The following criteria and questions can help you to judge the value of a source.
Instructions: Use the document you have found. Answer the following questions. In order to assess the credibility of your chosen source; you may need to do some additional research:
1. First, write the full reference here:
Title:Why organic versus conventional farming is a redundant debate.
Authors:Giles, Jim
Source:New Scientist; 8/8/2009, Vol. 203 Issue 2720, p10-10, 1p
ISSN:02624079
Accession Number:43700863
2. Evaluate Authority: Who is the author of this text? Do they have a degree or other expertise that qualifies them to write on the subject? What else has the author published?
Authors:Giles, Jim
http://www.jimsafe.com/ Jim Giles is reporter in the San Francisco bureau of New Scientist. He writes about science, politics and the environment.
“In December 2005, he and colleagues published a story that compared the accuracy of science articles in Wikipedia to those in Encyclopaedia Britannica. Peer reviewers recruited by Nature identified an average of four inaccuracies in the Wikipedia articles they examined and an average of around three in articles on the same topics in Britannica.[1] Britannica subsequently criticized the story[2], prompting Nature to clarify the methodology used[3] to compile the results.”
“Giles studied physics at the University of Bristol. He received a master's degree in computational neuroscience from the University of Oxford. Giles initially developed exihibitions at the Science Museum in London, joining Nature in 2001 as a news and features editor and becoming a reporter for the journal in 2003.”
3. Evaluate Affiliation: What institution (company, organization, university, etc.) published this text? Is it a commercial or non-profit publisher? What else does the institution publish? Could
the author's affiliation with this publisher bias their work?
New scientist is a group of expert of science writers, colleagues and students since 1956. It is not peer reviwed. http://www.newscientist.com/.
4. Evaluate Currency: When was the text published and/or last updated? Will you use it for current information or for historical context?
New Scientist; 8/8/2009 and as the most of my research it is based on current information but with a little comparison with the organic farming before the 21st century.
5. Evaluate Purpose: What appears to be the purpose of this text? Is it to inform, persuade, entertain, report, or refute? Explain why do you think so.
This article is very interesting since it gives a current idea and information about the farming nowadays, what are the differences and the incentive to use conventional or non organic farming. Moreover, it gives opinion from some opponents "Organic agriculture is not without environmental consequences."
6. Write here specifically what information from this document you are going to use in your paper.
“But could the whole debate about organic versus non-organic be missing the point?” from my perspective I find that the text debate organic farming vs. non organic farming that’s very obvious from the thesis statement of the essay (the first quote in my answer). Therefore, I like to take the part of organic farming but with knowing very well what the opponents think about it, especially in economic matter.
7 Conclusion: Now that you have assessed the source in more detail, do you still think it is useful? Explain why or why not. If it is not useful, what are you going to do about it?
From a research to another, I found myself very related to this topic since I’m very interested about health and food. Moreover, I believe that most of our health problem eg cancer… are related to the way we eat and the quality of food. Therefore, it will be a pleasure to present my topic in an informative way to my classmate, and give them the opportunity to discover the importance of food since from the book that I read “America’s food” there is no substitution of the food in our life.
No comments:
Post a Comment