Vol 6, No 9, June, 1997
A major challenge in a time of Info-Glut and Info-Garbage is evaluation of information sources. Before basing a decision on the information available at a web site (or sites), wise researchers (and students) will give thought to the following criteria:
- Reliability - To what extent can we count on the information provided at this site? Is the source trustworthy? How did the author come up with the information listed here? Are sources cited? Did the author follow good research procedures? Does he/she have a bias? A reason to distort? Is this advertising? An advertorial? What is he/she selling?
- Accuracy - Are these real numbers and facts? Do they match reality? How do we know they are real and on target?
- Authority - Who did this work? Is the author or provider identified by name? Does the author have any credentials to be providing this information? Any evidence of training or professional skill?
- Currency - How recent are the facts and figures? Were they gathered ten years ago? Does the author tell us? Does it matter?
- Fairness - Has the author presented the material selectively or in an unbalanced manner? Is there bias or slanting in the reporting? Has some information been left out? Did the author focus only on the positive? The negative?
- Adequacy - Does the author tell you enough? Does he/she provide sufficient data or evidence? Does he/she go into enough detail and depth?
- Efficiency - Can you find what you need at this site relatively quickly or is it loaded down with graphics and elements which prolong your visit and your searching unnecessarily?
- Organization - Is the information laid out in a logical fashion so that you can easily locate what you need without wandering around and wasting time?
Staff and students need to learn to apply these concepts critically to the sites they are visiting so they become thoughtful and discerning information consumers. A healthy amount of skepticism is warranted, even necessary.
Using a table as a "visual organizer" often helps focus the evaluation of sources. List the site or source on the top and then rate each source from four asterisks to one asterisk.
**** Excellent *** Good ** Satisfactory * Weak
Source One
Source Two Source Three reliability accuracy authority currency
fairness
adequacy
efficiency
organization
Additional Information
For additional information and resources to support the development of Web site evaluation skills, visit the following sites:
- Review Template - A template from the USC library to help structure Web site reviews.
- WWW CyberGuide Ratings for Content Evaluation - A guide for rating the curriculum content on web sites.
- WWW CyberGuide Ratings for Web Site Design - A guide for rating the design of a web site.
- Evaluating Quality on the Net - A paper which explores relevance of existing criteria for other formats, the continuum of information on the net and the current state of evaluation tools on the net. By Hope N. Tillman, Director of Libraries, Babson College, Babson Park, MA.
- Evaluating Web Sites: Criteria and Tools - A brief list of good evaluation questions to ask of any Web site. From Cornell University Library.
- Evaluation Criteria for Web Sites - Adapted from the American Library Association - a form that sets up a rating criteria in six sections: Authority, Design/Style, Navigation, Content, Performance, and Curriculum Connections.
- Kathy Schrock's Guide for Educators - Critical Evaluation Surveys - Kathy Schrock offers several surveys for evaluating web sites. She also offers a rich bibliography.
- Library Selection Criteria for WWW Resources - Carolyn Caywood provides strong questions to guide thinking about ACCESS, DESIGN and CONTENT.
Credits: Drawings and graphics are by Jamie McKenzie. Copyright Policy: Materials published in From Now On may be duplicated for educational, non-profit school district use only. All other uses, transmissions and duplications are prohibited unless permission is granted expressly.
Page updated February 7, 2006 by Tom Anderson, Librarian, Oakmont Regional High School.