Elizabeth Winslett September 2, 2013 Itec 7445 Skills Assignment 1 - Webquest Review

Elizabeth Winslett
September 2, 2013
ITEC 7445
Skills Assignment 1 - WebQuest Review
WebQuest 1: (pg 2-9)
Name of WebQuest: Architects Competition
Name of WebQuest Author: Krista Hankins
Topic: Math Technology grades 9-12
URL of WebQuest: http://questgarden.com/162/13/3/130831185504/
Score: 33/50
Please see rubric below for comments in each category.
Name of WebQuest: To the Moon
Name of WebQuest Author: Sean Greiner
Topic: Math grades 9-12
URL of WebQuest: http://questgarden.com/150/03/7/121027143807
Score: 46/50
Name of WebQuest: My First Ride
Name of WebQuest Author: Kathleen Thomson
Topic: Math grades 9-12
Score: 46 /50
A Rubric for Evaluating WebQuests

Name of Evaluator: Elizabeth Winslett
Name of WebQuest: Architects Competition
Name of WebQuest Author: Krista Hankins
Beginning
Developing
Accomplished
Overall Aesthetics
Refers to the WebQuest site itself, not to the external resources linked to it.
0 points
Overall visual
2 points
4 points
appeal
There are few or no
graphic elements. No
variation in layout or
typography.
Or
Color is garish and/or
typographic variations are
overused & legibility
suffers. Background
interferes with the
readability.
Graphic elements
sometimes, but not always,
contribute to the
understanding of concepts,
ideas and relationships.
There is some variation in
type size, color, and layout.
Appropriate and
thematic graphic
elements are used to
make visual connections
that contribute to the
understanding of
concepts, ideas and
relationships.
Differences in type size
and/or color are used
well and consistently.
See Fine Points
Checklist.
Score
2: This WebQuest
has one picture on
the introduction
page. It has the
same font and size
throughout the
entire site. There
are color changes
between titles and
text. The use of
colors made the
text easy to pick
out from the titles
and made it easy to
see where thoughts
were broken up.
However, changing
the size could have
helped to created
that difference. The
one picture included
helped undertsnad
the title of the
project but it did
not engage me.
Navigation &
Flow
0 points
2 points
4 points
Getting through the lesson

is confusing and
unconventional. Pages
can't be found easily
and/or the way back isn't
clear.
There are a few places

where the learner can get
lost and not know where to
go next.
Navigation is seamless.
It is always clear to the
learner what all the
pieces are and how to
get to them.
Mechanical
Aspects
0 points
1 point
2 points
There are more than 5

broken links, misplaced or
missing images, badly
sized tables, misspellings
and/or grammatical
errors.
There are some broken

links, misplaced or missing
images, badly sized tables,
misspellings and/or
grammatical errors.
No mechanical problems
noted.
See Fine Points
Checklist.
4: This WebQuest was

very easy to navigate.
The table of contents
was nicely labeled and
the labels were easy to
understand what would
be under that topic.
The pages have
everything very plainly
written so that it easy
to understand.
2: This WebQuest
has zero broken
links and from my
inspection, no
mechanical errors.
Introduction
Motivational
effectiveness of
introduction
0 points
1 point
2 points
The introduction is purely

factual, with no appeal to
relevance or social
importance
Introduction relates
somewhat to the learner's
interests and/or describes a
compelling question or
problem.
Introduction draws the

reader into the lesson by
relating to the learner's
interests or goals and
engagingly describes a
compelling essential
question or problem.
0 points
1 point
2 points
The introduction doesn't

prepare the reader for
what is to come, or build
on what the learner
already knows.
The introduction makes

some reference to learner's
prior knowledge and
previews to some extent
what the lesson is about.
The introduction builds

