Selection Criteria Selection Criteria
Evaluation of Internet Resources for the ELISAD Gateway
If a resource falls within the scope of the ELISAD websites collection, it should be evaluated in terms of content, form and process.
These criteria are not as easy to define as the scope criteria, and you will need to weigh up the strengths and weaknesses of a resource to find an overall decision. Here are some questions and key words intended to helpful in the choice process for the working group and also the Editorial Board.
Evaluation criteria applied here are corresponding to options in the gateway data collection tool and subject of discussion by the whole working group.
1 Content Criteria
1.1 Validity
1.2 Authority and Reputation of Source
1.3 Substantiveness
1.4 Accuracy
1.5 Comprehensiveness
1.6 Uniqueness
1.7 Composition and Organisation
1.8 Currency / maintenance
2 Form Criteria
2.1 Ease of Navigation
2.2 Provision of User Support
2.3 Use of Recognised Standards
2.4 Appropriate use of Technology
2.5 Aesthetics
3 Process Criteria
3.1 Information Integrity
3.2 Site Integrity
3.3 System Integrity
Apply content criteria by looking at and evaluating the information contained in the resource. Remember that
The information content is a primary consideration when evaluating AOD Internet resources for the ELISAD Internet Catalogue. The gateway aims to point to primary information and not just to present lists of links. Information should be valid, accurate and current, and should come from a valid and authoritative source. The information should be substantive, for example giving organisational information (e.g. concept, structure, philosophy, activities) as opposed to merely contact details.
Your content evaluation is facilitated by subject-related descriptive options (checkboxes) in the gateway data collection instrument, the ELISAD online form. You can add more descriptive information using the freetext fields. The website should display enough information on the activities scope of an organisation / institution to enable you to write an appropriate website abstract (10-15 lines).
The term "quality" is used here in a service-oriented definition according to the potential needs of professional target groups in AOD.
The content of resources can be evaluated by considering the following criteria:
Is the website representing an institution / organisation / initiative / association ? Is it a private, NGO or public / governmental association ?
As an institutional /organisational internet presence, does the website fulfil its purpose in terms of informativity and communicability ?
Does the resource / website have a scope statement ("about", conception, history, purpose etc.) ? Are motivation, aims, philosophy and ideological background evident ?
Does the Website represent the organisation´s or institution´s work and activities in appropriate manner giving detail and primary information ?
Does the website represent a project ? Is it clearly evident who is conducting that project for which reasons and objectives ?
Are the sources of the information stated ?
Is/Are the publisher(s) and author(s) of the website contents and documents evident ? Is the web administrator evident ? is there an editorial board ? Are there contact possibilities ?
Is the information genuine i.e. what it appears to be? Does the information available correspondend to the scope formulation´s content ?
URL - Does the URL support the claim of authorship?
Email addresses: are emails for a publisher, the author, referees, sources, etc. given?
Contact details: are addresses and phone numbers given that support claims of authorship, staff/members, sponsorship etc.?
Does the resource point to other sources which could be contacted for confirmation?
Is the content of the resource verifiable - can you cross check the information?
Does the information claim to be unbiased (when in fact it is biased)? If there is political ideologay, are there clear mission statements ?
1.2 Authority and Reputation of the Source
Who provides the information? Who is the website publisher ?
Is the publishing institution/organisation /company displayed?
Are the sources of the information stated ?
Is the URL an originate DENIC registration ? a university server? a commercial domain ? a governmental domain ?
Are the institution´s/organisation´s staff or members full names displayed?
How reputable is the information provider?
Have you heard of the institution / organisation /project before?
Are the topics covered on the website clearly falling in the publisher's area?
Has the publisher provided other /previous publications of note?
Is the website sponsored ? are banners / advertises on it ?
What is the level of moderation for mailing lists and newsgroups ?
Is the website linked to by multiple Internet sites?
Has the material been disseminated by a trade publisher?
Is the website sponsored by a company, organisation or individual widely recognised as an authority or expert in the field?
Via what source did you come across the resource? (i.e. did someone authoritative recommend it? search engine ? detective software tools ?)
Is the information substantive?
