Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 54 views

    Webfmword

    Uploaded by

    Sam Gitonga
    This document provides a framework for evaluating websites based on 5 criteria: authority, objectivity, accuracy, currency, and usability. For each criterion, the document lists types of evidence that could be used to rate a website on a scale of 1 to 5. The evaluator would then rate the website being evaluated for each criterion, add up the total points, and use that to assess the overall quality of the site as poor, fair, good, or excellent. The evaluator is also asked to provide an overall personal assessment of whether they would recommend the site and why.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Webfmword

    Uploaded by

    Sam Gitonga
    54 views2 pages
    This document provides a framework for evaluating websites based on 5 criteria: authority, objectivity, accuracy, currency, and usability. For each criterion, the document lists types of evidence that could be used to rate a website on a scale of 1 to 5. The evaluator would then rate the website being evaluated for each criterion, add up the total points, and use that to assess the overall quality of the site as poor, fair, good, or excellent. The evaluator is also asked to provide an overall personal assessment of whether they would recommend the site and why.

    Original Title

    webfmword.doc

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document provides a framework for evaluating websites based on 5 criteria: authority, objectivity, accuracy, currency, and usability. For each criterion, the document lists types of evidence that could be used to rate a website on a scale of 1 to 5. The evaluator would then rate the website being evaluated for each criterion, add up the total points, and use that to assess the overall quality of the site as poor, fair, good, or excellent. The evaluator is also asked to provide an overall personal assessment of whether they would recommend the site and why.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    54 views2 pages

    Webfmword

    Uploaded by

    Sam Gitonga
    This document provides a framework for evaluating websites based on 5 criteria: authority, objectivity, accuracy, currency, and usability. For each criterion, the document lists types of evidence that could be used to rate a website on a scale of 1 to 5. The evaluator would then rate the website being evaluated for each criterion, add up the total points, and use that to assess the overall quality of the site as poor, fair, good, or excellent. The evaluator is also asked to provide an overall personal assessment of whether they would recommend the site and why.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    Web Site Evaluation

    Name:
    Course:
    Instructor:
    Web Site Title:
    Web URL:
    Date Visited:
    Brief description of the contents of the site:

    Criteria and types of evidence How the Web site being Rating
    evaluated met the criterion
    1 2 3 4 5
    (low) (high)
    1. Authority with regard to topic
    who is responsible for the site?:
    Author of site
    (individual/institutional affiliation,
    organization
    Credentials, expertise, experience
    Contact information (name, e-mail,
    postal address)
    URL type suggest reputable
    affiliation (.edu=educational
    institution; .org=non-profit
    organization; .com=commercial
    enterprise; .net=Internet Service
    Provider; .gov=governmental body;
    .mil=military)

    2. Objectivityis the purpose of


    the site clear, including any
    particular viewpoint?
    Statement of purpose/scope
    Intended audience
    Information presented as factual or
    opinion, primary or secondary in
    origin
    Criteria for inclusion of
    information
    Disclosure of sponsorship or
    underwriting
    Criteria and Types of Evidence Web Site Evidence Rating
    1 2 3 4 5
    (low) (high)
    3. Accuracyis the information
    accurate?
    Facts documented or well-
    researched
    Facts compare to related print or
    other online sources
    Links provided to quality Web
    resources

    4. Currencyis the information
    current?
    Evidence of current content
    Pages date-stamped with latest
    update

    5. Usability:is the site well-


    designed and stable?
    Site organization logical and easy
    to maneuver
    Content readable by intended
    audience
    Information presented is error-free
    (spelling, punctuation)
    Readily identifiable link back to
    the institutional or organizational
    home page
    Site reliably accessible
    Pages loaded quickly

    Sub-Total by rating of points


    awarded for each of the five criteria

    Assessment of Web Site


    Rating based on the total number of points: Your personal assessmentwould you recommend
    this site? Why or why not?
    5-9 points: poor
    10-14 points: fair
    15-19 points: good
    20-25 points: excellent _____________

    Kent State University


    Libraries & Media Services, BFS, 10/99

    You might also like