← Back to Handouts

🔍 Evidence Evaluation Framework

Tools for assessing the quality and reliability of sources

Why Evaluate Evidence?

In a world of information overload, the ability to evaluate evidence is essential. Not all sources are equal — some are reliable, some are biased, and some are outright false. This framework gives you tools to critically assess any source before you use it.

🎯 The Goal

After using this framework, you should be able to:

  • Determine if a source is trustworthy
  • Identify potential bias or agenda
  • Assess how current and relevant the information is
  • Decide whether to use the source in your work

The CRAAP Test

Use these five criteria to evaluate any source:

📅 Currency

How recent is the information?

  • When was it published or last updated?
  • Has the information been revised or updated?
  • Is timeliness important for your topic?
  • Are the links functional?

🎯 Relevance

Does the information fit your needs?

  • Does it answer your research question?
  • Who is the intended audience?
  • Is the level appropriate (not too simple/complex)?
  • Would you be comfortable citing this?

👤 Authority

Who created this information?

  • Who is the author/publisher/source?
  • What are their credentials or qualifications?
  • Is there contact information?
  • Does the URL reveal anything (.gov, .edu, .org)?

✓ Accuracy

Is the information correct and verifiable?

  • Where does the information come from?
  • Is it supported by evidence?
  • Has it been reviewed or peer-checked?
  • Can you verify it with other sources?

🎭 Purpose

Why does this information exist?

  • Is it to inform, teach, sell, entertain, or persuade?
  • Is the author's intention clear?
  • Is the information fact, opinion, or propaganda?
  • Are there political, ideological, or commercial biases?

Evidence Quality Scale

Rate your source on this scale:

Unreliable Weak Moderate Strong Excellent
Source Type Typical Quality Considerations
Peer-reviewed journals Excellent Rigorous review process; highest credibility in academia
Government publications Strong Official data; may reflect political perspectives
Quality news outlets Strong-Moderate Professional journalism; check for editorial standards
Books (academic publishers) Strong Typically well-researched; may be dated
Organisational websites Moderate-Varies Check the organisation's reputation and purpose
Wikipedia Moderate Good starting point; always check the references
Personal blogs Weak-Varies May be expert or uninformed; verify credentials
Social media posts Weak Unverified; may be opinion, rumour, or misinformation

Evaluating Sources in Aotearoa Context

⚠️ Consider whose perspective is represented:

When researching topics related to Aotearoa, te ao Māori, or local issues, ask:

  • Does this source include Māori perspectives and voices?
  • Is mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge) respected and accurately represented?
  • Who benefits from this information being presented this way?
  • Are there alternative sources from Māori authors or organisations?
For historical topics about Aotearoa, look for sources that include perspectives from tangata whenua, not just colonial accounts. Treaty settlement documents, Waitangi Tribunal reports, and Māori historians provide important perspectives often missing from older sources.

Trusted New Zealand Sources

  • Te Ara - The Encyclopedia of New Zealand: Government-funded, peer-reviewed
  • Waitangi Tribunal Reports: Official inquiry documents
  • Stats NZ / Tatauranga Aotearoa: Official statistics
  • Ministry of Education resources: Curriculum-aligned materials
  • NZ On Screen: Curated media archive
  • RNZ / Māori Television: Public interest journalism

📝 Source Evaluation Worksheet

Use this worksheet to evaluate a source you're considering for your research:

Source Details

Title:

Author:

Publication/Website:

Date published:

URL (if online):

CRAAP Evaluation

Currency (Rate: 1-5)

Currency Score: ___/5

Relevance (Rate: 1-5)

Relevance Score: ___/5

Authority (Rate: 1-5)

Authority Score: ___/5

Accuracy (Rate: 1-5)

Accuracy Score: ___/5

Purpose (Rate: 1-5)

Purpose Score: ___/5

Overall Assessment

Total Score: ___/25

Quality Rating:

  • 21-25: Excellent — highly reliable
  • 16-20: Strong — generally trustworthy
  • 11-15: Moderate — use with caution, verify claims
  • 6-10: Weak — significant concerns, seek better sources
  • 0-5: Unreliable — do not use

Should I use this source?

☐ Yes, it's reliable ☐ Yes, with verification ☐ No, find a better source

Notes / Concerns:

🚩 Red Flags to Watch For

Warning Signs of Unreliable Sources

  • No author or anonymous — Who is responsible for this information?
  • No date — When was this written? Is it still relevant?
  • Emotional language — Is it trying to provoke rather than inform?
  • No sources cited — Where did this information come from?
  • Sensational headlines — "You won't believe..." or "SHOCKING..."
  • Poor spelling/grammar — Professional sources are well-edited
  • One-sided — No acknowledgment of other perspectives
  • Asks you to share before reading — Designed for clicks, not information
  • Claims to have "hidden truth" — Conspiracy thinking pattern

Practice Activity

🔎 Spot the Difference

Your teacher will provide two sources on the same topic. Use the CRAAP test to evaluate both, then discuss:

  1. Which source is more reliable? Why?
  2. What red flags (if any) did you notice?
  3. How do the sources differ in their perspective or bias?
  4. Would you use either source? Under what circumstances?