|
- Mtandao Afrika : Internet Challenge 2008 Rubrics :
|
| |
| Check Rules page. |
| |
| Following are the detailed rubrics for Mtandao Afrika judging
criteria, these rubrics are provided as guides for the team members to help
them determine the value of their sites and the areas of focus. These criteria
will be used by judges to evaluate the sites submitted by teams. |
| |
| 10 points - Team Collaboration & Diversity among Student Team
Members |
a) Computer and Network Resources
Judges will consider significant differences in computer and network resources
available among the student team members' schools. Team members must enter this
information when the team completes its entry form/final questionnaire.
b) Social and cultural diversity
Judges will consider other factors (such as the different ages, genders,
nationalities and languages of the participants) that influenced the
collaboration, taking special note of cultural diversity in the African
context.
c) Team collaboration
In order to encourage collaboration between students with different skills,
resources, and backgrounds, Judges will evaluate how successfully team members
collaborated on their entry by sharing their individual knowledge, skills,
effort and contributions with other team members, how they shared their
individual knowledge and skills towards the overall project and how the team
managed to use different internet communication tools to complete their entry.
|
|
top
|
| 20 points - Educational Value
|
In order to encourage teams to create entries that have
significant educational value, Judges will evaluate:
The importance of the educational objectives of the entry,
The extent to which the entry meets these educational objectives in (a) above,
The originality, innovation and artistic presentation of the entry and its
material,
| |
| 1. Evaluate the importance of the
educational objectives of the Entry and its effectiveness in meeting those
objectives.
|
| Give This Entry 0-3 if:
|
Give This Entry 4-7 if:
|
Give This Entry 8-10 if:
|
| The educational objectives addressed have
limited relevance to the age and grade-level of the target audience.
|
The Entry has some educational value and
does a moderately effective job addressing a set of educational objectives that
have relevance to students.
|
The Entry has strong educational value
and clearly and effectively engages students in its designed learning
activities.
|
| 0 1 2 3
|
4 5 6 7
|
8 9 10
|
| |
| 2. Evaluate the originality, innovation,
graphic design, and artistic presentation of the Entry and its material. |
| Give This Entry 0-3 if:
|
Give This Entry 4-7 if:
|
Give This Entry 8-10 if:
|
| The Entry resembles the direct transfer
of information from other media (e.g. textbooks, pamphlets, magazines) onto the
Web; graphic design is unappealing.
|
The team has taken advantage of the
strengths and capabilities of the Web to create a new presentation of
information and materials; the design and presentation of materials is average.
|
The Entry is original, exemplifies
excellent graphic design and uses the many capabilities of the Web to create an
engaging, contagious and fun learning environment for students.
|
| 0 1 2 3
|
4 5 6 7
|
8 9 10
|
| |
|
| 15 Points - Africa Related Content
|
| Judges will determine whether an entry has been developed with
specific focus on Africa and targeting African learners and its contribution
towards establishing web based African educational content.
|
| |
| 1. Evaluate the contribution that this site makes
towards establishing online African content
|
| Give This Entry 0-1 if: |
Give This Entry 2-7 if:
|
Give This Entry 8-15 if:
|
| The content includes African material, but makes
limited reference to African issues and resources.
|
The content is African, but only makes partial
reference to African contexts. Most links are to non-African references.
|
The content is African and deals thoroughly with
African issues in the world context.
|
| 0 1
|
2 3 4 5 6 7
|
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
|
|
|
top
|
| 20 points - Entry Quality |
In order to encourage students to create high-quality entries,
Judges will evaluate:
The technical quality of the entry, including its reliability, ease-of-use,
internal consistency, robustness, and ability to perform quality checks on data
submitted, and to work efficiently as increasing numbers of students and
schools use the entry, and
The quality of the content of the entry, including the accuracy and
completeness of information (formulae, propositions, text, illustrations,
etc.), the expressiveness and clarity in communication of ideas, and the
appropriateness of the attribution(s) for the work of others. |
| |
| 1.Evaluate the technical quality of the
Entry. Is it reliable, easy to use, consistent, self-checking, robust, and well
performing on a range of browsers and platforms. |
| Give This Entry 0-3 if: |
Give This Entry 4-7 if:
|
Give This Entry 8-10 if:
|
| Many links fail, users can "crash" the
Entry; multimedia connections don't work; it is easy to "get lost" in the
pages; Entry does not work with more than one browser. |
Users can navigate easily throughout the
Entry and use it effectively with the instructions provided. Not all pages work
with all browsers and platforms; some links may have failed. |
The Entry is intuitively easy to navigate
and use. It generates no errors and all links and multimedia connections work.
