A Rubric for Evaluating WebQuests

Modified from Bernie Dodge's Rubric at http://webquest.sdsu.edu/webquestrubric.html


The WebQuest format can be applied to a variety of teaching situations. If you take advantage of all the possibilities inherent in the format, your students will have a rich and powerful experience. This rubric will help you pinpoint the ways in which your WebQuest isn't doing everything it could do. If a page seems to fall between categories, feel free to score it with in-between points.

Beginning
Developing
Accomplished
Score
Required components

0 points

Missing two or more sections

2 points

Missing 1 required component

4 points

Includes all required components

 
Mechanical Aspects

0 points

There are more than 5 broken links, misspellings and/or grammatical errors.

1 point

There are some broken links, misspellings and/or grammatical errors.

2 points

No mechanical problems noted.

 

 

Introduction

Motivational Effectiveness of Introduction

0 points

The introduction is purely factual, with no appeal to relevance or social importance

OR

The scenario posed is transparently bogus and doesn't respect the media literacy of today's learners.

1 point

The introduction relates somewhat to the learner's interests and/or describes a compelling question or problem.

2 points

The introduction draws the reader into the lesson by relating to the learner's interests or goals and/or engagingly describing a compelling question or problem.


Cognitive Effectiveness of the Introduction

0 points

The introduction doesn't prepare the reader for what is to come, or build on what the learner already knows.

1 point

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

2 points

The introduction builds on learner's prior knowledge and effectively prepares the learner by foreshadowing what the lesson is about.


Task (The task is the end result of student efforts... not the steps involved in getting there.)

Authenticity of Task

0 points

The task is not authentic:

Not acceptable:
—Write a report
—Present to class
—Learn something

2 point

The task is authentic but limited in its significance.

4 points

The task is authentic and offers a significant real-life experience upon which students might draw in the future.


Cognitive Level of the Task

0 points

Task requires simply comprehending or retelling of information found on web pages and answering factual questions.

3 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.

6 points

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.

Process (The process is the step-by-step description of how students will accomplish the task.)

Clarity of Process

0 points

Process is not clearly stated. Students would not know exactly what they were supposed to do just from reading this.

2 points

Some directions are given, but there is missing information. Students might be confused.

4 points

Every step is clearly stated. Most students would know exactly where they are at each step of the process and know what to do next.


Scaffolding of Process

0 points

The process lacks strategies and organizational tools needed for students to gain the knowledge needed to complete the task.

Activities are of little significance to one another and/or to the accomplishment of the task.

3 points

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

Some of the activities do not relate specifically to the accomplishment of the task.

6 points

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 clearly related and designed to take the students from basic knowledge to higher level thinking.


Richness of Process

0 points

Few steps, no separate roles assigned.

1 points

Some separate tasks or roles assigned. More complex activities required.

2 points

Different roles are assigned to help students understand different perspectives and/or share responsibility in accomplishing the task.


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

Resources provided are not sufficient for students to accomplish the task.

OR

There are too many resources for learners to look at in a reasonable time.

2 point

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

4 points

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.


Quality of
Resources

0 points

Links are mundane. They lead to information that could be found in a classroom encyclopedia.

2 points

Some links carry information not ordinarily found in a classroom.

4 points

Links make excellent use of the Web's timeliness and colorfulness.

Varied resources provide enough meaningful information for students to think deeply.


Total Score

/40