User:KateReilly1/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: (link)
 * Disability Studies in Education
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article specifically because for my future career, I want to teach individual’s with special needs. Also, I work at the Blind Children’s Learning Center in Santa Ana, CA. I think by ending this, I will be more informed about how disability studies is taught. Lastly, I’m curious in what the curriculum is taught, how inclusivity is practiced, and how the future educators can expand their own practices.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * The lead does include an introductory sentence that clearly states the article's topic. The introductory sentence is also concisely written, allowing the reader to know what the topic is about.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The article does seem to be missing descriptions of the article's major sections. This is mainly because the article is quite underdeveloped and doesn't have a lot of major sections. This article is mainly about the definition of DSE.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes it does. This is mainly due to the fact that the lead introduces the topic and what it means.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is concise and quick to the point

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes the article's content is relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * No it is not. The article hasn't been updated since 2016.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There is a lot of content missing. The page is very short.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Yes the article does deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps. There are claims that address the negative effect of people's lack of equity and inclusion.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes, the article is neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * There are points on the page that point out the lack of inclusivity and the negative effects of people who do not support or acknowledge the importance of DSE.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The viewpoints are underrepresented and need more in-depth information.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No, there is not attempt to persuade the reader.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * A majority of the article is backed up by a reliable secondary source. However, not all claims have a reliable source.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * In my opinion, the sources do not reflect the available literature on the topic
 * Are the sources current?
 * No, the sources are outdate dating back to 2016 as the earliest source.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * No, there is not a diverse spectrum of authors. Also, there are no historically marginalized individuals.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * yes, the one's I checked work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * yes the article is well-written. It is easy to read and is clear and concise. However, there is improvements that need to be made on its length and amount of information.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No, there are not any grammatical or spelling errors that I found.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes the article is well-organized. Out of the few sections that are talked about, each have their own points and sections.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No, the article doesn't include any images to enhance the understanding of the topic.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * N/A

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * The article addresses some issues in the DSE. One of the main questions is about what is the most appropriate education for students with disabilities and what is inclusions and who is included.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * I couldn't find the article rating.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We haven't talked specifically about this topic in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * I would have to give the article a 3.5/10. There is valuable information, however, it lacks necessary content that would be useful in research and learning.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The strengths of the article was spelling and grammar and clear and concise writing.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article can be updated with more relevant and up-to-date sources. As well as, adding more information and content to the topic can be added.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is well-developed with what it has thus far. However, it is underdeveloped and needs more information.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: