| 16 Student Questions To Query
Internet Material
|
Scoring Range
|
Your Score
|
| Low
|
High
|
| 1. PURPOSE: Does the Internet material
help you achieve the purpose for which you want to use it in your course? How
well does it advance your course goals? (Give a low score for material that is
irrelevant to your course objectives)
|
0
|
10
|
|
| 2. SCOPE: How important is the
particular Internet material you are viewing in the context of other material
on the same subject at other Internet locations, and in hard copy format in
your local library? (Give a low score for significant subject-matter omissions
from the Internet material?)
|
0
|
5
|
|
| 3. EVIDENCE: Are claims supported by
evidence? (evidence can be statistical or descriptive). Is the evidence
convincing? Is the evidence appropriate for the claims being made? (Give a low
score for the lack of evidence or for poor or inappropriate evidence)
|
0
|
10
|
|
| 4. LOGIC: Are arguments logically
reasoned and developed? (Give low score for arguments based on ideology, faith,
or vested interest).
|
0
|
10
|
|
| 5. CONCEPTS: Are the key ideas and
concepts clearly stated and appropriate for the material in the Internet site?
(Give a low score for the absence of clearly defined concepts, poorly defined
concepts, or concepts which are not very useful for your course objectives)
|
0
|
10
|
|
| 6. REFERENCES: Is the Internet
material properly referenced to other material, which can be checked in your
local library or on the internet? Are there appropriate and high quality
hyperlinks to other content on the internet? (Give a low score for the absence
of references, or improperly cited references, or for poor references.)
|
0
|
5
|
|
| 7. METHODOLOGY: How good is the
methodology used to develop the material before it was published to the
Internet? (Is there any discussion of methodology? Is it appropriate for the
subject matter of the Internet material?) (Give a low score for the absence of
any discussion of what methodology was used to develop the internet material;
low scores can also be given for poor or inappropriate methodologies).
|
0
|
5
|
|
| 8: VALIDITY: How accurate are the
facts in the Internet site? (Give low scores for significant mistakes or errors
in the material?)
|
0
|
5
|
|
| 9. BALANCE: How balanced is the
material? Are pro and con arguments presented? Are alternative points of view
presented and considered fairly? Are claims and evidence considered which
challenge the main argument or thesis of the Internet site? (Give low scores to
material that argues for one point of view without considering possible
alternatives).
|
0
|
5
|
|
| 10. AUTHORITY: Is the author of the
material an expert in the field in which it is published to the Internet?
(Judge this by her or his professional training, experience in the field, and
related publications. Make sure the name of the author is on the site, and
there is a way to contact the author through an e-mail address or a surface
mail address.) (Give a low score to internet material missing the name and
contact of its author, or for cases in which the author is not qualified to
write on the topic).
|
0
|
5
|
|
| 11. GATEKEEPING: Did the material pass
through a rigorous external evaluation before it was published to the Internet?
(How would you rate the professional expertise of the external body that
evaluated the internet material? Was the material peer reviewed?) (Give a low
score to material that was published by an author or organization without being
reviewed by any external professional body).
|
0
|
5
|
|
| 12. SPONSORSHIP: Did a professional
scientific body, research centre, or educational institution sponsor the site?
(Give a low score to a site sponsored by an organization having a vested
interest in the content of the material, such as a commercial organization
promoting its own product, or an advocacy organization [religious organization;
political party; community organization; etc] trying to convince you of its
point of view).
|
0
|
5
|
|
| 13. DESIGN: How well organized is the
Internet material? Are logical sections and subsections divided by titles and
sub-titles? Is the organization of the material easy to follow and understand?
(Give a low score to pure text or graphics not logically divided into sections
or by themes).
|
0
|
5
|
|
| 14. ACCESS: How easy was it for you to
access the Internet material? (Give a low score if you had difficulty loading
the internet document, or printing out material from the site? )
|
0
|
5
|
|
| 15. NAVIGATION: How easy was it for
you to navigate or get around the Internet site? Did you understand how the
site was put together? Did it make sense? Is there an internal index or table
of contents that facilitates navigation of the material? Was a site map
available? (Give a low score for the lack of an index or table of contents, or
for one difficult to use).
|
0
|
5
|
|
| 16: CURRENCY: How up to date is the site?
When was the page produced? When was the site put online? When was it last
updated? How often is it updated? How critical is currency for the category or
purpose of the site? (Warning: a daily news site must be updated every
day. But one would not expect this of a historical database. Give a low score
for current information that is not updated, but a higher score for historical
archives that are not updated frequently). |
0
|
5
|
|
| TOTAL SCORE:
|
0
|
100
|
|