Evaluation of Internet Information requires two things at once:
1. Train your eye and your fingers to employ a series of techniques that help you quickly find what you need to know about web pages;
2. Train your mind to think critically, even suspiciously, by asking a series of questions that will help you decide how much a web page is to be trusted.( http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/TeachingLib/Guides/Internet/Evaluate.html)
3. Main Contents
1. Basic Concepts
2. Evaluation tools
3. Two Case studies ( application)
Basic
Evaluation Tool
Application
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
4. LEARNING OBJECTIVES
By the end of this study setting you will able to :
1. Understand why it's important to evaluate information
2. Identify the meaning and components of Information
Literacy,
3. Define Pseudoscience and Grey literature
4. Distinguish between popular and scholarly articles
5. Describe the Quality Criteria and HON-Code of health
information
6. Identify and apply basic criteria for evaluating
information (5Ws method and the 5 quality criteria
checklist)
7. Describe the types of internet sources and how to
evaluate the validity of information presented in these
sites
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
11. Information Literacy
Information Literacy is the ability to:
Identify
what information is needed,
Understand how the information is
organized,
Identify the best sources of information .
locate those sources,
Evaluate the sources critically,
and Share that information.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
13. Definition of ICT Literacy
Using digital technology,
communications tools, and/or networks
To
Access, Manage, Integrate, Evaluate,
and Create information
in order to function in a knowledge society.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
14. Importance of Information
Literacy
IL is critically important because we are
surrounded by a growing ocean of
information in all formats.
Not all information is created equal:
some is authoritative, current, reliable,
but some is biased, out of date,
misleading, false..
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
17. In 2000, the Association of College and Research
Libraries (ACRL),
a division of the American Library Association (ALA),
released:
"Information Literacy Competency
Standards for Higher Education ",
describing
Five standards
and numerous performance indicators
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
19. I.L Competency Standards for Higher
Education
The Five standards
Standard #1 = Know
Standard #2 = Access
Standard #3 = Evaluate
Standard #4 = Use
Standard #5 = Ethical / Legal
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
25. Why Evaluate Web Information ?
Anyone can put anything on the Web.
There are
no uniform
standards for quality for
what can be put on the Web.
Most Web sites are
not reviewed by experts in
a subject as scholarly journal articles are.
do not undergo any kind
of editorial process as most books and
Most Web sites
many other types of print sources do.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
26. Why Evaluate Web Information ?
Lack of Guidelines
Lack of Monitoring
Immediate mobility of information
Lack of Representation
Searching for information (spiders)
Bias/Objectivity of Information
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
27. Why Evaluate Web Information ?
Lack of Guidelines
There are no rules or standards
governing the type or quality of
information which a writer can put on
the Internet. Web sites may contain
factual information, opinions, data,
ideas, propaganda, self-promotion
and/or commercialism.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
28. Why Evaluate Web Information ?
Lack of
Monitoring
There are currently no laws in
effect which govern the material
which is placed on the Internet.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
29. Why Evaluate Web Information ?
Immediate mobility of
information
The most useful aspect of the Internet is
that a person can find the most up-todate information immediately from
almost anywhere in the world on almost
any topic with the just the click of a
mouse.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
30. Why Evaluate Web Information ?
Lack of
Representation
Although there are hundreds of
millions of pages present on the
Web today, these sites represent
only the minority of the world's
population.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
31. Why Evaluate Web Information ?
Searching for
information
With the Internet becoming more and
more commercial all the time it is
essential to constantly question, critique
and evaluate all aspects of Internet use.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
32. Why Evaluate Web Information ?
Bias/Objectivity of
Information
Obtaining unbiased
information from any media
source has always been a
difficult task.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
33. Challenge:
Marketing-Oriented Web Pages
On the Web, distinctions between
advertising and information can
become extremely blurred
Ads
WEB
Entertainment
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
34. Why Evaluate Web Information ?
Always validate or confirm information
on individuals, institutions or groups,
and countries that you find on the
Internet.
