Policy Brief-Accuracy and Validity Issues

Executive Summary
Because of the abundance of information and sources available today on the internet, you must choose the criteria used to judge the accuracy & validity of the information and sources you site in your instructional setting or research very well. There are several methods to descern valid and accurate sites. Redundancy and verifiability are two main techniques in use today.

Accuracy and Validity Issues
In many settings it is important to obtain accurate information. Finding several sites with the same information is a good way to check on accuracy, but not always feasible. Students and their instructors need information to ensure they:
◊ determine whether a website has a hidden agenda.
◊ look for supporting documents and other resources backing up the information found.
◊ determine whether the website updated regularly and contact information is presented.
◊ look at website extensions such as .gov, .edu and .com, to know sponsorship and affiliations.
◊ check the history of a website and authorship.

Several safety precautions can be taught quickly.
Appearance
Just look at the site. Does it look like a side show in a carnival or does it look serious? This is just the beginning of the examination process. Requiring Instructors and students to critically judge the value of information and their sources is the beginning of the evaluation process. Be sure to notice:
The domain extension (.edu, .gov, .com, .uk), spelling and grammar and references.
Source
Can you easily determine the source? Is contact information easily found?
Description of source: What does the domain of the site tell you about the purpose of the site? Check the list. Description of an evidence hierarchy: Was there some indication of a schemata for evaluating the information given on this site?
Currency
Is the date of the original document or content posting on the internet, and that of any updates, listed and are they current? Description of currency: can you find a ‘trail’ for this website? Using the waybackmachine website historical research engine might help.
Specific techniques
Instructing students to use specific techniques to check accuracy & validity such as:
◊ Distinguishing between Facts and Opinions
◊ Recognizing Generalizations:
◊ Testing Hypotheses:
◊ Weighing the Adequacy of Data and Evidence:
◊ Evaluating Persuasive Material
◊ Recognizing Persuasive Language
◊ Identifying Biased and Slanted Writing:
◊ Evaluating Arguments
◊ Asking Critical Questions

Verified good websites (not all are educational).
http://www.si.edu/Encyclopedia_SI/
http://www.britannica.com/#tab=active~home%2Citems~home&title=Britannica%20Online%20Encyclopedia
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/
http://www.scambusters.org/legends.html
http://www.americanfolklore.net/urban-legends.html
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2007/09/about_the_fact_checker.html
http://www.truthorfiction.com/
http://www.factcheck.org/
http://www.snopes.com/
http://support.microsoft.com/search/?adv=1
http://www.symantec.com/business/support/index.jsp
http://www.brain.northwestern.edu/mdad/frontal.html
http://www.symantec.com/business/support/overview.jsp?pid=15047
http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/289451.htm
http://publicliterature.org/books/relativity/xaa.php
http://www.jhuapl.edu/aboutapl
http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/readings/french.html
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf40.html
http://www.fcps.edu/LutherJacksonMS/library/techtips/tips/website_validity_guideline.html%20
http://www.archive.org/index.php
http://www.archive.org/web/web.php
http://www.thekingcenter.org/

Some things to watch out for:
◊ Chat forums that do not present referenced material as proof.
◊ Chat board from a reputable organization may or may not have valid information. It would depend on how well the comments are screened and discretion should be used.
◊ Chat forums, blogs without posts of how it is monitored or information on those presenting the information.
◊ Forum disclaimers stating moderators monitoring the site may not be relevant, as the information does not indicate who will be moderating the information.
◊ Personal blogs tend to create problems when sources are not names and the user's identity can be masked.
◊ Information on a website might be factually correct, but the inferences portrayed are sometimes skewed to the Author's personal perspective.


Invalid sites
http://www.revolutionhealth.com/forums/brain-nerves/alzheimers/89233
http://www.backupexecfaq.com/
http://www.backupexecfaq.com/about.html
http://www.backupexecfaq.com/contribute.html
http://www.siriusbackstage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=88878&page=7
http://www.pennlive.com/forums/environment
http://www.businessweek.com/debateroom/archives/2007/05/nuclear_power_a.html
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/nuclear
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.02/nuclear.html
http://neinuclearnotes.blogspot.com/2008/05/wired-magazines-green-issue-go-nuclear.html
http://www.wired.com/science/planetearth/news/2007/11/moore_qa
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_France
http://www.martinlutherking.org/
http://www.martinlutherking.org/%20

Conclusion
There is no replacement for diligence when citing and using web references. Many sources, such as wikipedia. are good for a general overview of a subject, but not for primary reference for research work. A word to the wise: Link popularity building leads to higher search engine ranking. In other words, higher search engine ranking of a website happens when it receives large number of high-quality inbound links.

Reference
Some websites to help us sort good from bad.
http://www.sc.edu/beaufort/library/pages/bones/lesson5.shtml
http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/TeachingLib/Guides/Internet/Evaluate.html
http://www.factcheck.org/
SEO Articles (2007). Search Engine Optimization Articles.
http://www.site-booster.com/seo-sem-articles-2007/website-assessment-criteria-link-popularity.html
TruthOrFiction
http://www.truthorfiction.com/
FactCheck.
http://www.factcheck.org/
Snopes
http://www.snopes.com/
Educational information I use
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia
Encyclopedia Britannica
http://www.britannica.com/
HighBeam Encyclopedia
http://www.encyclopedia.com/
Living Internet
Webmonkey
Answers.com Technology. Retrieved on July 15, 2008 from http://www.answers.com/open+source?cat=technology
Open Source.org. Home Page. Received on July 15, 2008 from http://www.opensource.org/about
http://72.14.205.104/custom?q=cache:3ax8K3dxP70J:www.purdue.edu/hr/doc/OnlineResourceValidity.doc+checking+accuracy+validity+of+sources&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=7&gl=uk&client=pub-2070091971271392
http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/resources/special_initiatives/wa_resources/wa_teachers/backgrounders/harris_evaluating.cfm