Evaluating sources. Is the source relevant to my project? Will it be relevant to my readers? Will it answer their questions? Is it timely? More specifically, if it’s not recent, is it outdated? If I’m writing on a topic that advances quickly, this will be more important than with, say, a paper on a piece of literature or a part of history. Is my source balanced? Does it provide a complete or well-rounded view of its topic? If my topic is wide, my sources will also need to be wide. If my topic is more specific, then this will be less important.
How’s the evidence in my source? Is there enough of it? Is it the kind I need? Is the author of the source using it fairly, or are they engaging in one or more fallacies? Has the author of my source identified their own sources properly?
Speaking of the author, are they reliable? Do they know about the topic they’re writing on? Do they have any biases or affiliations to consider? If so, how might those biases affect their writing? Watch out for that. Same for the publisher. Does the publisher have biases? Will this affect the content or tone of the source? Its reliability?
Web sources require special considerations when evaluating credibility in particular. Here's a tutorial on the evaluation of web sources. Field sources: I’ll need to evaluate their timeliness, relevancy, and accuracy in particular. With interviews and surveys, be aware of the relative reliability of the individuals interviewed or surveyed.
No comments:
Post a Comment