HTML Project Grading Rubric
This chart shows how I evaluate your tutorial. Every aspect listed down the left side receives a score from 5 (high) to 1 (low). The text is a description of what a particular number means for a particular aspect of your tutorial.
| Excellent 5 | Good 4 | Average 3 | Fair 2 | Poor 1 | |
| Target audience | Entire program--screen design, objectives, instructional strategies, motivation--all are appropriate for the target audience. | Mostly appropriate for the target audience. | Many elements are not appropriate for the target audience | ||
| Objectives | Objectives are clearly stated or immediately evident, or they are emergent in the instruction. Objectives match the instructional goal(s). | Objectives somewhat clear | Objectives not found or not emergent by the end of the instruction. Objectives do not match instructional goal(s). | ||
| Learning theory or orientation | The designer clearly has chosen a theoretical orientation and the program design follows the tenets or assumptions of that orientation | Some elements of learning theory present | Instruction follows no known learning theory orientation | ||
| Instructional strategies | Strategies are varied and appropriate based on the objectives and constraints. | One or two strategies somewhat implemented | Instructional strategies poorly attempted or not present. Program only "tells" information at best. | ||
| Motivation | Motivational design is present and effective. Elements of Keller's ARCS model are present and evident. | Designer has given some consideration to motivating the learner | Program is devoid of motivational design. | ||
| Assessment | Matches the instructional goals and objectives. Is as authentic as possible. | Mostly relevant to instruction. | Not present, or not related to instructional objectives. | ||
| Screen Design | Interface elements on the screens are easily found and identified. Layout is clear, clean, and aesthetically appealing. No distracting background or other inappropriate elements. Splash or title screen present. | Interface elements are clear and somewhat related. | Interface elements are scattered randomly about the screens. Elements change radically from screen to screen. Loss of integrity of program. | ||
| Images | Photos, icons, and clip art are complementary and follow a theme. Images are clear, high quality, and relevant to the instruction. | Images are of average quality. Icons and clip art are inconsistent with "look and feel" of program. Some images not relevant. |
|
Inappropriate, random, or of poor quality. Mixed types with no theme or consistency. Images irrelevant to instruction. | |
| Text | Text is clear, concise, relevant. Typefaces are consistent, with only one or two typefaces throughout program. Sizes are appropriate for one user at one computer. Text complements the screen design. Line length is appropriate for high readability. Perfect spelling and grammar. | A few too many sizes and fonts. Average aesthetic quality and readability. | Text very difficult to read. Poorly written, inaccurate, or incomplete. Grammatical errors. Line length much too long which decreases readability. Size much too large or too small for single user. | ||
| Navigation | Buttons and links are consistent and easy to find. The user can easily navigate through the program. Navigation elements are in consistent locations from screen to screen. High usability. Low confusion for user. Program is not just a page-turner. Some branching present. | Somewhat clear navigation. The user may become confused when navigating between screens. Page-turner navigation only. | The user may become unintentionally lost. Buttons or links are missing or do not work. Navigation is unclear. User becomes completely confused and disoriented. Button locations change from screen to screen. |
