Teachers:
Junior & Senior
Teams
Class:
English, Science,
Social Studies & Mathematics
Project Title:

Digital Portfolios
Evaluating Web Sources for Information
  1. For this assignment:
    *Look at the sites below which contain several web sites to evaluate.
    *Choose three sites for you and your partner site to evaluate. One of the 3 sites must be from last year's MHS Digital Portfolios.
    *Complete the evaluation checklist for each site that you evaluate.
    *Give it a score to determine if it is a reputable source of information.

  2. Web Site Evaluation Check List
    Use this list to evaluate individual web sites.

  3. Kathy Schrock's Sites to Use to Demonstrate Critical Evaluation
    Discovery Education: Discovery School.com
    *Scroll down to the bottom of the page to find a list of 20 "interesting" sites.

    OR

  4. Joyce Valenza: Springfield Township High School Virtual Library
    A Web Quest about Evaluating Web Sites
    *Click on Resources to find sites about controversial issues.

  5. Evaluating Web Sites: net.TUTOR home
    An Online Tutorial for Evaluating Web Sites
    Use this tutorial on your own to review or learn about web site evaluation.
  6. Below is an explanation of the criteria used for evaluating web sources.

Five Criteria for Evaluating Web Sources

Accuracy | Authority | Objectivity | Currency | Coverage

Accuracy

  • Is the information reliable and error-free?
  • Is there an editor or someone who verifies/checks the information?

Rationale

  • Anyone can publish anything on the Web
  • Unlike traditional print resources, web resources rarely have editors or fact-checkers
  • Currently, no web standards exist to ensure accuracy

Authority

  • Is there an author? Is the page signed?
  • Is the author qualified? An expert?
  • Who is the sponsor?
  • Is the sponsor of the page reputable? How reputable?
  • Is there a link to information about the author or the sponsor?
  • If the page includes neither a signature nor indicates a sponsor, is there any other way to determine its origin?

>Look for a header or footer showing affilitation.
>Look at the URL. http://www.fbi.gov
>Look at the domain. .edu, .com, .ac.uk, .org, .net

Rationale

  • See all of the rationale for accuracy above
  • It is often difficult to determine a web page's authorship
  • Even if a page is signed, qualifications are not usually given
  • Sponsorship isn't usually indicated

 

Objectivity

  • Does the information show a minimum of bias?
  • Is the page designed to sway opinion?
  • Is there any advertising on the page?

Rationale

  • Frequently the goals of the sponsors/authors aren't clearly stated.
  • Often the Web serves as a soapbox.

Currency

  • Is the page dated?
  • If so, when was the last update?
  • How current are the links? Have some expired or moved?

Rationale

  • Publication or revision dates are not always provided.
  • If a date is provided, it may have various meanings. For example, it may indicate when the material was first written or when the material was first placed on the Web or when the material was last revised.

Coverage

  • What topics are covered?
  • What does this page offer that is not found elsewhere?
  • What is its intrinsic value?
  • How in-depth is the material?

Rationale

  • Web coverage often differs from print coverage.
  • Frequently, it's difficult to determine the extent of coverage.
  • Sometimes web information is just-for-fun or outright silliness.

Last updated: December 13, 2006

Michelle Powers
Library Media Specialist
Mission High School
3750 18th Street
San Francisco, California
415-241-6240
mpowers1000@sbcglobal.net

The information for this page is from:
Beck, Susan. The Good, The Bad & The Ugly: Evaluation Criteria. 22 Sept. 2004
The Good, The Bad & The Ugly:
or, Why It's a Good Idea to Evaluate Web Sources