to Aspray, Mayadas and Vardi, it is inevitable that globalization generally and
offshoring particularly will continue to grow in the foreseeable future. The
factors that they attribute this fact to include improvements in technology such
as inexpensive broadband networks, changes in work processes that lend the
ability to offshore discrete portions of processes, the rise of companies who
exist specifically to facilitate the offshoring process for others, and the
improvements internationally in technical education (9).
claims that with careful planning and execution, offshoring initiatives can
result in reductions in cost of up to 20 percent (1). Aspray, Mayadas and Vardi
are more skeptical and caution that "offshoring magnifies existing risks and
creates new and often poorly understood or addressed threats to national
security, business property and processes, and individuals' privacy" (8). The
botXXXXX XXXXXne for information technology workers in the United States is that
offshoring is transforming the marketplace for their skills. "IT professionals
who understand how to interweave their IT skills with new business know-how have
the best chance of weathering this transformation" (Benjamin and Smith
William, Frank Mayadas, and Moshe Y. Vardi. "Globalization and Offshoring of
Software: A Report of the ACM Job Migration Task Force." ACM Job Migration Task
Force. 2006. Association for Computing Machinery. 7 July 2007.
B. Shao, and David XXXXX XXXXX. "The Impact of Offshore Outsourcing on IT
Workers in Developed Countries." Communications of the ACM 50.2 (2007):
Kirk. "Implementing IT Outsourcing." April 2007. Faulkner Advisory for IT
Studies. Peirce College Library. 4 June 2007
you well know, just because you read it on the World Wide Web doesn't mean it's
true. You may have heard the expression "caveat emptor" meaning "let the buyer
beware"; here you'll be applying the rule of "caveat lector", or "let the reader
beware". This exercise is intended to step you through some questions that
will help you evaluate the credibility, authority and usefulness of web
evaluate the following websites:
BOTH of the above sites answer questions 1-14 below. Please be sure to
number your responses, and do not combine your reviews the two sites together.
Please keep them separate.
- Identify, if
possible, the author of the site.
- If the author is
listed, provide any biographical information about the author, either from
within the site ("About Us", "Background" "Biography", etc.) or better still, by
doing a separate search as well. Does the author appear to be an authority?
How well are you able to tell?
- Even if the author
is not listed, the organization responsible for publishing the site often is.
What organization is responsible for this site? (Try clicking examining or
clicking on the copyright notice for help finding the publisher).
- What are the author
and/or publisher's credentials? Can you verify these credentials from other
sources? Does the author seem well qualified, and why or why not?
- Does the URL of the
site tell you anything about the credibility of the site? What is the top level
domain of the site (.com, .org, .edu, etc.)? What (if anything) does this tell
you about the authority or credibility of the site? Does the site appear to be
someone's personal page? How can you tell? (Visit http://www.library.jhu.edu/researchhelp/general/evaluating/url.html
for help decoding urls.)
- Who owns the domain
name in question? (Go to http://www.easywhois.com/ and type the domain name into the
form there to find out.) Note that the information you find here may help you
with answering 3 and 4 above.
- Who is the intended
audience for the information? Is it primarily for medical doctors, academic
researchers, consumers, the general public, experts, etc?
- What is the site's
purpose? Is it to inform, to explain, to persuade, to sell, to
- How balanced and
objective is the site's information? Does it appear that the author has a
political, commercial or philosophical agenda?
- Is the information
up-to-date? Are you able to tell? How important is currency given the subject
- Does the source
provide a bibliography or links to other sources that support the information
provided? Are you able to view these sources? Are the sources themselves
credible and authoritative?
- What sites link to
the source? You can find out by using the "link:" feature in Google, like this:
"link:www.peirce.edu" to find which sites link to Peirce's homepage. What kinds
of sites link to the source and how many? What does this say about the
credibility of the site?
- Can you find at
least 2 other reliable sources either from the library or the Web that
support the information provided by the source?
14. Under what
circumstances, if any, would you be confident using the information provided by
the site? Why? In particular, would you reference the site in a research paper
for school? Why or why not?
At this point in the project you
should have already researched your topic thoroughly, created an annotated
bibliography, put together a written summary of the main points of your
presentation and provided in-text citations in the text of that summary
indicating where and how you used the sources listed in your annotated
bibliography. In the fifth and final portion of the project you'll pull the
information you've gathered into a polished PowerPoint presentation. The
PowerPoint presentation is to to be a clear, well written, informative,
carefully documented, attractive 10-15 slide presentation summarizing the
research you've conducted in the class.
You'll be graded on the content of
the presentation, the research you did and the way that you documented that
research in your presentation, and your use of PowerPoint, as well as on grammar
Add your name as footer
Be sure to consult the
detailed grading rubric below for the things you'll need to do to receive a good
grade on your final project!
Wikipedia, and Dictionaries should NOT be included as sources for the Works Cited
Sunday by 7pm