1. Website Evaluation Derived from iTunesu “Guide to Digital Research: Website Evaluation”

2. INTRODUCTION TO WEBSITE EVALUATION Evaluating a website is similar to evaluating any other source of information. Budding researchers need to critically evaluate all media for reliability when searching for information.

3. ONLINE DATABASES Roughly half of the information available on the Internet is unsearchable (LSU Libraries, 2008; Zillman, 2011). The Best practice when collecting credible information online should begin with online databases. Access databases through the GHS Library site

4. The Wikipedia Debate Many educators frown upon the use of Wikipedia in research, but studies have found roughly the same error rate when compared to encyclopedia Britannica (Terdiman, 2005). In 2012, Public Relations Journal quizzed 1,284 members about their clients' Wikipedia entries. Up to 6 out of 10 had factual errors. Regardless of this finding, the ability for anyone to quickly and easily change Wikipedia’s information without much scrutiny is both a benefit and a drawback.

5. Famous Wikipedia Blunders falsely reported the "death" of Sen. Edward Kennedy after he actually did suffer a seizure. The actor Sinbad was falsely reported dead of a heart attack by a Wikipedia entry in 2007. Another Wikipedia "joke" from 2006 insisted that David Beckham "was a Chinese goalkeeper in the 18th century." An anonymous Wikipedia contributor who edited thousands of entries and claimed to be a professor of religion turned out to be a 24-year-old college dropout, according to MSNBC. Plato was an ancient Hawaiian weather man and surfer, writer of cosmo girls and founder of the punahou in Ancient Florida? According to his one- time Wikipedia entry, he was.

6. HOW DO I EVALUATE A WEBSITE? There are several useful methods when evaluating a web resource for credibility, but the basic criteria are: (1) author, (2) purpose, (3) currency, (4) source, & (5) applicability.

7. Author Researchers should know who is responsible for the content on a web site. “The best sites are produced by those who have appropriate education, training, or experience to write with authority on the topic” (net.TUTOR, 2008, ¶ 3).

8. author ctd. ASK YOURSELF: Who is the author? What are the credentials of the author/ organization? ASK YOURSELF: Can I contact the author/organization?

9. Author This suggests that he has been testing users of the web for fact checking of information posted there.

10. purpose The researcher should identify the intent of a website or article. Every site on the Internet has a general reason for existing and it is the researcher’s job to consider this purpose. Websites have a variety of reasons for existing (informative, commercial, entertainment, etc...) but there is no organization evaluating the Internet’s content (net.TUTOR, 2005).

11. purpose ctd. ASK YOURSELF: What does the URL tell me? Internet Domain Name System Domain EndingDescriptionExample.com Commercial apple.com.edu Higher Education harvard.edu.gov U.S. Government Agency whitehouse.gov.mil U.S. Department of Defense army.mil.mobi Mobile Devices mtld.mobi.net Networkmostpopularsites.net.org Organization npr.org Country Domains Australia=.au

12. Purpose CTD. ASK YOURSELF: What is the goal of this website? Credible web sites are often clear in mission and easy to reference. When determining whether a web site is credible or not, look for an “about” link or “disclaimer” near the top or bottom of the page. Sites which are clear in purpose will state this in an easy to find manner.

13. Purpose ctd. Most times, websites aren’t so obvious about their purpose if they have ulterior motives.

14. Currency The Internet can change in seconds, and it often does. Previous examples of errors made (and cited) on Wikipedia clearly demonstrate the need for up-to-date information and fact checking. While some information may not change dramatically from year to year, time-sensitive information requires researchers consider the age of any sources (net.TUTOR, 2008).

15. Currency ctd. ASK YOURSELF: When was this website made and how recently was it updated? Credible web sites will tout their creation date and updates clearly. Websites looking to remain current will highlight updates or revisions and fix broken links. Look for sections noting “what’s new” or “updates” and articles with release dates. Look for creation and updates near the bottom or top of the web page.

16. Currency ctd. The original creation date and lack of updates should raise a warning flag for the researcher.

17. source the content of a credible website should be based off of equally credible sources. Researchers should be able to quickly and easily note citations, identify the author/ organization, and check out links to and from the web site. Credible web sites are also balanced (offer pros and cons) and documented (claims are substantiated) (net.TUTOR, 2008).

18. Source ctd. ASK YOURSELF: Can I identify where this website gets its information? What do other sources say about this information? Researchers should evaluate the information available on a web site by exploring the links provided from the primary site and to it. Look for a collection of links surrounding a certain topic nested within the article or as a separate page. Look for awards or celebrations of a site’s content. Credible sites are not afraid of touting their accolades and often do so blatantly.

19. Source ctd. ASK YOURSELF: Can I trust the referenced sources? Is there evidence to support both sides? Reflective researchers also acknowledge their own bias (net.TUTOR, 2008). Whether you agree with a web site’s claims may reflect on your personal experiences and opinions. Researchers will do their best to demonstrate learning in an unbiased fashion.

20. source ctd. Spelling errors, Fictitious sources, Universities that don’t exist...what’s actually right here?

21. Applicability ASK YOURSELF: Does this site offer something meaningful and specific to my research? Why would you use this web site over another? If a researcher begins with subscription services and cannot find sufficient information on his or her topic, then a search of the World Wide Web is warranted. The results, however, need to pass the credibility test for each previous component (author, purpose, currency, and source) before the researcher reflects on applicability. The resulting article or web site should be just as good as or better than a scholarly journal, online database, or print literature if one is going to use.

22. works cited College of Idaho. "HIS 303: Wikipedia Research/revision Biography Paper." College of Idaho. 19 Feb. 2010. Web. 25 Sept. 2011..http://faculty.simpson.edu/nick.proctor/www/ assignments/Wikipedia%20Improvement%20Assignment.htm ICANN. "ICANN Approves Historic Change to Internet's Domain Name System." Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. 20 June 2011. Web. 24 Sept. 2011..http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-20jun11-en.htm Jaschik, Scott. "A Stand against Wikipedia." Inside Higher Ed. 26 Jan. 2007. Web. 25 Sept. 2011..http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/26/wiki Lesley University. "Evaluating Web Sites." Lesley University Library. 3 Dec. 2007. Web. 24 Sept. 2011..http://www.lesley.edu/library/guides/research/evaluating_web.html LSU Libraries. "Deep Web vs. Surface Web." LSU Libraries. 2008. Web. 25 Sept. 2011..http://www.lib.lsu.edu/instruction/deepweb/deepweb01.html McCarthy, Caroline. "Colbert Speaks, America Follows: All Hail Wikiality!" CNET News. 1 Aug. 2006. Web. 25 Sept. 2011..http://news.cnet.com/8301- 10784_3-6100754-7.html Mika, Josh. “website evaluation.” 2011 Net.TUTOR. "Evaluating Web Sites." Ohio State University Libraries. 25 June 2008. Web. 24 Sept. 2011..http://liblearn.osu.edu/tutor/les1/ Olsen, Stefanie. "Wikipedia Co-founder Plans 'expert' Rival." CNET News. 16 Oct. 2006. Web. 25 Sept. 2011..http://news.cnet.com/Wikipedia-co- founder-plans-expert-rival /2100-1038_3-6126469.html