Case Study 36.2: The News Literacy Project's Checkology Platform — Design, Evidence, and Scale

Overview

The News Literacy Project (NLP) is a nonprofit educational organization founded in 2008 by veteran journalist Alan Miller. Its primary digital product, the Checkology virtual classroom, is one of the most widely adopted K-12 media literacy platforms in the United States. As of the mid-2020s, Checkology had been used by teachers in all 50 states and more than 100 countries, with tens of millions of lesson completions logged on the platform.

Checkology's distinctive approach combines journalism-industry expertise with classroom pedagogy: the platform was developed with extensive input from professional journalists and news organizations, and it frames media literacy primarily through the lens of understanding how credible journalism works — the assumption being that students who understand how reliable news is produced will be better equipped to recognize when news fails to meet those standards.

This case study examines Checkology's curriculum design, the research evidence on its effectiveness, its challenges and limitations, and its significance as a model for scaling media literacy education through technology platforms.

Organizational Background

The News Literacy Project's Mission

The News Literacy Project describes its mission as "empowering educators to teach news literacy skills to enable all students and educators to become informed news consumers and engaged citizens." The organization takes a specific stance on what news literacy means: it focuses on the standards of credible journalism — verification, source diversity, editorial independence, transparency — as the framework for evaluating information quality.

This journalism-centered approach is distinctive. Many media literacy curricula adopt a broader critical literacy framework that includes advertising, social media, entertainment media, and political communication as objects of study. Checkology, while it addresses these broader contexts, centers the standards of professional journalism as the primary lens.

The NLP's journalism-industry connections have been a significant asset: the organization has recruited journalists from major news organizations to serve as instructors in Checkology lessons, and it has developed partnerships with news organizations including The Washington Post, The New York Times, and regional outlets to provide case studies and authentic examples.

Funding and Governance

Checkology has been funded primarily through foundation grants and journalism-industry support. Major funders have included the Knight Foundation, the Democracy Fund, and numerous journalism foundations and family foundations. This funding model has allowed the platform to be offered free to educators, removing the cost barrier that limits adoption of many educational technology tools.

The NLP's close relationship with the journalism industry has been noted by both supporters and critics. Supporters argue that journalism-industry backing ensures that the curriculum accurately represents journalistic standards and provides authentic content. Critics have suggested that the curriculum may have an inherent bias toward legitimizing mainstream journalism institutions and may not adequately address the limitations and failures of professional journalism.

Curriculum Design

Structure of the Checkology Platform

Checkology is structured as a set of self-paced digital lessons that teachers can assign to students as part of a broader media literacy unit. As of the mid-2020s, the platform offered approximately 20 lessons covering a range of news literacy topics. Lessons typically take 20-45 minutes to complete and are designed for independent student use, with the teacher serving as a facilitator rather than a primary instructor.

The platform's user interface presents lessons in a video-and-interactive format: students watch short video segments (often featuring real journalists explaining their work), then complete interactive activities, quizzes, and reflection exercises. This design allows teachers to assign Checkology lessons as independent work while using class time for discussion and application.

Key lesson topics include: - "Seek the Facts," which introduces the concept of credible evidence and fact-based reporting - "The Verification Process," which explains how journalists verify claims before publication - "Understanding Sources," which covers how journalists evaluate and use sources - "Propaganda Techniques," which teaches students to recognize common propaganda strategies - "The First Amendment," which addresses press freedom and its relationship to democratic society - "Spotting Misinformation," which provides specific strategies for identifying false information - "Algorithms and Filter Bubbles," which explains how digital platforms shape information access

Pedagogical Approach

Checkology's pedagogical approach rests on several principles:

Authentic examples. The platform prioritizes real journalism examples — actual news articles, actual journalist processes, actual corrections and retractions — rather than constructed or hypothetical scenarios. This is consistent with research on transfer, which suggests that practice with realistic content is more likely to generalize to naturalistic contexts.

Journalist perspectives. By featuring professional journalists explaining their verification processes, source selection decisions, and ethical standards, Checkology makes the implicit practices of journalism explicit. This "behind the scenes" approach is designed to help students understand journalism as a set of practices with specific standards, not simply a product they consume.

Structured reflection. Most lessons include structured reflection questions that ask students to apply concepts to their own information-seeking behavior. This metacognitive component is designed to connect curriculum content to students' daily media consumption.

Connection to civics. Many Checkology lessons explicitly connect news literacy to democratic citizenship — framing the ability to evaluate information as a civic responsibility and a prerequisite for informed participation in democracy.

What Checkology Does Not Cover

An honest assessment of Checkology requires noting what it does not cover or covers less thoroughly than some competing approaches:

Lateral reading. While Checkology teaches some source evaluation skills, its approach to source evaluation is primarily vertical — evaluating internal features of a website or article — rather than fully embracing the lateral reading methodology endorsed by Wineburg and colleagues. Given the evidence that lateral reading is more effective than vertical reading for online source evaluation, this is a potential limitation.

