1. Evaluating Websites Hsiao-Chieh, Fengzhu, Shuchen, Sachie

2. Content ＊ Introduction ＊ 5 Criteria: 1. Accuracy 2. Authority 3. Objectivity 4. Currency 5. Coverage ＊ Examples ＊ Quiz Time ＊ Conclusion

3. Introduction Why should we evaluate websites? Websites: -search engine: Google, Yahoo, etc. -research, information Good? Bad? Suspicious? How to evaluate? 5 criteria: Accuracy; Authority; Objectivity; Currency; Coverage

4. Accuracy Is the information reliable and error- free? Is there an editor or someone who verifies/checks the information?reliable and error- free Rationale  See number 1 above  Unlike traditional print resources, web resources rarely have editors or fact- checkers.  Currently, no web standards exist to ensure accuracy.

5. Authority Is there an author? Is the page signed?Is the page signed Is the author qualified? An expert? Who is the sponsor?author qualified? An expert Who is the sponsor? Is the sponsor of the page reputable? How reputable?sponsor of the page reputable? How reputable Is there a link to information about the author or the sponsor?link to information about the author or the sponsor If the page includes neither a signature nor indicates a sponsor, is there any other way to determine its origin?is there any other way to determine its origin

6. Look for a header or footer showing affiliation. Look at the URL. http://www.fbi.gov Look at the domain..edu,.com,.ac.uk,.or g,.net

7. TLDMeaningExamples.comU.S. commercial business, a company ibm.com, att.com, ford.com.netNetwork provider, Internet Service Provider webtv.net.govU.S. governmental agency whitehouse.gov, nasa.gov eduU.S. educational institution uiuc.edu, stanford.edu.orgNon-profit institution redcross.org, sfopera.org.milU.S. militaryarmy.mil.intInternationalitu.int.bizBusinesses

8. Rationale  Anyone can publish anything on the web.  It is often hard to determine a web page's authorship.  Even if a page is signed, qualifications are not usually provided.  Sponsorship is not always indicated.

9. Currency 1. Is the information on the page up-to-date? 2. Can you tell when the page was last updated? 3. Are there dead links? 4. Is there a difference between the date the information was created and the date the page was last updated?

10. Example http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/04/04/iraq.explosions/index.html?hpt=T2 http://www.nytimes.com/

11. Objectivity 1. Does the content reflect a bias? 2. Is the bias explicit or hidden? 3. Does the identity of the author or sponsor suggest a bias? 4. How does the bias impact the usefulness of the information?

12. Example http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/326/7398/1057

13. Coverage  Special software requirement  A fee requirement  An opinion for a suggested browser for better viewing Adobe Reader®

14. Check List  Are the links (if any) evaluated and do they complement the document’s theme?  Is it all images or a balance of text and image?  Is the information presented cited correctly? http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/122/1/27

15. Example of web sources  A trustworthy sources Authority http://coombs.anu.edu.au/WWWVL-AsianStudies.html Objectivity http://www.cancer.org/ Accuracy &Coverage http://www.socialstudies.com/c/@EOW_f3bSqI81w/Pages/holo.html  A poor web source http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090529040508AA4iNOy  A suspicious web source

16. February 21, 2007 A History Department Bans Citing Wikipedia as a Research Source By NOAM COHEN When half a dozen students in Neil Waters’s Japanese history class at Middlebury College asserted on exams that the Jesuits supported the Shimabara Rebellion in 17th-century Japan, he knew something was wrong. The Jesuits were in “no position to aid a revolution,” he said; the few of them in Japan were in hiding. He figured out the problem soon enough. The obscure, though incorrect, information was from Wikipedia, the collaborative online encyclopedia, and the students had picked it up cramming for his exam.

17. Quiz Time

18. Conclusion ＊ Websites can be wrong and fake. ＊ We can use it, but do not fully trust it. ＊ To avoid making further mistakes, evaluating websites first.

19. Works Cited Cohen,Noam. “A History Department Bans Citing Wikipedia as a Research Source” New York: The New York Times 21 Feb 2007. 3 Apr 2010. Web. <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/21/education/ 21wikipedia.html>. International Women's Issues Tutorials. Phyllis Holman Weisbard. University of Wisconsin System Women's Studies Librarian. 30 Jun. 2002. Web. 3 Apr. 2010. <http://www.library.wisc.edu/ projects/ggfws/iwitutorials/quizzes/searchenginequiz.htm>. Lesley University Library. Lesley University. 03 Dec. 2007. Web. 3 Apr. 2010. <http://www.lesley. edu/library/guides/research/evaluating_web.html>. United States. Lake Forest College. Donnelley and Lee Library. 2010. Web. 5 Apr 2010. <http://www. lib.lfc.edu/help/evalweb.html>.