expert_researcher
fidocane
website_evaluation_guidelines.docx
Website Evaluation Guidelines
Purpose
The purpose of this assignment is to allow the learner to demonstrate effective strategies for evaluation of credible scholarly websites.
Course Outcomes
This assignment enables the student to meet the following course outcomes.
1. Demonstrate effective verbal, written, and technological communication using legal and ethical standards for transferring knowledge. (PO #3)
2. Use leadership strategies that promote quality nursing practice and increase collaboration with other disciplines when planning comprehensive care for individuals and groups. (PO #2)
4. Integrate critical thinking and judgment in professional decision-making in collaboration with faculty and peers. (PO #4)
9. Demonstrates responsibility for personal and professional development by assessing computer competence, implementing plans for upgrading computer skills, and using effective strategies for online student success. (PO #5)
Due Date
Submit the assignment to the Week 6 Dropbox by Sunday, end of Week 6, 11:59 p.m. MT.
Points
This assignment is worth a total of 150 points.
Preparing the Website Evaluation Assignment
1. Read this document (Website Evaluation Guidelines), including the Rubric.
2. From Doc Sharing, download the Website Evaluation Template. Rename the document as Your Last Name Website Evaluation.docx. Save it to your own computer or flash drive in a location where you will be able to retrieve it later. Type your assignment directly on the saved document. Remember that only Microsoft Word 2010 or a later version is acceptable. The document must be saved as a .docx. Save your work frequently as you type to prevent loss of your work.
3. Before you prepare your Website Evaluation Assignment, review the Evaluating Internet Health Information tutorial from the Week 5 Assignments page.
4. Select a website on a health topic ( not a nursing or professional organization) with a domain name ending in .org or .gov. This should be an entire website ( not an individual web page). Complete the Website Evaluation Assignment by completing the activities required on the Website Evaluation Template. Work on this assignment during Weeks 5 and 6. Don’t wait until the due date to begin your work!
5. When your assignment is completed, save and close the document. Enter the course and submit the document as an attachment to the Week 6 Dropbox. See the Week 6 Assignments page for step-by-step instructions on how to use the Dropbox.
Directions and Grading Criteria
|
Category |
Points |
% |
Description: See Grading Rubric for Details |
|
General Information |
15 points |
10% |
Clearly state the following regarding the selected website: search engine used to locate website and URL of homepage of selected website. URL must link to homepage when copied or clicked. |
|
Authority |
25 points |
16.66% |
Clearly describe the reasons this website would be considered a reliable resource for information on the topic. Include the contact information (group name, address, and phone number). |
|
Information |
40 points |
26.67% |
Clearly describe information presented on the website, including all of the main headings of the site. Describe accuracy and thoroughness of information and how you made this determination. |
|
Objectivity |
25 points |
16.67% |
Clearly explain how content does or does not represent bias based on advertising and sponsorship. |
|
Ease of Navigation |
15 points |
10% |
Discuss the ease of use of this website for healthcare professionals and for lay persons. Differentiate ease of navigation for each group. |
|
Usefulness |
30 points |
20% |
Clearly describe how useful the information on this website is for healthcare professionals and for lay persons. Differentiate between the usefulness for each group. |
|
Total |
150 points |
100% |
A quality assignment will meet or exceed all of the above requirements. |
Grading Rubric
|
Assignment Criteria |
A: (92–100%) Outstanding or highest level of performance |
B: (84–91%) Very good or high level of performance |
C: (76–83%) Competent or satisfactory level of performance |
F: (0–75%) Poor or failing or unsatisfactory level of performance |
|
General Information 15 points |
Clearly states the following regarding the selected website: search engine used to locate website and URL of homepage of selected website. URL must link to homepage when copied or clicked.
(14–15 points) |
Name of search engine or URL may be unclear or incorrect.
(12–13 points) |
Name of search engine or URL may be unclear or incorrect. URL may not link to homepage of website when clicked or copied.
(11 points) |
Search engine and/or URL not provided.
(0–10 points) |
|
Authority 25 points |
Clearly describes the reasons this website would be considered a reliable resource for information on the topic. Includes the contact information (group name, address, and phone number).
(23–25 points) |
Statement regarding reliability of source needs additional clarity. Contact information is provided, but one area may be incorrect or missing.
(21–22 points) |
Statement regarding reliability of source is unclear or incomplete. OR more than one part of contact information is incorrect or missing.
(19–20 points) |
No statement of reliability OR some or all of contact information is missing or incorrect.
(0–18 points) |
|
Information 40 points |
Clearly describes information presented on the website, including all of the main headings of the site. Describes accuracy and thoroughness of information and how this determination was made.
(37–40 points) |
Describes information presented on the website, including most of the main headings of the site. Describes accuracy and thoroughness of information, but lacks clarity regarding how this determination was made.
(33–36 points) |
Information description is unclear or incomplete. May or may not describe accuracy and thoroughness of information or how this was determined.
(30–32 points) |
Part or all of requirements are missing or poorly presented.
(0–29 points) |
|
Objectivity 25 points |
Clearly explains how content does or does not represent bias based on advertising and sponsorship.
(23–25 points) |
Statements regarding objectivity and/or bias need additional clarity. Advertising and sponsorship are considered.
(21–22 points) |
Statements regarding objectivity and/or bias are unclear or incomplete. Advertising and sponsorship may or may not be considered.
(19–20 points) |
Part or all of requirements are missing or poorly presented.
(0–18 points) |
|
Ease of Navigation 15 points |
Discusses the ease of use of this website for healthcare professionals and for lay persons. Differentiates the ease of navigation for each of these two groups.
(14–15 points) |
Discussion of ease of use needs additional clarity. Professional use and lay person use may or may not be differentiated.
(12–13 points) |
Discussion of ease of use is unclear or incomplete. Professional use and lay person use may or may not be included or differentiated.
(11 points) |
Part or all of requirements are missing or poorly presented.
(0–10 points) |
|
Usefulness 30 points |
Clearly describes how useful the information on this website is for healthcare professionals and for lay persons. Clearly differentiates usefulness for each of these two groups.
(27–30 points) |
Description of usefulness needs additional clarity. Differentiates use for professionals versus lay persons.
(25–26 points) |
Description of usefulness is unclear or incomplete. Differentiation of use for professionals and lay persons lacks detail.
(23–24 points) |
Part or all of requirements are missing or poorly presented.
(0–22 points) |
|
Total Points Possible = 150 points |
|
Website Evaluation Guidelines.docx Revised 2/9/2013 cjm |
3 |
