Kerry Phillips

Culture & Inclusion

Webquest Analysis-Week 4
Culture & Inclusion Final Project

After searching for webquests that relate to the grade level and content I teach, I was able to find three

webquests related to 4th grade science standards. Using the rubrics provided, and the knowledge acquired

through this course and course discussions, I evaluated these webquests for cultural inclusivity. There were a

variety of domains provided in the rubric that helped me assess the quality of these webquests, some of which

include: cognitive level of task, scaffolding of process, and quality of resources. I have, personally, never

created or implemented a webquest in my classroom, but I am eager to explore these more. Upon first glance,

all three of these webquests seemed appropriate for my classroom, however, the rubric provided allowed me to

discern appropriateness for my students. I learned that the three webquests were not created equally. These

webquests were on the topics of Endangered Species, Erosion, and Ecosystems.

The first webquest I analyzed was meant to engage students in the exploration and study of Endangered

Species. On the rubric, attached, you will see I determined this webquest scored a 40/50 on the evaluation.

This webquest was designed well, and aesthetically, is pleasing to look at and well-organized. The links,

images, and content is thoughtfully constructed. The introduction was engaging and I believe would excite

students to begin their task. Initially, I wondered how much background knowledge students must have to be

successful on this quest, but my concerns were eased when I realized the teacher that created this had addressed

this by creating a link that houses a list of resources to review prior knowledge. I feel that the steps (process)

are outlined very clearly for students, and include hyperlinks to additional information. There are not

suggestions on how to delegate tasks among partners, and I feel that may be necessary in a classroom, if

students are not self-directed or comfortable in an inquiry type assignment. However, the overall quest,

including the additional tabs for linked resources to animal research and evaluation rubrics are easy to find and

helpful for student achievement.

The second webquest was one I was most eager to dive into, as I teach the entire grade level Earth

Science. I have 1:1 devices, and was hopeful to find a resource that could potentially be used in my own
classroom. Using the evaluation rubric provided, this webquest scored 25/50, so if I decide to use it, I will

likely need to make some adjustments to it. The first thing to note is that it is, aesthetically, a mess. The visuals

are appropriate for the content, but they compete with each other and the text (font, size, and color) lack in

uniformity and do not work well with the background images. I found myself struggling to read through this

webquest because of this issue, so I imagine students may really struggle to even read the directions of this

quest. Another thing I noticed about this quest, it makes a lot of assumptions about learners, and perhaps that is

because the teachers students do have prior knowledge, but there is no evidence of this. For example, there are

links to websites and instructions to create an account and click this video to learn how to create it. This

implies that students are left on their own, or to rely on each other, to develop these skills. Personally, I feel

that it is important for students to have the resources and knowledge of skills required prior to jumping into an

inquiry based assignment. This would limit students frustration and time spent on creating accounts, and allow

for more time on task. I didnt sense a strong engagement factor in this webquest, as it merely provides a task

and then a list of several resources for students to collect research from. There is a lot of information on this

page, and it appears to be a long-term webquest which would last more than a couple weeks. I like the idea of

assigning roles to students, and I feel that a strength this teacher has is by providing a description of the various

real-life roles they will simulate: Wind Erosion Geologist, Water Erosion Geologist, and Glacial Erosion

Geologist. However, there is a lot of text and, again, I found myself struggling to read any of it because of the

formatting, backgrounds, and font choices.

After evaluating the Erosion webquest, I thought it could only get better, and I was wrong. The third

webquest I analyzed is on Ecosystems and seems to have been put together in very little time. I even began to

wonder if this webquest is not meant for actual implementation. There are many pieces missing on this

webquest, and I dont feel that students would be able to successfully accomplish the task at hand. In contrast

to the previously discussed webquest on Erosion, this webquest was lacking in visuals. There is minimal

information provided, with a white background and simple bullet points, differing from the numerous

paragraphs and redundancy found on the former. I believe this simplicity could work if it were a guided lesson

with supplemental direct instruction. The evaluation rubric is even simple as it allows for: outstanding,
acceptable, or unacceptable work. Below the rubrics students have to use, there is a list of links provided for

various ecosystems, but all of the information found on these links is similar to that of which could be found in

an encyclopedia. To enhance this, I would differentiate the types of resources provided to account for various

learning styles. Additionally, the standards listed below are not directly related to the task at hand. There is

potential for students to acquire the knowledge related to standards listed, but not with a deep understanding.

