Connie Lippenholz
LS521, Su02
7/12/02
Elective - Evaluating Websites (Instruction)
Evaluating Websites
Introduction: How do you know if a website is good or bad, accurate
or biased? The following criteria can help you determine the value of the information
contained on a website.
Types of web pages: Different types
of web pages have different functions for the information presented. Therefore,
any type of evaluation should be adjusted accordingly.
- Advocacy - primary purpose is to influence public opinion;
typically sponsored by an organization such as a political party or charity
organization (usually ".org")
- Business/Marketing - primary goal is to promote or sell goods
or services, typically sponsored by a commercial enterprise (usually ".com")
- News - primary purpose is to provide extremely current information,
typically sponsored by a television or print news provider (usually ".com")
- Informational - primary purpose is to present factual information
(usually ".edu" or ".gov")
- Personal - published by an individual, who may or may not
be part of a larger institution (URL may end in any of the above, but often
will contain "~", "%", or "users")
Evaluation Criteria:
| Navigation |
- Is the site easy to navigate?
- Are the links accurate and up-to-date?
- Is the site geared towards specific technologies (i.e. high-speed
connections, Internet Explorer vs. Netscape, etc.)? Will this impact
your students' ability to access the site at school or home?
|
| Authority |
Is it clear who has developed and is responsible for maintaining the
information presented (organization, individual, etc.)?
- Organization:
- If an organization, is there contact information to verify its
legitimacy?
- Is there a link to a page describing the purpose of the sponsoring
organization?
- Individual:
- Are the author's qualifications for writing or compiling the information
clearly stated?
|
| Validity of Information |
- Does the site clearly differentiate between factual and biased information?
- Can you easily identify the intent of the page?
- Are the sources of factual information listed, so the information
can be verified?
- Is the information presented similar to that on other sites regarding
the same topic?
- For biased information, is it clear what the organization/individual's
reason is for providing it?
- Does the site contain dates indicating when it was created and when
it was last updated?
- Have other reputable sites linked to this one?
|
| Presentation of Information |
- Is the information presented in a way that makes it easy to read?
- Is the information free of spelling and grammatical errors?
- Is the information supported with interactive activities, games, links
to additional information, etc.?
- Is there a method to communicate site issues to the webmaster or site
creator?
- Is the site information clearly separated from advertising?
|
| Aesthetic Appeal & Appropriateness |
- Does the page appeal to the target audience?
- Are the graphics appropriate to the topic?
- Are the graphics appropriate for the target audience?
- Is the reading level appropriate for the target audience?
- Are the links appropriate to the target audience?
|
Examples: Below are links to two sites regarding flag burning. I have
categorized them as good or not-so-good, and justified my reasoning based on
the above evaluation tool:
Good site: The Flag Burning
Page <http://www.esquilax.com/flag/>
- Navigation - site is easily navigated. Index page has obvious categories
to link to. Each page has link back to home.
- Authority - in the "Purpose of This Page", the author identifies
himself and why he is developing the page.
- Validity - in the "Purpose of This Page" the author specifies
it as a "standing protest to any amendment to the U.S. Constitution which
would allow Congress or the States to pass laws against flag burning...";
specifies that the page was created in March of 1995, and his intent to maintain
it indefinitely. In addition, this site has been reviewed and linked to by
numerous local and national sources, as described on the "Awards and
Publicity" page. A further search on Google.com shows about 384 links
to this page.
- Presentation - Although many parts of this site are editorial, there are
numerous links to congressional records, court decisions, influential speeches,
the legal definition of "flag", and more. He supports his message
with the option of burning a virtual flag. His email is at the bottom of each
page if you want to contact him about the website. The only advertising I
saw was on the "How You Can Help" page, which he specifies as fund-raising.
- Aesthetic Appeal & Appropriateness - the page should appeal to anyone
interested in the history of flag-burning. Graphics are appropriate to the
topic and general audience. Reading level is appropriate for the general population,
other than the links to legal documents.
Not-so-good site: Flag Burning-
Your Right and Duty to Burn the Flag <http://www.flagburning.org/>
- Purely editorial, with no facts or links to supporting information.
- The only link to determine who wrote the article is a small one at the bottom
stating "a project of the People's Legal Front", although linking
to their site does not readily provide additional information about flag burning.
*Types of pages and descriptions excerpted
from J. Alexander & M. Tate's site on Evaluating
Web Resources, http://www2.widener.edu/Wolfgram-Memorial-Library/webevaluation/webeval.htm
ÉBACK
TO THE BLONDE BOOKWORM'S HOME PAGE