Multimedia Evaluation
- Thursday, September 18, 2014
Website
Title on Homepage: E2CCB
Curriculum Modules 6-8
This
purpose of this website is to help students focus on reading,
writing, listening, and speaking. It is established
by Expeditionary Learning, which promises to take the challenges of learning to
new heights. Its claim is that it is
very successful at every grade level. It
utilizes historical events and mythology literature to develop literacy through
writing objectives. These lessons are
designed to be completed over the period of several weeks.
The structure of this website is quite a bit different from what I
am used to when navigating through the different links and elements of the
site. First, I noticed that there is no top
menu like we are all used to seeing when we first come to a website. I had to figure out that clicking on the
title of the site would bring me back to the homepage, which is essentially the
first item on the menu in the middle of the page “About the Modules”. From there you can choose one of the menu
items: Grade 6, Grade 7, or Grade 8, and
a pop-out submenu will appear. This is
where the modules are located. By
clicking on a module, you will be able to see all the task and objective
information. Each requirement in each
module is stated in clear detail and with a high level of inclusiveness. It also follows a good pattern of sequential
progression. However, I also noticed
that visuals are used very sparingly. I
am sure it is due to the nature of the program, and what its intentions are.
After
the modules for Grades 6 thru 8, the next menu item is Module Appendices. Located
here, are two appendices where teaching materials for the lower grade levels
can be accessed. The last item on the
menu is E2CCB Support. The pop-out submenu shows four items: News, Upcoming Events, Materials Resources,
and Workshop Resources. When these items are accessed, they all come up
blank, except for the Upcoming Events. This struck me as odd, since resources
are what is needed to complete
objectives.
All
Instructional Aspects scored a five with the exception of the following:
|
Instructional Aspects
|
Score
|
Comments
|
|
6.
Resources adequate/significant for achieving objectives
|
1
|
Resource menu items were blank.
|
|
14.
Navigation clear and easy to access
|
3
|
There was no top menu on the Homepage. Menu items could have been a bit clearer
and with more color.
|
|
15.
Authorship and date clearly stated
|
4
|
These modules were developed by
Expeditionary Learning. By clicking on
their link, you could then see a normal looking website with all the
necessary information.
|
|
17.
Use of multimedia (Text, graphic, audio, video,
animation, etc.) visually appeal
|
2
|
There was not much of this at all. I would like to think there was a logical
reason for this, as the program focused more on reading, writing, listening,
and speaking.
|
|
18.
Mechanical aspects (No broken links, misplaced or
missing images, etc.)
|
1
|
This would come alongside item #6, as there
were menu items in the support section that were blank when accessed.
|
Great Job Titus!
ReplyDeleteWhile this module was a bit bland in graphics and text, there is a bit of simplicity that I appreciate about this as well. I was slightly confused about the module and unit correlation until I went back to the homepage and found text describing how they are related. I also like that the module assessments contain the performance task and mid/end of unit assessments.
Thank you, Rachel. I guess "bland" is the right word to use to describe this site. I could not tell that it was only used for teachers. Dr Hu was able to tell by looking at it with a more experienced eye. However, in my opinion, this platform could be revamped to accommodate a student level environment using the same information. Rearranging some of the information and adding a few graphics and animation, it could be a very effective teaching tool.
DeleteI agree with Rachel, thought the site was bland, but very well organized. Liked how the site was organized by separate pages, by grade, and then all modules had their own page. Well Done!
ReplyDeleteThe site was pretty basic. The navigation was clear on the site, however, the links moved quickly as you moved your mouse across the links. The modules are pretty lengthy. This site is for one specific audience and you have to know what you are looking for.
ReplyDeleteYes, Kimberly. Apparently, the audience here is teachers. If I was a teacher using this site for my lesson plans, and student evaluations, I would be very dependent on it. It has all the information you need for your objectives and all, but the empty resource links could be a problem. If this link is active, and being used by teachers currently, I would be curious as to why the resource links were blank. Thanks for your comment.
DeleteAlthough it may be a little bland this site appeals to my sense of structure and organization more than any other. Other than the two blank links this site is informative, organized and logical. It is definitely for a specific audience, but from the information I have been given concerning common core literacy this seems to be a good resource.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the site was a little bland, but it was easy to navigate. On the assessment sections the text was a little small for me to see well. I liked how each grade listed had its own page.
ReplyDeleteGreat find Titus. I really liked this learning module. I thought it was very thorough and was easy to navigate and understand. I also like the layout and did not feel it was bland. I really enjoyed the animation video "The Hero's Journey" it kept my attention and I'm sure it would keep the students attention as well. I did find one grammar issue. It looked like the T on The got cut off or mistyped. With that said I think the creators of this module did a great job.
ReplyDeleteThis site is not actually used to deliver instruction or present information, it is mainly used to post lesson plans and materials for the teachers. This is why it does not have the appeal that we are used to seeing on many other WBI sites. I guess its purposes or goals decide its design of the look.
ReplyDeleteThanks to Titus for a nice evaluation of the site! Thank you all for posting your views and comments!
This site reminded me a lot of the Common Core website, which isn't really a surprise after looking at the modules. It's easy to to navigate, and the layout makes sense. It was pretty annoying to have to keep hitting the back button. I never figured where else to click.
ReplyDeleteThank You, Marybeth. I agree that the navigation was fairly easy. It was one of the more different sites I had come across of this nature. After I found out it was not used for students, I realized why it was laid out this way. Not sure how many different ways there are to arrange information and/or visuals on a website, but I am beginning to think it is close to infinite. Thanks again.
DeleteAwesome job on the review. Navigating through the modules was a little difficult for me. I think I was expecting the modules to be on that site and not redirected somewhere else. Overall great review.
ReplyDeleteI am a visual person and would have liked a more complex setting. I also believe that learners who are not computer savvy would find it hard to navigate the sight and give up. Your posting was right on and informative. LOL with the Common Core not surprising!!!!!
ReplyDeleteThis was essentially taking a lecture class and putting it on the web. With the text serving in place of the lecture. Definitely needed more graphic and media elements.
ReplyDeleteWeb design conventions were thrown out the window. Wrong hyperlink colors, no home button, no buttons to return to modules.
I would not recommend it!
I agree the website seemed under decorated and boring. I also noticed a couple of typos. For a learning module, this would seem extra important.
ReplyDeleteI agree, great review. The site was not setup for easy navigation. I was not impressed with how you felt like you were being redirected all over the place. It being web based, I agree where are the resources.
ReplyDeleteThis site is just too bland for me. I first wrote a post before Dr. Hu responded, but it did not post. However, I was glad it didn't post because after reading her post I understand a little more why this website is structured the way it is. Even taking that point into account, I still fill like the navigation menu/structure could of been better organized. This website has good information on it, but because off the basic layout the information credibility goes down some.
ReplyDelete