|
|
| Name: Kelly L. Whaley | Date: June 29, 2001 |
| WebQuest Evaluated: Censorship and Fahrenheit 451 | |
| Score | Explanation | |
| Overall Aesthetics (This refers to the WebQuest page itself, not the external resources linked to it.) | ||
|
Overall visual appeal (0-2)
|
|
The layout and typography are simple, but consistent. There aren't many graphics, but the ones that are used are relevant to the project. The Process page contains no graphics. Color is used well to facilitate easy readability. |
| Introduction | ||
|
Motivational effectiveness of Introduction (0-2)
|
|
The Introduction is motivationally effective because most students have strong opinions on contemporary censorship (music, internet, etc). This introduction engages them by stating that they will play the role of a member of the Government's freedom of Speech Commission. As a member of this commission, they will be asked to help make decisions about modern day censorship issues. In other words, their opinions count - something very important to teens! |
|
Cognitive effectiveness of the Introduction
(0-2) |
|
After reading the introduction, students should have a clear understanding that the lesson is about researching the history of censorship and then relating that research to modern day censorship issues. However, it is not clear that the students' prior knowledge is being built upon. Have they already read Fahrenheit 451, or is this lesson going to be used as an introductory activity? |
| Task (The task is the end result of student efforts... not the steps involved in getting there.) | ||
|
Cognitive level of the task (0-6)
|
|
The Task requires the students to analyze the information in the websites and then write an essay in which they take a stand on a censorship issue, using the information in the websites to support their opinions. The creative aspect is that the students are to pretend they are writing the essay as a member of the Government's Freedom of Speech Commission. I think a more creative task could have included the the Commission participating in a round table discussion or a debate. Also, the state standards that are being addressed are not specifically listed or even mentioned. |
|
Technical sophistication of task (0-2)
|
|
This task is not very technically sophisticated at all. As long as the students know how to click on the links provided, they will be able to work through this webquest. The teacher does not even state specifically that the essay has to be typed. |
| Process (The process is the step-by-step description of how students will accomplish the task.) | ||
|
Clarity of Process (0-2)
|
|
The Process is very clear. Students should have no trouble understanding exactly what they are supposed to do from the directions given. |
|
Richness of process (0-6)
|
|
The activities start out as basic reading comprehension and move onto activities that require the students to use higher level thinking skills and form and support opinions. The teacher will check for understanding by collecting the answers to the questions in Part I. However, there are no separate roles assigned. As a matter of fact, this seems to be an individual assignment rather than a group one. Everyone has the same role as a member of the Government's Freedom of Speech Commission. |
| Resources (Note: you should evaluate all resources linked to the page, even if they are in sections other than the Resources block. Also note that books, video and other offline resources can and should be used where appropriate.) | ||
|
Quantity of resources (0-2)
|
|
All of the resources listed are clearly connected to to the information that the students need to accomplish the task. Most of the resources contain links to other sites where students can read more on the topic. |
|
Quality of resources (0-4)
|
|
The resources are varied and provide meaningful information to make the students think. All of the resources also seem to be from credible sources, and all of the links work except for the first link in McCarthyism and Blacklisting in Hollywood. |
| Evaluation | ||
|
Clarity of Evaluation Criteria (0-2)
|
|
On the Evaluation page, students are told in paragraph form what aspects of the project will be graded, but a rubric is not included. The teach uses generic words such as effective and well organized. He/she should define exactly what is meant and what he/she will be looking for. |
| Total Score
(0-30) |
|
While this webquest has some good qualities, such as the resources used, I would not do it with my students because I would have to make so many modifications that I might as well make my own from scratch. I think the task could be more creative by incorporating a debate. |