Evaluating the Relevance and Reliability of Sources Chris

Evaluating the Relevance and Reliability of Sources Chris Cuozzo, Ph. D. Woodgrove High School

Relevance and Reliability • The new challenge for your generation and everyone after you is not finding answers to your questions, but determining what information is relevant and reliable

Relevant • Will this source be focused specifically on my topic/question? • Is it current and up-to-date? Unless you are aiming for a historical perspective, focus on sources from the last five years

Reliability • Is this a source I can trust? Rely on? Is this information credible? • Will other people believe me if I use this to support my argument? • Who wrote/created this information? Do they have an obvious bias or agenda? • Are they trying to persuade me in some way? • Why might they be interested in not telling you the full, objective truth?

• Anyone can post a web site! (e. g. crazy people, children) • A site littered with lots of click bait is probably questionable • Just because a website looks professional, doesn’t make it reliable • If you can’t figure out from the site who created it, and why, be leery! Websites

Evaluating Websites • Every web site was created and funded by a person or an organization • If a single author is not listed, the “author” is the organization responsible for the website • Sometimes these are funded by other groups hoping to push an agenda or advocate for a set of ideas or policies – Political groups – Corporations or industry advocacy groups (e. g. “clean coal, ” petroleum/oil companies, Mc. Donalds)

Blogs • Anyone can create a blog (heck, you have made one this month…) • Some blogs are maintained by true experts in a field, and they will include references and links to supporting evidence. • These may be a useful source to point you towards reliable evidence, but the blogs themselves are rarely reliable sources. • Pay attention to the information about the author (although keep in mind that they could make all that up, also!)

Social Media • The widespread use of social media means that information can quickly “go viral, ” spreading to millions of people world-wide in a matter of hours, regardless of its validity or reliability. • Yet, somehow we “think” that the more people that have seen, “liked” and shared the information, the more likely it is to be true

Social Media + Arguments by (Perceived) Authority • When celebrities tweet, re-tweet, or otherwise share/like/endorse a social media post, it multiplies the “viral” spread of the information and gives it a level of perceived validity it may not deserve • Just because this person is famous, does that make them an expert/authority on this topic? • Just because someone is an expert on one topic, does that make them an expert on this particular topic?

Beware of Statistics • The appearance of a logical (“logos”), rational, even seemingly scientific argument, claim, or evidence may seem very persuasive on the surface, don’t immediately take it at face value • Consider the source of the data and how it was collected • Consider the contexts and parameters of the claims or evidence

This statistic went viral in the hours after the Florida school shooting, but it was based on the advocacy group Everytown for Gun Safety’s definition of a school shooting: “any time a firearm discharges a live round inside a school building or on a school campus or grounds. ” Only 7 of these 18 situations were ones in which people were shot on a school campus while school activities were happening. Based on their definition, the number is accurate, and that is still a lot of people killed in schools in 6 weeks, but the number was not what people most people thought it meant.

Causality vs Corrleation • Is X really causing Y (causality), or are they both just happening at roughly the same time, potentially caused by something else (correlated)?

Evaluating Sources: A Rubric 4 Highly Reliable/ Credible Non-partisan source Scientific/objective data collection Full context and analysis Experts/authorities in this field, peer reviewed articles Data from government agencies (e. g. CDC, EPA, FBI) People’s direct experiences (not being filtered by others) 3 Generally reliable Articles from mainstream, reputable news outlets (CNN, NYT, Wash. Post, NPR, PBS, 2 Questionable reliability Blogs, small websites with obvious agendas or political affiliations Arguments are of questionable coherence or strength 1 Clearly unreliable Source is obviously biased Data/evidence does not seem reliable, credible, or objective Arguments are not sound

Annotated Bibliography • Not just a list of the books you used • Find at least 9 different sources • Relevance and reliability rated (1 -4) and explained • Include at least two of each of the four levels (1 -4), but don’t use any 1’s or 2’s in your research • Show me you can make these kinds of evaluations