This is a lesson for school librarians on evaluating resources from the web.

1. Evaluating Website Sources
How do you know when something on
the internet is true?

2. The CRAP Test

3. 1. Currency= is it recent?
●It may have been a good source…. 10 years
ago.
●Is there new information that negates it?
Is Pluto as a planet?
Is a Brontosaurus a
kind of dinosaur?
Columbus was the
first European to
discover America?

5. 2. Reliability
● What kind of information is included in the website?
Is the content primarily fact, or opinion?
Based on your other research, is it accurate?
...complete?
Does the author provide references for
quotations and data?
If there are links, do they work?
●Don’t be fooled by the exact same wording.

7. 4. Authority
●How did the author get this information? Did
they just make it up?
●Can you determine who the author/creator
is?
●Is there a way to contact them?
●Is there evidence they're experts on the
subject?
●Who is the publisher or sponsor of the site?
●Is this publisher/sponsor reputable?

9. 1. Purpose
● What's the intent of the website (to persuade, to sell
you something, etc.)?
How might the domain (.edu, .org, .com, etc.)
influence the purpose/point of view?
Are there ads on the website? How do they relate to the
topic being covered (e.g., an ad for ammunition next to
an article about firearms legislation)?
Who might benefit from a reader believing this website?

10. Hillaryclinton.org bears the likely Democratic presidential candidate's name, but she
would not want supporters to go there: some cyber security experts said this week the site
contains malicious software.
The site is registered, not to Clinton, but to an administrator in the
Cayman Islands. Its existence underscores the challenge 2016 U.S. presidential hopefuls will
face in trying to control their digital brands, more important than ever before as voters increasingly
turn to the Internet to learn more about candidates.
An examination by Reuters of domains including the full names of eight Republican and four
Democratic hopefuls, ending in .com, .org, .net and .info, showed that only a few of those
sites appear to be under the control of the candidates.
The rest are seemingly owned by a hodgepodge of buyers - from self-declared fans of the candidates
to anonymous registrants who have "parked" the domains - that is to say owned but unused - for
undisclosed reasons.
Read more at Reutershttp://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-domains-idUSKBN0MT21O20150402#tLtUUIkdAHqec6Jq.99

11. http://www.dhmo.org/
Is this a reliable source?
1.Yes
2.No

12. http://www.genochoice.com/
Is this source reliable?
1.Yes
2.No

13. http://www.prisonexp.org/
Is this a reliable source?
1.Yes
2.No

14. http://allaboutexplorers.com/
Is this a reliable source?
1.Yes
2.No

15. Some Tips
1.Use DATABASES
1. Ask your librarian
for help.