Evaluating Web Sites Chart

Site 1 Name. BP: 4
Strengths: Good for kids, easy to read and navigate through and links were helpful.
Weaknesses: Site was cluttered and not reliable. Unclear purpose.

Site 2 Name. Smoking from all Sides: 5
Strengths: Tried to cover all perspectives
Weaknesses: Some links were not working and not relevant
. Boring to navigate.

Site 3 Name. DHM: 3
Strengths: Links were important for some people to know (EX: Dairy) and layout was easy to follow. Good side links (related info) = good credibility.
Weaknesses: Does not present both sides of argument equally and may be hard for younger users to understand.
Selling product takes away from credibility.

Site 4 Name. Dino: 1
Strengths: Easy navigation, good navigation with pictures to follow. Distinguishes fact vs opinion. Berkeley site, therefore reliable.
Weaknesses: Layout was not engaging - design, color, etc.


Site 5 Name. Jacopo: 2
Strengths: Descriptions on pictures, easy to follow and was unbiased and relevant links. Design was good - flash intro and good navigation.
Weaknesses:
Outdated disclaimer on link validity.



In one or two sentences, defend your choice for the #1 site related to the criteria you were assigned:
Dino site was the most credible with relevant links that outlined what was fact and fiction. Easy to navigate through and author was not biased. Wide audience appeal - kids and scholars.