Post a composite review
Unpost a composite review
Search all MERLOT
Select to go to your profile
Select to go to your workspace
Select to go to your Dashboard Report
Select to go to your Content Builder
Select to log out
Search Terms
Enter username
Enter password
Please give at least one keyword of at least three characters for the search to work with. The more keywords you give, the better the search will work for you.
Select OK to launch help window
Cancel help


Advanced Search


Peer Review

Plagiarism and Academic Scholarship



Overall Numeric Rating:

3 stars
Content Quality: 3.3 stars
Effectiveness: 2 stars
Ease of Use: 3.5 stars
Reviewed: Jun 08, 2004 by Information Technology Editorial Board
Overview: A reference material providing links to information about how to evaluate Web
resources and how to detect plagiarism. It also provides searching tips.
Additional resources assist with proper citation references.

Type of Material:
Reference material: This is text based material with links to resources and
Recommended Uses: This material can be used to direct students to resources for research and for
instructors to assess papers for plagiarism.

Technical Requirements: HTML
Identify Major Learning Goals: To acquaint teachers and students with resources on how to evaluate Web
resources and detect plagiarism.
Target Student Population: College
Prerequisite Knowledge or Skills: None

Evaluation and Observation

Content Quality

Rating: 3.3 stars
Strengths: Lists web site evaluation criteria.The site serves as a hub to other resources
for writing research papers.

Concerns: Lacks definitions, introductions to the material and its three sections, and
explanations. (e.g. The first section, Evaluating Web Sites, starts with a list
of Web Site Evaluation Criteria without any introduction or explanation. The
source of the criteria stated, therefore, not identified. )The hyperlink to
Lies, Damned Lies, & Web Pages: Falsehoods on the Internet does
not get the article.?Web Search Tools that Evaluate? section has a hyperlink to which does not appear to be a web search tool.Misspelling:
?curriculm?; ? in the URL for the White House.There are many
more resources available with greater depth than those presented here.

Potential Effectiveness as a Teaching Tool

Rating: 2 stars
Strengths: A reference material providing links to information about how to evaluate Web
resources and how to detect plagiarism.While geared primarily toward instructors
this site does offer alternative language for students in writing papers as
well as samples to correctly cite sources.
Concerns: Introductions to the sections and explanations are needed to make the material
useful as a teaching-learning tool.Because the site has such limited materials
and there are better alternatives this site's effectiveness is minimal.

Ease of Use for Both Students and Faculty

Rating: 3.5 stars
Strengths: Easy to use.This site is written as a resource to students and faculty and has
easy to follow links and a navigation bar to easily return to the home page.


Other Issues and Comments: