The purpose of this assignment is to learn how to evaluate online information and webpages using these criteria: authority, accuracy, objectivity, coverage, and design.

Much of this assignment was adapted from the Web site "Teaching Critical Evaluation Skills for World Wide Web Resources" created by Jan Alexander and Marsha Tate of the Wolfgram Memorial Library, Widener University.

http://www.science.widener.edu/~withers/webeval.htm

The internet provides users a wide range of information; scholarly documents posted next to dubious ones; advertisements mixed with critical articles. Because the information is largely unfiltered, evaluation sites recommend caution. Caveat lector- Let the reader beware. While it is true that some evaluation services are available and some internet review criteria parallel those used for print resources, it is also true that additional criteria need to be identifed and defined to use reviewing internet sources.

Step one in evaluating, using or copying resources found online, is a visit to THE COPYRIGHT WEBSITE, (http://www.benedict.com/)

Next, apply at least the following criteria to online information:

AUTHORSHIP OR AUTHORITY

	Is there a signature? Who is the author? (usually in footer)
	Is the author qualified? (mentioned by another authority? linked to biographical information that allows you to judge credentials?)
	Who is the sponsor? How reputable is the sponsor?
	Is this page cited by other authorities in the field?
	If there is no signature nor clear indication of sponsor, is there a way to determine the origin of the page? (phone number, address, email address*an email address alone is not enough-look at headers or footers for affiliation)

Note: As information published online can seem to be anonymous, establishing authorship and authority become crucial to establishing credibility of source material. The server replaces the publishing body of the print world without guaranteeing the peer review process print media undergoes. Therefore, search for the name of an organization, a watermark or a link to that information. You are trying to determine whether the information resides on a personal or an official Web site, first, and then to evaluate the official site and the authors purpose and credentials.

Visit the following sites to evaluate authorship and authority:

	How Aids has Affected Our Society http://www.schoolsucks.com/papers/science/health/aids832.txt
	Feline Reactions to Bearded Men http://www.improb.com/airchives/cat.html
	Environmental Science and Technology http://pubs.acs.org/journals/esthag/index.html
	The Age of Social Transformation http://www.theatlantic.com/atlantic/election/connection/ecbig/soctrans.htm

ACCURACY

	Is the information reliable?
	Is the site well-edited, error-free?
	Does the document name a methodology, provide a bibliography, list those responsible for verifying data?
	Is the information presented as fact, accurate?

Note: Remember how easily anyone can publish on the internet. At present, most websites exist without standards to ensure accuracy.

Visit these sites to evaluate accuracy:

	Smokers Homepage http://www.tezcat.com/~smokers
	The True but Little Known Facts About Women with Aids http://147.129.1.10/library/lib2/AIDSFACTS.html
	Health Care Management Science http://www.baltzer.nl/hcms.asp
	Evaluating Quality on the Net http://www.tiac.net/users/hope/findqual.html

OBJECTIVITY

	Is the document located on the server of an organization with a particular bias? Is the intent to sway opinion or deliver information impartially?
	Is there advertising on the page? (If products representing a company or the political agenda of a party appear, you are reading advertising.)
	Again, does the resource explain and cite original material used to support the article?

Note: Because information is rarely neutral, because controversial questions are often so interesting, because publishing is so easy online, be careful to check objectivity. Do you want to use research residing on a page sponsored by an advocacy group for an informational paper on abortion?

Visit the following pages to evaluate objectivity:

	We’re All Gineau Pigs (http://www.webcom.com/~pinknoiz/coldwar/humantest.html)
	The National Right to Life Committee (http://www.nrlc.org)
	NARAL(National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League) http://www.naral.org
	Top 10 Ways (http://www.glover.com/sucky.html)

CURRENCY

	Is the document dated?
	Is the site well-maintained? When was the last update?
	How reliable is the location? How current are the links? Are some of the links expired or moved?
	If the page is not dated, can you view the directory to find the date it was last modified?

Note: Because webpages are constantly changing, dates become especially important. Remember,
though, that the dates may mean date of authorship, of revision, of posting on the web.

Visit these sites to evaluate currency:

	CNN (http://www.cnn.com)
	USA Today (http://www.usatoday.com)
	The Copyright Grab (http://www.wired.com/wired/whitepaper.html)
	National Institute of Health http://www.nih.gov/news/
	WWW Virtual Library History of Science, Technology & Medicine http://www.asap.unimelb.edu.au/hstm_ove.htm

COVERAGE

	Is the subject covered completely? in-depth? omissions?
	Is the material appropriate to the intended audience? What is the technical level of this audience?
	What does this site do uniquely? Compared to other sites on similar topics is it superior? Does it offer information that is valued?
	What does this page contribute to other literature in the field?

Note: Appropriateness becomes an important issue when we consider access to minors. Depth is always critical to research.

Visit these sites to evaluate coverage:

	Oncolink (http://oncolink.upenn.edu/cancer_news/)
	What’s in my desk drawer (http://cac.psu.edu/~jag164/desk.html)
	The History of the Universe (http://www.cv.nrao.edu/~eschulma/hist.html)
	Welcome to H.E.L.P. (http://www.sfsu.edu/~humanity/helpsite/)
	Forensic Science Books and Journals http://wwwscience.murdoch.edu.au/teaching/m235/forensicbooks.htm

ARRANGEMENT AND VISUAL DESIGN

	What makes the site distinctive, “cool”?
	Does the arrangement suit the topic, enhance its use, contribute to the utility and value of the site?
	Does the overall design contribute to the information? Are the images attractive and appropriate to the purpose of the page?
	Are the headers, font size and white space used well? helpfully?
	How would you rate the ease of use? Is there a table of contents? an index? a search engine?
	Are the hotlinks appropriate and complete to satisfy the purpose?

Note: Web page design, like internet publishing, is an individualized, unmonitored process. It becomes important, then, to determine whether a page is arranged effectively to enable efficient use.

Visit these pages to evaluate arrangement:

	Michael Davidson (http://www.mdavidson.com)
	Teaching Critical Evaluation Skills for World Wide Web Resources (http://www.science.widener.edu/~withers/webeval.htm)
	Techno-Impressionist Museum (http://www.techno-impressionist.com)
	University of Pennsylvania Library Electronic Journals http://www.library.upenn.edu/resources/ej/ej-genscience.html

Attributions: Although many resources exist online, the following three by Jane Alexander and Marsha Tate, Susan Beck, and Elizabeth Kirk are exceptionally helpful. Visit them for in-depth evaluation guides; this teaching exercise is a compilation of portions of their web site evaluation articles residing at:

http://www.science.widener.edu/~withers/webeval.htm
http://lib.nmsu.edu/staff/susabeck/eval.html
http://milton.mse.jhu.edu:8001/research/education/net.html