on learner's prior
knowledge and
effectively prepares the
learner by
foreshadowing what the
lesson is about.
OR
The scenario posed is
transparently bogus and
doesn't respect the media
literacy of today's
learners.
Cognitive
Effectiveness
of the
Introduction
Task
The task is the end result of student efforts... not the steps involved in getting there.
1: This WebQuest
does not compel me
to investigate this
quest further.
Although the
description does
describe a problem,
it does not talk
about the learners
interests.
0: The introduction
shows no prior
knowledge. It
simply says that the
student are taking a
specific class.
Connection of
Task to
Standards
0 points
2 point
4 points
The task is not related to

standards.
The task is referenced to

standards but is not clearly
connected to what students
must know and be able to do
to achieve proficiency of
those standards

standards and is clearly
connected to what
students must know and
be able to do to achieve
proficiency of those
standards.
3 points
6 points
Task is doable but is limited

in its significance to
students' lives. The task
requires analysis of
information and/or putting
together information from
several sources.
Task is doable and

engaging, and elicits
thinking that goes
beyond rote
comprehension. The task
requires synthesis of
multiple sources of
information, and/or
taking a position, and/or
going beyond the data
given and making a
generalization or
creative product.
Cognitive Level 0 points

of the Task
Task requires simply

comprehending or
retelling of information
found on web pages and
answering factual
questions.
See WebQuest
Taskonomy.
2: This task lists

the standards that
are a part of the
project but not
what they must
know or do to
accomplish each
standard.
6: This task is
engaging and
requires the
students to use
multiple resources
and create an
authentic product.
It requires the
students research
and create. It
requires the
students to take on
a role of an
architect.
Process
The process is the step-by-step description of how students will accomplish the task.
0 points
2 points
4 points
Clarity of
process
Process is not clearly
stated. Students would
not know exactly what
they are supposed to do
just from reading this.
Some directions are given,

but there is missing
information. Students might
be confused.
Every step is clearly

stated. Most students
would know exactly
where they were in the
process and what to do
next.
3: The process is
stated but there is no
step by step process
to help guide the
students. There are
requirements that
the students must
have but the
students do not know
exactly what to do
next. They would not
know exactly where
in the process they
were but they might
have a general idea
of how close to being
done they were.
Scaffolding of
Process
0 points
3 points
6 points
The process lacks

strategies and
organizational tools
needed for students to
gain the knowledge
needed to complete the
task.
Strategies and
embedded in the process
are insufficient to ensure
that all students will gain
the knowledge needed to
complete the task.
The process provides

students coming in at
different entry levels with
strategies and
organizational tools to
access and gain the
knowledge needed to
complete the task.
Activities are of little

significance to one
another and/or to the
accomplishment of the
task.
Some of the activities do

not relate specifically to the
accomplishment of the task.
Activities are clearly

related and designed to
take the students from
basic knowledge to higher
level thinking.
Checks for understanding
are built in to assess
whether students are
getting it. See:
Process Guides
A Taxonomy of
Information
Patterns
Language Arts
Standards and
Technology
WebQuest
Enhancement Tools
Reception, Transfor
mation &Productio
n Scaffolds
3: The process tools

that are given are
not everything that
the students might
need. The process
states: Your team
must abide by city
and state building
laws and follow
proper safety
protocol when
thinking of your
design, but there are
no resources listed to
help guide them to
where those city
guidelines are listed.
As a reader, I do not
know if they are
discussed research
skills and so how will
I be able to duplicate
the guidelines that
they find. All
activities are related
but I also do not
know what activities
were done to help
the students
complete this project.
Richness of
Process
0 points
1 points
2 points
Few steps, no separate

roles assigned.
Some separate tasks or

roles assigned. More
complex activities required.
Different roles are

assigned to help
students understand
different perspectives
and/or share
responsibility in
accomplishing the task.
0: There are no roles

assigned and there
are no separate steps
incorporated with this
process.
Resources (Note: you should evaluate all resources linked to the page, even if they are in sections other than the
Process block. Also note that books, video, and other off-line resources can and should be used where appropriate.)
Relevance &
Quantity of
Resources
0 points
2 point
4 points
Resources provided are

not sufficient for students
to accomplish the task.
There is some connection

between the resources and
the information needed for
students to accomplish the
task. Some resources don't
add anything new.
There is a clear and

meaningful connection
between all the
resources and the
information needed for
students to accomplish
the task. Every resource
carries its weight.
OR
There are too many
resources for learners to
look at in a reasonable
time.
2: There are 5
resources that talk
about a lot of the
same thing. There
are not enough
resources to
complete and not all
of the resources add
something new to the
project.
Quality of
resources
Evaluation
Clarity of
evaluation
criteria
0 points
2 points
4 points
Links are mundane.

