Criteria for Evaluation Good Web Pages
| Criteria | Standards | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Level 4 | Level 5 | |
| Development Process
|
Handwritten proposal sheet submitted to teacher | Text for page entered into simple word processor or HTML-creation program (BBEdit, PageMill, Claris HomePage, FrontPage) | Draft page is printed out from within Netscape; text on page partially achieves proposal | Evidence of revision of page in web browser (Netscape, Explorer); substantially achieves (or explains changes to) proposal | Critical reflection of development process is submitted in writing (individually) |
| Network Skill
|
Student has problems bring up their Web Page within a web browser (Netscape, Explorer) | Text is in a program other than the word processor; Images not saved in .gif or .jpg format; One or more files in wrong location or have wrong file name | All .html files in simple word-processor of HTML-creation program; All images .gif or .jpg; All file names and group numbers correct | Running word-processor or HTML-creation program and web browser (Netscape or Explorer) simultaineously; efficient use of Internet access programs | Efficient revision: testing changes by switiching between word-processor or HTML-creation program and web browser (Netscape or Explorer) |
| Thinking Process
|
Disconnected and unrelated thoughts; vague ideas | Concrete description and evaluation; no analysis of causes, no meaning | Description, analysis, meaning, evaluation; identifies problems and solution | Integrates multiple sources of information to assess issue; balances personal and external | Identifies and examines root causes as well as immediate issue; persuasive and convicted |
| Writing Process
|
Difficult to understand, tangents, spelling and other errors | Many errors but consistent line of thought | Easy to understand; perfect spelling; one or two grammar, syntax, or semantic problems | Same as Level 3 but no errors | Clear, concise, well written |
| HTML Skill
|
No HTML formatting tags; Text is not broken into paragraphs | Text is broken in paragraphs; Headings are used; no other tags | Paragraphs; headings; title ; and the following tags as appropriate: preformatted text ; styles ; centered text ; horiz. rule | Same as Level 3 plus: images > and links | Same as Level 4 plus at least two lists, images as Links, "Return to..." links, colored text/background, background image |
| Layout
|
Layout has no structure or organization | Text broken into paragraphs and/or sections | Headings label sections and create hierarchy; some consistency | Hierarchy closely follows meaning; Headings and styles are consistent within pages; Text, images, and links flow together | Consistent format extends page-to-page; design is intentional; attention to different browsers and monitor size |
| Navigation
|
One Page | One Page with TITLE, Heading | 2 pages (or one page with links to other resources) | 3 pages with clear order, labeling and navigation between pages; all links work | Title Page with other pages branching off, and at least four pages total; Navigation path is clear and logical, all links work |
| Images
|
No images | Images are unrelated to page/text/proposal; most images were recycled from other pages on the Internet; Images too big/small in size or resolution; Images poorly cropped or have color problems | Images have strong relation to text; some Images are student produced; Images have proper size, resolution, colors, and cropping | Same as Level 3 plus images are from 3 or more sources (scan, CD-ROM, QuickCam, ZapShot, video tape, net, SuperPaint, PhotoShop, LogoMotion, etc.) | Same as Level 4 with either: more advanced Photoshop, PhotoDeluxe or Illustrator work |
Source: This Rubric is a modified version of that created by
John Pilgrim, SW Computer Electives, Fall 1995, Horace Mann MS.
You can find the original version at his web site:
http://nisus.sfusd.k12.ca.us/schwww/sch618/jwp/pilgrim_links.html
More Evaluation Information
Return to Inservice Index