This document summarizes the evaluation of two websites - WebMD and LD Online - regarding their credibility on information about executive function skills. It analyzes their authority, accuracy, currency, and objectivity based on attributes like author qualifications, references, dates, and presence of biases or advertisements. Both sites provided generally reliable information, though LD Online offered more detailed and relevant resources specifically about executive function skills with less distracting ads.

1. Website Evaluation
Tutorial
A Comparison of Executive Function Skills Websites
Lori Sand
EDTL 6360
Module 3

2. This presentation will demonstrate the process of evaluating websites
for credibility using two websites containing information about
Executive Function Skills.
Website #1 is a page from a site called WebMD
http://www.webmd.com/add-adhd/executive-function
Website #2 is page from a site called LD Online
http://www.ldonline.org/article/29122/
This website evaluation process will use four areas for determining
the reliability of these webpages: Authority, Accuracy, Currency, and
Objectivity.

3. AuthorityIsthereanauthor?Aretheyqualified?Whoisthe
sponsor?
Website #1 Website #2
This page does not list a specific
author for its content. There is a
name listed as a "reviewer" with
an active link to a biography of
this individual. The biography is
also part of the WebMD site.
When "googled", this individual's
credentials can be verified as
accurate.
When WebMD is "googled" a
variety of perceptions arise, with
one recurring theme that WebMD
is a commercial, profit driven
organization.
Sponsors for WebMD are
companies paying for advertising.
The page lists two authors with a
date as a by-line. At the end of
the "article," there is a reference
to the authors book and it's
publishing house. Both authors
can be "googled" for credentials
and information.
The owner for this website is non-
profit PBS company listed as
WETA Learning Media. It hosts
several other education related
websites.
The sponsors listed (as
advertising) are limited and less
obtrusive.

4. AccuracyIstheinformationreliable? Errorfree? Isthere
someonewhoverifiestheinformation?
Website #1 Website #2
The page has a link to a list of
references for the information
provided. Including an About
page listing staff and editors.
The page within the website
does list a reviewer who can be
googled for credentials.
The page is professionally
written and contains no spelling
or grammar errors.
The page has links to other
resources.
The website itself has a
comprehensive page outlining
staff, mission, funders and
awards.
The page is professionally
written and contains no spelling
or grammar errors.

5. Currency Isthepagecurrent?Thelinkscurrent?Datespresent
toprovethis?
Website #1 Website #2
The page lists a date for when it
was last reviewed by the reviewer.
It does not list a date for when it
was authored or added to the
website.
Using a WHOIS search, only the
ownership of the entire website is
available, not the information for
individual articles.
All of the resource links work but
they are on a much broader range
of topics.
The specific Executive Functioning
Skills page has a date regarding
publication. There is not a recent
update record.
Using a WHOIS search, there is a
date for the last time the database
for the website was updated.
This webpage contains six links
with topics /subtopics specifically
for Executive Functioning Skills
such as behavior management
and homework.

6. ObjectivityIstheinformationminimallybiased?Advertisement
onthepage?Doespagedesignswayreader’sopinion?
Website #1 Website #2
While the body of the webpage does
not appear to be presented in a biased
manner, promoting a theory or a
product, the surrounding information
on the webpage does. Most of the
advertising and the "resource" links
are related to ADD and ADHD issues
and products. At first glance or by
association, it appears that Executive
Functioning Skills are related only to
ADD and ADHD.
The information presented in the body
of this article appears to be presented
in an unbiased manner. While there
are advertisements for related
products, they are very few. The fact
that the authors wrote a book on the
subject, could point to a bias in that
the information is solely from their
point of view. The resources listed
(and linked) are from several sources.
The website that the page is on is
dedicated to Learning Disabilities and
one could surmise that Executive
Functioning Skills are unique to
Learning Disabilities until the article is
fully read.

7. Conclusion of Reliability
Both of the websites reviewed for credibility have value. WebMD,
being a commercial site, had a broad overview but less relevant
resources for expanding information.
The LD Online website had more detailed information regarding
Executive Functioning Skills and the additional resources provided
were specific to the subject.
I feel as though both sites were trustworthy. The information
presented on both pages was consistent. I prefer the LD Online page
because there is less advertising clutter and more relevant extensions
of the subject in the form of clickable links.
For student use, explaining that sites like WebMD are a good starting
point for researching information, but that additional resources will be
needed depending on the reason for the search.

8. Credits
CRITICAL EVALUATION OF A WEB SITE: WEB SITES FOR USE BY
EDUCATORS
http://www.schrockguide.net/critical-evaluation.html
Evaluation Criteria
http://lib.nmsu.edu/instruction/evalcrit.html
Website Evaluation Tutorial
http://www.widener.edu/about/campus_resources/wolfgram_li
brary/evaluate/default.aspx
WHOIS Domain Search
http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/index.jsp