If you don't know who wrote what you
read or why they wrote it,
You don't know if it's reliable !!!.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
35. Why Evaluate Web Information ?
“61%
of adults gather health
information online”
“Health searches impacted treatment
decision”
“Three-quarters of health seekers do
not check the source and date of the
health information they find online”
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
39. Spectrum of Web Information
Gray Literature
Pseudoscience
Popular articles
scholarly articles
Propaganda
Misinformation
Disinformation,
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
40. Grey Literature
Information produced on all levels of
government, academics, business and
industry in electronic and print formats ,
but which is not controlled by
commercial publishing.
i.e. where publishing is not the primary
activity of the producing body.”
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
42. Characteristics of Science and
Pseudoscience
Science
Their findings are
expressed primarily
through scientific
journals that are peerreviewed and maintain
rigorous standards for
honesty and accuracy.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
Pseudoscience
The literature is aimed
at the general public.
There is no review, no
standards, no prepublication
verification, no
demand for accuracy
and precision.
43. Characteristics of Science and
Pseudoscience
Science
Reproducible results
are demanded;
experiments must be
precisely described so
that they can be
duplicated exactly or
improved upon..
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
Pseudoscience
Results cannot be
reproduced or
verified. Studies, if
any, are always so
vaguely described that
one can't figure out
what was done or how
it was done.
44. Characteristics of Science and
Pseudoscience
Science
Pseudoscience
Failures are searched
Failures are ignored,
for and studied closely,
because incorrect
theories can often
make correct
predictions by accident,
but no correct theory
will make incorrect
predictions.
excused, hidden, lied
about, discounted,
explained away,
rationalized, forgotten,
avoided at all costs.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
45. Characteristics of Science and
Pseudoscience
Science
Does not advocate or
market unproven
practices or products
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
Pseudoscience
Generally earns some
or all of his living by
selling questionable
products and/or
pseudoscientific
services .
46. Popular And Scholarly Articles
What is the difference
between popular
And
scholarly articles?
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
47. Popular Articles (Magazines)
Are often written by journalists or
professional writers for a general
audience
Use language easily understood by
general readers
Rarely give full citations for sources
Written for the general public
Tend to be shorter than journal articles
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
49. Scholarly Articles (Journals)
Are written by and for faculty,
researchers or scholars
Uses scholarly or technical language
Include full citations for sources
Are often refereed or peer reviewed
(articles are reviewed by an editor and other
specialists before being accepted for
publication)
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
51. Why Evaluate Web Information ?
Propaganda
Misinformation
Disinformation,
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
52. Why Evaluate Web Information ?
Propaganda
Propaganda based in fact, but
facts represented in such a way
as to provoke a desired
response.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
53. Why Evaluate Web Information ?
Disinformation
"The dissemination of
intentionally false/fabricated
information,
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
54. Why Evaluate Web Information ?
Misinformation
differs from propaganda in that it
always refers to something which
is not true.
It differs from disinformation in that
it is "intention neutral": it isn't
intentional, it's just wrong or
mistaken.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
58. Evaluation Techniques
Evaluating web pages skillfully requires you to
do two things at once:
Train your eye
and your fingers to employ
a series of techniques that help you quickly find
what you need to know about web pages;
Train your mind
to think critically, even
suspiciously, by asking a series of questions that
will help you decide how much a web page is to be
trusted.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
59. Web Sites 5 Criteria
Evaluation
5W
Accuracy
W
WHO?
Authority
Where?
When
Objectivity
Currency
What?
WHY?
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
Coverage
60. THE 5 W’S
OF WEB SITE
EVALUATION
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
61. WWW = W? W? W? W? W?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
Who
What
When
Where
Why
62. THE 5 W’S OF WEB SITE EVALUATION
1- WHO wrote the pages and are
they an expert in their field?
Can you identify an author or
sponsoring organization?
Is the author or sponsor well
regarded in their field?
Can you contact the author or
organization?
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
63. THE 5 W’S OF WEB SITE EVALUATION
2- WHAT is the purpose of the
site?
Is this site mostly fact or opinion?
Are there links to the sponsoring
page, or is this a lone individual?
Is this actually an advertisement
disguised as information?
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
64. THE 5 W’S OF WEB SITE EVALUATION
3- WHERE does the information
come from?
Does the author let the reader
know where they got their
information?
Does the author provide
citations?
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
65. THE 5 W’S OF WEB SITE EVALUATION
4- WHEN was the site created,
updated, or last worked on?
Does the website tell when it was
created or last updated?
Does it matter to me when this
information was posted to the
Internet?
