Module 4 Tasks - Evaluating the Web

In your own words, write an annotation for the source which could communicate to a reader both your 'judgement' of the site according to what you have learnt from the tutorial, and also the following information:
the reliability and authority of the site / source / article
the main ideas or subjects discussed in the article
the purpose for which the site was written (this might include any apparent external interest, intellectual motivation or contextual information).
Record your annotation in your learning log.

I originally chose http://www.k12science.org/tutorials/advanced/ which is an Advanced Internet User Tutorial from an organisation called CIESE (The Centre for Innovation in Engineering and Science Education). Although the site appears to be commercial it has the suffix .org which suggests that it is a non-profit organisation but this is not conclusive. CIESE was founded in 1988 with the goal to improve K-12 science and mathematics education through the use of technology. It seems to be a reliable site. It recieves funding from grants issued by various US government departments. It provides links to journals written by their staff or about the organisation by others. It also lists awards and recognitions that they have recieved. The tutorial covers various procedures and aspects of the browsing on the Internet. The procedures are divided into individual subjects that have browser specific instructions and practice exercises.
After using the tools learnt in the tutorial exercise, I believe the site is a valid source. It comes highly referenced, gains government funding and has been around for quite some time. These factors along with the tutorial itself, lead me to conclude that this is an appropriate site to recommend for the Advanced Internet User.


Compare your final analysis and annotation with the material you saved for the last task, and think about these questions (you may wish to discuss these questions in your group)
in terms of your own future use, which 'body ' of information (ie. the original 'snapshot' of the site, or your own, annotated, analytical version) would be most useful to refer back to?
I definitely believe my second annotated format on the web site is more useful. It is more thorough and uses the skills learnt in the tutorial. The annotated format covers purpose, who authored the site, links and references and a more detailed look at the content. The previous version gave a quick review of what the site contained and what CIESE stood for.


In term of external users (i.e. if you included this site as a hyperlink or resource on a website) which body of information would best help them judge if the site was useful or of interest to them?
The tutorial page has the main body of information that suits an Advanced Internet User looking for information. It has the tutorials, exercises and browser specific instructions to perform the task at hand. To validate the site for the user, the "About Us" link shows where CIESE is from, their mission and how they operate. It gives validity and credibility to the site and its information.