source evaluation

Description

Having Trouble Meeting Your Deadline?

Get your assignment on source evaluation  completed on time. avoid delay and – ORDER NOW

Do my paper

One learning goal of this course is to be able to use reliable/credible sources. In an age of disinformation mixed in with good information, it is important to learn how to measure the credibility of sources. For this assignment, you will evaluate two sources. Your report can find all, some, or none of the sources credible. The important part is doing the work to complete the analysis well.

Minimum Requirements: Two (2) sources that are on the topic of your Proposal Argument must be analyzed using the template. One source must be accessed from our library. The other source must be accessed from the open web.

Format Requirements: The report is not an essay and will instead be formatted as given in the template. You must use the template linked here: Source Evaluation Template.docx

. Please be sure to rename the file by adding your name after downloading it.

Content Structure: Each source will be presented on its own. Each analysis will be split into two sections: Citation and Analysis. The Citation section will present the citation as it would appear on an MLA Works Cited page. The Analysis section will be broken into answers to each part of the analysis: Authority, Accuracy, Bias/Purpose, Timeliness, Relevance, and Overall Evaluation.

Submission Guidelines:

You must submit print copies of all the sources on the due date in class. If the source is long, submit at least three pages of the source. The report must be submitted electronically as well as on paper.

Examples:

These are examples for your reference.

Source Evaluation Student Example #1-1.pdf

Source_Evaluation_Student Example #2-1.pdf

Rubric

Source Evaluation

Source Evaluation
Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSource One CitationCorrectly cited in MLA and formatted with hanging indent.
2 pts

Excellent

 1.6 pts

Proficient

One error

 1.4 pts

Average

A few minor errors

 1 pts

Developing

Missing some important info.

 0 pts

Missing

2 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAuthority
5 pts

Excellent

The author(s) are identified and why they are experts on the subject and how authoritative they are. If no authors or the authors do not have much authority, where it is published is mentioned, and how much authority does the place of publication have on the subject.

 4 pts

Proficient

Some grammar errors

 3.5 pts

Average

Authority is clearly stated, but missing support why the source does or does not have authority.

 2.5 pts

Developing

The incorrect authority stated OR a very poorly written answer.

 0 pts

Poor

Does not meet requirements.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeVerifiable AccuracyLook at least two of the linked or documented sources.
5 pts

Excellent

Two sources of information are identified or a lack of sources is noted. How sources are cited is mentioned. The authority of the sources is determined just as the authority of this source is identified.

 4 pts

Proficient

Some grammar errors

 3.5 pts

Average

Only one example of why it is verifiable is given. If none is verifiable, very poorly written.

 2.5 pts

Developing

Only mentions how information is variable, not why it is accurate.

 0 pts

Poor

Does not meet requirements.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBias/Purpose
5 pts

Excellent

Clearly indicate the source’s bias, purpose, and audience. All relevant questions from the template are answered.

 4 pts

Proficient

Some grammar errors

 3.5 pts

Average

Missing one of the following: bias, purpose, or audience.

 2.5 pts

Developing

Lacks two OR is very poorly written.

 0 pts

Poor

Does not meet requirements.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTimeliness
3 pts

Excellent

The answer clearly indicates the date of publication (or lack of one) and the currency of information (i.e. is it still likely to be timely for the topic).

 2.1 pts

Average

Poorly written

 1.5 pts

Developing

Only gives the date of publication.

 0 pts

Poor

Does not meet requirements.

3 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRelevance
3 pts

Excellent

Gives at least one reason why the information is relevant to your research by explaining how it can or cannot possibly be used for your argument.

 2.1 pts

Average

Poorly written

 1.5 pts

Developing

Why it is relevant is unclear.

 0 pts

Poor

Does not meet requirements.

3 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOverall Evaluation
10 pts

Excellent

Why the source is credible is explained by referring to the source’s authority, likely accuracy, bias, timeliness, and/or relevance. Be specific about how the balance of these leads you to your determination of how credible the source is.

 8 pts

Proficient

Some grammar errors

 7 pts

Average

Clear evaluation but underdeveloped support

 5 pts

Developing

Very poor grammar and/or unclear evaluation OR your evaluation does not make sense given the analysis.

 0 pts

Poor

Does not meet requirements.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSource Two CitationCorrectly cited in MLA and formatted with hanging indent.
2 pts

Excellent

 1.6 pts

Proficient

One error

 1.4 pts

Average

A few minor errors

 1 pts

Developing

Missing some important info.

 0 pts

Missing

2 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAuthoritySource Two
5 pts

Excellent

The author(s) are identified and why they are experts on the subject and how authoritative they are. If no authors or the authors do not have much authority, where it is published is mentioned, and how much authority does the place of publication have on the subject.

 4 pts

Proficient

Some grammar errors

 3.5 pts

Average

Authority is clearly stated, but missing support why the source does or does not have authority.

 2.5 pts

Developing

The incorrect authority stated OR a very poorly written answer.

 0 pts

Poor

Does not meet requirements.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeVerifiable AccuracySource Two: Look at least two of the linked or documented sources.
5 pts

Excellent

Two sources of information are identified or a lack of sources is noted. How sources are cited is mentioned. The authority of the sources is determined just as the authority of this source is identified.

 4 pts

Proficient

Some grammar errors

 3.5 pts

Average

Only one example of why it is verifiable is given. If none is verifiable, very poorly written.

 2.5 pts

Developing

Only mentions how information is variable, not why it is accurate.

 0 pts

Poor

Does not meet requirements.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBias/PurposeSource Two
5 pts

Excellent

Clearly indicate the source’s bias, purpose, and audience. All relevant questions from the template are answered.

 4 pts

Proficient

Some grammar errors

 3.5 pts

Average

Missing one of the following: bias, purpose, or audience.

 2.5 pts

Developing

Lacks two OR is very poorly written.

 0 pts

Poor

Does not meet requirements.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTimelinessSource Two
3 pts

Excellent

The answer clearly indicates the date of publication (or lack of one) and the currency of information (i.e. is it still likely to be timely for the topic).

 2.1 pts

Average

Poorly written

 1.5 pts

Developing

Only gives the date of publication.

 0 pts

Poor

Does not meet requirements.

3 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRelevanceSource Two
3 pts

Excellent

Gives at least one reason why the information is relevant to your research by explaining how it can or cannot possibly be used for your argument.

 2.1 pts

Average

Poorly written

 1.5 pts

Developing

Why it is relevant is unclear.

 0 pts

Poor

Does not meet requirements.

3 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOverall EvaluationSource Two
10 pts

Excellent

 8 pts

Proficient

Some grammar errors

 7 pts

Average

Clear evaluation but underdeveloped support

 5 pts

Developing

Very poor grammar and/or unclear evaluation OR your evaluation does not make sense given the analysis.

 0 pts

Poor

Does not meet requirements.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTemplate and Minimum Source TypesCorrectly uses the template and meets the requirement that one source is from the library and the other is from the open web.
10 pts

Full Marks

 5 pts

Did Not Use Template

 0 pts

Only One Type of Source

Fails to have a source from the library AND the open web.

10 pts

I will upload my topic down

Explanation & Answer

Our website has a team of professional writers who can help you write any of your homework. They will write your papers from scratch. We also have a team of editors just to make sure all papers are of HIGH QUALITY & PLAGIARISM FREE. To make an Order you only need to click Order Now and we will direct you to our Order Page at Litessays. Then fill Our Order Form with all your assignment instructions. Select your deadline and pay for your paper. You will get it few hours before your set deadline.

Fill in all the assignment paper details that are required in the order form with the standard information being the page count, deadline, academic level and type of paper. It is advisable to have this information at hand so that you can quickly fill in the necessary information needed in the form for the essay writer to be immediately assigned to your writing project. Make payment for the custom essay order to enable us to assign a suitable writer to your order. Payments are made through Paypal on a secured billing page. Finally, sit back and relax.

Do you need an answer to this or any other questions?

Similar Posts

ENGLISH 101 SMC Stress As An Emotion Reaction Paper

ByMagic

Description The reaction paper is your first intervention for this course. I believe these papers will help you develop more self-awareness. And this is crucial for your well-being and relationships. Your reaction paper should be based on watching/listening to one of my pre-recorded lectures, which are below each chapter lecture notes in Modules. This should…

Rasmussen University English Composition Essay

ByMagic

Description Assessments Content Deliverable 05 – English Composition CompetencyUse collaboration techniques to correct written documents.InstructionsShow your ability to analyze, correct, and revise the following rough draft, giving your input on the revision necessary to improve the quality of this essay. You will show successful completion of this deliverable by: Providing feedback for corrections/alterations using the…

SBCC Latinas Representations And Hinduism Lecture Discussions

ByMagic

Description 1 Discussion. Latina Discussion (1 attached) Read the first pages (269-270), take a peak at the “Method of Inquiry” (pp. 272-275) and on page 275, dig into the “Discussion” through the rest of the article. Pick two reasons why it is important that Latinas are represented in textbooks.  You can quote directly from the…

write a letter

ByMagic

Description write a Letter of Interest, highlighting your relevant work experience and qualifications for this position. the position Information Technology (IT) Skills Software expertise Computer proficient Expertise in Mathematics Priority management Ability to handle Cash in a fast paced environment Strong Customer service Skills Time management Education High School Diploma 2016 El Cajon Valley High…