WebQuest

This week, we were supposed to evaluate a webquest. Here is the webquest that I chose.

Overall Visual Appeal

First of all, I will talk about the visuality of the webquest. I think it is colorful. Each part has relevant pictures and it appeals the readers. Therefore, I give 4 points for visuality.

Navigation & Flow

When it comes to navigation & flow, I guess 4 points is appropriate. Because when I read the task and process parts, it was so simple and understandable that I didn’t get lost. All the information related to navigation was clear enough.

Mechanical Aspects

In the webquest there are several links that are related to the topic. I found most of them necessary and there weren’t any problem with them. For instance, in the process part there are a few links that takes you some relevant sites. When you click on ‘prezi’, you directly go to the site, when you click on ‘example’, you go to the site and see the example prepared by the teacher. So, my point is 2.

Motivational Effectiveness of Introduction

I found the introduction part appealing. There is a poem related to the topic. When I was searching for a webquest, I read the poem and I liked it. Then, I decided to choose this webquest. I think, if it were just the introductory text, it wouldn’t be appealing to the readers. Therefore, I give 2 points.

Cognitive Effectiveness of the Introduction

For this part, I definitely give 2 points. Because the introduction part gives clear information about what students will learn with the help of this project. It says “By the end of the Web Quest, you will be a Parts of Speech Pro!”

Connection of Task to Standards

I found the task useful. Students are supposed to review the definitions and explore examples for each part of speech. With the help of this project, they will strengthen their knowledge, so my point is 4.

Cognitive Level of the Task

Actually the task has several parts. Students are supposed to research, to solve pre-test, to make up sentences, to prepare a prezi project and so on. By doing those, they will improve their skills: conducting a research, reading, working in pairs, etc.  I give full points for this part.

Clarity of Process

Each step is clear enough. The teacher explains the process step by step and there is nothing confusing. In the webquest, the teacher makes her explanation simpler by adding some links. Therefore, the students know exactly what to do. I give 4 points.

For scaffolding of process and richness of process parts I give full points. Because I really liked the webquest, especially process part. The teacher explains what she wants in detail. The process is rich, because, as I said before, the task has various parts.

Resources

For the quantity part I give full points. The links, documents are enough. If she gave much more documents or sites to visit, then the students would get lost in conducting the research.

For the quality part I give 2 points. Because some of the information seemed too simple to me.

Clarity of Evaluation Criteria

Criteria for success are clearly stated. The teacher explained what would affect the evaluation process: how well they worked with their partner, how well they used their time, etc. Also,she gave an evaluation rubric. I give full points.

Total score is: 48/50

I found this project enjoyable. At the very beginning, I couldn’t understand what to do, but when I started, evaluating something made me feel good. Also, when I was looking for a webquest, I found some appealing webquests.