R-4+Babes+&+A+Guy-My+Page+Evaluation+&+Example

=
· **Examine the content**-Clear and easy to get around on site. Contains reference pages where information was found to back up fact/fiction inquiries. They show their work and also list a bibliography.=====

=
· **Ask questions about the author/site**- April 2009 Reader’s Digest wrote about snoops.com and the couple who “found it”. []=====

=
· I also did a search for “is snoops.com” a hoax? I did not see any sites right off hand that thought snoops.com was a farce.=====

=
· **Look at the links coming in/going ou**t-Facts and question section. Glossary-explains the terms used on site. All links I clicked on worked and gave good information about the site. **Last date page updated** –Updated just today 3/12/09=====

=
· **Mail-to link for questions, comments** - Also, contact page to email questions, videos/photos=====

=
I decided to check out snoops.com because I have seen the site listed on some of the e-mails I receive. Since many students have e-mail sites at home, I felt this would be a good way to teach them how to do research on pictures or stories that may seem a bit far fetched. Reason being, some e-mail’s content is only out to hurt an individual or company and there is no need to pass on the message if it is false. I would print off pictures and stories that were either true or not true and have them see if they can find out rather they are true or not at snoops.com website. I would also use this site as a teaching tool about finding the criteria needed to prove that it was a legitimate website.=====

Kim =**Web URL Address:** [] = **Title of Web Address:** Penguin Warehouse We called our rubric Drive CARS. I used this criteria: __Drive__ with ease? No – Many of the links lead to “deadends.” All I could get to was a shopping site until I typed in a reference given in the description for the web site. The Google Search had over 200 thousand hits. On the first page I tried several sites which referred to buying a Penguin for a pet as a hoax. __C__redibility – Written by Friends who were outraged over the selling of penguins. Offer to join their network. __A__ccuracy – There was a 2009 copyright, but last update in the site was noted as Dec. 18, 2005. __R__easonableness - Most remarks were opinions rather than fact. __S__upport – Other links given was for __Snopes__, a site that reveals fraudulent web sites. On that site the authors tell how the penguin for sale idea got started and how all things on line are not accurate or true. I could use this web site with my class of 3rd graders to help them understand that everything on the internet is not necessarily always true. Many of the other sites we looked at in class would be too difficult for most of them to read, let along decipher the information that the sites gave, but this site holds some familiarity for them. They know about penguins and could even relate it to a story we are reading in class right now called “Mr. Popper’s Penguins” in which the main character does come to have several penguins as pets. The students would generally agree that having a penguin for a pet would be fun and would interested in knowing how they could have one also. By using the primary rubric we could step through the process of determining whether this site was authentic or just a hoax, similar to how I used it for this assignment.
 * Truth or Trash?:** This web site does not sell penguins directly, so in that respect I would say it is “trash.” It does, however, link you to a shopping site with penquin merchandise. It is categorized by Books, Jewelry, Clothing, Art &Decorations, Stuffed penguins, and Things for your house.
 * Determining Criteria:** I used the primary rubric that we compiled in class.
 * How I would use this site with my class:**

Lisa-- A. Web URL Address: http://www.license.shorturl.com B. Title of Web Site: Driver’s License Search, Brought to You By: The National Motor Vehicle License Organization C. Is the site TRUTH or TRASH: TRASH (but fun & easy to try) D. Describe the criteria you applied to determine if it was truth or trash: I used the “Driving CARS” Rubric that my group came up with as the criteria for evaluating this site. DRIVE (DESIGN): The pictures were clear. The colors were bright. The site loaded quickly. CREDIBILITY: There really is no author given—other than it saying, Brought to You By: The National Motor Vehicle License Organization. There is no mailing address given that I could find. There was no e-mail address given. I could not find a phone number either. ACCURACY: There was no date anywhere that I could find of when the site was created or updated. There also was no copyright. REASONABLENESS: This site mentions what seems like a fact: a United States amendment to the Freedom of Information Act enacted on Sept. 3rd, 2007 which provides for public access to motor vehicle drivers’ information. The site also gives some opinions on people’s evaluation of the site. SUPPORT: The only other link given was the Privacy Policy. Plus—there was a License Search option. After reading the Privacy Policy and trying the search it was very obvious that this was a TRASH site, but funny none the less. E. Short Paragraph on using this with my students: I choose to evaluate this site after examining some of the others because it was a site that my first graders would get a “kick” out of. Plus, it was easy to follow the rubric guidelines of “Drive CARS.” Many of the other websites would have been way too tricky for my students and they **wouldn’t** have gone away with the understanding that there are Bogus Websites out there. This site allows them to learn in a fun way “not to believe everything on first site” but to do some investigating first. After doing this site and other more obvious Bogus sites with them, I may choose a harder one for them to evaluate. Our “Drive CARS” Rubric is fairly basic and may not catch some of the real difficult Bogus sites though.

