Legitimacy of Operative Websites

Website#1:

Strong African American Families program

https://www.blueprintsprograms.org/

https://www.blueprintsprograms.org/programs/168999999/strong-african-american-families-program/print/

Website#2

The Center for African American Health

https://caahealth.org/about/board

 Legitimate authority ( does it carry legitimate authority?)does it carry legitimate authority? Is there a reputable person, company, or organization behind the website with recognized authority? Often the domain suffix can be helpful in an initial stage of evaluating credibility. Information from .edu, .gov, or .org sites may be more reputable than a .com site. Educational institutions, nonprofit professional organizations, and government entities are often in the business of acquiring and disseminating research-based information without the competing goal of profit. Commercial sites designed for profit may be more

  Website 1:

 Website 2:

 Authorship

 authorship provided? When the name of the author is given, the credentials and contact information are usually also given. This requires an author to stand by his or her work and opens the work to challenges or questions, particularly when the author is accessible by e-mail.

Website 1:

 Website 2:

purpose of the information

What is the purpose of the information? What action would the author of the information like you to take? Is the information designed to advocate a specific position? Does it sell a product or service? Does it inform or entertain? Does it serve to link you to an online community or to redirect you to a commercial enterprise? Identifying the purpose of information may help you recognize any bias in the information. Most reputable websites will identify the mission or purpose of the website; it may be important for one to find out how the mission is being carried out or funded.

  Website 1:

 Website 2:

 Peer review process

Has the information been passed through a peer-review process where there is an opportunity for acceptance or rejection? Online journals or information accepted only after a rigorous review process is generally better information. While not of equal value, even the online reviews generated by consumers or uninvited critics may be useful. More educational sources are following the example of commercial giants such as Amazon in creating these opportunities for informal and ongoing reviews.

Website 1:

 Website 2:

 Current and accurate

Is the information current and accurate? Does it appear to be updated regularly? Dates should indicate when the information was originally written or created. Information with errors is less likely to have been through a review process or to have been edited for clarity and accuracy by a qualified editor.

 Website 1:

 Website 2:

 Relevant to situation

Is the information relevant to your specific situation? Cure-all approaches that provide a single “snake oil” solution for all problems are rarely of significant value. Information that is conveyed cautiously and identifies the specific contexts or conditions is generally more reputable. Individuals should look for specific examples that are similar to their own situation. Quick fixes and single solutions are rarely the answer to family life challenges that are clouded with dozens of interacting variables.

 Website 1:

 Website 2

• Compare Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (PSEL) to FPLS Using a Chart
• Inclusion
• Assessment Strategies
• Education
• Learning Disabilities
• Complete: Florida Principal Leadership Standards Introduction
• Starrat’s Multidimensional Ethic of Caring Implementation
• Chapter 2 Assignment EL Text
• Reaction Essay
• Delegating Responsibilities to Paraeducators