Evaluating Sources

What if you had tons of sources? It happens. During the writing process, we are often bombarded with so many pieces of information, like those stick notes or magnets on our fridges. Unfortunately, we are not able to display them all on the paper. Not only are readers not able to digest that many lines, unselected evidence and supporting details often leaves our audience an impression of discursiveness.

Enter the word satisficing. Do not worry if you aren unfamiliar with this word, because it is not a natural one. Satisficing combines satisfying with sacrifice, which perfectly outlines what is going on in tailoring your sources to your need: You need to sacrifice some of the sources for satisfaction.

But how? That is where CRAAP model comes to play.

What is CRAAP model?

CRAAP is an acronym that stands for Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, and Purpose. It has been widely used in American universities, the origin of which is unknown. It provides an effective framework for you to quickly reexamine your sources. The following questions in each category are excerpted from a Duquesne University's Library online page, which I think has covered all points in your self-questioning process. Please enjoy.

Currency: the timeliness of the information

When was the information published or posted?
Has the information been revised or updated?
Is the information current or out-of date for your topic?
Are the links functional?

Relevance: the importance of the information for your needs

Does the information relate to your topic or answer your question?
Who is the intended audience?
Is the information at an appropriate level (i.e. not too elementary or advanced for your needs)?
Have you looked at a variety of sources before determining this is one you will use?
Would you be comfortable using this source for a research paper?

Authority: the source of the information
Who is the author/publisher/source/sponsor?
Are the author's credentials or organizational affiliations given?
What are the author's credentials or organizational affiliations given?
What are the author's qualifications to write on the topic?
Is there contact information, such as a publisher or e-mail address?
Does the URL reveal anything about the author or source? Examples:
- com (commercial),
- .edu (educational),
- .gov (U.S. government),
- .org (nonprofit organization),
- or .net (network)

Accuracy: the reliability, truthfulness, and correctness of the content

Where does the information come from?
Is the information supported by evidence?
Has the information been reviewed or refereed?
Can you verify any of the information in another source or from personal knowledge?
Does the language or tone seem biased and free of emotion?
Are there spelling, grammar, or other typographical errors?

Purpose: the reason the information exists
What is the purpose of the information? to inform? teach? sell? entertain? persuade?
Do the authors/sponsors make their intentions or purpose clear?
Is the information fact? opinion? propaganda?
Does the point of view appear objective and impartial?
Are there political, ideological, cultural, religious, institutional, or personal biases?

Now Practice!

Google Sites

Report abuse