|
|
| Karen Schleifer | July 1, 2001 |
| WebQuest Evaluated:Cutting Edge:Searching for the Perfect Website | |
|
|
Score | Explanation |
| Overall Aesthetics (This refers to the WebQuest page itself, not the external resources linked to it.) | ||
|
Overall Visual Appeal , Navigation and Flow,
and Mechanical Aspects
(0-10)
|
7 | The introductory graphic elements
of this WebQuest, like its navigation graphics, are interesting and keep
the reader moving. It looks like a real web site rather than a student
workbook page.
Although the overall graphic design is more appealing than many others geared towards Middle School, the actual selection of graphics and photographs are not at all in line with m.s. interests. Only yuppies and those anxious to climb the corporate ladder would find this appealing. It looks like office rooms where students of this age go to wait impatiently for their parents. The clip art selections are standard business types. The navigation is clear and simple if not a little redundant. The links are a little hard to locate, but not overwhelmingly so. There are not apparent mechanical problems. The links are active at least from the site. Some of the links on the linked pages expired.
|
| Introduction | ||
|
Motivational effectiveness of Introduction (0-2)
|
1 | The introduction may be appealing to a few, but it certainly doesn't have an exciting universal appeal. The hook is to have a student be in charge of a project for a major company. Many middle school students are not on that wavelength. It is my opinion that the students would do the task because it is an assignment--it seems a little too contrived. |
|
Cognitive effectiveness of the Introduction
(0-2) |
1 | The introduction alludes to the fact that they will have an important role in a business, but it does not clearly state what that will be. It doesn't give enough information to have a strong appeal to the reader's sense of curiosity. It assumes that readers are interested in climbing the corporate ladder. This is the first clue that this WebQuest was designed by a development firm, not a teacher. |
| Task (The task is the end result of student efforts... not the steps involved in getting there.) | ||
|
Cognitive level of the task (0-6)
|
0 | This task is not referenced to any standards. It is not designed with any assistance from a teacher in mind. There is no educator support. It is not designed for teacher interaction(no guide, lesson plans, or standards connections). |
|
Technical sophistication of task (0-2)
|
1 | The task requires the reader to group and split the tasks, meet, interact, and keep track of the groups progress. Then they are to put together a final product. The task is to learn about what makes a good Web page, and then create a collaborative chart of this information. |
| Process (The process is the step-by-step description of how students will accomplish the task.) | ||
|
Clarity of Process (0-2)
|
1 | The readers are directed to divide into groups, and then are given what amounts to one-paragraph job descriptions. Depending on the prior knowledge and organizational qualities of the reader, this may or may not be enough information. They may not know how to proceed. |
|
Richness of process (0-6)
|
4 | There is little support given to the reader on how to accomplish the tasks. Experienced students may be savvy enough to understand what to do without any assistance. The students are told to divide up specific tasks and come back and work with the group. |
| Resources (Note: you should evaluate all resources linked to the page, even if they are in sections other than the Resources block. Also note that books, video and other off-line resources can and should be used where appropriate.) | ||
|
Quantity of resources (0-2)
|
2 | The only resources given are links to adult how-to sites. These are relevant to part of the task, however, they require a great deal of reading and dissemination of material that is written on an adult level. Skimming is recommended, but as an experience reader I had difficulty gleaning the relative points from the hype. Although individual tasks are recommended, the resources are not divided into categories. This could be good because it forces everyone to find their piece out of each resource. It could also be confusing and frustrating. |
|
Quality of resources (0-4)
|
2 | The resources are written for adults and may frustrate many middle school students. The links lead to a great deal of quality information, if the student is a good reader. |
| Evaluation | ||
|
Clarity of Evaluation Criteria (0-2)
|
1 | There is an example of how to complete the task, through an example of a finished product. Unfortunately the sample is of a completely different subject, and the parallels may not transfer for the student. There are suggestions on how to organize the project, but there is no grade scale or rubric to follow. |
| Total Score
(0-30) |
20 | This WebQuest might be a good start, but I'd rather use it as a model and tailor it to my needs and the students age level. |