ICYouSee Critical Thinking:
On the ICYouSee Critical Thinking page, there are six main points which are offered, these include:
1. Make sure that you are using the right resource for the purpose of your task.
2. When in doubt about a website, question how accurate it is, as anyone can put up information on the World Wide Web.
3. Think about who wrote it, try to find some information on them to see if they are a legitimate source.
4. Find out the purpose of the website, why was it created in the first place?
5. Looking for certain details to show that it is accurate and can be a trusted source. For example is the language used simple or complex? Or appropriate use of grammar and correct spelling?
6. Find out whether the original source was for the internet or if it was a composed originally as a paper source. An online source may be missing parts that the paper source had or vice versa.
The framework for evaluating internet websites is listed as well these consist of: authority, accuracy, objectivity, currency, coverage and value. 
INCO 48 Offline Information Competency - Evaluating Internet Sources:
On the INCO 48 website a different approach was taken to that of the ICYouSee Critical Thinking page. On this one the URL is spoken of first; its counterparts which are the domain names and what they mean. The second section speaks of “who, why and when.” And finally something called the “Ten C's For Evaluating Internet Sources” which include: content, credibility, critical thinking, copyright, citation, continuity, censorship, connectivity, comparability and context.
On the INCO 48 website there are seven points which the other website did not include or had not written in more depth. These points include critical thinking, copyright, citation, continuity, censorship, connectivity and comparability. I believe that this website is more efficient and looks more professional than the other in its presentation. The same data appears here but in a more complex form.
Good, the Bad and the Ugly or Why It's a Good Idea to Evaluate Web Sources:
Similar information appears on the Good, the Bad and the Ugly website but the difference between this website and the other two is, there is information present but on the Evaluation Criteria section the links do not take the user to more information from that website but to another website as an example.
Though the “Good, the Bad and the Ugly” has References to the work whereas the other two do not.
All three websites come from educational backgrounds:
INCO 48 is from Taft Community College
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly is from New Mexico State University Library
And ICYouSee Critical Thinking page is from Ithaca College.
Task 2 - Reliving the Sixties: a Web Site Evaluation Exercise:
When starting the "Reliving the Sixties: a Web Site Evaluation Assignment" exercise I decided to use the American Cultural History: 1960 – 1969 and Almost Great Society: The 1960s websites.
For American Cultural History: 1960 – 1969:
This website was the right place and worth visiting as the information about the Sixties was quite relevant. It included information about:
Art & Architecture
Theatre, Film & Radio, & Television
Books & Literature
Fashion & Fads
Education
Music
Events & Technology
Sports
I believe that this website is an accurate one as it is an educational website from Lone Star College-Kingwood Library (Kingwood, TX). Just to make sure I typed the name of the college in the search bar on Google and had a look to see whether it would pick up more than one link, which it did. The facts seem accurate about the assassination of John F Kennedy, his brother and Martin Luther King and the music section for example.
I searched Susan Goodwin’s name, the writer of the webpage, into Google and I found a list of people who work at the college and she was named as a Librarian. I then looked through other links and found on a website that she is a Reference Librarian. It seems that this writer has some knowledge of referencing.
The purpose of this site is to inform the reader about the topic. Under each topic there are references and different resources for the user to look up if they decide they would like extra information on a subject.
I have a feeling that this website was made specifically for the internet as it can be used to backup other information on the World Wide Web and paper form material.
For The Almost Great Society: The 1960s:
This website does give some of the information that I may be looking for when looking for History of American politics but it is not in a great order so it is difficult to follow. Though, the Webpage is worth visiting as it is an educational website.
I believe that the information on the website is accurate as it was composed by Stanley K. Schultz (Professor of History) of University of Wisconsin. The facts seem to be well documented with different areas of The Almost Great Society: The 1960s. There would be a slight bias in this document as everyone has a different point of view on a particular subject but it is not easily picked up. But there does not appear to be a strong point of view but a factual view.
The webpage’s purpose is to inform students about the American politics of the 1960s. The document was designed for a university or college, as a lecture to a class and then released on the internet for students to gain extra knowledge or for the notes on the topic.
Task 3 – Evaluation of Two 1960s Websites:
http://www.lib.virginia.edu/small/exhibits/sixties/index.html
ACCURACY:
The information that appears on this website seems to be accurate as a university would not offer information to their students which was false. It was created by several people whom work at the university so information they would release on a university website would have to be correct.
AUTHORSHIP:
The main author of this website is George Riser a librarian at the University of Virginia. Stephen Railton (Professor of English Language and Literature, University of Virginia) contributed the introduction and Kathryn Morgan (Associate Director for Special Collections, University of Virginia) wrote the Foreword part to this website but the rest was written by George Riser.
The Psychedelic Sixties was designed by Josie Pipkin (Web Manager of the University Library), Gretchen Knight assisted with the homepage logo and George Pipkin completed the CGI image load scripting.
