Citation of the Source: Ross, Russel. Cambodia: A Country Study.

eBook, Washington: GPO for the

Library of Congress, 1987.
Title of the Source: Cambodia: a country study

Author of the Source: Russel R. Ross, and the Federal Research Division

C- Currency 1. Has the information since been refuted?

It does not appear that the information has not since been refuted.
2. Is it too recent?
No, it came out in 1987
R – Relevance 1. What does it have to do with your particular topic?
This talks about Cambodia economics before, after, and during Pol Pot's
reign.
2. If creating an argument, is it useful as a support or as something for your
counterargument?
Yes, it is useful as I can use it to describe the economy either before, during,
or after and how treacherous it was on the citizens.
3. Can you find better information for your purposes?
It is unlikely as this source tells the way of thinking that the Khmer Rouge
alongside it talks about the economy before the genocide.
A – Authority 1. Is the person who wrote the article an authority on that topic?
It is unclear but it is hosted on the Library of Congress alongside the Federal
Research Division.
2. Is it a scholarly source?
No, it is not a scholarly source
3. Can you trust the person who wrote the article to remain bias-free, or are you
willing to acknowledge their bias in your writing?
There is no bias as this article is created for the sole purpose of educating
civilians.
A – Accuracy 1. Is the information in the article overgeneralized?
No, it is not overgeneralized.
2. Did the author take the information and make sweeping statements without
support?
No, there were no instance of sweeping statements. They provided quotes
to help support their statements.
3. If the article is a study, check if they acknowledge their limitations.
N/A
4. Do they cite their sources?
Yes, they include a bibliography at the bottom.
5. Are you using another source that contradicts it?
No, I am not
P – Purpose 1. What was the intent of the article? (explore, explain, etc.)
The intent was to educate and explain the development of Cambodia through
times.
2. What are you planning to use it as?
I am planning to use it as
3. Does it fit with the rest of your sources?
 Yes, it does since it talks about the
4. Do your sources look at the topic from a variety of perspectives?
Yes, it looks at it from the Khmer rouge perspective alongside the perspective
of the people that survived and their beliefs on how the economy should be
organized.
Citation of the Source: Frederick Z. Brown. “THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF VIETNAM, LAOS, AND
CAMBODIA.” Journal of Northeast Asian Studies, vol. 12, no. 4, Winter 1993, p.3. Advanced Placement
Source, December 1993, Accessed on September 25, 2019.

Title of the Source: THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF VIETNAM, LAOS, AND CAMBODIA

Author of the Source: Frederick Z. Brown

C- Currency 1. Has the information since been refuted?

It does not appear that it has been refuted.
2. Is it too recent?
It came out in December of 1993, so it is not too recent.
R – Relevance 1. What does it have to do with your particular topic?
It talks about the economy of Cambodia post wars.
2. If creating an argument, is it useful as a support or as something for your
counterargument?
It would useful as a supporting source to describe the aftereffects of the war.
3. Can you find better information for your purposes?
It is unlikely as this source goes in depth with the economic development of
Cambodia with several other sources supporting him.
A – Authority 1. Is the person who wrote the article an authority on that topic?
Yes, he is because he worked as a director of the 3 countries stated
https://www.adst.org/OH%20TOCs/Brown,%20Frederick%20Z.toc.pdf
2. Is it a scholarly source?
Yes, it is a scholarly source.
3. Can you trust the person who wrote the article to remain bias-free, or are you
willing to acknowledge their bias in your writing?
Yes, I can trust because it has been peer reviewed.
A – Accuracy 1. Is the information in the article overgeneralized?
No, the information is not overgeneralized.
2. Did the author take the information and make sweeping statements without
support?
No, the author did not make any sweeping statements and he also included
evidence when supporting his statements.
3. If the article is a study, check if they acknowledge their limitations.
N/A
4. Do they cite their sources?
Yes, they do.
5. Are you using another source that contradicts it?
No, I am not.
P – Purpose 1. What was the intent of the article? (explore, explain, etc.)
The purpose was to explain the development of Cambodia economically.
2. What are you planning to use it as?
I am planning to use it as a source to help me describe the economy of Cambodia
afterwards.
3. Does it fit with the rest of your sources?
Yes, it describes what happened after the genocide.
4. Do your sources look at the topic from a variety of perspectives?
 Yes, it looks at the development from various outside forces perspective alongside
the citizens living in Cambodia.
Citation of the Source: Menon, Jayant. “Cambodia.” Regional Outlook, Jan. 2012, p. 128. EBSCOhost,
doi:10.1355/9789814379816-025.

Title of the Source: Cambodia

Author of the Source: Jayant Menon

C- Currency 1. Has the information since been refuted?