Chris A. The Web URL is: http://www.solarviews.com/ B. Title of the Web Site: Views of the Solar System: Mars Introduction C. Is the Site Truth or Trash: **Truth** D. Criteria Used to Determine Truth or Trash: Rubric created by Chris and Jodi

Based on the criteria Jodi and I established to analyze web sites, using the acronym F.A.C.T., the site I chose met most of your criteria. **Accuracy**: A vast majority of the information I cross checked with other sites proved to be reliable and did not include questionable materials related to space. **T-Reliability:** I checked a number of the links on the web site and had no problems accessing the connected sources. Furthermore, the links did not include any dead ends, or traps. **How would I use this site in my classroom? I would use this site with my 7th grade Geography or World Geography courses as an introduction to the planetary system, plate tectonics, etc. As far as using this exercise in my class, I can see students developing their own criteria to evaluate authentic web sites v. bogus sites, while also having allowing them the opportunity to analyze a bogus site (unknown to them) to see just how easy it is to be lured into believing something that is bogus. **
 * Functionality:** The Home Page includes a site map and text, which is easy to easy and follow; however, he does provide a lot of text on his site, which can be over whelming. The site does not include an “About Us” link, but does include information related to the author if visitors click on his name at the bottom of the Mar Introduction page. The site does not include a back button or return home link, which may cause confusion with visitors visiting the site.
 * Creditability:** The site did identify the author, however, most of the sites I viewed to check his connections, or creditability with other institutions often times lead me back to his web site. The site in general contained information specific to when it was last updated and appeared current. He did include a bibliography and sources; however, all of his sources were linked to another web site he created called, solarviews.com, which served as his primary web site. In addition, I believe this site to be a personal web site, because he is not making any claims to be associated with another agency or organization.

Jodi

A. Web URL Address: [] B. Title of Web Site: Sellafield Zoo C. Is the Site Truth or Trash: Trash D. Criteria Used to Determine Truth or Trash: Rubric created by Chris and Jodi 1. **Functional** **Web** **Design**: All text was clear and readable. The back button and return to links were all functional. The Home Page provided a link to an "About Us" page. This site met the criteria for "Functional Web Design." 2. **Accuracy**: This was the most entertaining portion of the website. None of the information could be validated through a second source. In fact, as I went through all of the links, I am not sure that there is any accurate or valid information. All of the information and pictures are clearly fictional. For instance, when visiting the link on seals, it states "Elsie the Arctic Seal is a favourite with young children, who are allowed to stroke her soft fur, and even take moderate amounts of it home with them as it comes off in their hands." In addition to "favourite" being spelled wrong, this information is clearly for entertainment purposes. Every link throughout the website goes to a different animal and bizarre yet funny "facts" are provided. 3. **Credibility**: "JFH Web Design" is a link that suggests author information. However, when you go to this link, it states "  The page you are looking for is currently unavailable or no longer exists." It also suggests that if you continue to experience problems, you should "contact the relevant support desk via the link below." This link goes to a website concerning entertainment news. The last link that proves that there is no credibility to this site is a link named "credibility." When you go to this, my determination of this site being "trash" is verified. It states " As you may have realised, all the information on this site is false. These pages are for entertainment purposes only, and no money is made from this endeavour. The images on this site have been culled from the public domain and modified by the author - please report any copyright infringements." 4. **Reliability**: All of the hyperlinks were technically functional. The site did lead to dead-ends. Pages being "unavailable" or "no longer existing" were found throughout this site. 5. **How I would use this site with my class**: Since I teach at the high school level, I think my primary goal would be to do exactly what we have been doing in this assignment; illustrate to students what makes a website valid or invalid. Making the rubric with Chris really gave me some specific things to focus on and I believe that is what we have to do with our students. Having them surf the net for truth or trash sites without any validation factors wastes time and can be frustrating. The site that I chose to evaluate ended up being very easy to classify as trash but I felt that it provided me with a great opportunity to use my rubric to break-down each element. Starting with a site like this one with my students will get them started on evaluating websites. As their rubrics become more defined, my students will be able to move on to more difficult sites and hopefully be able to use these skills in all of their classes and everyday life situations.  Please try again later. 