They lead to
information that could
be found in a classroom
encyclopedia.
Some links carry

information not ordinarily
found in a classroom.
Links make excellent

use of the Web's
timeliness and
colorfulness.
0 points
3 point
Criteria for success

are not described.
Criteria for success are at

least partially described.
Varied resources provide

enough meaningful
information for students
to think deeply.
6 points
Criteria for success are
clearly stated in the
form of a rubric. Criteria
include qualitative as
well as quantitative
descriptors.
2: The links are

redundant but do
produce information
that is not normally
found in the
classroom.
6: The rubric is very

clear on how the
students will be
graded.
The evaluation
instrument clearly
measures what students
must know and be able
to do to accomplish the
task.
See Creating a Rubric.
Total Score
33 /50

Name of WebQuest: To the Moon
Name of WebQuest Author: Sean Greiner
Beginning
Developing
Accomplished
Overall Aesthetics
0 points
2 points
4 points
Overall visual
appeal
There are few or no
typography.
Or
suffers. Background
interferes with the
readability.
Navigation &
Flow
Graphic elements
contribute to the
Appropriate and
thematic graphic
understanding of
concepts, ideas and
relationships.
Score
3 points: This
quest uses the
same color for the
font but does uses
different font sizes.
It is all of the same
font. There are
pictures used for
several pages to
draw interest and
help illustrate the
project.
See Fine Points

Checklist.
0 points
2 points
4 points

is confusing and
clear.

go next.
get to them.
4 points: This quest

is very easy to
navigate. It is
seamless and has
all of the necessary
pieces.
Mechanical
Aspects
Introduction
Motivational
effectiveness of
introduction
0 points
1 point
2 points

and/or grammatical
errors.

misspellings and/or
grammatical errors.
noted.
0 points
1 point
2 points

relevance or social
importance
problem.

OR
literacy of today's
learners.
See Fine Points

Checklist.
2 points: There
are no broken links
and all the
mechanical aspects
seem to be working.
2 points: The
introduction does
draw the reader in.
it discusses the
goals of the project
and how it relates
to the students. It
produces a question
that the students
are required to
answer.
Cognitive
Effectiveness
of the
Introduction
0 points
1 point
2 points

on what the learner
already knows.

prior knowledge and

on learner's prior
knowledge and
learner by
lesson is about.
1 point: The
project does not
describe the
previous knowledge
required for this
project. It says
that student will be
exploring the
quadratic equation
but it does not give
an idea as to the
depth that they
have already gone
into that topic.
Task
Connection of
Task to
Standards
0 points
2 point
4 points

standards.

those standards

connected to what
standards.
4 points: the task

does say the
standard that is
being addressed
and defines the
standard. The
standard is clearly
linked to the
project.

of the Task

comprehending or
answering factual
questions.
3 points
6 points

several sources.
Task is doable and

thinking that goes
beyond rote
comprehension. The task
requires synthesis of
multiple sources of
information, and/or
taking a position, and/or
going beyond the data
given and making a
generalization or
creative product.
6 points: The task

is doable and
engaging. The
students are
required to take on
the role of an
engineer and are
required to process
data and go beyond
it to analyze the
problem.
See WebQuest
Taskonomy.
Process
0 points
2 points
Clarity of
4 points
process

be confused.

would know exactly
next.
4 points: There are

steps listed that are
easy to follow and
flow in a logical
manner. The steps
should be easy for a
student to follow.
Scaffolding of
Process
0 points
3 points
6 points
The process lacks

strategies and
gain the knowledge
task.
Strategies and
complete the task.

significance to one
task.


different entry levels
with strategies and
access and gain the
knowledge needed to
complete the task.
basic knowledge to
higher level thinking.
Checks for
understanding are built
in to assess whether
students are getting it.
See:
Process Guides
A Taxonomy of
Information
Patterns
Language Arts
Standards and
Technology
WebQuest
Enhancement
Tools
Reception, Transf
ormation &Produ
ction Scaffolds
6 points: The process

is clearly stated and
easy to follow. It has
resources that are
great to help the
students be engaged
and figure out the
answer to the
question posed. The
activities in the
process all help the
students come to a
logical conclusion
based on their
research.
Richness of
Process
0 points
1 points
2 points

roles assigned.

Different roles are

assigned to help
students understand
and/or share
responsibility in
0 points: There are

no roles assigned to
separate students.
Relevance &
Quantity of
Resources
0 points
2 point
4 points


add anything new.

between all the
resources and the
carries its weight.
OR
There are too many
time.
4 points: The
resources given apply
to the project and all
give something new
for the students to
use. Almost every
resource will be used
for complete this
project. All resources
have a meaningful
connection to the
quest.
Quality of
resources
0 points
2 points
4 points
Links are mundane.

They lead to
information that could
be found in a classroom
encyclopedia.
Some links carry


use of the Web's
timeliness and
colorfulness.
enough meaningful
to think deeply.
4 points: All links

are valuable and add
something to new for
the students. All
resources help to
engage the students
and require them to
think deeply about
how to solve their
question at hand.
Evaluation
Clarity of
evaluation
criteria
0 points
3 point

are not described.

6 points
descriptors.
The evaluation
instrument clearly
task.
6 points: The
evaluation is very
clear on how the
students will be
graded. The
evaluation clearly
measures how much
work and effort the
students put into the
project.
Total Score
46/50

Name of WebQuest: My First Ride
Name of WebQuest Author: Kathleen Thomson
Beginning
Developing
Accomplished
Overall Aesthetics
0 points
2 points
4 points
Overall visual
appeal
There are few or no
typography.
Or
suffers. Background
interferes with the
readability.
Graphic elements
contribute to the
Appropriate and
thematic graphic
understanding of
concepts, ideas and
relationships.
See Fine Points
Checklist.
Score
4 points: This quest

uses a lot of
pictures to helps
make a point and
draw attention. It
uses different color
and sizes of font.
The choices help
the site flow.
Navigation &
Flow
0 points
2 points
4 points

is confusing and
clear.

go next.
get to them.
Mechanical
Aspects
0 points
1 point
2 points

and/or grammatical
errors.

misspellings and/or
grammatical errors.
noted.
0 points
1 point
2 points

relevance or social
importance
problem.

Introduction
Motivational
effectiveness of
introduction
OR
literacy of today's
learners.
See Fine Points

Checklist.
4 points: The
navigation makes
sense and the quest
page has a good
flow.
2 points: There are

no broken links and
no mechanical
errors that I can
see.
2 points: The
introduction
definitely draws in
the reader. The
goals are clearly
listed and a
compelling question
is posed.
Cognitive
Effectiveness
of the
Introduction
0 points
1 point
2 points

on what the learner
already knows.

prior knowledge and

on learner's prior
knowledge and
learner by
lesson is about.
1 point: The
introduction does
not reference any of
the learners
previous learning or
skills that they may
have already. It
references that
students know a
little about cars.
Task
Connection of
Task to
Standards
0 points
2 point
4 points

standards.

those standards

connected to what
standards.
4 points: The task

clearly states that
standard that is
connected to the
projects. The
connection is clear
and the standard is
achievable.

