Intended Audience
What type of audience is the author addressing? Is the publication aimed at a specialized or a general audience? Is this source too elementary, too technical, too advanced, or just right for your needs?
Objectivity
Is the information covered considered to be fact, opinion, or propaganda? It is not always easy to separate fact from opinion. Facts can usually be verified; opinions, though they may be based on factual information, evolve from the interpretation of facts. Does the information appear to be valid and well-researched, or is it questionable and unsupported by evidence? Note errors or omissions. Are the ideas and arguments advanced more or less in line with other works you have read on the same topic?
Coverage
Does the work update or clarify prior knowledge, substantiate other materials you have read, or add new information? Does it extensively or only marginally cover your topic? Does it provide a balanced perspective? If the item in question does not meet this criteria, you should review enough sources to obtain a variety of viewpoints.
Writing Style
Is the publication organized logically? Are the main points clearly presented? Do you find the text easy to read, or is it stilted or choppy? Is the author's argument repetitive?
Evaluative Reviews
In the case of books, locate critical reviews of the work. Is the review positive? Is the book under review considered a valuable contribution to the field? Do reviewers agree on the value or attributes of the book or are there strong differences of opinion? Does the reviewer mention other books that might be better? If so, locate these sources for more information on your topic.
Brand-Gruwela, Saskia and Marc Stadtlerb. “Solving Information-based Problems: Evaluating Sources and Information.” Learning and Instruction 2 (April 2011): 175-179;
Barzilaia, Sarit and Anat Zohara. “Epistemic Thinking in Action: Evaluating and Integrating Online Sources.” Cognition and Instruction 30 (2012): 39-85;
Evaluating Sources. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University;
Evaluating Print Sources. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina;