Entry Evaluation and Criteria

Rating Criteria

Below are some questions to help you think about how to measure each of the criteria.

Reliability

• What kind of information is included in the resource?
• ·Is content of the resource primarily opinion?  Is is balanced?
• · Does the creator provide references or sources for data or quotations?
• How complete is this information?

Highest Rated Entries:

• No errors, clear concise, well written, information is current, accurate and relevant.
• An in-depth understanding of the related issues shows the author’s familiarity with the subject.
• Links to or from are also reliable. Has a bibliography. Information can be verified from other sources.

Authority

• Who is the creator or author of the entry?
• What are their credentials?
• Who is the published or sponsor?
• Are they reputable?
• What is the publisherÂ’s interest (if any) in this information?
• Are there advertisements on the website?
• Is the site well regarded, cited, and written by experts in the field?

Highest Rated Entries:

• Author and publisher are clearly identified, respected and reliable.
• Able to confirm legitimacy of the author and content.
• AuthorÂ’s name and credentials are provided, can be verified, and demonstrate probable expertise on topic; and publisher is reputable.

Accuracy and Quality

Is the site highly vetted with good coverage of the topical area?

Highest Rated Entries:

Formally cited and from a peer-reviewed, academic or professional source or it is a primary source.

Originality

Is the site a source of original content?

Educational value

Does the site content help advance educational goals?

Currency or contemporaneity

• When was the entry published?
• How recent is the entry information?
• How recently has the entry been updated?
• How recent do you need it to be?
• Is it current enough for your topic?

Highest Rated Entries:

• Updates are shown, regular and current.
• The source is less than 3 years old and is a current source of its type on the topic, or it is a primary source.

Language

The best-regarded site is useless if the reader does not understand the content or if it does not help with the purpose of visiting.

Purpose and Bias

• Is the site a well-respected source of content intended to inform users?
• Is this fact, propaganda or opinion?
• Is it biased or stereotyped?
• Is the creator/author trying to sell you something?
• Why has the person or organisation created this resource?

Highest Rated Entries:

• Facts are presented free from bias.
• Information is thorough, multiple viewpoints are given.
• Purpose is clearly identifiable as educational with an intended audience.
• The source examines both sides of the issue fairly, and/or is primarily fact-based.

Relevancy

• Is the relevance according to the purpose of the entry?
• How much use will the entry be to the reader?
• Most of the information I will be able to use to answer my question.

Appropriate to the intend Audience

How much can the reader understand?

Highest Rated Entries:

• I am able to understand all the content.
• The information is very useful.

Substance

Depth of coverage needed for your purpose and written at a college or professional level.

Crap Detection

From http://blog.sfgate.com/rheingold/2009/06/30/crap-detection-101/:

“Today, just as it was back then, “Who is the author?” is the root question. If you donÂ’t find one, turn your skepticism meter to the top of the dial. And use easywhois.com to find out who owns the site if there is no author listed. If the author provides a way to ask questions, communicate, or add comments, turn up the credibility meter and dial back the skepticism. When you identify an author, search on the authorÂ’s name in order to evaluate what others think of the author – and donÂ’t turn off your critical stance when you assess reputation. Who are these other people whose opinions you are trusting? Is the site a .gov or .edu? If so, turn up the credibility a notch. If it helps, envision actual meters and dials in your mindÂ’s eye – or a thermometer or speedometer. Take the websiteÂ’s design into account – professional design should not be seen as a certain indicator of accurate content, but visibly amateurish design is sometimes an indicator that the “Institute of Such-and-Such” might be an obsessive loner.

More good questions to use as credibility probes: Does the author provide sources for factual claims, and what happens when you search on the names of the authors of those sources? Have others linked to this page, and if so, who are they (use the search term “link: http://…” and Google shows you every link to a specified page). See if the source has been bookmarked on a social bookmarking service like Delicious or Diigo; although it shouldn’t be treated as a completely trustworthy measurement, the number of people who bookmark a source can furnish clues to its credibility. All the mechanics of doing this kind of checking take only a few seconds of clicking, copying and pasting, searching, and judging for yourself. Again, the part that requires the most work is learning to do your own judging.

Although the Web undermines authority, the usefulness of authority as another clue to credibility hasnÂ’t entirely disappeared. I would add credibility points if a source is a verified professor at a known institution of higher learning, an authentic M.D. or Ph.D., but I wouldnÂ’t subtract points from uncredentialed people whose expertise seems authentic. Nor would I stop at simply verifying that the claim to be a professor is valid. The next step: use the scholarly productivity index that derives a score from the scholarÂ’s publications, citations by other scholars, grants, honors, and awards. If you want to get even more serious, download a free copy of Publish or Perish software, which analyzes scientific citations from Google Scholar according to multiple criteria. Again, donÂ’t trust just one source. Triangulate.

You could Google the authorÂ’s name, enter the authorÂ’s name in the scholarly productivity index, and use the literacy resources at factchecked.org to triangulate a source.

The Health on the Net Foundation has been a steady source of finding reliable/credible health information online. They even have a browser plug-in that enables you to check health information on any website against HONÂ’s database. An astute medical student wrote a guide to how to check quality of medical information online.”