Source Evalution: Web Sites

Topic #1: Pediatric Medicine Score scale 1 = worst, 5 = best
Site: American College of Pediatricians
URL: http://acpeds.org/
Score:
27
Currency:
When was this site last updated? Look at a few documents on the page—can you tell when they were written?
This page was established in 2002. Yes I could. There are documents in this page all written in different years.
4
Authority:
What person or organization is responsible for this content? What are his/hers/their credentials? Who do you think is the audience for this info?
American college of pediatricians
There are multiple physicians that are medical doctors.
The audience for this information is parents. The web page is helping parents in odd situation. How to deal with their kids if they decided to be homosexual or how family structure is majorly important to a child grows up.
5
Relevance:
What is this site about? Is it easy to tell? What is the scope of coverage (broad, narrow, etc.)
This site is about helping parents in situations that they may not know how to handle. I do think this is easy to tell what it is about. There is a lot going on in this site but I think it’s well organized. On the main page it’s broad but when you click or highlight the side topics it gets narrower and more specific.
5
Depth & Documentation:
Any references or referrals to other sites/pages? How “deep” is this info? Is it appropriate for a research paper, or more suited to a consumer?
There are other referrals to site. For example when you click on resource sites, it directs to you others helpful sites. The information is deep because it brings you to other useful site. These sites are appropriate for a research paper.
4
Information Type:
Facts, research, opinion pieces, primary sources (interview, etc.) If facts, do they appear accurate?
In this site there are facts, and research material here. The facts seem to appear accurate. There is nothing that would lead me to think that these facts are inaccurate.
4
Objectivity:
Does this site appear to be objective, or does it contain a bias? Is the site selling something, like a produce or an idea?
This site is not bias I think it is objective. Its selling ideas on how to go about complicated situations.
5

Site: American Academy of Pediatrics
URL: http://www.aap.org/
Score:
28
Currency:
When was this site last updated? Look at a few documents on the page—can you tell when they were written?
I can’t find an actual date that the site was made. The multiple pages I brought up had recent dates, for example 02/09. It seems that the pages get updated often.
4
Authority:
What person or organization is responsible for this content? What are his/hers/their credentials? Who do you think is the audience for this info?
American Academy of Pediatrics.
David T. Tayloe, Jr. has a MD, and a FAAP AAP. This site is for mothers and fathers that have young children.
4
Relevance:
What is this site about? Is it easy to tell? What is the scope of coverage (broad, narrow, etc.)
This page contains a place for parents, health topics, books you can read on these topics. Yes this page is well organized and very helpful. The tabs on front page are broad but then get narrow when you get inside the specific tabs.
5
Depth & Documentation
Any references, or referrals to other sites/pages? How “deep” is this info? Is it appropriate for a research paper, or more suited to a consumer?
When clicking on highlighted words it takes you to other sites within the main site. Therefore there are not any other references to other sites or pages.
5
Information Type:
Facts, research, opinion pieces, primary sources (interview, etc.) If facts, do they appear accurate?
This site is full of facts, and primary sources. These facts appear accurate, I didn’t look them up to make sure but from skimming they seem convincing and accurate for the topic.
5
Objectivity:
Does this site appear to be objective, or does it contain a bias? Is the site selling something, like a produce or an idea?
There was not one site that was bias but lots of helpful information. This site has a book store that you can get books that will help you with topics that are inside this site.
5

>Review your CARDIO assessment for each Pediatric Medicine site. In your view, which has a better overall score? The American Academy of Pediatrics received more points from me.

>Would you consult either of these sites if doing research on this topic? Both? Neither? Explain.
I would consider both because then I can compare information from both sides. In American College of Pediatrics there are multiple sites from that that will help me.

Topic #2: Aztec History Score scale 1 = worst, 5 = best
Site: Aztec History
URL: http://www.crystalinks.com/aztechistory.html
Score:
21
Currency:
When was this site last updated? Look at a few documents on the page—can you tell when they were written?
It was updated in the year 2009. On this page there is a blog that is updated daily, the other pages don’t have dates when it’s last updated.
3
Authority:
What person or organization is responsible for this content? What are his/hers/their credentials? Who do you think is the audience for this info?
Ellie Crystal’s Metaphysical and Science Website. Ellie is a psychic, therapist, author, researcher, and lecturer. I think the audience will be people who are into psychic and spiritual development.
4
Relevance:
What is this site about? Is it easy to tell? What is the scope of coverage (broad, narrow, etc.)
I am not really sure what this site is about. On the main page are specific topics and then get narrow when you click into the page.
4
Depth & Documentation
Any references, or referrals to other sites/pages? How “deep” is this info? Is it appropriate for a research paper, or more suited to a consumer?
There doesn’t seem to be references or referrals in this site or pages. It doesn’t seem to be extremely deep information. This is not a place I would use for a research paper.
3
Information Type:
Facts, research, opinion pieces, primary sources (interview, etc.) If facts, do they appear accurate?
There are lots of opinion pieces in this site.
4
Objectivity:
Does this site appear to be objective, or does it contain a bias? Is the site selling something, like a produce or an idea?
I think there are objectives and there selling lots of ideas in this site.
3

Site: The Aztecs: A Pre-
Columbian History
URL: http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1999/2/99.02.01.x.html
Score:
22
Currency:
When was this site last updated? Look at a few documents on the page—can you tell when they were written?
This site was updated in 2009. I can’t tell when these documents were written but the main site was structured in 2009.
4
Authority:
What person or organization is responsible for this content? What are his/hers/their credentials? Who do you think is the audience for this info?
The person is Silverio A. Barroquerio. I don’t think this guy has a credential. I think his audience is history teachers.
4
Relevance:
What is this site about? Is it easy to tell? What is the scope of coverage (broad, narrow, etc.)
This site is about Aztecs and history. It is nice that on the top of the site has a tap of contents. The site made it nice that when you click on the topic in the table of contents it brings you to the exact spot in the page.
5
Depth & Documentation
Any references, or referrals to other sites/pages? How “deep” is this info? Is it appropriate for a research paper, or more suited to a consumer?
On this page there are not any other references or referrals. I would not use this site for a research paper.
2
Information Type:
Facts, research, opinion pieces, primary sources (interview, etc.) If facts, do they appear accurate?
I think that this page contains facts, I didn’t see a work cited page or else I would say that there was research done.
3
Objectivity:
Does this site appear to be objective, or does it contain a bias? Is the site selling something, like a produce or an idea?
This site doesn’t sell anything. It helps teachers with an outline and objectives to ask the students.
4

>Review your CARDIO assessment for each Aztec History site. In your view, which has a better overall score? A Pre- Columbian History has my highest score.

>Would you consult either of these sites if doing research on this topic? Both? Neither? Explain.
I would use the Pre- Columbian History over the other site. I feel that this site I could argue with and have a good research project or essay going for myself.