Skip to main content
SingaporeComputer ApplicationsSyllabus dot point

How do I search the web effectively and judge whether a website is reliable before I trust it?

Use a search engine effectively with good keywords, refine searches, and evaluate websites for reliability before using the information

A practical answer to the N-Level Computer Applications outcome on web search: choosing good keywords, refining a search, and evaluating a website for reliability before trusting the information.

Generated by Claude Opus 4.88 min answer

Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed

Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page

Jump to a section
  1. What this dot point is asking
  2. The answer
  3. Examples in context
  4. Try this

What this dot point is asking

This outcome is about finding good information online and judging whether to trust it. You should be able to choose effective keywords, refine a search to narrow the results, and evaluate a website for reliability before using its information. This is a core digital-citizenship skill, because not everything online is accurate. In the written paper you suggest keywords, describe refining techniques, and list reliability checks.

The answer

Choosing good keywords

A search engine matches the words you type, so the words matter. Good keywords are:

  • Specific. Search for exactly what you want, such as "how volcanoes form", not "stuff about volcanoes".
  • Free of filler. Drop words like "the", "about" and "for my project" that do not help the search.
  • Focused on the topic. Use the main nouns and ideas, and add a subject or place to narrow it.

Refining a search

If the first results are not useful, refine the search rather than giving up:

  • Add more specific words to narrow it, such as a place or a year ("volcanoes Southeast Asia").
  • Use quotation marks around a phrase to find that exact phrase, for example "ring of fire".
  • Use the search tools to limit results by date, type (images, news) or region.
  • Try different words if a term is too broad or too narrow.

Reading results carefully

The top result is not always the best. Read the page titles and short descriptions to pick results that actually match your need, and be aware that some top results are adverts, marked as sponsored.

Evaluating a website for reliability

Before trusting information, check the source. Useful questions:

  • Who wrote it? Is the author or organisation named and qualified, such as a school, a government body or a known expert?
  • Why does it exist? Is it informing, or trying to sell something or push an opinion? A site with something to sell may be biased.
  • How current is it? Is there a recent date, so the information is not out of date?
  • Is there evidence? Does it give sources, and does it agree with other reliable sites when you cross-check?

A site address ending in edu or gov often signals an official source, but you should still apply the checks.

Examples in context

Example 1. A history assignment. A student researching an event searches a focused phrase, filters the results to recent pages, and chooses a government archive and an encyclopaedia. They cross-check the dates between the two, so the facts in their assignment are well supported.

Example 2. A health question. Looking up a health topic, a student avoids a page that is mainly selling a product and instead uses a recognised health authority's site, checks the date, and confirms the advice on a second trusted site, getting reliable rather than biased information.

Try this

  • Cue. Rewrite the search "information about the water cycle for homework" as focused keywords. (For example "water cycle stages" or "how the water cycle works", dropping the filler words.)

  • Cue. Describe two ways to refine a search that returns too many results. (Add more specific words such as a place or year, and put a key phrase in quotation marks to find that exact phrase, or use the date and type filters.)

  • Cue. List three checks to decide if a website is reliable. (Who wrote it and are they qualified, why the site exists and whether it is biased, and how recent it is and whether it gives evidence you can cross-check.)

Exam-style practice questions

Practice questions written in the style of SEAB exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.

Original4 marksA student searches for 'stuff about volcanoes for my project' and gets unhelpful results. Suggest better keywords, and describe two ways to refine a search to find more useful results.
Show worked answer →

Better keywords focus on the exact topic and drop filler words, for example: "how volcanoes form" or "types of volcanoes". Specific keywords describe what you actually want.

Two ways to refine a search, for example:

  1. Add more specific words to narrow it, such as adding the subject or a place ("volcanoes Southeast Asia").
  2. Put a phrase in quotation marks to find that exact phrase, or use the search engine's tools to limit results by date or type.

What markers reward: focused keywords without filler words, and two genuine refining techniques such as adding specific terms, using quotation marks for an exact phrase, or filtering results.

Original5 marksExplain four things you should check to decide whether a website is reliable before using its information in a project.
Show worked answer →

Any four sensible checks, for example:

  1. Who wrote it: is the author or organisation named and qualified, such as a school, government body or known expert?
  2. Why it exists: is it informing, or is it trying to sell something or push an opinion, which can make it biased?
  3. How current it is: is there a recent date, so the information is not out of date?
  4. Evidence and accuracy: does it give sources, and does it agree with other reliable sites when you cross-check?

Other acceptable checks include the type of site (an edu or gov address often signals an official source) and whether the writing is professional and free of obvious errors.

What markers reward: four distinct, genuine reliability checks such as author, purpose, date, evidence and cross-checking, not four versions of one idea.

Related dot points