Good or Bad Resource?
Primary resources are always considered good.
If you’re working with secondary or tertiary resources, you may find it difficult to determine their accuracy. Wild guesses are frowned upon in academia, so here’s a list of criteria which may guide you in the right direction.
Probably Good – It has been written by an expert or scholar within the discipline. (Has the author been quoted in text books or by other authors? Are they famous for their work in this discipline? Do an internet search on them, or ask someone you know who works in the field.) – It has cited materials. (Look for footnotes or endnotes, a bibliography, etc.) – It uses academic language and vocabulary which would be used by people who work or study in the discipline. (If it would be easily understood by a Grade 8 student, be suspicious.) – It goes into a certain amount of depth. (Two-hundred and fifty words do not constitute an academic article: academics love to read.) – It is not pretty. (Are the pages glossy? Are there lots of unnecessary pictures or illustrations? Are there lots of advertisements and perfume samples?)
- It’s notorious within the discipline for being incorrect or unsubstantiated. (Has the author been repeatedly addressed as “a quack”?)
- It’s very short.
- It uses extremely simple or informal vocabulary.
- It has glossy pages and things to make it pretty.
- It’s trying to sell something rather than impart information.
- Previous article Primary, Secondary, or Tertiary Resources