Rubric for Assessing
Hotlists
|
Needs
Improvement |
Satisfactory
|
Outstanding |
Topic
Selection |
Topic does not
lend itself to the use of the web. |
There may be
some good web resources for this topic. |
Using the web
to explore this topic would enhance student
learning. |
Websites |
Insufficient number of websites or inappropriate selection of websites. |
Websites address the topic and, for the most part, are educationally sound and appropriate. |
Websites address the topic, are educationally sound, appropriate for the age or grade level of students, and address various learning styles and/or aspects of the topic. |
Links |
Some or all links are not working. |
Most links are working. |
All links are working. Titles or names of websites, rather than just urls, have been used as the link. |
Annotations |
There is little or no description of each site. |
Some desriptors have been provided but it may be difficult to differentiate between various sites. |
Appropriate descriptors are provided for all websites. It is easy for the learner to differentiate among the sites and to determine which ones to visit. |
Format |
Hotlist is not in table format or design features may significantly detract from the list itself. |
Table format has been used. Some attempt has been made to explore design features such as font and color. |
The hotlist is in table format. Fonts and colors enhance the page. |
Credibility |
There is no indication of who created this page. |
The author of the page is identified. |
The author of the page is identified by name and school. Author's e-mail is available to use for feedback. |
Adapted from: Tom March. “Assessing Webquests.”
(Online) 24 July 2001.
<
http://www.ozline.com/webquests/rubric.html>