It does not appear that the information has since been refuted.
2. Is it too recent?
It came out in January of 2012, so it is not that recent.
R – Relevance 1. What does it have to do with your particular topic?
It talks about the economic development of Cambodia in 2010.
2. If creating an argument, is it useful as a support or as something for your
counterargument?
Yes, because is it useful as a support to show how Cambodia’s economy is growing
steadily.
3. Can you find better information for your purposes?
No, because it goes into precise detail of the economic development in the 21 st
century. Includes percentages.
A – Authority 1. Is the person who wrote the article an authority on that topic?
Yes, because he is a lead economist, as well he is a part of an economic research
and regional cooperation department.
2. Is it a scholarly source?
Yes, it has been peer reviewed
3. Can you trust the person who wrote the article to remain bias-free, or are you
willing to acknowledge their bias in your writing?
Yes, I can trust that the person would remain bias free.
A – Accuracy 1. Is the information in the article overgeneralized?
No, it is not overgeneralized
2. Did the author take the information and make sweeping statements without
support?
No, they did not make any sweeping statements.
3. If the article is a study, check if they acknowledge their limitations.
N/A
4. Do they cite their sources?
Yes, they have a reference page.
5. Are you using another source that contradicts it?
No, I am not using another source that contradicts it.
P – Purpose 1. What was the intent of the article? (explore, explain, etc.)
The intent was to explain the development of Cambodia’s economy post genocide.
2. What are you planning to use it as?
I am planning to use it as a place to cite on the after works of the economy and
how it grew.
3. Does it fit with the rest of your sources?
Yes, it does
4. Do your sources look at the topic from a variety of perspectives?
No, it does not.
Citation of the Source: Chhair, Sokty and Luyna Ung. Economic history of industrialization in Cambodia.
2016

Title of the Source: Economic history of industrialization in Cambodia

Author of the Source: Sokty Chhair and Luyna Ung

C- Currency 1. Has the information since been refuted?

It does not appear that it has been refuted
2. Is it too recent?
It came out in 2016 so it is fairly recent.
R – Relevance 1. What does it have to do with your particular topic?
It talks about the economic history of Cambodia from 1953 and up.
2. If creating an argument, is it useful as a support or as something for your
counterargument?
Yes, it is since I can employ it to help describe the economic development
throughout Cambodia’s history.
3. Can you find better information for your purposes?
It is highly unlikely that I can find better information since they conduct their own
research as well as they include data/charts/ other statistical forms of displaying
information.
A – Authority 1. Is the person who wrote the article an authority on that topic?
Yes, because one of them has a degree in economics as well as the MEF of
Cambodia; however, he is a part of the Ministry of Economy and Finance.
2. Is it a scholarly source?
No.
3. Can you trust the person who wrote the article to remain bias-free, or are you
willing to acknowledge their bias in your writing?
I am willing to acknowledge the author’s bias since one of them is a Cambodian
National.
A – Accuracy 1. Is the information in the article overgeneralized?
No, the information is not overgeneralized.
2. Did the author take the information and make sweeping statements without
support?
No, they did not make any sweeping statements. They backed up their statements
as well.
3. If the article is a study, check if they acknowledge their limitations.
N/A
4. Do they cite their sources?
Yes, they do.
5. Are you using another source that contradicts it?
No, I am not using another source that contradicts it.
P – Purpose 1. What was the intent of the article? (explore, explain, etc.)
The intention of the article was to explain the history of Cambodia’s economy.
2. What are you planning to use it as?
I am planning to use it to help explain the economy during the Khmer Rouge rule.
3. Does it fit with the rest of your sources?
Yes, it does.
4. Do your sources look at the topic from a variety of perspectives?
No, they don’t.
https://www.history.com/topics/cold-war/pol-pot

Citation of the Source: History.com Editors. “Pol Pot.” History.com, A&E Television Networks, 9 Nov.
2009, https://www.history.com/topics/cold-war/pol-pot. Accessed on September 26, 2019.

Title of the Source: Pol Pot - History

Author of the Source: History.com Editors

C- Currency 1. Has the information since been refuted?

It does not appear that the information has been refuted
2. Is it too recent?
It originally came out in 2009, so it is not too recent.
R– 1. What does it have to do with your particular topic?
Relevance It talks about how the people were affected by Pop Pots ideologies and how they
were affected from the economic changes
2. If creating an argument, is it useful as a support or as something for your
counterargument?
Yes, it can be because it talks about how economically poor, they were treated
3. Can you find better information for your purposes?
It is possible that I can find better information such as someone’s own book.
A – Authority 1. Is the person who wrote the article an authority on that topic?
There was no name listed; however, History.com revolves around telling the
events that took place around the world at all different timelines.
2. Is it a scholarly source?
No, it is not.
3. Can you trust the person who wrote the article to remain bias-free, or are you
willing to acknowledge their bias in your writing?
I may not be able to trust the person as they are not named but the purpose of
history.com is to explain what happened in the past.
A – Accuracy 1. Is the information in the article overgeneralized?
The information is not overgeneralized.
2. Did the author take the information and make sweeping statements without
support?
No, there was no sweeping statements.
3. If the article is a study, check if they acknowledge their limitations.
N/A
4. Do they cite their sources?
As far as I was able to tell, they did not cite their sources.
5. Are you using another source that contradicts it?
No, I am not using another source that contradicts it.
P – Purpose 1. What was the intent of the article? (explore, explain, etc.)
The intent of the article was to explain what happened during the reign of the
Khmer Rouge.
2. What are you planning to use it as?
I am planning to use it as a source to help explain the perspective of the citizens.
3. Does it fit with the rest of your sources?
It somewhat fits as it describes the economic effects on the citizens.
4. Do your sources look at the topic from a variety of perspectives?
Yes, it looks from the citizens and the Khmer rouge.
https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/cambodia/overview

Citation of the Source: “Cambodia Overview.” World Bank, World Bank, 27 July 2016,
https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/cambodia/overview. Accessed on September 26, 2019.

