Premise

So you have to find information for a paper, project, or presentation. As such, you might be wondering: what makes a “valid” source? That’s a great question—and one that requires a bit of contextual explanation.

Students are often taught that some sources (e.g., websites) are either “good” or “bad.” But the truth is much more complex. Simply put: some websites are “better” than others in terms of how credible their information is. Some are great resources; others, not so much. So how can we tell which is which?

Examples

Say, for example, that you are writing about the quality of campus dining food at your college. Obviously, you’re going to want to do your research, and so your instinct might be to investigate scholarly sources, like research databases and library resources.

And good instincts! These areas are likely to yield what we typically consider as “valid sources.” But why? Often, the answer is because they’ve been vetted by a higher authority. E.g.: a comprehensive researched study across a dozen different universities, calculating how high nutritional quality campus dining food has a direct link to increased student academic performance. This obviously sounds like it should be a quality (i.e., valid) source. And unless there’s any glaring biases that you notice, it’s probably all good.

So how do you actually evaluate the usefulness of a source? Let’s use our source evaluation worksheet to try to objectively look at some factors for consideration with two sample sources (we’ll mark their scores in bold font):

Source One: A comprehensive study on university dining hall food by researchers at John Hopkins University

1. What type of source is it?
   • Book (+5)
   • Scholarly Article (+4)
   • Newspaper Article (+3)
   • Magazine Article (+2)
   • Website (+1)
   • Other (+0?)
2. When was it written?
   • Last five years (+5)
   • Last ten years (+3)
   • Last fifteen years (+1)
   • Longer than 15 years ago (-2)
   • Unknown (-4)
3. Author(s) Credentials:
   • None/Unknown (-1)
   • Bachelor’s (+1)
   • Master’s (+2)
   • PhD (+4)
   • Higher/Multiple degrees (+5)
4. Strong political leanings in any direction? (I.e., do they seem politically biased?)
   • Neutral (+1)
   • Politically biased (-1)
   • Strongly politically biased (-3)
5. Google search to look up the authority or credentials of the publisher? What kind of publication are they?
   • Educational (University Press, etc.) (+5)
   • Private Publisher (if book +4)
   • Newspaper (+3)
   • Magazine Article (+2)
   • Website/Blog (+0)
6. Does the publisher have any political leanings when you read about them online?
   • Yes (-3)
   • No (+2)
7. Are there any other seeming biases to the source (I.e., other than/in addition to political ones)?
   • None (+1)
   • Some (-1)
   • Lots (-3)
8. Is the source trying to promote or sell anything?
   • Yes (-3)
   • Maybe (-2)
   • No (+1)
9. Does the source have a Bibliography or Works Cited Page?
   • Yes (+3)
   • No (-1)
10. If it is an internet source:
    • Does the domain name end in: .edu, .gov, .ny, .us (or other govt. initial)? (+3)
    • Does the domain name end in .com., .org, .net? (-2)

Score: 30

• 18-25 or higher: This is likely a reliable and credible source
• 11-17: While this is likely a credible source, you should be wary of the bias/political leanings of it, and the implications this will have on your audience
• 5-10: Try and avoid using this source if possible. If you are focusing on a particular opinion within this source, make sure to indicate such to your audience
• <5: You should avoid using this source

Proper MLA citation:

• Wang et al. “Trends in higher metabolic function among college freshmen based on common dining hall offerings.” Health Sciences Informatics. John Hopkins University, 11 June 2025. hopkinsmedicine.org/som/. Accessed 19 June 2025.

How do you know whether this source/author is reliable?

• The authors and institution who published this study are both highly credible based on my investigation.

Why do you feel like this source might be useful/not useful in your paper (despite the score)? What more/else should you find in addition or replacement to this source?

• I think this source should be very useful. The score of “30” is well above the highest tier of credibility assessment, and the information is extremely relevant to my researched topic.

How you found this text (database or search terms used to retrieve it)

• My university databases under the “Health Sciences” search tab.

As you can see in this example above, clearly this seems like a high-quality source. The authors are all researchers at a prestigious university-affiliated hospital, who have conducted detailed and unbiased research within recent years. As such, as long as this research is used in a relevant way within your paper, it should definitely add to the credibility of your own writing!

But now, let’s look at another source from a social media source in comparison:

