Martin's WebQuest Rubric

WebQuest Evaluation Rubric

This rubric is based on the models created by Dr. Bernie Dodge and Tom March and was tailored to assess WebQuests created in Filamentality.

	Beginning	Developing	Accomplished	Score
Introduction (The introduction should engage, orient, and motivate the learner.)
Motivation	0 points Introduction is purely factual, with no appeal to relevance or social importance. Little attempt is made to appeal to learners.	1 point Introduction relates somewhat to the learner's interests and/or describes a compelling question or problem.	2 points 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.
Quest/Task/Question (The task is the end result of student efforts... not the steps involved in getting there.)
Higher-level thinking	0 points Task requires simply comprehending web pages and answering questions, not higher level thinking. OR The task or quest is unclear.	1 points Task is clear and requires analysis of information and/or putting together information from several sources.	2 points Task clearly requires synthesis of multiple sources of information, taking a position, and going beyond the data to make a generalization or creative product. Task requires higher level thinking.
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. Learners would not know exactly what they were supposed to do just from reading this.	1 point Some directions are given, but there is missing information. Learners might be confused.	2 points Every step is clearly stated. Most learners would know exactly where they were in the process and what to do next.
Roles/richness of process	0 points Too few steps. OR No separate roles assigned.	1 points Some separate tasks or roles assigned. More complex activities are needed. OR Roles are unclear or artificial.	2 points Lots of variety in the activities performed. Different roles and perspectives are taken. Authentic roles match the issues and resources.
Resources (This is an assessment of all resources linked to the page, regardless of where they are placed.)
Background for everyone	0 points Resources provide little or no common background.	1 point Some effort is made to build a common background.	2 points Resources effectively provide a common foundation of knowledge.
Quantity of resources	0 points Few online resources used. (Less than 5 links.)	1 point Moderate number of online resources used. (5-10 links.)	2 points Many online resources provided. (10 or more links.)
Quality of resources	0 points Links are mundane or not relevant. They are not particularly engaging or informative.	1 points Links are engaging and rich in information and/or opinion. The resources are authoritative.	2 points Links are very engaging, informative, and authoritative. They make excellent use of the Web's diversity and timeliness.
Evaluation/Real World Feedback (This should describe the method of assessment.)
Clarity of evaluation	0 points Learners have no idea on how they'll be judged.	1 point Criteria for success are at least partially described.	2 points Criteria for success is clearly stated, perhaps in the form of a rubric. OR Provide a realistic means of obtaining real world feedback.
Conclusion (The conclusion should suggest how the learner will summarize, synthesize, generalize, or bring closure to the WebQuest.)
Closure and generalization	0 points Minimal conclusion. No tie in with the Introduction.	1 point Sums up the learners' experiences. Makes some reference to the ideas expressed in the Introduction.	2 points Clear closure and tie in with the Introduction. Suggests how learning could be synthesized and generalized to other areas.
Stock Language (This refers to default ideas or wording supplied by Filamentality, i.e., "Picture this: you and a team of learners are presented with the task of describing an elephant...")
Use of stock language	0 points Relies heavily on standard or stock language.	1 points There are a few stock phrases, but most of the language is original.	2 points No stock language or ideas are employed. The writing is completely original.
Total Score

Created by Dr. Bill Martin on 8-28-99. Updated 10-30-99 with the help of students from ED554 Modern Educational Practices.

Grades are based on a 20-point scale: A=18-20; B=16-17, C=15; F=Less than 15 points.