How Evaluate a website

Evaluation Rubric

There are many sources of Evaluation Rubrics for Internet Websites.  Many have similar focuses, while prioritise differently. The following sites have detailed rubric for the evaluation of internet websites.  They are mostly 3rd level institutions rubrics but these contain essential instructions in the evaluation of websites by 2nd level students.  The ability to source back knowledge, in the case of a challenge, must be paramount.

Browsing Criteria

When searching for information there is plenty information given by the search engines, the most important piece is the URL (Universal Resource Locator), the address of the site.  This can often tell us if this is what we are looking for. 

Broken down into the domain and the publisher, sites can be quickly evaluated by their origins.  The domain (the .ie .com etc) defines where a website comes from. Domains .org .edu .net are considered to be sites on behalf of non-commercial institutions, they often provide information and services.  If the information or topic is country specific it may be best resourced by sites on the national domain (.ie / .uk / .nl /.au).  Domains to be concerned about with regard to any commercial bias, are those domains upon which sites are bought by any organisation or person, (.com / .co etc.)

The middle part of the URL the server name can often be seen as the publisher of the site.  Some servers act as warehouses for personal web pages (geocities, yahoo etc).  These sites may be of great interest however we must be sure the information is factual by cross referencing with linked sites.  Other servers are maintained by Organisations, usually commercial one, again the data on these sites may well be accurate, helpful and appropriate.  These sites normally however have some degree of bias related to the commercial business interests of the server’s owners.  Again any information gleaned from these sites should be cross-referenced.

Choosing URL’s that seem appropriate will reduce time spent on non-relevant sites.

Referencing a Site

In order to properly cite referenced information we need to provide 3 pieces of information to the reader, the name, location and date of publication. 

The location is simply the URL, however a student must search for other information. The authors name and the date of publication must first be found in any work to be referenced.

Evaluating a Site

In order to evaluate a site it is reasonable to break down the criteria into separate sections.  The headings I have chosen are; Authenticity & Authority, Suitability and Content.  Under these 3 sections we should be able to distinguish between good and poor resources.

When evaluating a site it may be helpful for the student to have an easy to follow rubric, the following is a set of questions to which graded responses can be given, 3 marks for a good example to 0 marks where no example exists. The grade 2marks should be given where the example is satisfactory. 1mark should be employed to note its presence but with poor functionality.

The marks are out of a total 99.

Authenticity & Authority

Suitability

Content

Total Evaluation score

for

http://_____________________________________________________

embeds.sites.google.com/internal/jot2atari/imagenotfound?src=javascript:void(0);

Authenticity & Authority

1. Is the author of the page named?                                                       0          1          2          3

1. Are there Contact details for the author?                                            0          1          2          3

1. Is there any biography (description of experience) for the author?    0          1          2          3

1. Do you know of or do you trust the publishing organisation? 0          1          2          3

1. Is it linked from any other pages on that server?                               0          1          2          3

1. Does the page carry a statement or logo of the publisher?               0          1          2          3

1. Does the site have a ‘last updated’ date?                                           0          1          2          3

1. Is that date sufficiently recent?                                                           0          1          2          3

1. Is the site objective (3 marks) or strongly biased (0 Marks)? 0          1          2          3

1. Is the page linked to or from trusted sites?                                        0          1          2          3

Suitability

1. Is the information provided as a public service?                                0          1          2          3

1. How fast does the site load? (very fast = 3)                                       0          1          2          3

1. Does the website require additional software downloads

to be viewed? (yes = 0marks, No = 3 marks)                                                0          1          2          3

1. Can you surf freely (3marks) or must you log on to site giving

away some information (2/1mark) or your e-mail address (0)?         0          1          2          3

1. Does the site carry advertising (lots = 0marks)(none = 3marks)?    0          1          2          3

1. What is the sites function? educational/informational (3marks)       

to purely Commercial (0marks) ?                                                       0          1          2          3

1. Is the language easy to understand or complicated?             0          1          2          3

1. Does it have an age range? Is it suitable for the students?               0          1          2          3

1. Does the content provide suitable material to be used as an           

information resourse?                                                                         0          1          2          3

1. Are the sources of information clearly listed?                                    0          1          2          3

1. Is there evidence that this site is actively maintained with updates? 0          1          2          3

Content

1. Are all links valid and working?                                                           0          1          2          3

1. Have all pictures and text loaded properly?                                        0          1          2          3

1. Does it comment on sources of images, data or text on the page? 

(with links?)                                                                                         0          1          2          3

1. Is the site easily navigable (including backward navigation)?            0          1          2          3

1. Is the information clearly presented?                                                  0          1          2          3

1. Is the site aesthetically pleasing (does the site look good)?              0          1          2          3

1. Do pictures have alternative text comments to explain the image?   0          1          2          3

1. Does the site use multimedia elements? (video or audio)                 0          1          2          3

1. Does the site use interactive elements?                                            0          1          2          3

1. Are there links to related sites?                                                         0          1          2          3

1. Are there links from those related sites?                                           0          1          2          3

1. Are pages in an appropriate format, do they sit within the screen?

Is there a printer friendly version?                                                       0          1          2          3