Assessing Source Credibility for Crafting a Well-Informed Argument
197
W
R
IT
IN
G
SP
AC
E
S 3
dered. Someone could have tried to return her to her owners if she wore
a tag, or Emily could have been turned in to the nearest animal shelter or
humane society. With Emily’s fortune
at the back of your mind, you want
to learn more about animals in animal shelters and possibly write your
findings in a paper.
You have a zillion questions to ask. How many animal shelters are cur-
rently in
operation in the United States, or even in a given state? How
many animals are kept there? What are the most common animals in a
shelter? Do most animals in shelters get adopted? How do shelters ensure
that an animal goes to good hands and not to abusive owners or research
labs? What happens to those who cannot find a
new owner because of their
age, illness, or behavioral problems? How do shelters raise money? What
happens to animals when a shelter cannot house them any longer?
Following in the steps of dozens of your fellow classmates, you opened
a Google search and typed in “animal shelter” (see figure 1). Among the
top results, you saw links to your local animal shelters and other res-
cue organizations.
Figure 1. Google search for “animal shelter” shows several ad results, including
“Humane
Society of North Texas,” “Dallas Pets Alive Pet Rescue,” DFW Hu-
mane Society,” and “Houston SPCA.”
Kate Warrington, Natasha Kovalyova, and Cindy King
198
W
R
IT
IN
G
SP
AC
E
S 3
When searching for “animal shelter,” you receive more than one bil-
lion results. You are now faced with
a formidable evaluation task, but you
can’t possibly look at all of these sources. You could choose to narrow your
search terms to something like “animal shelters and lost pets” (which yields
66,200,000 results) or take Google’s apparent
suggestion and focus your
search on animal shelters in your local area. Let’s say you decide to focus
on the Humane Society of North Texas, the first result from your original
search (see figure 2).
Figure 2. The Humane Society of North Texas
homepage shows the organiza-
tion’s logo, a basic navigational menu, and a photo of a large dog looking out a car
window into the camera. Text next to the dog encourages viewers to donate their
vehicle in support of the Humane Society.
To guide you during this evaluation process
are the critical reading
questions that we discussed earlier.
1. Who is the author?
2. How do I know that he/she is knowledgeable about the subject?
3. Is the author using emotional appeals/manipulation in his or
her argument?
4. Does the author use “loaded” language to distract readers from
relevant reasons and evidence?
5. Is the support for the argument appropriate to the claim?
6. Are all the statements believable?
7. Is the argument consistent and complete?
Dostları ilə paylaş: