rubric

Web Design Rubric
//A guide for teacher and students participating in the GVC Contest// (want to say boring!) ||
 * || 5 || 4 || 3 || 2 || 1 - 0 ||
 * Content ||
 * Theme || Well thought out and logical. Interesting topic(s) throughout || Interesting topics, but scattered organization or thoughts. || Well organized, minimal topic coverage || Many topics but no cohesiveness || Minimum content; no logical organization ||
 * Quality of Content || Informs, entertains, shares, teaches. Strong in originality or creativity. |||| Informs, entertains, shares, teaches. Good originality or creativity. || Just a rehash of the ‘same old topic’. Nothing or little which is creative or original. || Minimal content; nothing original or creative.
 * Cultural Connection |||||| Content reflects the various cultures / viewpoints of its creators. |||| Content dominated by a single point of view or a single school. ||
 * Citations || Each page contains credits for text, images, etc. Original work also indicates country of creator. Third party work credited with indicator of permission for its use. || Each page contains credits for text, images, etc. Third party work credited with indicator of permission for its use. || Each page contains credits. Third party work credited with indicator of permission for its use. || Content credited, but just with a page of links. No indication of which links refer to which part of the site’s content. || No attribution anywhere on site. ||

Text is readable. |||||| Text difficult to read because of color choice and/or background. Images & other media add nothing to content but are there for their own sake. || Including Website's Journal |||||||| Content reflects the participation of all 3 schools, such as sharing research, or technical expertise, or artwork. Credits on each page indicate which students from each country created that page or contributed to the content. (Web work can be done by one school as long as others contributed to content and/or graphics.) Site's Journal montl=hly entries reflect this collaboration from all three schools. |||| Each school made their own pages independently, with no apparent interaction. Journal entries on site reflect only one school. |||| No indication of collaboration. Site appears to be the work of only one school. Journal entries not evident or only present for the final months. ||
 * || 5 |||| 4 || 3 |||| 2 |||| 1 - 0 ||
 * Presentation ||
 * Navigation and structure |||||| Easy to navigate; structure is clear (sections and sub sections); no instances of being ‘stranded’ without a way to continue or return. Graphics based navigation contains alternate menu. |||||||||| Easy to navigate; structure is clear (sections and sub sections); no instances of being ‘stranded’ without a way to continue or return. || Only way to navigate is by using the browser’s back button to the main page. ||
 * Visual appeal |||||| Images, animations, video, or sound are used effectively to add meaning. |||||| Site is attractive, with good design (for age level).
 * Creativity and Consistency |||||| Graphics and multimedia, creative and original. Site design is consistent throughout. |||||| Creative and original, but overall design inconsistent. |||| Consistent design but no original graphics or multimedia. || No overall design. ||
 * || 5 |||| 4 || 3 |||| 2 |||| 1 - 0 ||
 * Collaboration
 * Connections |||||||||||| Evidence of collaborative process in chat, Skype or other methods documented on the site. |||| No evidence of collaborative discussions. ||
 * Reflections |||||||||||| Teacher and student reflections reflect learning through collaboration with partners. |||| No reflections included. ||