| Learning
Technology by Stephen Bostock |
Keele MScIT, MMI module, January -
September 2002
Criteria for web coursework marking
While in general authorship of an
application should be clear, in this
assignment it should be as anonymous as
possible.
1. Robustness - verification of
code, depending on complexity
- Poor: 45% or less- broken
links, missing content, frames not
loading correctly, browser crashing...
anything not working properly in the
browsers it is supposed to,
inappropriately slow download time.
- Good: 55% - In a straightforward
application everything works except
some loading is excessively slow, or
one or two small content items don't
load.
- Very good: 65% - In a more
complex application, everything works,
pages and media load quickly taking
account of their complexity.
- Excellent: 75%
- In a complex application with (for
example, one using a range of
technologies such as Flash, JavaScript
or Java) everything works as expected
with no fuss or delay or irritation.
- Any images and media are well
compressed.
- The lowest spec. system, browser,
and appropriate screen settings are
made clear.
- Accessibility rules are followed.
- Error making is prevented as far
as possible and error messages are
helpful.
2. Page design - balance,
composition, eye movement, use of
foreground and background colour and
pattern for consistency, emphasis,
creativity
- Poor: 45% or less - Screen layouts
are inconsistent, difficult to use,
distracting the user from the task or
the content. Colours are clashing,
obscuring content or navigation, or
gratuitously irritating. Probably
little or poor use of justification
tags, tables or frames for controlling
layout.
- Good: 55% - solid screen layouts
which are easy to read, mostly
consistent colours with patterns and
colour schemes not entirely suitable to
the content or audience, adequate
contrast between foreground and
background, too many colours in
places obscure meaning or utility or
too few miss opportunities for
emphasis. Basic information on purpose,
date, location is present on every page
(not authorship in this case).
- Very good: 65% - balanced screen
layout, where the attention is guided
naturally to the important content,
consistent colours help usability and
structure, good contrast between
foreground and background help
understand content, pleasing patterns
and colour schemes are suitable to the
content and audience. Good use of
justification tags, tables or frames
for controlling layout.
- Excellent: 75% and above -
balanced, consistent, pleasing, layouts
and colour schemes that help the user
navigate and understand the content.
Imaginative use of colours and graphics
(not content or navigation) to create
appropriate atmosphere or mood. Layouts
respond well to resizing the browser
window and the different resolutions
recommended.
3. Site design and content structure
- Poor - 45% or less - inaccurate or
inadequate content, with no sources or
indications of its currency. Poor
structuring with missing material.
- Good 55%
- Very good 65%
- Excellent: 75% and above
- The site makes clear its purpose,
the authorship of the content, its
currency and date.
- Content has a logical and
consistent structuring suitable to the
topic and the user.
- The page size and links between
pages or sections of pages are
appropriate for the content.
- The content is accurate and
sufficient for the purpose, and any
missing content is signalled as being
under preparation for a later version.
- Help is available for the novice
user.
- There is support for a mental
model of the site.
- Tasks are simplified.
4. Navigation design
- Poor: 45% or less - the user easily
gets lost or cannot find a way of
navigating to the desired content.
- Good 55%
- Very good 65%
- Excellent - 75% or more
- The user always has necessary
navigation mechanisms/tools visible or
available but they do not dominate the
content.
- Orientation information and
navigation tools are consistent in
style and positioning.
- Clear instructions on finding
information.
- Clearly marked exits.
- Little or no memorizing of
navigation information is needed.
- Navigation choices are easily
reversible.
- Shortcuts to popular information
are available for expert users.
5. Text design - readability
- poor - 45% or less - language is
unclear, difficult, ungrammatical,
misspelled, badly structured, or
without a clear flow. Reading age is
too high. Text appears cluttered, white
space is too much or too little.
Unnecessary scrolling. Fonts,
backgrounds, or colours decrease
readability.
- Good 55%
- Very good 65%
- excellent - 75% and above
- The language is clear,
grammatical, simple, logical,
free of jargon, consistent, and easy
to understand.
- Style and presentation appropriate
to purpose.
- Page length and scrolling
appropriate (no horizontal scrolling).
- Introductions, titles and
subtitles are used to signal structure
and flow of ideas.
- There is sufficient 'white space'
around text; text is uncluttered.
- Any technical words are explained
or in an accessible glossary.
- Fonts and colours help
readability.
- Text stands alone when graphics
are turned off.
- Emphasis features enhance the text
without being distracting.
- If font size is scaled by the user
text is still readable and structured.
6. Design of graphics and other
media - used to enhance presentation or
content.
- poor 45% or less - picture quality,
size, position, resolution,
colour depth, compression or file type
are inappropriate. Any animation, audio
or video are gratuitous, not supporting
the purpose. They are difficult for the
user to control and poor quality.
- Good 55%
- Very good 65%
- excellent - 75% and above
- Graphics are consistent with the
tone, purpose and other content.
- They are of suitable picture
quality, size, position, resolution,
colour depth, compression and file
type.
- Any animated graphics have a
suitable speed.
- Alt text is used.
- Any animation, audio or video is
appropriate. The user can control it.
Download times and quality are
acceptable.
- Creative use of the web engages
the user in appropriate forms of
interaction (e.g. quizzes, tutorials,
simulations, puzzles, or adventures).
Stephen Bostock, July 04, 2005