Pls Response any 2 (Two)
Case # 1
I would say that source 1 was a great source because it had sources to backup the given information. I would however, have to say that it was hard to read because of black background and white letters.
I would have to say that source 2 was a great source to get statistics from. To me this page would be easy to follow. This is an .edu site which normally tends to have information based on facts rather than opinions.
Source 3 to me is not credible because it is a Wikipedia source which can be changed based upon opinion and not actually facts.
Source 4 to me would not be considered credible because it is a blog which has subjective information on it. I do not feel that information on a blog would be a good source for a research paper because I do not feel that the information may not be true.
Source 5 to me could be considered credible and not credible because it did give the author’s information and her references but some may see the .com and just say that it was not credible because these sites could be purchased and used by any person.
Case # 2
1. This article is creditable becasue it has many references to back up what is being said. But I do not agree with the writer voicing his own personal opinion. Secondly the article was harder to read becasue it had a black background.
This is a creditable website full of information. It is considered a reference page more than an article. It has articles within it for the reader to read and the information can be accessed through the links provided.I think that the definitions of both Capital Punishment and Death Penalty should have been listed at the top of the page so that the reader could understand the difference between the two and it would have more been more fluent.
3. This is a good article that includes reference pages to be accessed so that the reader can check and cross reference the subject being discussed.
4. This is not a creditable site. The name itself lets the reader know it is a blog site. This means that it can be publicly edited by anyone even if they are not an expert on the subject. This article does not use references to back up what is being said or how they obtained the information.
5. This article is not a creditable site becasue the writer is a expert on politics not the law. Which means she just want to be politically correct not necessarily morally right. There are no good creditable references to back up what the experts in their field to support what is being said.
Case # 3
Good evening class. Upon starting reading from the first source, while I found it full of information, I had an extremely hard time reading it, having the black background with white letters. It took the longest to read and left me with a headache from trying to focus the words. The second source was very informative, and being from a reputable source, the Bureau of Justice, I found it to be a resourceful tool in learning about capital punishment. The third source, Wikipedia gave similar information, but isn’t a reliable source, only informative for research to reliable sources. The fourth source, or blog, was not a good choice for research for a paper. It relied solely on China, so if you are studying statistics in the United States, it would not be useful. The last source was very informative with reputable sources and statistics. It was easy to read and understand, and would be useful in research. I learned in this weeks lecture that it is crucial to use only reliable, creditable sources that are factual. Wikipedia is good for research to lead to reputable sources, but is unreliable on it’s own.
Leave a Reply