Then as their final project in this class, which meets the creating level of Bloom's Digital Taxonomy, the students develop a webquest of their own, in groups of 2 - 4. For this project, the students use a website specifically designed for teachers/students to create webquests and share them with others. What is nice about this website is that webquest creators are able to focus on the content of the quest rather then worry about developing a website, etc. This website basically walks the creator through the steps. Here is a simple webquest about service learning that I created using this website several years ago.
I think that this process is an excellent way to have students pull together all that they have learned about the webquest process as well as other concepts that we discussed in class about learning with technology. To me, this is an ideal "creating" project for them!
Objectives:
- After exploring the process of a webquest, the student will create a webquest of their own.
- In the creation of their webquest, students will focus on using technology to foster: authentic assessment, collaborative learning, higher level thinking, and project based learning.
This is the final "exam" for this class. Students present their webquest website to their peers by highlighting the main points of the quest. The students are assessed by looking at the effectiveness of the different sections of the quest and several factors relating to authentic assessment, collaborative learning, higher level thinking, and project based learning.
This is the rubric that is currently in use for this project. It will likely be adapted as time goes on.
Webquest | Beginning (0 - 1 pt) | Good (2 – 3 pts) | Excellent (4 – 5 pts) |
Mechanics | There are more than 5 broken (non working ) links, misplaced or confusing images, misspellings and/or grammatical errors. (NOTE: this is worth 0 points.) | There are some broken (non working) links, misplaced or confusing images, misspellings or grammatical errors. (NOTE: this is worth 1 pt.) | No mechanical problems noted. (NOTE: This is worth 2 pts.) |
Blooms Taxonomy level of webquest project. | WebQuest project only addresses the lower level of Blooms. | WebQuest attempts to address an upper level of Blooms, but the goal/project is weak. | Webquest addresses one of the three upper levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy. |
Motivational Effectiveness of Introduction | The introduction is purely factual, with no appeal to relevance of today’s world and students in it. | The introduction relates somewhat to the learner’s interests and/or describes a compelling question or problem. | The introduction draws the reader into the lesson by relating to the learner’s interests or goals and engagingly describing a compelling question or problem. |
Cognitive Effectiveness of Introduction | The introduction doesn’t prepare the reader for what is to come, or build on what learner may already know. | The introduction makes some reference to learner’s prior knowledge and previews to some extent what the lesson is about. | The introduction builds on learner’s prior knowledge and effectively prepares the learner by hinting or giving a clue to what the lesson is about. |
Cognitive level of Task | Task requires simply comprehending or retelling of information found on web pages and answering factual questions. | 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. | Task is doable and engaging, and elicits thinking that goes beyond rote comprehension to higher levels of Bloom’s taxonomy. The task requires synthesis of multiple sources of info, and/or taking a position, and/or going beyond the data given and making a generalization or creative product. |
Clarity of Process | Process is not clearly stated. Students would not know exactly what they were supposed to do just from reading this. | Some directions are given, but there is missing information. Students might be confused. | 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. |
Richness of Process | Few steps, no separate roles assigned. | Some separate tasks or roles assigned. More complex activities required. | Different roles are assigned to help students understand different perspectives and/or share responsibility in accomplishing the task. |
Relevance and quality of Resources | Resources (websites, etc.) are not sufficient for students to accomplish the task. OR There are too many resources for learners to look at in a reasonable time. AND Links are mundane. They lead to information that could be found in a classroom encyclopedia. | There is some connection between the resources and the information needed for students to accomplish the task. Some resources don’t add anything new. AND Some links carry information not ordinarily found in a classroom. | There is a clear and meaningful connection between all the resources and the information needed for the students to accomplish the task. Every resource carries its weight. AND Links make excellent use of the Web’s timeliness and colorfulness. Varied resources provide enough meaningful information for students to think deeply. |
Clarity of Evaluation Criteria | Rubric is not clearly outlined with expectations for success. | Rubric provides some guidelines for expectations for success. | Rubric is complete and clearly outlines what is needed for the student to be successful on the WebQuest. |
Conclusion | Summary is weak or not present. No Closure | Summary is present. | Good summary of task. Gives closure to quest. |
Relevance of Teacher resources/standards | Standards are missing or not at all relevant. No teacher information shared. | Standards are selected. Teacher information is shared. Neither is very elaborate or complete. | Appropriate standards are selected for project. Teacher information is relevant and well expressed. |
Presentation | The presentation was clearly not prepared or organized. | Presentation was clear and fairly well organized. Most participants were well prepared. | Webquest presentation is well prepared and organized. Participants knew their part and were well prepared for it. |
Participation | Student received negative comments from each of their partners. | Student did not get completely positive results. | The student’s peer evaluations were all very positive. |
62 points Total. Grade will be determined based on the percentage of points earned on rubric.