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
66. THE 5 W’S OF WEB SITE EVALUATION
5- WHY is the information
valuable?
Is this new to me, or did I already
know these facts?
Can I confirm the reliability of
this information by finding
similar facts elsewhere?
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
70. 1-Accuracy -Criteria
Is the information reliable and error-free?
Can you find when was the last update?
Is there an editor or someone who
verifies/checks the information?
71. 1-Accuracy -Rationale
Anyone can publish
anything on the
Web.
Unlike traditional print resources, Web
resources rarely have editors or factcheckers.
Currently, no Web standards exist to
ensure accuracy.
74. 2- Authority -Criteria
Is the page signed?
Are the author's qualifications available?
Does s/he have expertise in this subject?
Is the author associated with an educational
institution or other reputable organization?
Does the publisher or publication have a reputation
for reliability?
Is contact information for the author or group
available on the site?
75. 2-Authority -Rationale
It's often hard to determine a web page's authorship.
Unlike traditional print resources, Web resources
rarely have editors or fact-checkers.
There are no standards for information on the web
which would ensure that all information there is
accurate and useful.
People create web pages for different reasons:
Personal
Advocacy
Commercial/Marketing
Informational
76. 2-Authority -Verify
Look at the top and bottom of the web page for
clues.
Use the WhoIs service to determine the page's
owner.
Is there a link to a main web site for the
group/educational institution/ organization hosting
this web page?
Look at the first part of the URL for the web page. Is
it .org? .edu? .gov? .net? .com?
Does the author or host have a web page explaining
who they are and what their mission or philosophy
is?
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
78. 3- Objectivity -Criteria
Does the information show a
minimum of bias?
Is the page a presentation of facts
and not designed to sway opinion?
Is the page free of advertisements
or sponsored links?
79. 3-Objectivity -Rationale
Frequently the goals of the
sponsors/authors aren't clearly
stated.
Often the web serve as a virtual
"Hyde Park Corner," a soapbox.
The content of the page may be
influenced by the advertiser.
80. 3-Objectivity-Verify
Read through/scan the web page and
consider.
Does the author or host have a web page
explaining who they are and what their
mission or philosophy is?
See what other websites link to the site in
question. Google's link searches is one
method.
Ask a Reference Librarian if information
about the author/ company/ organization is
available.
82. 4-Currency -Criteria
Is the page dated?
Can you find when was the
last update?
Are the links current and do
they point to existing pages?
83. 4-Currency -Rationale
Publication or revision dates are not always
provided.
Pages with broken links may not be updated
regularly.
If a date is provided, it may have various
meanings. For example it may indicate when
the material:
was first written
was first placed on the Web
was last updated
84. 4-Currency-Verify
Read through and scan the text to see if the
author attributes information/facts to a
particular year. e.g. "in 1997, 35 car accidents
were caused by chickens crossing the road."
Scan through the bibliography or list of
references (be concerned if there isn't one!)
and see how current each item is. e.g. Cool,
Joe. (1975) "Current flying practices." Canine
Aviation 32(3):23-40.
Look at the footer to see if the author has
included a date.
86. 5- Coverage -Criteria
Is the information even relevant
to your topic?
Do you think it is useful to you?
Does this page have information
that is not found elsewhere?
How in-depth is the material?
87. 5-Coverage -Rationale
Web coverage often differs from
print coverage.
Frequently it's difficult to determine
the extent of coverage.
Sometimes web information is justfor-fun or outright silliness.
88. 5-Coverage-Verify
Read through/scan the web page
and consider.
Ask a Reference Librarian if the
information you have found can
be verified elsewhere.
91. (URL).
Much like the address on an envelope, each
part of a URL provides information about the
Web page.
http://www.wmich.edu/registrar/registration.html
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
92. URL Web Address
What does the URL say about the producer of the web
site, and its purpose?
.gov Government agency: www.whitehouse.gov
.net Internet Service Provider: www.whitehouse.net
.Com Commercial site -Go there at your own risk.)
.edu
Higher education - www.lesley.edu.
.org Organization; may be charitable, religious, or a
lobbying group - http://www.rtda.org.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
96. What can the URL tell you?
Read
the URL carefully:
Look for a personal name (e.g., jbarker
or barker) following a tilde ( ~ ), a
percent sign ( % ), or or the words
"users," "members," or "people."