Title of the Source: Cambodia Overview/Data

Author of the Source: N/A

C- Currency 1. Has the information since been refuted?

No, it has not been refuted.
2. Is it too recent?
I was unable to find the original publication date, but the most recent update
happened on September 25, 2019 so if it is based on that then it is too recent. After
further investigation, it was originally published in July of 2016 which is fairly recent.
R – Relevance 1. What does it have to do with your particular topic?
It talks about the economic development of Cambodia up to present day.
2. If creating an argument, is it useful as a support or as something for your
counterargument?
Yes, I can include their statistics to show how Cambodia has changed.
3. Can you find better information for your purposes?
With the addition of data and statistics, it is highly unlikely that I can find better
information for my purpose
A – Authority 1. Is the person who wrote the article an authority on that topic?
Yes, they are an authority because they work at the world bank which prioritizes
economic principles and they are talking about the economic development of
Cambodia.
2. Is it a scholarly source?
No, it is not
3. Can you trust the person who wrote the article to remain bias-free, or are you
willing to acknowledge their bias in your writing?
I can trust that the person that the person remained bias free since they are
reporting and explaining the statistic of Cambodia’s economy.
A – Accuracy 1. Is the information in the article overgeneralized?
No, it is not overgeneralized as the article states multiple statistical facts that apply
specifically to Cambodia.
2. Did the author take the information and make sweeping statements without
support?
No, the author supports their statements with statistics about said statement to
help support their argument.
3. If the article is a study, check if they acknowledge their limitations.
N/A
4. Do they cite their sources?
No, it does not appear that they cited their sources, but they employ scientist in
other countries to gather information and they also work with the home nation to
help with the accumulation of information.
5. Are you using another source that contradicts it?
No.
P – Purpose 1. What was the intent of the article? (explore, explain, etc.)
 The intent was to explain the development of Cambodia throughout time with
respect to the genocide and present conditions.
2. What are you planning to use it as?
I am planning to use it as a place where I can retrieve information about the
poverty rates and overall the economic wellness of Cambodia.
3. Does it fit with the rest of your sources?
Yes, it does since it is talking about the economic development of Cambodia.
4. Do your sources look at the topic from a variety of perspectives?
No, they do not look at it from a variety of perspectives.
http://worldwithoutgenocide.org/genocides-and-conflicts/cambodia

Citation of the Source: “Cambodian Genocide.” WorldWithoutGenocide,

worldwithoutgenocide.org/genocides-and-conflicts/cambodia. Accessed on 28 Sept. 2019

Title of the Source: Cambodian Genocide

Author of the Source: N/A

C- Currency 1. Has the information since been refuted?

No, the information has not been refuted
2. Is it too recent?
There is no official publication date but it was last updated May of 2018, so if
based on the last update list then yes it is too recent
R– 1. What does it have to do with your particular topic?
Relevance It talks about how the Khmer Rouge treated the citizens and killed the intellectuals
who could have organized the economy of Cambodia post genocide.
2. If creating an argument, is it useful as a support or as something for your
counterargument?
It can be useful as a support to show it detrimentally affected the innocent
civilians.
3. Can you find better information for your purposes?
It is probable that I can find better information, but in my quest, I was unable to.
A – Authority 1. Is the person who wrote the article an authority on that topic?
There is no stated author; however, the website’s intention is to inform the people
about the genocides that have occurred.
2. Is it a scholarly source?
No, it has not been peer reviewed.
3. Can you trust the person who wrote the article to remain bias-free, or are you
willing to acknowledge their bias in your writing?
I am willing to acknowledge their bias as the websites main goal is to prevent
genocides so they could exaggerate the circumstances.
A – Accuracy 1. Is the information in the article overgeneralized?
No.
2. Did the author take the information and make sweeping statements without
support?
No.
3. If the article is a study, check if they acknowledge their limitations.
N/A
4. Do they cite their sources?
Yes
5. Are you using another source that contradicts it?
No.
P – Purpose 1. What was the intent of the article? (explore, explain, etc.)
The intent of the article was to inform the public on how the genocide came to rise
and the ideologies of the rulers.
2. What are you planning to use it as?
I am planning to use it to describe how the civilians were treated in terms of their
stolen possessions and scriptment of their titles. Which were apart of Pol Pot’s
economic ideas.
3. Does it fit with the rest of your sources?
Yes, it fits in because of the description of the effects of Pol Pot’s economic beliefs
on the citizens.
4. Do your sources look at the topic from a variety of perspectives?
Yes, it does.