Does the resource contain more than contact details?
Is the information full-text? (As opposed to just references)
Is there value added information? If the resource consists of a collection of links, is there substantial annotation or value-added information? (e.g. an annotated bibliography, website descriptions in a gateway)
ALL institutions, organisations, initiatives, projects: Is a scope formulation, general conception, history, philosophy, aims, mission statement available ? Is the general orientation evident ? Does the resource include an overview on organisational structure, staff and members ? Is background information given on the type of organisation and financing / funding situation ?
AOD services / treatment: Are detailed descriptions given for the treatment approaches / facilities and service offers the institution provides ? Is clear information on access and conditions for persons requiring therapy or services given ? Can you learn about more activities of the institution (e.g. trainings, conferences&) from their website ? Is information on psychoactive substances, addictive behavior, consequences of AOD use, target groups available ?
AOD research: Are scientific disciplines, thematic focus, methodological and theoretical approaches evident ? Is there an overview of finalised and current research projects ? Can you learn about actual themes (substances, populations) of research ? Are reports and other publications available online (fulltext ? abstacts ? references?) Is there information on more/other activities of the institute (lectures, conferences, etc.) ?
AOD policy: Are principles, general perspective, orientation and paradigms of political activities available from the website content ? Is there accurate information on actors /persons and activities in AOD policy given ? Are there basic political documents available ?
AOD documentation / information: Are focus and kind of documentation evident ? Are numbers and types of documents given ? Are there searchable databases online available ? Are descriptions of information services and target groups evident ?
Journals: is information available on actual and past issues, themes, authors, disciplines ? Are tables of content, abstracts, articles available for free ? How about the costs /registration ?
AOD prevention: are prevention aims, definitions, focus stated ? Are there detailed descriptions of prevention activities and programs available ? Is the website itself (part of) a prevention measure ? Are target group(s) and substance specific focus evident ?
Is the information accurate?
Are you able to check the accuracy of the information?
Does the page cite cooperation to other institutions / organisations or provide references to confirm the accuracy of the information?
Are the grammar and spelling accurate?
Are there a large number of typographical errors?
To what level of detail does the resource go?
Is the title informative?
Is an abstract given? Is it unproblematic to create an abstract for the website using the information given in the scope statement (see 1.1 /1.3) ? How exhaustive is the background information available ?
Is there an opening mission statement of the purpose of the resource?
Are key words evident that indicate the information content?
Is the language used comprehensive for general public or academic public ?
Is everything you expect to find in the site there?
Is some of the information incomplete?
Are all aspects of the subject covered?
Does the index or contents page imply comprehensive coverage?
Is the information on the website unique?
Is it primary material?
Is there any original work available at the site?
Does the material have any relation to other works?
Is the site inward focused i.e. not just a list of links to external sites?
1.7 Composition and Organisation
Is the information well composed? Is the information clearly organised?
Is there a good website structure? Is the information within a resource arranged logically and consistently? Is the information broken down into logical parts?
Is the resource organised by the needs of the user? Is the information broken down into digestible parts? Is the content clearly described? Are the headings clear and descriptive? Is the resource well laid out? Are graphical elements serving as navigation help or cause to confusion ?
Does the text follow basic rules of grammar, spelling and literary composition?
Does it include jargon?
2. Form Criteria: Evaluating the Medium
Form criteria can be applyed by looking at and evaluating the medium, design and presentation of the resource. Remember that on the Internet the way a resource looks depends on the equipment you are using and the way that your equipment is set up, so different people will see the resource in different forms.
The ELISAD gateway likes to point to resources that are user-friendly. They should be easy to navigate, provide adequate user-support and make appropriate use of technology. However, resources with valuable information content should not be rejected on form criteria alone.
The form of resources can be evaluated by considering the following criteria:
Is it easy to navigate the resource? Are there hidden website sections and documents that are difficult to discover?
Does it take more than three 'clicks' (three links) to get to something interesting?
Do all the links serve an easily identified purpose? Are all the links clearly labelled?
Are there good back and forward links between pages?
Can a particular page be located from any other page?