The Entry performs well on different browsers and platforms at different speeds
and will scale well as usage grows. |
| 0 1 2 3
|
4 5 6 7
|
8 9 10
|
| |
| 2. Evaluate the quality of the contents
of the Entry, including its accuracy, completeness of information, and the
entrants' ability to express ideas clearly. |
| Give This Entry 0-1 if: |
Give This Entry 2-3 if:
|
Give This Entry 4-5 if:
|
| Information contains numerous or
fundamental errors; information is presented as original when it is not. Entry
is ineffective at helping others learn; the content is weak and/or
disorganized.
|
Information presented is generally
accurate and any errors are not substantive. Content is presented in average
manner.
|
Information is presented in a clear and
accurate way. Team members have thoroughly reported on their topic and
presented the information in an interesting and creative manner.
|
| 0 1 |
2 3
|
4 5 |
| |
| 3. Evaluate the Entry for its appropriate
and complete attribution for others' work. Have the students provided
appropriate and complete attributions for work done by others?
|
| Give This Entry 0-1 if:
|
Give This Entry 2-3 if:
|
|
| Citations are consistently missing;
credits are incomplete.
|
Entry may be missing very minor
citations, but the Entry is intellectually honest.
|
References and sources are cited properly
and in an outstanding manner. Credits reflect all work contributed by others.
|
| 0 1
|
2 3
|
4 5
|
|
|
top
|
| 10 points - Internet Style of Learning |
In order to encourage each team to create an entry which uses
computers and the Internet to enhance the users' learning experiences, Judges
will evaluate the extent to which an entry:
Allows for active participation by others,
Encourages others to share data, ideas, and materials that can enrich the
overall value of the entry, and that help to create a "learning community"
around the entry, and
Fosters interactive, participatory, collaborative "Internet style" learning
that encourages users to explore the Internet's timely resources and to create
new relationships that broaden the communities in which they live. |
| |
| 1. Evaluate how the Entry allows users to
contribute and participate by sharing ideas, views, experiences and data with
each other via the Entry.
|
| Give This Entry 0-2 if: |
Give This Entry 3-5 if:
|
| The Entry contains information that is
static; repeat visits to this site will not provide further insight into the
topic. There is no opportunity for students to participate; therefore it is
unlikely that a student will make repeated visits to this site.
|
The Entry creatively exploits the
interactive nature of the internet and has accomplished the goal of encouraging
others to contribute information to increase the value of the site for all
visitors. Students are able to interact and additional visits will provide the
user with increasing knowledge and information.
|
| 0 1 2
|
3 4 5
|
| |
| 2. Evaluate the extent to which the Entry
fosters the "Internet Style" of learning -- an interactive, participatory,
collaborative style -- that encourages students to explore the Internet's
timely resources and create new relationships by broadening the community in
which they live. |
| Give This Entry 0-2if: |
Give This Entry 3-5 if: |
| The Entry does not foster and encourage
active sharing and collaboration by students/users; there may be a "guest book"
or "message board" but the team is the only source of ideas, views and
experiences. |
Users engage in active collaboration
through ongoing discourse, collaborative problem solving, simulation and/or
interactive games. Visitors are able to participate in the learning process and
able to explore beyond their communities. |
| 0 1 2 |
3 4 5 |
|
|
top
|
| 10 points - Entry Usage |
Judges will determine whether an entry has been, and is likely
to be, highly used by others. This evaluation will be based on:
The proven nature of its use and users, and the comments of other users about
the entry
The expectation that other African learners will heavily use the entry.
Consequently, factors students should consider as they build an entry
include:
-
the entry's appealing nature to users
-
its breadth of potential African users
-
its educational effectiveness in the African context
-
its originality, appropriateness, and clarity
-
Entrants should also plan how to effectively and appropriately inform potential
users of the merits of their entry, and how to implement their plan once the
entry is made available for use by others.
|
| 1. What is the likelihood that the Entry
will be heavily used by African learners due to its appealing nature,
educational effectiveness, originality, appropriateness and clarity? |
| Give This Entry 0-3 if: |
Give This Entry 4-7 if:
|
Give This Entry 8-10 if:
|
| There seems to be little likelihood that
learners will frequent this Entry in the future.
|
The Entry is sufficiently engaging and/or
effective. African learners are likely to visit the site in the future.
|
The Entry is so original, appealing,
appropriate, clear and effective that it is likely the Entry will enjoy
repeated use by learners in the future.
|
| 0 1 2 3
|
4 5 6 7 |
8 9 10 |
|
|
top
|
| 15 Points - Multilingual |
| Judges will determine whether an entry has been developed in
more than one languages, this evaluation will be based on:
|
| 1. Evaluate the usage of local/indigenous
African languages beside the official languages of Mtandao afrika |
| Give This Entry 0 if: |
Give This entry 1-5 |
Give This Entry 6-15 if:
|
| The web site is developed in only one
language |
The web site is developed in the two
official languages of MAf (English and French). some content is translated but
not all, quality of the translation is not always accurate. |
6-9 – one local language, most content is
translated, quality of the translation is reasonable
10-13 – one local language, all content is translated, good quality translation
14-15 – two local languages used, or all content translated, excellent quality
translation |
| 0 |
1 2 3 4 5
|
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 |
|
|
top
|
|