Example of Simple Source Evaluation

ESUS 1 CW1: Reading & Writing Section 2&3

Section 2 - Source evaluation

1) Authority: This text has authority to a certain extent, the author is easily identifiable (Daniel Schwartz). The report is under the supervision of Aldo Lale-Demoz who is the director of the UNODC which is an independent organisation, however there is some doubts about the authority, for example it does not provide the readers with background information of the author therefore his expertise are questioned.

2) Reliability: This text is reliable in the sense that it is very factual, it is also filled with statistics that were gathered and published by a world renowned and trustworthy independent organisation called the UNODC which is also a non profit organisation. There are many references and citations within this text thus making it very credible and reliable with the exception of the lack of the authors background and expertise. The UNODC deals in drugs, crimes and trafficking of illegal goods therefore the organisation is relevant to the topic.

3) Objectivity / Subjectivity: This text is very objective, there is no clear sign of personal opinion, statements were made with supporting references to help state the authors case, sources were from government bodies and/or agencies, no language evidence can be found to support that this text is subjective or bias. The authors claims are also supported by evidence and data from the USCBP (U.S Customs and Border Protection Office of International Trade).

4) Currency: It is current, this report was published less than a year ago (2013), all references were no more than 5 years old, therefore all information and arguments are still relevant and in use today. It is still very relatable as we still live in a world filled with "knock offs" and software piracy.

5)Academic Conventions: This text follow academic conventions such as being a very well researched, well structured and planned report, the language style is formal and...