What Do You Think: Example #1

Example #1: How did you gauge the credibility of a site? What criteria did you use in assessment of the website? What more would you need to know about a site to render an informed decision? What makes a history website valuable for your research and teaching?

Comments

[tokiujosa]

Hello

It is healthy, I shall come on your site more often, thank.

http://niko.onecoolhost.info/girl-065.html


Bye

[dwarb]

This web site appears to be credible based on the association of the Smithsonian. The fact that it is printable gives confidence that the format will be correct.

[mlg]

thought it was credible; but may need some more info. good that it was put out by the Smithsonian.

[Chuck]

Example 1--Because it's from Smithsonian the reputation of the institute helps immediately. The graphics are also inviting and draw the browser in.

[Bryan Back]

the Smithsonian site appeared to be credible, professional, with multiple options, etc. one would expect the Smithsonian to check thier facts and be accurate.

[David Tiley]

Coming from Australia, I am not keyed into the Smithsonian logo and missed it.

In general it looked very slick, which doesn't work so well for me. Smacks of marketing people being involved, some inability to admit the dialectical nature of history, and a paucity of information.

It has a romantic look to it which puts me on guard.

I have a problem when a site seems to come from a television source because the history in that area is so degraded. I know this is a museum, but the look made me think television.

[Debra Hutton]

I love that it's from the Smithsonian, always a source of quality information. Also, it has a fantastic look. It's color scheme and graphics give it a very professional and polished appearance.

[Carolyn Leck]

Although each site presented would supply a researcher with a vast amount of infomation there are a few of the observations I had of the presentations:
Example #1 "Price O Freedom" was very effective with the use of exciting pictures and earth-tone colors which are a great representation of what we think of when we think of Native American culture.

[Steve Clark]

My decision to was based on the credibility of the source. Smithsonian

[John Seal]

Due to the fact that it is a Smithsonian website gives this immediate crediblity, however there needs to be information given at this site. This site could be very useful in teaching both U.S. and Kansas History Standards since it gives insight to the large problem we faced in the plains in the 1870's.John S in Kansas

[Brian Ogilvie]

The site looks impressive. But there doesn't seem to be that much information presented on any given page, and it uses "mystery meat navigation" at the bottom (i.e., pictures that don't indicate where clicking on them will take you--see Vincent Flanders's webpagesthatsuck.com for further explanation). And I'm often disappointed by museum websites that tell you less than you would learn by going to the exhibit and looking at the artifacts and labels there. The scroll bar on the text window is almost half the size of the window, so there are at most a few more paragraphs on this page. That implies that the ratio of useful content to flashy images (like the background) is going to be low.

[JP]

I would hope that this would be very credible because it is found on the Smithsonian site. I expect them to have reliable information.

[Don hageman]

I was surprised that it did not project what it descriibed as well as the others.

[Mindy A]

Ditto on the Smithsonian. Also, it looked easy to navigate for more information.

[Bill Wolff]

I thought it was a sort of credible site based on the layout of the site. Though after reading the other comments its apparent I missed the Smithsonian logo in my skimming of it.

[Eddie K]

This site seemed to be the most authentic. Having the Smithsonian Museum of American History on it caught my eye. The site seemed to be very well done. I thought this was the best of the six sites.

[Debbie Shaffer]

I judged this site credible due to the fact that first of all there is the smithsonian logo, then secondly due to the layout. I felt that this layout was basic, but yet the few paragraphs that were on the first page of it did caputre my attention.

[Mike McEwan]

I saw the smithsonian logo, which carries alot of weight when figuring its credibility.

[Mary C.]

I liked the layout. It looked professional. The picture behind the picture made it really stand out. There was a good amount of information listed, and the pictures at the bottom really helped it look authentic.

[Greg Traxson]

I noticed the Smithsonian logo which immediatly gained my trust. The links to artifacts also showed me that this site is well thought out and planned.

[A. Cephalous]

I didn't notice the Smithsonian stamp, but the overall design of the website swayed me: no ad banners and evidence of a professional eye for color coordination. The nuanced color scheme compares quite favorably to red, white and blue monstrosities whose addresses I will not share for fear they are what has led to my indictment as a bit of comment spam.

[Diane Reeves]

I feel this is a crediable site because it had Smithsonian name in the bottom portion of the site. I like the way the site is oraganized. It seems like it would be easy to follow and I like the lay out. I also liked the design of it and I feel students would be drawn to it because of the pictures and explanation of the feature.

[M. Ballard]

Example #1

Because of the Smithsonian logo I judged this site as credible and would have used it to as a resource.

[Dan]

I tended to look at the information to find credibility, but when I got to subjects I did not know much about,I found it hard to tell. If hte site has the Smithsonian seal, it has to be credible, right?

[Brady]

This website was very credible and I immediately saw that it was from the Smithsonian Institute, which is well-known. The design was also very professional.