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
97. URL Web Address
~ ("tilde")
Personal site http://www.members.tripod.com/~DAdams/qkbrdinf.html
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
99. What is the History of a Website?
The Wayback Machine:
www.archive.org allows you
to browse through 30 billion
web pages archived from
1996 to a few months ago.
105. eEurope 2002: Quality Criteria for Health
related Websites
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
Brussels, 29.11.2002 COM( 2002) 667 final
2.1 Transparency of Health Related Content
2.2 Authority of Health Related Content
Providers
2.3 Privacy and data protection of Health Data
2.4 Updating of Health Related Information
2.5 Accountability for Health Related Content
2.6 Accessibility in Health Related Content
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
106. Transparency and Honesty
Transparency of provider of site – including name,
physical address and electronic address of the
person or organisation responsible for the site
Transparency of purpose and objective of the site
Target audience clearly defined (further detail on
purpose, multiple audience could be defined at
different levels).
Transparency of all sources of funding for site
(grants, sponsors, advertisers, non-profit, voluntary
assistance).
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
107. Privacy and data protection
Privacy and data protection policy and
system for the processing of personal data,
including processing invisible to users, to be
clearly defined in accordance with
community Data Protection legislation
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
108. Updating of information
Clear and regular updating of the site,
with date of up-date clearly displayed
for each page and/ or item as relevant.
Regular checking of relevance of
information.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
109. Accountability
user feedback, and appropriate oversight
responsibility .
Responsible partnering -all efforts should
be made to ensure that partnering or
linking to other websites is undertaken only
with trustworthy individuals and
organizations who themselves comply with
relevant codes of good practice.
Editorial policy -clear statement describing
what procedure was used for selection of
content.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
110. Accessibility
Accessibility -attention to guidelines on
physical accessibility as well as general
findability, searchability, readability,
usability, etc.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
127. Types of Internet Information Sources
Web pages ….. ……. ……. …….
Wiki
Blogs
Databases
Social
networking
Multimedia
Forum , group
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
128. Wikis
A wiki is a publishing platform on which
many people can contribute new
content and revise existing content.
The content benefits from the collective
knowledge base and the dynamic
nature of the contributions.
Examples: Wikipedia,
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
129. To evaluate the content on a wiki
The sponsorship of the wiki. This may be
explained on an "About" or similar page.
The wiki, whether academic or popular, suits
your needs.
The identity of those who are able to edit or
add content. If it is a select group, try to
determine if they have expertise in the wiki’s
topic.
Changes to the page appear reasonable.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
130. Blogs
A blog is a Web-based journal entry
platform that can accept reader
comments.
Entries are usually presented in
reverse chronological order.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
131. To evaluate the content on a blog, look for
these clues
Most blog postings focus on a discussion of
issues rather than day-to-day personal or
recreational activities.
Blog postings are signed by an identifiable
author.
The author has expertise on the topic of the
blog.
Comments on blog postings emphasize
substantive discussion of the issues.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
132. Social networking sites
Social networking sites are online
communities in which members can interact
in a number of ways.
Full‐featured communities offer the ability to
share a personal profile, initiate contacts
with “friends,” form groups of members with
similar interests, contact group members
directly, engage in discussions, share media
or photos, and discover other common
connections through ones’ contacts
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
133. To evaluate the content on a social
networking site, look for these clues:
• The identity of the source of shared information can
be verified. This can be done by examining the
profile page if made public, verifying the named
source of the information, and so on.
• Information on the profile page of the individual,
institution, company, or library can be verified.
• The individual, institution, etc. contributing
information has expertise on the topic.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
135. To evaluate the content in a multimedia
presentation, look for these clues:
• The presentation is sponsored by a reputable
institution, organization, or identified
individual(s)whose expertise can be verified.
• If individuals appear or speak in a
presentation, they are identified and their
expertise can be checked.
• The presentation or its accompanying
information includes contact information.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat
136. To evaluate the content in a multimedia
presentation, look for these clues:
• The presentation or its accompanying
information includes contact information.
• Comments that may accompany the
presentation evaluate its quality (even if you
don’t agree with what others have to say).
• If previously recorded, the presentation can
be identified by date so that you can determine
the currency of the information provided.
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat