Identifying credible sources What makes a credible source
Identifying credible sources
What makes a credible source? ● ● ● Authority Accuracy Objectivity Currency Coverage
Authority ● ● Who is the author? What gives them their expertise? What are their credentials? Are they related to an academic institution?
Accuracy ● Is there a bibliography? ● Are statistics and numbers clearly sourced? ● Are there spelling errors or grammatical mistakes?
Objectivity ● Is there evidence of bias? ● Is the text factual or persuasive? ● Is any imagery used relevant?
Currency ● ● When was the information published? When was the information last updated? Do any hyperlinks work? Is the date for the sources given?
Coverage ● Is the site still active? ● Is the scope manageable? ● Are there references to other supporting materials?
Links https: //www. history. com/this-day-in-history/adolf-hitler-is-named-chancellor-ofgermany https: //www. britannica. com/biography/Gustav-Stresemann https: //encyclopedia. ushmm. org/content/en/article-48 https: //www. facinghistory. org/weimar-republic-fragility-democracy/readings/weimar -political-parties https: //en. m. wikipedia. org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler%27 s_rise_to_power
History. com: Is it reliable? ● ● ● Well known and reliable institution. No editors names or credentials. No relevant imagery. Broad topic. No sources listed.
Britannica ● ● Well known and respected encyclopedia. Author’s credentials available. Narrow topic. Sources available.
USHMM ● ● Reliable institution. No sources. No author listed. Recently updated.
Facing History ● ● Author is listed, but hard to find. Author’s credentials are good, but not listed on site. Fairly recent. Sources listed, but again, hard to find.
Wikipedia ● ● Lots of sources. Regularly updated and curated. Anyone can edit. No credentials for editors.
- Slides: 13