Liberty High School Library | home
Website Evaluation
Web site Evaluation
Anyone can build and upload a website onto the World Wide Web. To determine if a Web Site can be used as a resource in your research you should thoroughly evaluate it's content. The information you use to cite an internet site is similiar to the information you will us to evaluate a website as follows:
Can you Trust These Web sites?
1. Evaluate: /home.inreach.com/kumbach/velcro.html" http://home.inreach.com/kumbach/velcro.html
2. Evaluate: license.shorturl.com/" http://license.shorturl.com/
3. Evaluate: www.genochoice.com/" http://www.genochoice.com/
Classroom Assignment
I. Introduction
If you are like most students, you are relying heavily on resources from the World Wide Web for your research. Not all Web resources are created equal. If fact, there are great variations in the quality of the resources you access. The rule of thumb is "when in doubt, doubt." When you carefully select your resources, when you understand their strengths and limits, you create better products.
II. The Task
You will be working in groups of four to evaluate a group of Web pages on the topic of tobacco and smoking, or cloning. Each of you will be examining sites from a different perspective. You will be ranking the sites and comparing your rankings with other groups the class.
III. Resources
You will each be responsible for completing an evaluation chart, focusing on the perspective you assume within your group. Your teacher will select five of the following Web sites from one of these two controversial areas for you to evaluate:
A. Cloning sites:
Bioethics and Cloning
Ayn placeRand Institute
American Heart Association
Americans for Cloning Elvis
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
Scientific and Medical Aspects of Human Cloning http://www7.nationalacademies.org/cosepup/Human_Cloning.html
Roslin Institute Online
B. Smoking and tobacco sites:
American Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation http://www.no-smoke.org/
R.J. Reynolds http://www.rjrt.com/home.asp
American Lung Association (Tobacco Control section) http://www.lungusa.org/site/c.dvLUK9O0E/b.22937/
Tobacco Free Initiative (World Health Organization) http://tobacco.who.int/
Tobacco Free Kids website http://tobaccofreekids.org/
Big Drug's Nicotine War http://www.forces.org/evidence/pharma/index.htm
Phillip Morris Tobacco Company page on Youth Smoking Prevention http://www.philipmorrisusa.com/en/cms/Home/default.aspx
Children Opposed to Smoking Tobacco http://www.costkids.org
IV. The Process
Your group of 4 students will evaluate the selected Web sites. Divide your group into the following four specialties to cover ground more efficiently.
1. Content specialist:
Does the site cover the topic comprehensively? Accurately? Can you understand what is being said? Is it written above or below your level of understanding?What is unique about this site? Does it offer something others do not? Are the links well-chosen? sufficient?Currency: Can you tell: the date the information was created? the publication date? the date the material was last revised? Are thes dates meaningful in terms of the subject matter?
Would you get better information in a book? an encyclopedia? Would you include this site in your bibliography?2. Authority/Credibility specialist:
Who is responsible for this site? Who sponsors it? Hint: truncate each section of the URL back until you are able to find the sponsor.What are his/her credentials?Have the authors of the site cited their own sources? Are the sources documented appropriately?What is the domain name? Does it end in .com, .gov, .edu, .org, .net? Is it a personal page?Is that a meaningful clue in evaluating the site? (You can't always judge a web page by its suffix. Some commercial sites provide solid information. Some university sites offer less-than-serious personal pages to graduate students.)Who else links to the siteWould you include this site as your citation?3. Bias/purpose specialist:
Why was this site created? (to persuade, inform, explain, sell, promote, parody, other?)Is it a personal, commercial, government or organization site? Is there any bias? Is only one side of the argument presented? Does it appear that any information is purposely omitted? Is there a hidden message? Is it trying to persuade you or change your opinion? Is the bias useful to you in some way? Can you distinguish facts from opinion?Would you include this site in your citation?4. Usability/design specialist
Is the site easy to navigate (user-friendly)?Is there a well-labeled contents area?Do all the design elements (graphics, art, buttons, etc.) enhance the message of the site? Is there consistency in the basic formats of each page?Are there any errors in spelling or grammar?Do the pages appear clean, uncluttered?Do the links on the site work? Would you include this site in your citation?Each student in the group should complete his/her own organizer through the perspective they are assigned.
As you examine each site, record any relevant information in your chart/organizer. Begin to rank the sites 1 through 5, with 1 being the best. It may be easier to think to yourself, "Which are the two best sites in the set; which are the two worst."
Each group should select, 1. a secretary to take notes on group discussion, 2. a discussion leader, whose job it will be to make sure each member gets a chance to contribute and to lead the group toward reaching a consensus about the best and worst sites, 3. a presenter to present the groups decision to the class.
Be prepared to discuss/compare your group's findings and rankings with the rest of the class during the class discussion period.
V. Evaluation
You will be evaluated on your group work, your completed organizer, and your participation in large group discussion using this rubric. Make sure your group is able to defend its choices in the discussion ranking the sites.
Rubric for Evaluating Web Sites
Standard: Students worked effectively as a group to divide tasks and reach consensus.
Evaluation: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Comments:
Standard: Students understood their roles as evaluators and their focused perspective is clear in their organizer.
Evaluation: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Comments:
Standard: Organizer was completed with accurate and relevant information. Students displayed critical thought in examining the Web sites
Evaluation: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Comments:
Standard: Members of the group were involved in the discussion and defended their rankings of the Web sites.
Evaluation: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Comments:
Evaluating Web Sites Chart
____ Content _____Authority ____Bias/Purpose ____Usability/Design
Site name and URL
|
Strengths
|
Weaknesses
|
Rank
|
Site
#1 ______________
URL ____________
|
|
|
|
Site
#2 ______________
URL ____________
|
|
|
|
Site
#3 ______________
URL ____________
|
|
|
|
Site
#4______________
URL ____________
|
|
|
|
Site
#5______________
URL ____________
|
|
|
|
VI Conclusion
You will find yourself using the Internet for information. The Internet is only one of a variety of information options. Remember that journals, books, videos and other sources are available as well. Evaluating information is a skill you will be using throughout your lifetime.