This ranking scheme is not fixed.
It should be used as a tool to assist students in
evaluation of web resources.
The scheme can be adapted to reflect the priorities and emphasis of different
subject areas. (ie. In the area of primary legal materials there should be increased
weighting for currency of the website - up to 6 marks, and reduce the marks
allocated to other criteria such as authority of author etc.)
URL of site/page being assessed:.....................................................................
|
Criteria
|
Indicators to test
|
Application of test
|
Ranking
|
|
|
Authority
of Web site
Domain
Top
Level
Lower
Level
|
Domain credibility.
Authority of page.. is the organisation acknowledging
responsibility – or does the responsibility lie with the author.
Personal pages vs professional pages
|
Rank by recognised domain
- published by government (gov) or major academic/research
institutions (edu, ac, ….), professional organisations (org),
associations (asn),
- net sites – need lower level analysis (net)
- fun/ personal/ propaganda sites. (com)
|
Domain
Gov
Edu ac
Org
Asn
Net
Credible Personal page
Suspect page – often moves
|
Marks
5
3
2
0
|
Your marks, comments
|
|
Authority
of Web site - Aims
|
What is the aim of the site / page?
Is it a credible source?
|
If the domain and organisational brief is clearly the
parent of the site –give full marks
Are the aims clearly stated and easy to read and to find
- look at the "About us" "About the page/site"
Is there a political rationale/bias for the page?
|
Purpose /Rational for site obvious from the institution.
Purpose /Rational for page openly stated on the page.
Fuzzy – vague
Not obvious/not found
|
2
2
1
0
|
|
|
Authority
of Author
|
Has this author published extensively in this subject
area?
|
Search for other articles by this author. – databases
and web.
Check the catalogue to see if they have had books published
in the area.
NB. Multiple articles published on the authors own site
should only count as one article.
|
Total No. of articles
1
2-3
4-6
7-10
10+
1or more book
Book(s) + 7+ articles
|
Marks
0
1
2
3
4
4
5
|
|
|
Content
of Article & relevance to your research
|
When you read the abstract does it suggest that it is
going to be of value to you?
|
Examine the abstract, identify key concepts.
|
Article directly on point
Covers your area of interest within wider discussion
|
2
1
|
|
|
Content
|
Is the page you thought it would be ?
|
Is the page relevant?
Is it more advertising/propaganda than content?
|
This page is very relevant
Less Relevant
Some relevance - mostly advertising etc.
No Content - all +advertisments"
|
4
3
1
0
|
|
|
Depth
of coverage
|
How substantial is the web page?
|
Number of pages
|
No of pages
1-3
4-8
9+
|
1
2
3
|
|
|
Currency
of website
(This
criteria should be adapted to suit requirements)
|
Is the site being maintained?
When was it last updated?
When was the page written
|
Look at the date at the bottom of the page.
Adapt this to suit your needs
When your research requires "recent" information the range
of marks in the next box would be relevant. If an historical topic was
being covered you would change the range.
|
Updated in last 3 months
Updated 3-9 months ago
Updated 9months – 2 years
Not updated
|
3
2
1
0
|
|
|
Readability
|
Was the page easy to read – visually friendly
|
Look at font size style, carpets/background images getting
in way or enhancing page.
Colours readable - (ie.red on black – hard toread)
|
Rank 4- easy to read
Rank 0 – impossible to read
|
4
3
0
|
|
|
Navigability
|
East to work around
|
Was it easy to work through the site to find the About
Us statement, other articles, information you required.
|
Easy to work around
Hard
Impossible
|
2
1
0
|
|
|
Other
criteria??
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
/30
|
/30
|
Library Home