Source Two: A social media post by a student complaining about campus dining

1. What type of source is it?
   • Book (+5)
   • Scholarly Article (+4)
   • Newspaper Article (+3)
   • Magazine Article (+2)
   • Website (+1)
   • Other (+0?)
2. When was it written?
   • Last five years (+5)
   • Last ten years (+3)
   • Last fifteen years (+1)
   • Longer than 15 years ago (-2)
   • Unknown (-4)
3. Author(s) Credentials:
   • None/Unknown (-1)
   • Bachelor’s (+1)
   • Master’s (+2)
   • PhD (+4)
   • Higher/Multiple degrees (+5)
4. Strong political leanings in any direction? (I.e., do they seem politically biased?)
   • Neutral (+1)
   • Politically biased (-1)
   • Strongly political biased (-3)
5. Google search to look up the authority or credentials of the publisher? What kind of publication are they?
   • Educational (University Press, etc.) (+5)
   • Private Publisher (if book +4)
   • Newspaper (+3)
   • Magazine Article (+2)
   • Website/Blog (+0)
6. Does the publisher have any political leanings when you read about them online?
   • Yes (-3)
   • No (+2)
7. Are there any other seeming biases to the source (I.e., other than/in addition to political ones)?
   • None (+1)
   • Some (-1)
   • Lots (-3)
8. Is the source trying to promote or sell anything?
   • Yes (-3)
   • Maybe (-2)
   • No (+1)
9. Does the source have a Bibliography or Works Cited Page?
   • Yes (+3)
   • No (-1)
10. If it is an internet source:
    • Does the domain name end in: .edu, .gov, .ny, .us (or other govt. initial)? (+3)
    • Does the domain name end in .com., .org, .net? (-2)

Score: 30

• 18-25 or higher: This is likely a reliable and credible source
• 11-17: While this is likely a credible source, you should be wary of the bias/political leanings of it, and the implications this will have on your audience
• 5-10: Try and avoid using this source if possible. If you are focusing on a particular opinion within this source, make sure to indicate such to your audience
• <5: You should avoid using this source

Proper MLA citation:

• u/Hatemyskool666. “campus dinin is like hell.” Reddit, 9 Mar. 2025, www.reddit.com/r/sbu/campus_dinin_is_like_hell/. Accessed 6 May 2025.

How do you know whether this source/author is reliable?

• I’m not sure, because even though this person claims to be a student at my school, how do I know they’re not biased? What if their experience is really the outlier?

Why do you feel like this source might be useful/not useful in your paper (despite the score)? What more/else should you find in addition or replacement to this source?

• I think this voice could be useful still to use, despite the low score. But I would definitely have to find other examples, polls, etc. to corroborate the claims here to show that it’s not just a biased, angry student—but rather someone who’s experience is representative of a larger issue among others.

How you found this text (database or search terms used to retrieve it)

• Google searched my college with keywords like “campus dining.”

As you can see here, clearly the second source is objectively not scoring as high as the first one for various reasons of consideration. However, and interestingly, the student is still considering using the source for a couple of reasons. The main premise is the fact that if they are examining how an issue exists on their own campus, and make sense for them to, at a particular point in their paper at least, identify how and why this issue actually exists among their fellow students. As such, and not only makes sense, but is likely vital to show some of the student voices. The question is whether or not this student’s voice in the example given via the source evaluation is in fact representative of a larger consensus among other students, like the evaluator themselves here asks about.

As such, this is a great example of a contextual situation where even a source that scores low might still be valuable and able to use if it’s in a particular instance with the considerations mentioned above. Obviously, you wouldn’t just cite this example and say, “Oh look, one student complained about this so we know it’s true for all other students!” Again, like the evaluator themselves points out, you would probably want to—and have to point out—in your research paper itself why we should still listen to this voice, as readers might inherently suspect some of the low scoring points here that you yourself have looked at and further depth. You can do this in a few ways:

1. Taking time to explain how the source fits into the research process. E.g., “If you go to our school’s Reddit page and search for a simple keyword phrase like ‘campus dining,’ you’ll find dozens of posts of students pointing out the various issues with our university’s food from just the past semester alone. While there are many examples given, perhaps the most salient example comes from one student who pointed out how…”
   1. In this way, the source you’re giving is because you feel like it’s the best example to illustrate what you’ve established that a larger voice among the issue of collective students is saying
2. Finding other voices, polls, etc. E.g., “Several other students also voice their concerns in similar but uniquely daunting ways. For example…” or “A poll posted by the student University newspaper received over a thousand votes, the majority of which pointed out how the campus food is…”
3. Corroborating with outside research. E.g., “The student’s claim here seems like it might indeed be representative of what many in fact experience. As a matter of fact, a study on this matter by researchers at the University of Maryland pointed out how ‘across a dozen public colleges in the northeastThat we surveyed, 8 out of 10 students claim that poor campus dining food quality was impacting personal wellness in various ways.”

Of course, you could use a couple of these considerations above if you feel like the source needs extra explanation, but you definitely want to at least consider one of these such corroborating elements here the lower the score that a source has received!

Click here to access a version of this source evaluation sheet without any scores marked to use for your own source evaluations!

Further considerations

Consider this list of further questions that you may or may not deem as relevant to assessing any given source, depending upon contextual considerations:

• Again, if you would like to practice source evaluations for your own research, please feel free to make a copy from this unmarked version of the evaluation samples above.
• Of course, there are lots of further considerations that we’ll cover in other articles—like how exactly do you decide when a source is “too old” to use? So keep this in mind as you ask whether or not (and to what degree) some of these metrics count for in assessing any given source.
• Note again that this type of source evaluation is not necessarily exhaustive. I.e., there may be further metrics you wish to consider in your own evaluations—some of which may outweigh other considerations. Just think of what we sometimes colloquially refer to as “red flags,” as an example.