CONDENSED SUMMARY OF THE INTERVENTION

WWW SOURCE CREDIBILITY EVALUATIVE CRITERIA

Prof. G. Jones, WCU

AUTHORITY:

Ø Can you truncate back to basic domain?

Ø Sponsor or publisher? (Note domain name check: http://www.allwhois.com/ , http://www.whois.org)

Ø Active links out to independent support for information presented?

Ø Who links TO this site? (link-in-to -- In Google, search, link:http://url.url )

Ø Identifiable author? (Credentials? “About Us” “Google” the author?)

Ø If an organization, credentials of others given?

Ø Contact information? (street address, email)

Ø Independent verification of information via trusted sources?

ACCURACY / RELIABILITY:

Ø Reviewed? (Part of an edited or peer-reviewed publication?)

Ø Verifiable? (Can factual information be verified through footnotes or bibliographies to other credible sources?)

Ø Documented sources? (Scholarly journals or otherwise reliable sources? Hyperlinked “webliography” of cited sources?)

Ø Fit with existing knowledge? (Based on what you already know about the subject, or have checked from other sources)

Ø Responsibility? (Is it clear who has the responsibility for the accuracy of the information presented?)

Ø Endorsements? (Does an institution or internet provider support or endorse the information?)

Ø Data? (Is statistical data labeled clearly; source provided?)

Ø What do recognized directories say? (http://about.com, http://infomine.ucr.edu, http://lii.org)

OBJECTIVITY / PURPOSE:

Ø Ironic or satirical? Parody?

Ø bias? (due to author’s or organization’s affiliation or subtle purpose)

Ø Read the fine print (“About us…” etc.)

Ø Minimal (or no) promotional material

Ø If an organization, mission/membership stated?

Ø If controversial subject, both sides represented?

Ø Publication, web page or parent site directed towards a particular audience?

Ø Inflammatory or provocative language?

Ø Sufficient evidence for conclusions drawn?

Ø You must also use your general knowledge and critical thinking ability here…

CURRENCY:

Ø Most recent update of page?

Ø If article, date of article (as distinct from page)?

Ø Links still active?

Ø Do the links point to current information?

Ø Dates of external link checks noted?

COMPREHENSIVENESS

Ø Broad perspective or viewpoint of the topic

Ø Links to appropriate array of related internal and external documents

DESIGN & LAYOUT

Ø Is the site searchable? (internal search engine)

Ø Usefulness of information?

Ø Overall site design? (layout, typography, images, consistency, appropriate balance of graphics to text)

Ø Error-free? (grammar, syntax, spelling, punctuation, etc.)

Ø Load time (appropriate amount of graphics and multimedia)

Disclaimer? Privacy statement? Consideration of users with disabilities?

EASE OF USE / NAVIGABILITY

Ø Ease of Use (User-friendly with effective interface?)

Ø Navigable, with clear paths?

Ø Well organized? (e.g., is there a site map?)