Social media manipulation at depth. While Checkology includes lessons on misinformation and filter bubbles, its coverage of sophisticated manipulation techniques (bot networks, coordinated inauthentic behavior, deepfakes) is less comprehensive than some dedicated prebunking programs.

Structural critique of journalism. The platform's journalism-industry backing may limit the degree to which it can critically examine the structural incentives and failures of professional journalism — the role of advertising models in shaping news coverage, the under-representation of marginalized communities in mainstream journalism, or the relationship between media ownership concentration and editorial independence.

Research Evidence

NLP-Commissioned Research

The News Literacy Project has commissioned several research studies on Checkology's effectiveness. A major evaluation conducted by an independent research firm found that students who completed Checkology lessons showed significantly higher scores on news literacy knowledge assessments compared to students in schools that had not used Checkology.

The study found effect sizes in the small-to-medium range (d ≈ 0.30 to d ≈ 0.45 across different outcome measures). Students who used Checkology demonstrated better knowledge of journalistic standards, better ability to identify credible versus non-credible sources, and more positive attitudes toward credible journalism. These findings held across different grade levels (6-12) and across diverse school demographics.

Methodological considerations: The NLP evaluations have used quasi-experimental designs, comparing students in schools that used Checkology to students in schools that did not. This design cannot rule out selection effects: schools that choose to adopt Checkology may already have stronger media literacy cultures than those that do not, which would inflate apparent program effects. The NLP has acknowledged this limitation and is pursuing more rigorous designs.

Independent Research

Several independent researchers have studied Checkology's effectiveness, generally finding positive results with important caveats.

Vraga and Tully (2021), whose research on news literacy and social media behaviors is among the most cited in the field, have found positive associations between news literacy instruction (including Checkology) and reduced sharing of misinformation on social media. However, they note that observed effects on actual behavior are smaller than effects on knowledge and attitudes.

Ashley, Maksl, and Craft (2013) developed the News Media Literacy Scale (NML) and have used it to assess the impact of news literacy education programs including Checkology. Their research found that NML scores are positively associated with reduced conspiracy theory endorsement and greater accuracy in identifying misinformation, suggesting that the knowledge and skills developed through Checkology have real-world consequences.

Comparison to Control Schools

A limitation of much Checkology research is the difficulty of identifying appropriate control schools. Schools that choose to adopt Checkology differ from those that do not in ways that may affect media literacy outcomes independently of the platform. Identifying a matched set of comparison schools requires careful propensity-score matching or randomized encouragement designs — methodological approaches that the NLP's commissioned research has not consistently employed.

The NLP has recognized this limitation and has been developing more rigorous evaluation designs, including a randomized controlled trial with matched schools. Published results from this trial were anticipated in 2025-2026.

Teacher Adoption and Implementation

Adoption Patterns

Checkology's adoption patterns reveal important insights about the challenges and facilitators of ed-tech implementation. The platform has been adopted most extensively by: - Teachers in states with media literacy standards (Illinois, New Jersey, California) who can integrate it into requirements - Teachers in English Language Arts and social studies, who have the clearest curriculum connections - Teachers who are personally motivated by concerns about student media consumption - Schools in affluent districts with reliable device access and internet connectivity

Adoption has been lower among: - Science and mathematics teachers, who may not see clear connections to their subjects - Schools with unreliable technology infrastructure - Teachers with heavy curriculum demands and limited discretionary time - Districts that have not provided explicit support or professional development for media literacy

Quality of Implementation

Research on educational technology implementation consistently finds that the quality of implementation varies enormously across schools and teachers. Checkology is no exception. In schools where Checkology is assigned as a homework activity without classroom integration or discussion, the learning outcomes are likely much weaker than in schools where teachers use the platform as a launching pad for structured discussion, in-class application activities, and ongoing media literacy practice.

The NLP has responded to implementation quality concerns by developing teacher support resources, including lesson plans, discussion guides, and professional development opportunities for Checkology educators. However, the effectiveness of these supports depends on teacher uptake, which is itself uneven.

Teacher Professional Development

The NLP's professional development offerings for Checkology teachers represent a significant investment. The organization offers summer institutes, online training courses, and school-year coaching support for teachers adopting the platform. Teachers who complete professional development report significantly higher confidence in media literacy instruction and more consistent implementation of Checkology lessons.

The evidence suggests that teacher professional development is a critical success factor for Checkology implementation — but it is also the most resource-intensive element of the program. Scaling professional development to reach the full population of teachers who use or could use Checkology is a significant logistical and financial challenge.

Scale and Reach

Current Scale

As of 2024-2025, Checkology had been used by: - Over 50,000 registered educators in the United States - Students in all 50 states and more than 100 countries - Approximately 20 million "lesson completions" (individual student completions of individual lessons)

These numbers are large in absolute terms but must be contextualized. Twenty million lesson completions across the US student population of approximately 50 million K-12 students represents average exposure of less than one lesson per student — far below what would constitute a meaningful media literacy curriculum. The 50,000+ educators who have registered represent a much smaller proportion who are using Checkology regularly and meaningfully.