of the Task

comprehending or
answering factual
questions.
3 points
6 points

several sources.
Task is doable and

thinking that goes beyond
rote comprehension. The
task requires synthesis of
multiple sources of
information, and/or taking
a position, and/or going
beyond the data given and
making a generalization or
creative product.
6 points. The quest

is very engaging
and doable. It
requires the student
to create and
analyze data and
make a logical
decision based on
the answers and
information they
have.
See WebQuest Taskonomy.
Process
0 points
2 points
4 points
Clarity of
process

be confused.

would know exactly
next.
4 points. The
process is very clear.
It spells out exactly
how to complete the
quest and be
successful. It is very
easy to follow.
Scaffolding of
Process
0 points
3 points
6 points
The process lacks

strategies and
gain the knowledge
task.
Strategies and
complete the task.

significance to one
task.


different entry levels
with strategies and
access and gain the
knowledge needed to
complete the task.
basic knowledge to
higher level thinking.
Checks for
understanding are built
in to assess whether
students are getting it.
See:
Process Guides
A Taxonomy of
Information
Patterns
Language Arts
Standards and
Technology
WebQuest
Enhancement
Tools
Reception, Transf
ormation &Produ
ction Scaffolds
5 points: All of the

activities are not
directly related to the
task. I can see how
one could argue that
they are related, but
creating a resume to
buy a car is not
something that they
will have to do in real
life. All of the other
tasks are related and
make sense. The
process is clearly
stated but could be
made clearer buy
number the steps.
Richness of
Process
0 points
1 points
2 points

roles assigned.

Different roles are

assigned to help
students understand
and/or share
responsibility in
2 points: All the

students are required
to do all of the steps
so separate roles are
not required.
Relevance &
Quantity of
Resources
0 points
2 point
4 points


add anything new.

between all the
resources and the
carries its weight.
OR
There are too many
time.
4 points: All of the

resources are helpful
to give the students
options and helpful
information to
complete their task.
Almost every
resources will be
used.
Quality of
resources
0 points
2 points
4 points
Links are mundane. They

lead to information that
could be found in a
classroom encyclopedia.
Some links carry


use of the Web's
timeliness and
colorfulness.
2 points: Most of the

resources carry good
information but they
do not require the
students to think
deeply.

enough meaningful
to think deeply.
Evaluation
Clarity of
evaluation
criteria
0 points
3 point

are not described.

6 points
descriptors.
The evaluation
instrument clearly
task.
6 points. The
criterion in the
evaluation is clearly
stated and lets the
students know
exactly how they will
be graded. It clearly
measures the
students work and
what they
accomplished.
Total Score
46 /50

Elizabeth Winslett September 2, 2013 Itec 7445 Skills Assignment 1 - Webquest Review

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Elizabeth Winslett September 2, 2013 Itec 7445 Skills Assignment 1 - Webquest Review

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Elizabeth Winslett

A Rubric for Evaluating WebQuests

Getting through the lesson

There are a few places

There are more than 5

There are some broken

4: This WebQuest was

The introduction is purely

Introduction draws the

The introduction doesn't

The introduction makes

The introduction builds

The task is not related to

The task is referenced to

The task is referenced to

Task is doable but is limited

Task is doable and

Cognitive Level 0 points

Task requires simply

2: This task lists

Some directions are given,

Every step is clearly

The process lacks

The process provides

Activities are of little

Some of the activities do

Activities are clearly

3: The process tools

Few steps, no separate

Some separate tasks or

Different roles are

0: There are no roles

Resources provided are

There is some connection

There is a clear and

Links are mundane.

Some links carry

Links make excellent

Criteria for success

Criteria for success are at

Varied resources provide

2: The links are

6: The rubric is very

A Rubric for Evaluating WebQuests

See Fine Points

Getting through the lesson

There are a few places

4 points: This quest

There are more than 5

There are some broken

The introduction is purely

Introduction draws the

See Fine Points

The introduction doesn't

The introduction makes

The introduction builds

The task is not related to

The task is referenced to

The task is referenced to

4 points: the task

Cognitive Level 0 points

Task requires simply