Joy Robinson


Class: Wed 6–9:15pm, McGaw 142
Office hours: Weds 5–6pm
(or by appointment)
OfficeMcGaw 115G
Phone
: Office 773.325.2066
email:
 jrobin37@depaul.edu 
gChat
: njoying
visit joyrobinson.com for more

Illinois Colleges and Universities

Members: AmyM, MoniqueM, SusannaL

We are evaluating the websites of 20 Illinois colleges and universities.

Criteria proposed:
• Aesthetics
• Content
• Content Accuracy
• Layout
• Navigation


Website links:
City Colleges of Chicago
Harold Washington College
Kennedy-King College
Malcolm X College
Olive-Harvey College
Richard J. Daley College
Truman College
Wilbur Wright College
Illinois State University
University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana
University of Illinois Chicago
Eastern Illinois University
Western Illinois University
Northern Illinois University
Southern Illinois University
DePaul University
University of Chicago
Loyola University
Columbia College
Northwestern University


The rubric is attached below. Each group member will use the rubric to evaluate and score each of the 20 sites listed above. These individual scores will be averaged to find which are the best web-based design sites. All results will be included in our presentation. 

Web Site Design Rubric: Illinois Colleges and Universities










Group Names: Monique, Susanna and Amy






CATEGORY 4 3 2 1
Aesthetics Attractive look and feel, readability is clear and concise. Colors, fonts and graphics match and look attractive paired with each other. Homepage is inviting and feeling of wanting more. Readability is fairly clear and easy to understand. Colors, fonts and graphics are attractive but missing the mark on some design elements. Homepage is somewhat inviting. Readability is not clear or concise. Colors, fonts and graphics could use more effort and continuity. Homepage is not very attractive or inviting. Readability is poor, and difficult to read and understand. Colors, fonts and graphics are not contiguous or are non-existent. No design element efforts and homepage not inviting.
Content The site has a well-stated clear purpose and theme that is carried out throughout the site while navigating. The site has a clearly stated purpose and theme, but may have one or two elements that do not seem to be related to it. The purpose and theme of the site is somewhat confusing and vague. The site lacks a purpose and theme.
Content Accuracy All information provided on the Web site is accurate and up to date. Clear headings to illustrate an outline of the content. All content is relevant to the user. Almost all information provided is accurate and up to date. Headings are somewhat clear and illustrate an outline of content. Most of the content is relevant to the user. Little information is provided and is accurate and up to date. Headings are often not clear and do not follow the outline of the content. Little of the content is relevant to the user. There are several inaccuracies in the content. Headings are not at all clear and do not follow outline of content. No content is relevant to the user.
Layout The Web site has an exceptionally attractive and usable layout. It is easy to locate all important information. White space, graphic elements and/or alignment are used effectively to organize material. The Web pages have an attractive and usable layout. It is easy to locate all important information. The Web pages have a usable layout, but may appear busy or boring. It is easy to locate most of the important information. The Web pages are cluttered looking or confusing. It is often difficult to locate important information.
Navigation Links for navigation are clearly labeled, consistently placed, allow the reader to easily move from a page to related pages (forward and back), and take the reader where s/he expects to go. A user does not become lost. Links for navigation are clearly labeled, allow the reader to easily move from a page to related pages (forward and back), and internal links take the reader where s/he expects to go. A user rarely becomes lost. Links for navigation take the reader where s/he expects to go, but some needed links seem to be missing. A user sometimes gets lost. Some links do not take the reader to the sites described. A user typically feels lost.
                       




 

Č
Ċ
ď
joy robinson,
Apr 21, 2010 12:53 PM
Ċ
ď
joy robinson,
Apr 21, 2010 12:59 PM
Ċ
ď
joy robinson,
Apr 20, 2010 2:46 PM
Ċ
ď
joy robinson,
Apr 21, 2010 12:58 PM
Ċ
ď
joy robinson,
Apr 20, 2010 2:50 PM
Ċ
ď
joy robinson,
Apr 21, 2010 12:53 PM

Comments

Brooke Becker - Apr 20, 2010 12:27 PM

I like how you had your rubric on a 1 through 4 ranking. We used a Yes or No and I sometimes it was hard to make the decision of either it is or it isn't. I feel that your good-better-best really is ideal to evaluate. Your chart is very detailed with the descriptions of what each category would be at that ranking. As a University - you want to look collegiate and professional but your audience is high school students and working professionals.

Jessica Moore - Apr 20, 2010 2:03 PM

I really like that you focused on Illinois Colleges and Universities, opposed to looking at all colleges and univerisities in the U.S. How did you decide on which 20 to use? And if you still have time, can you add Midwestern University to your list. I'd love to find out how you rate my company's site!!

Joe Andrukaitis - Apr 20, 2010 5:33 PM

I agree with Brooke that the decision to give each category a 1-4 score works well given the subject matter. Since deciding between colleges takes a lot of time and research, evaluation of these sites should take more careful consideration than just a yes or no snap decision on each subject.

Nicole Trafton - Apr 20, 2010 6:47 PM

Your point system seems to work well, and I really like how you described in detail what aspects of the site would warrant each point- it will probably help a lot in replicating this rubric for other types of sites, ensuring that all graders follow the same guidelines.

Katie Holland - Apr 20, 2010 7:32 PM

Our group used a similar rubric in the numbering system of 1-4 but I never thought of explaining number by number what each of the selection means is nice. Its interesting because the categories that we used for our project were similar. How did you guys differentiate aspects of the content and content accuracy?

Brad Knutson - Apr 20, 2010 7:52 PM

In depth breakdown of exactly what constitutes for each number ranking is quite impressive. Huge bonus points for your own design skills by creating a clean grid within the Wiki interface.

Nicolette Pajda - Apr 20, 2010 8:00 PM

Wow, you're rubric is so precise and detailed in such a way that it leaves less room for subjectivity; I like the 1-4 scale. These sites were interesting to go through. Ha, I'm curious if certain websites ever deterred potential students from enrolling in programs.

alexandre sar - Apr 20, 2010 8:17 PM

The subject for your grading system was not easy. Colleges and universities have so many content to put online and a very diversify readership.
I was very curious to see how you would be able to analyze them. What I liked about your rubric is your approach of it. The graph for the results is like your grading system: very easy to read and to understand.

anissa evans - Apr 21, 2010 6:49 AM

Wonderful Job on the rubric ratings/details and results graph. It is very important to be detailed and up to date when searching for information on colleges and universities. I am curious to know during your presentation what improvements the DePaul website could use in order to reach the same perfection as Columbia College?? Great Job!

Jenee Graham - Apr 22, 2010 9:00 PM

Great job on your rubric unfortunately I missed your presentation but looking at all of the links it looks as those you guys were really thorough. Everything looks very well put together and organized. Our group used a somewhat similar grading system and I think it worked really well for us too.

joy robinson - Apr 27, 2010 10:59 AM

You have presented some very compelling information by your analysis. Your rubric was a thorough look at categories that were relevant to this genre of websites. I suspect it may have made your task relatively easy to grade. I might have liked to have heard something about the websites' connectivity to social media in the rubric, especially given the audiences involved. Overall, excellent work.