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this website was to briefly describe and inform the user or student about important parts of the 1960s era. There will only be about a paragraph of data on a certain topic but no more than this.
DETAIL AND DESIGN:
It does not cover every part of the era or every piece of information. In fact there is a limited amount of information on this website; it may have been that it was created for a starting point to students who want to do any study into the era. The design of this website fits the subject matter but it does not seem to be that professionally composed. Once a user has clicked on a certain topic they will be taken to the subject and several linked images will be located with a paragraph of text. It is expected that there will be even more detailed information on the topic when clicking on the image but in fact this is not the case just a larger version of the image.
OVERALL WORTH:
I believe that there are much better resources out there on paper or on the internet about the 1960s, as this website has a restricted amount of information and has more images than informative data.
A Trip Through the Sixties:
http://www.hippy.com/php/sitetopics.php?topic=1
ACCURACY:
On the articles presented on this website the information appears to be correct but as most of the pages have no details present about who wrote it or edited the document anyone could have done so; either an academic writer or non-academic writer. But if an academic writer were to have written it their name would be on the page somewhere, as these documents are usually copyrighted. Only some of the pages have a source as where the information came from.
AUTHORSHIP:
The website seems to be owned by http://www.hippy.com/ which is also a forum website. The author of these articles of the 1960s is not actually stated on most of the pages and therefore is not a source which should be trusted or used for referencing in any academic works.
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this website is to inform the users on the history of this era, nothing more and nothing less. But it has to be questioned how accurate and trustworthy is this website.
DETAIL AND DESIGN:
The information on this website is quite in depth and covers a lot of areas of the 1960s era. The font type and colouring are quite effective and suit the theme. A few different colours are used on the WebPages but the same font is consistent throughout except for the heading style which is given a ‘hippy’ design. Several photographs are present on each webpage to give an idea about what is being spoken about.
OVERALL WORTH:
This website is useful to someone who wants to casually read up on the 1960s but as university or academic work goes it is not an appropriate source as there is hardly any publication dates or writer’s names present. The only item that would be benefited from this 1960s part of the website is the suggested reading at the bottom of each page which gives a published source that will give and explain in more depth about the topic which would have proper references.
Lecture:
This week’s lecture looked at evaluation and authentication. True or false questions were asked of the class they included:
1. Anyone can put up a website.
2. WebPages can be about anything.
3. All WebPages are kept up to date.
4. There is no quality control.
5. Most sites are “peer-reviewed.”
6. Websites are trustworthy as scholarly publications.
Several areas were covered in this lecture about evaluation and authentication. Fit-For-Purpose was spoken about being useful in one area of study or research, may not be in another. There is no control over who, what or why something is put onto the World Wide Web. In Roman times it took days to get to its location but now it takes seconds, this has disadvantages and advantages. No one person owns the internet; this can be a positive thing and also a negative thing.
The Smithsonian was compared to Wikipedia and NineMSN to BBC. The BBC and Smithsonian are far better known worldwide for their authenticity and accuracy as trustworthy sources. Whereas NineMSN and Wikipedia can be changed and written by absolutely anyone, therefore being inappropriate resources for academic works.
Some people on the World Wide Web can write anything they want and be whomever they like to say they are without anyone knowing.
Tutorial:
In the tutorial, our tutor went through the different points that the class should have on their weekly blogg up to Week 6 and also went into depth about the different parts that are in our group task. Gary our tutor also spoke about different functions in Microsoft PowerPoint and how to use them efficiently.
Readings for the Week:
The five different sources of this week all contain very similar information on the evaluation of the internet, these include:
Thinking Critically about World Wide Web Resources by Esther Grassian provides many questions to think about when using an internet resource. There are forty listed to be exact with four different sub titles which are Content & Evaluation, Source & Date, Structure and Other. There are some very good points on how to evaluate a website when writing an academic paper.
Evaluating Web Sites: Criteria and Tools by Michael Engle gives different points and sections on evaluating websites such as the situation in which a person is using the internet and the context that the internet has to other sources. There are several dot points about different ways to evaluate a website and a bibliography of resources that were used.
Evaluating Information Found on the Internet by Elizabeth E. Kirk includes area of internet evaluation such as authorship, publication of document, point of view, referencing to other pieces of work, accuracy, currency, picking up when information is incorrect and being able to understand the different parts of evaluating the internet.
The Good, The Bad, & The Ugly or, Why It's a Good Idea to Evaluate Web Sources by Susan E. Beck has been arranged into 4 sections. The first point is Examples which as the title states, contains examples of some areas of social problems. The second section which is titled Suggestions gives different points to teachers to guide or help them with their students and successful internet assignments. The third part of the website contains evaluation points for the internet which include: authority, accuracy, objectivity, currency and coverage. And finally a Bibliography section is present for all the sources that were used.
Evaluating Internet Research Sources by Robert Harris speaks of many different points but basically the whole document contains information credibility, accuracy, reasonableness and support.
0 comments:
Post a Comment