summary

Kirk Semple’s 2011 New York Time’s article “Moving to U.S. and Amassing a Fortune, No English Needed” tells the entrepreneurial success stories of three different US immigrants despite the fact that they have never mastered the English language. Semple’s examples, supplemented by data from the U.S. Census Bureau, seem to question the assumption that English fluency is a prerequisite for immigrants to financially succeed in the United States. The article, not ignoring the exceptionality of these stories or some challenges of not knowing the primary language, attributes these success stories to personal ambition, technological advances, and bilingual support staff or family.