Evaluating Sources
9 likes3,852 views
The document provides guidelines for evaluating sources, emphasizing the importance of critical thinking in assessing the credibility of information. Key factors to consider include the author's qualifications, the publisher's reputation, the relevance of the publication date, and the nature of the evidence provided. It also outlines additional criteria for online resources, such as checking the domain and the presence of citations.
Evaluating Sources
- 2. Why evaluate sources?Critical thinking skill that is useful in both your academic and everyday life.All sources are not equal.Wikiality http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/72347/july-31-2006/the-word---wikiality Wikilobbying http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/81454/january-29-2007/the-word---wikilobbying "More evidence of what happens when you bring democracy to information"How do I evaluate source?Identify and evaluate the publication information.AuthorPublisherSponsorDateGenreAudienceEvaluate the content.
- 3. Publication InformationAuthor:Is the author knowledgeable about the topic?What is the author’s affiliation?How do the author’s biases affect the information, ideas, and arguments in the source?Publisher:Is the publisher reputable?How do the publisher’s biases affect the information, ideas, and arguments?
- 4. Publication InformationSponsor:Who supported the publication?Date:When was the source published?Is it appropriate for the topic?Genre:What is the document type (e.g., research report, newspaper, magazine article, journal article, blog, website)Is the document type appropriate?
- 5. ExamplesToward an integrative software infrastructure for water management in the Smarter Planethttp://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=5512828
- 7. RelevanceDetermine if the information addresses your needs and will help you accomplish your purpose.
- 8. EvidenceIs enough evidence for a position offered?Is the right kind of evidence being offered?Is the evidence presented appropriately and fairly?Is there enough evidence?Is the source of the evidence provided?
- 9. ComprehensivenessIs there a complete and balanced view?Is it broad/narrow enough for your topic?
- 10. Additional criteria for online sourcesWeb sites and blogsCheck the domain (purpose and publisher)Check the title bar, page header and page titles (purpose, publisher, and relevance)Search for the author and publisherCheck the timelinessRead the body and review illustrations (relevance, evidence and comprehensiveness)Check page footers (publisher, author)
- 11. Is organic farming better for the environment?Google Is organic farming better for the environment? Google Does organic framing hurt the environment?
- 12. Evaluating Sources: Analyzing ContentEnter Group Name Here
- 13. Group members:_____________________________Controversial Issue:_________________________________Source #1URL:__________________________________Summarize the main position of this source:
- 14. Type of resource (e.g., company or organization website, newspaper, journal, book)?__________________________________Author:__________________________________Publisher:________________________________Date Published:_______________________________Sponsor of the information:______________________________
- 15. Does source present facts or opinions?_________ How do you know?________________________Are there citations or references to other sources?_________________________________Is there bias or is the source balanced?________ How do you know?________________________What is the intent of resource (to inform, to pursued, something else)?_______ How do you know?___________________________________
Editor's Notes
- #3: Look beyond the presentation and ask important questions. Emphasize true with TV…
- #7: IBM Journal of Research and DevelopmentSponsor IBMFindings are very positive for the framework described.
- #8: Both comment on Hayward’s firing. [Sponsor information]Heritage Foundation: It was high time someone’s head rolled. Hayward’s immediate response to the crisis was not reassuring. Add to that, BP’s alleged role in the release of the Lockerbie terrorist Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, and a 40 percent drop in market value. No wonder BP stockholders wanted someone better. But is Hayward the only person we should hold accountable for this catastrophe? analysts spent the last three weeks in Louisiana studying the response. We heard from fishermen, port workers, drilling crews and energy and environment experts — and learned firsthand that the federal response — or lack thereof — helped turn this crisis into a disaster. Think Progress: Melancon: Give Tony Hayward ‘his life back’ by firing him. Much more negative tone.-----Then go back and look…Heritage Foundation> AboutThe Heritage Foundation is a research and educational institution—a think tank—whose mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense. Heritage Foundation> About> Board of Trustees----Toward the bottom on the right:About:Think Progress is a project of the Center for American Progress Action Fund. The Center for American Progress Action Fund is a nonpartisan organization. Through this blog, CAPAF seeks to provide a forum that advances progressive ideas and policies. ThinkProgress was voted “Best Liberal Blog” in the 2006 Weblog AwardsClick on the link to the Center for American progress.
- #13: Pick the chicecologist & the nature faqSunday Times – look at newgroup