-
Want to take part in this year's BoS Trials event for Maths and/or Business Studies? Click here for details and register now! -
YOU can help the next generation of students in the community! Share your trial papers and notes on our Notes & Resources page
help with validity and reliability (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter McKala
- Start date
russianROULETTE
Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2007
- Messages
- 830
- Gender
- Female
- HSC
- 2008
i did this in history as part of an annotated bibliography... if you're unsure about how to go about it, cover a few of the following points:
what did you use the source for [simple background research, or comprehensive information on someting etc]? was it useful/effective as a source? was it easily accessible or difficult to navigate? how does it compare to other sources you have used? how good (accurate/reliable) was the information provided i.e.
wikipedia - this source has a tendency to be unreliable hence it was used only for the purpose of gaining background knowledge on the topic. However it was effective in this role.
really good site - this site was effective as a source as the information it provides on [insert point here] was accurate and comprehensive. however it does not include/there is less information on [insert point here]
so on and so forth. good luck
what did you use the source for [simple background research, or comprehensive information on someting etc]? was it useful/effective as a source? was it easily accessible or difficult to navigate? how does it compare to other sources you have used? how good (accurate/reliable) was the information provided i.e.
wikipedia - this source has a tendency to be unreliable hence it was used only for the purpose of gaining background knowledge on the topic. However it was effective in this role.
really good site - this site was effective as a source as the information it provides on [insert point here] was accurate and comprehensive. however it does not include/there is less information on [insert point here]
so on and so forth. good luck
For reliability, also mention if it is an organisation - medical, scientific and government organisations tend to be reliable.
For validity mention if the source is up to date or outdated. Also check the country from which it comes from (ie if the question asks you to talk about something that has happened in Australia, statistics from other countries may be useful but not relevant)
For validity mention if the source is up to date or outdated. Also check the country from which it comes from (ie if the question asks you to talk about something that has happened in Australia, statistics from other countries may be useful but not relevant)
Ok to check validity you need to check who wrote it (if they are well known), when (to see if the ideas are outdated), for who (there may be an agenda) and under what organisation (if the place the work is respectable)
Reliability might be cross checking it with other ideas from other scientist (they could be saying the wrong thing). Also where it appeared (it could be made up) ect...
Reliability might be cross checking it with other ideas from other scientist (they could be saying the wrong thing). Also where it appeared (it could be made up) ect...