The Spread and Depth Tension

The tension between reach (how many students are exposed to Checkology) and depth (how extensively any given student uses it) is a fundamental challenge for the platform. Wide adoption of single lessons by many students may have less impact than deep adoption (completing many lessons) by fewer students.

The NLP's data suggests that the median student engagement with Checkology is approximately 3-5 lessons over a school year — well below what would constitute a comprehensive media literacy curriculum. A small proportion of students, typically in schools with particularly committed media literacy teachers, engage with 10-15 or more lessons. The distribution is highly skewed.

Implications and Lessons

The Platform Model for Media Literacy

Checkology represents an important proof of concept: that a web-based platform can deliver media literacy content at scale, reduce implementation barriers for teachers, and produce measurable improvements in student knowledge and attitudes. The platform model has several advantages over traditional curriculum approaches:

Low marginal cost per additional user
Easy updating of content as the media landscape evolves
Data collection on student engagement and performance at scale
Accessibility for schools that cannot afford dedicated media literacy staff

At the same time, the platform model has important limitations: - Quality of learning depends heavily on teacher integration, not just platform use - Screen-based learning may not be optimal for developing metacognitive skills - The platform cannot replace the classroom discussion and guided reflection that deepen learning - Technology access disparities create equity issues in who benefits

Research Gaps and Priorities

The most important research gaps for Checkology — and for K-12 media literacy platforms generally — include:

Behavioral outcomes: Most research measures knowledge and attitudes, not actual information-seeking behavior. Studies that follow students into their real social media use and document actual sharing, verification, and information-seeking behavior are needed.

Long-term effects: Assessments conducted weeks or months after Checkology use are rare. Do knowledge gains persist? Do skill improvements hold up over time?

Dosage effects: How much Checkology use (how many lessons, over what time period) is needed to produce meaningful and lasting effects? Is there a minimum effective dose?

Equity effects: Do Checkology's effects differ across demographic groups? Are certain student populations (those with less access to quality media at home, those with less educated parents, those in schools with less overall quality) more or less likely to benefit?

Teacher moderating effects: How much does the quality of teacher integration moderate Checkology's effectiveness? What teacher practices amplify or diminish the platform's impact?

Policy Implications

Checkology's experience offers several lessons for policy-makers seeking to promote media literacy education through technology platforms:

Free access is necessary but not sufficient. Removing cost barriers (Checkology is free) dramatically expands adoption, but adoption does not guarantee effective use. Professional development investment is as important as platform development.

Standards alignment matters. Adoption is significantly higher in states with media literacy standards or explicit curriculum requirements. Policy-makers who want to promote platform adoption should accompany it with curriculum policy that creates clear integration points.

Platform and teacher must be complementary. The most effective implementations treat the platform as a resource that supports teacher instruction, not a replacement for it. Policy frameworks should support the development of teacher capacity alongside platform deployment.

Conclusion

The News Literacy Project's Checkology represents one of the most significant attempts to scale media literacy education through technology, and its reach — tens of thousands of teachers, millions of students — is genuinely impressive. The research evidence suggests that it produces meaningful improvements in news literacy knowledge and, to a more limited degree, in attitudes and behaviors.

The honest assessment is that Checkology, like most educational technology interventions, is neither as transformative as its advocates hope nor as ineffective as its critics fear. It is a useful tool that improves media literacy outcomes when used well, but its impact is highly dependent on teacher integration quality, implementation depth, and institutional support. In schools where it is embedded in a serious, sustained media literacy curriculum with strong teacher facilitation, it is likely to produce lasting and meaningful effects. In schools where it is assigned as occasional homework without follow-up or integration, its effects will be modest at best.

The most important lesson of Checkology's experience may be structural: the infrastructure of teacher professional development, standards alignment, and institutional support that makes media literacy education effective is as important as the content of the curriculum itself. Technology can scale content delivery; it cannot scale the human infrastructure of good teaching.

Discussion Questions for Case Study 36.2

Checkology's journalism-centered approach — framing media literacy primarily through understanding how credible journalism works — is distinctive. What are its advantages over broader critical media literacy approaches? What does it potentially miss?
The NLP-commissioned research on Checkology uses quasi-experimental designs that cannot rule out selection effects. Design a stronger evaluation methodology that would more convincingly estimate Checkology's causal effect on media literacy outcomes.
The tension between reach (exposing many students to some Checkology content) and depth (exposing fewer students to extensive Checkology content) is fundamental to any scaled educational technology. How should the NLP balance these competing priorities, and what data would help them make this decision?
Checkology's adoption is higher among English Language Arts and social studies teachers than among math and science teachers. What would be needed to extend adoption into STEM subjects, and would the benefits be worth the investment?
The NLP's journalism-industry partnerships have been described as both an asset (ensuring curriculum accuracy, providing authentic content) and a potential source of bias (toward legitimizing mainstream journalism). How should educational organizations manage the tension between industry partnership and critical independence?