A finished EN 111 Unit 3 source evaluation worksheet: several sources run through one named criteria set, with at least one rejected on stated evidence. Searches like "en 111 unit 3 assignment example", "en111 unit 3 sample" and "en 111 unit 3 example" land here.
What a finished EN 111 Unit 3 source evaluation worksheet looks like
The worksheet is usually a grid, and the same questions run down every column so the sources can be compared rather than described one after another. Each source is identified by its full citation at the head of its column. Under it the criteria the classroom named are applied in turn, and each answer points at something checkable: the author's position and where that was verified, the publication and what kind of publication it is, the date and whether the subject moves fast enough for the date to matter, the purpose the piece was written for, and whether its claims carry references. One column holds a source the writer rejected, evaluated at the same depth as the others. A closing note says what the rejection rested on.
How a EN 111 Unit 3 example is structured
Criteria run down and sources run across, because the comparison is the point and a worksheet organized as five separate write-ups cannot show one standard applied to each. The citation sits at the head of every column so a reader can verify anything recorded below it. Answers are written as findings rather than as ratings, since a cell reading strong tells a marker nothing about what was checked. Evidence for authority is recorded with where it was found, as an author note supplied by the source itself is a weaker check than one confirmed elsewhere. The rejected item occupies a full column rather than a footnote, because a rejection worked at the same depth is the clearest evidence the criteria were applied rather than fitted to a decision already made.
One criteria set applied to every source
The same named tests run down each column, so a reader sees one standard applied rather than five separate impressions collected together.
Full citation heading every column
Each source is identified completely at the head, which lets a marker verify any finding recorded underneath it.
Findings recorded instead of ratings
Cells say what was checked and what was found, because a rating of strong or weak hides whether anything was checked.
Authority verified away from the source
Where an author's standing was confirmed is recorded, since a note supplied by the publication is the weakest available check.
A rejected source worked at full depth
The item that failed occupies a complete column, which is what shows the criteria were applied rather than fitted to a decision.
Currency judged against the subject
Whether the date matters is argued rather than assumed, because a fast-moving subject and a settled one age differently.
Where marks go in EN 111 Unit 3
Evaluation worksheets lose points when every source passes. A sheet where five items are all credible and all useful has either searched very well or, far more likely, not applied the criteria, and markers read it as the second. Cells filled with ratings rather than findings leave no evidence of checking. Authority answered from the publication's own author page repeats what the publisher says about itself. Currency treated as a rule, where anything older than a set number of years fails regardless of subject, misapplies the criterion. Purpose left blank is common and costly, since who a piece was made for shapes everything else in the grid. Sources described rather than evaluated produce an annotated list. A rejection recorded in one line beside four full columns was never examined.
Get a EN 111 Unit 3 example written to your instructions
Hand over the Unit 3 instructions, your EN 111 rubric and the criteria set your classroom uses, since sections name different ones. We write a custom example applying those tests to several sources at equal depth, recording findings rather than ratings, and working a rejected item through the full grid. First custom sample free, back in 24 to 48 hours.
EN 111 Unit 3 questions, answered
Which evaluation criteria should the worksheet use?
The ones your classroom names, and they vary. Several well-known checklists circulate under different acronyms, sections sometimes supply their own, and a worksheet applying a set your instructor did not assign answers a different question. If the instructions leave it open, say at the top which set you chose and where it came from.
Does a source have to be scholarly to pass?
Not necessarily, and that judgment belongs to what the source is for. A government statistics release, a trade publication or a news report can be entirely appropriate depending on the claim it would support, while a peer-reviewed article far outside its field can be a poor choice. Evaluate against use, and say in the sheet what each source would be used for.
Can I evaluate a source I found through my employer?
Evaluate something your instructor can open. A document held behind your organization's login, an internal report or a vendor paper supplied to your team cannot be verified by anybody grading the worksheet, and some of it is not yours to circulate. Publicly available sources let every finding in your grid be checked by the person marking it.