Do you ever find yourself in a position where there are no hyper-links to anywhere else? Are hyperlinks ambiguous i.e. is it obvious where a link is leading you to?
Are the individual web pages concise or do you have to scroll forever?
Do images support ease of navigation?
Are graphics/sounds/videos clearly labelled and identified?
Can pages or portions of a document be printed separately?
Are there single document options for those resources that may be printed?
For discussion in mailing lists and Usenet groups, are digests available?
Is it easy to browse the resource? Is there an index? Is the resource indexed electronically?
Is it easy to search the resource? Does the system have an effective website search facility? Is keyword searching possible? How effectively can information be retrieved from the resource?
Is it easy to search the database? Does the database have an effective search facility? Is keyword searching possible? Is field-oriented search possible ? Is there an option for simple and advanced search ? How effectively can information be retrieved from the database?
Are there instructions? Is there online help? Is contextual help available?
Are there other navigation help facilities such as a sitemap ?
Is there a website search possibility ? Is there a search engine help ? Do essential instructions appear before links and interactive portions?
Is there an email or interactive 'Help Desk'? Is there a telephone helpline? Are training materials/courses provided? Are direct links provided for the download of free software applications ?
2.3 Use of Recognised Standards
Is the website written in standard HTML?
Have proprietary extensions to the HTML been added that some
browsers will not recognise?
Are there documents in PDF or other formats ? Are there download possibilities for according tools ? Do you get java script error messages ? Any other error messages ?
2.4 Appropriate use of Technology
How appropriate is the format?
Does it do more than can be done with print?
Is appropriate interactivity available? Do you get a feedback if you send some data or mail using the according website options ?
Has consideration been given to the appearance of the site? Does the resource follow good design principles? Does it look and feel friendly? Is the balance of text, images, links, headers, font sizes and white space good?
Are the size, colour and animation of the images appropriate?
3. Process Criteria: Evaluating the System
Apply process criteria by considering the processes and systems which exist to support the information resource. Remember that on the Internet resources are volatile and are likely to change over time. The integrity of Internet resources is dependent on the original information provider, the Web site manager, and the underlying technology.
The ELISAD gateway aims to point to resources that are physically accessible and stable, and that are adequately maintained. The information, the interface and the system supporting the resource should all be reliable.
The processes associated with resources can be evaluated by considering the following criteria:
3.1 Information Integrity (work of the Information Provider)
Is the information current and up to date? Is the latest update evident ? Is regular updating indexed ? Is the date given stating when the Web item was created?
Do the stated dates correspond to the information in the resource?
How current is the material included ?
Is the information durable in nature?
If the site contains data or information that are time-sensitive, how current are these data and information? How time-sensitive is the information, and how does this relate to frequency of update? (e.g. for resources such as timetables, schedules and conference announcements)
If it is a static resource (not updated) will the information be of lasting use to the audience? Is the information of a type that has a limited period of use?
Is there adequate maintenance of the information content?
Are time-sensitive resources available in near real-time?
Is the information provider likely to be able to maintain the information?
Is the resource improved, enlarged and updated appropriately?
Has the data been updated recently? Is there a statement about the frequency of update? Are there cpoyrights of the publisher evident ?
3.2 Site Integrity (work of the Web-Site Manager)
Is the site current and up to date?
Are there any dead links? Are there links to sites that have moved?
Are all the pages dated with the creation/ last revision date?
Is the date of last update to the resource displayed? Are you being redirected to a new URL?
Is the site either proven to be, or expected to be durable?
Is there a description of the update frequencies for the resources?
Is the site frequently updated/maintained?
Is the site adequately administered and maintained? Is there a possibility to contact the website administrator directly for problems, propositions etc. ?
Does the organisation or institution hosting the resource seem to have the commitment to the ongoing maintenance and stability of the resource?
3.3 System Integrity (work of the Systems Administrator)
Is the technical performance of the resource acceptable?
Is the resource currently accessible? Is it usually possible to reach the site or is it overloaded?
Is the system stable? Are the connections to the site providing the information reliable and stable?
Are adequate measures taken to maintain the integrity of the system?
Is the site mirrored?