iRubric: Website Evaluation Rubric_Keerthana

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...

Website Evaluation Rubric_Keerthana

Website Evaluation Rubric

Evaluation of https://edu.assemblrworld.com/

Rubric Code: U2522CC

By keerthana222

Ready to use

Public Rubric

Subject: Education

Type: (Other)

Grade Levels: Undergraduate, Graduate

Website Evaluation
	Poor 10 pts	Fair 10 pts	Good 10 pts	Excellent 10 pts	Comments (N/A)
Purpose	Poor The purpose is unclear or cannot be determined.	Fair The Web site has more than one purpose but meets only a few of my objectives.	Good The purpose is somewhat clear and meets most of my objectives.	Excellent The purpose of the Web site is clear and meets my objectives.	Comments
Content	Poor The information on the Web site does not relate to my objectives. There is evidence of bias in information.	Fair The information relates to my objectives, however not completely neutal.	Good The information relates to my objectives and is mostly neutral.	Excellent The information relates to my objectives and the content is neutral and free from bias.	Comments
Currency	Poor Information on the site has not been revised in the last 18 months, or no date can be located.	Fair Information on the site has not been updated in the last year, but the information is still good quality.	Good Information has been updated in the last six months and seems to reflect currency.	Excellent Information has been updated in the last three months and is accurate.	Comments
Credibility Accuracy	Poor No contact details or credentials of the author appeared on the website, nor any detail of the web master. The web site lacks accurate information.	Fair There is insufficient detail on the website with regard to the author and web master. The site contains partially accurate information.	Good The website contains a fair amount of detail with regard to credentials of author and contact details and those of the web master. It contains mostly accurate information.	Excellent The author/organisation is clearly identified. Appropriate credentials and contact detail are provided. Contains accurate information.	Comments
Affiliation Objectivity	Poor It is unclear what insitution supports this information. The Web site is full of advertising and heavily biased.	Fair The site appears to have an institution that supports its content, however it is unclear the exact relationship between the author and institution. The Web site has a great deal of advertising and has some bias.	Good The site is supported by a larger institution, but some bias is apparent in the information from the institution. The Web site contains some advertising and minimal bias.	Excellent The site is supported by a reputable institution without bias in the information. The Web site contains little or no advertising and is free of bias.	Comments
Design Aesthetic appeal Navigation Accessibility	Poor The site is not visually appealing to audience. Web site is difficult to navigate and often confusing. Majority of links are not labelled and not active. Difficult to access the web site and additional software is needed.	Fair The site is mildly appealing. Website is not easy to navigate. Only a few links are active and current. The web site can be accessed with effort, (time consuming) and some additional software is required.	Good The site is appealing to audience. Web site is reasonably well organised and therefore easy to navigate. The web site can be accessed with some effort and additional software might be required.	Excellent The site is visually appealing to target audience. Web site is easy to navigate and well organised. The web site is easily accessible and no additional software is required.	Comments
Audience Academic Level	Poor Directions, reading level and product are inappropriate for target audience. Website does not state academic levels and contains activities that are not suitable for target audience. Student diversity is not recognised.	Fair Directions, reading level and product are sometimes inappropriate for target audience. Website has limited activities suitable for target audience and partially recognises that students learn in different ways.	Good Directions, reading level, and product are mostly appropriate for targeted audience. The website is randomly states the academic level of target audience. It gives recognition to different ways of learning.	Excellent Directions, reading level and product are appropriate for targeted audience. Clearly states the academic level of target audience. It recognises that students learn in different ways.	Comments
Critical Thinking	Poor Learners not given opportunity to engage in higher level thinking.	Fair Learners given limited opportunities to engage in higher level thinking.	Good Learners given some opportunity to engage in higher level thinking.	Excellent Learners given extensive opportunities to engage in higher level thinking activities.	Comments
Interactivity	Poor Lacks enhancements that actively involve the learners.	Fair Minimal enhancements that actively involve the learners.	Good Contains some enhancements that actively involve the learners.	Excellent Contains many enhancements that maintains the learners actively involved.	Comments
Support Materials	Poor Support materials do not exist. Technical support is inadequate.	Fair Limited options for assistance are given.	Good Assistance is available but not quickly accessible. Additional resources are available.	Excellent Assistance is readily available at any point in the web site and many additional sources are available.	Comments

Keywords:

Interactive Learning Educational Website

Subjects:

Types:

(Other)

Discuss this rubric