Saturday February 17, 2018 - Es el 17 de febrero, 2018. Es sábado

WebQuest: Reflection

 

I really enjoyed working on this project, in part because I knew what a WebQuest was, but not quite how one was built, why it was built the way it was built and what needs to be done to build one. I also liked the topic I chose since it is much more limited than the first topic I had (the minds and persons behind the Enlightenment), and also because it hits closer to home with regards to my students' interests. If I had built a WebQuest dealing with the independence and revolutionary movements of Central America it might have been even more interesting to my students, but I know much more, and found it a lot less difficult to lay out a WebQuest for the South American independence movements.

One of the discoveries I made is that the more limited the project, the better. Yet even with this more limited project, I found it hard to put the WebQuest together. Part of it is the structure which can be a bit tricky to work with, especially setting up an introduction and then laying out the task and the process. It seems like the three pages share a lot in common which makes the content a bit repetitive, but that is probably OK for my students learning needs.

Las meninas, de Diego Velazquez

I also realized that I should have done the project in Spanish since now I have the somewhat daunting task of translating the whole WebQuest into Spanish.

In the end, now I know how to build a WebQuest. I have also had to figure out the way my web site works (I built it three years ago, but have not had to build new menus for three years or had to create many new directories). After 12 hours I am pretty happy with the project, but as usual, most teaching projects require another rewrite before I use it, and then at least one more, or two, afterward.

A problem I have run into is that I now understand that a WebQuest is a framework within which students can get the support they need to accomplish the task, yet because of the nature of my WebQuest, I feel like there is more work to be done to provide useful links, including Kathleen Schrock's web site evaluation check list so that my students don't use whatever web site they find, but rather find quality sites for their projects.

WebQuest rubric

Beginning
Developing
Accomplished
Score

Overall Aesthetics (This refers to the WebQuest page itself, not the external resources linked to it.)

Overall Visual Appeal

0 points

There are few or no graphic elements. No variation in layout or typography.

OR

Color is garish and/or typographic variations are overused and legibility suffers. Background interferes with the readability.

2 points

Graphic elements sometimes, but not always, contribute to the understanding of concepts, ideas and relationships. There is some variation in type size, color, and layout.

 

4 points

Appropriate and thematic graphic elements are used to make visual connections that contribute to the understanding of concepts, ideas and relationships. Differences in type size and/or color are used well and consistently.

 See Fine Points Checklist.


Navigation & Flow

0 points

Getting through the lesson is confusing and unconventional. Pages can't be found easily and/or the way back isn't clear.

2 points

There are a few places where the learner can get lost and not know where to go next.

4 points

Navigation is seamless. It is always clear to the learner what all the pieces are and how to get to them.

 
Mechanical Aspects

0 points

There are more than 5 broken links, misplaced or missing images, badly sized tables, misspellings and/or grammatical errors.

1 point

There are some broken links, misplaced or missing images, badly sized tables, misspellings and/or grammatical errors.

2 points

No mechanical problems noted.

 See Fine Points Checklist.

 

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.)

Connection of Task to Standards

0 points

The task is not related to standards.

2 point

The task is referenced to standards but is not clearly connected to what students must know and be able to do to achieve proficiency of those standards.

4 points

The task is referenced to standards and is clearly connected to what students must know and be able to do to achieve proficiency of those standards.


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.

See WebQuest Taskonomy.

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.

Checks for understanding are built in to assess whether students are getting it. See:


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.


Evaluation

Clarity of Evaluation Criteria

0 points

Criteria for success are not described.

3 points

Criteria for success are at least partially described.

6 points

Criteria for success are clearly stated in the form of a rubric. Criteria include qualitative as well as quantitative descriptors.

The evaluation instrument clearly measures what students must know and be able to do to accomplish the task.

See Creating a Rubric.


Total Score

/50

Original WebQuest rubric by Bernie Dodge.
This is Version 1.03. Modified by Laura Bellofatto, Nick Bohl, Mike Casey, Marsha Krill, and Bernie Dodge and last updated on June 19, 2001.

© 2002-2010 SantamariaProductions
Antonio Santamaría
e-mail
Maestro de español en Wilson High School, Long Beach, CA
4400 E. 10th Street, Long Beach, California, 90804 - 562 433-0481 Ext. 6857

LBUSD, Wilson Classical High School disclaimer

Use of material on this web site - Uso del material en este web site