Lastly, I dont see any of the links to documents or worksheets that students might use while working through

these tasks, which may limit the success of students that may require accommodations or visual supports such

as graphic organizers, or even sentence frames.

Considering the cultural inclusivity of these webquests, I found several areas of growth. I believe that to

support diverse students, culturally and linguistically, it would be valuable to provide a glossary of related

vocabulary. On all aspects of these three webquests, I found myself questioning the level of academic

vocabulary and wondered if a student that was an English Language Learner would be successful independently

working through these tasks. The first quest (Endangered Species) asks students to record their research on a

data sheet, however, one is not provided on the website and I believe that it would be critical to scaffold such

a document to accommodate for the learning needs and styles of all students in a diverse classroom. According

to What is Curriculum Differentiation, this can be resolved with some preparation before the semester begins. An

instructor should design a set of the curriculum on at least three different levels.

Additionally, I wonder how student groupings are formed; To truly assess the cultural competency of

this, it would be important for me to know the cultures and abilities of the student population engaging in these

tasks. I mention this because in the research done by Lisa Delpit, I learned that certain cultures or even genders

of students tend to perform differently in groupings, for example, Latino girls find it difficult to speak out or

exhibit academic prowess in gender mixed settings (pp.169-170). I also learned the importance of scaffolding

to differentiate for students, and I did not see scaffolded assignments, choice in final product, or exemplars for

students to reference in any of the three webquests. Overall, the assignments have a great foundation, but I

would determine that these teachers did not create these assignments with a multicultural lens, and if I were to

use them, many adjustments would be required.

Work Cited:

Delpit, L. (2006). Skills and Other Dilemmas of a Progressive Black Educator. In Other People's Children -
Cultural Conflict in the Classroom. New York, NY: The New Press.

Gomez, R. (1991). Teaching with a Multicultural Perspective. ERIC Digest. . Retrieved May 04, 2017, from
https://www.ericdigests.org/1992-5/perspective.htm

What is Curriculum Differentiation? (n.d.) Retrieved, May 4, 2017 from: Differentiation article.docx
 1. Evaluation: Endangered Species WebQuest
Beginning
Overall Aesthetics (This refers to the WebQuest page itself, not the external resources linked to it.)
Overall Visual 0 points
Appeal There are few or no
graphic elements. No
variation in layout or
typography.
OR
Color is garish and/or
typographic variations
are overused and
legibility suffers.
Background interferes
with the readability.
Navigation & 0 points
Flow Getting through the
lesson is confusing and
unconventional. Pages
can't be found easily
and/or the way back isn't
clear.
Mechanical 0 points
Aspects There are more than 5
broken links, misplaced
or missing images, badly
sized tables, misspellings
and/or grammatical
errors.
Introduction
Motivational 0 points
Effectiveness of The introduction is purely
Introduction factual, with no appeal to
relevance or social
importance
OR
The scenario posed is
transparently bogus and
doesn't respect the
media literacy of today's
learners.
Cognitive 0 points
Effectiveness of The introduction doesn't
the Introduction prepare the reader for
what is to come, or build
on what the learner
already knows.
Developing Accomplished Score
2 points 4 points
Graphic elements Appropriate and thematic
sometimes, but not graphic elements are
always, contribute to the used to make visual
understanding of connections that
concepts, ideas and contribute to the
relationships. There is understanding of
some variation in type concepts, ideas and
size, color, and layout. relationships. Differences
in type size and/or color
are used well and
consistently.
2 points 4 points
There are a few places Navigation is seamless. It
where the learner can is always clear to the
get lost and not know learner what all the
where to go next. pieces are and how to get
to them.
1 point 2 points
There are some broken No mechanical problems
links, misplaced or noted.
missing images, badly
sized tables, misspellings
and/or grammatical
errors.
1 point 2 points
The introduction relates The introduction draws
somewhat to the the reader into the lesson
learner's interests and/or by relating to the
describes a compelling learner's interests or
question or problem. goals and/or engagingly
describing a compelling
question or problem.
1 point 2 points
The introduction makes The introduction builds
some reference to on learner's prior
learner's prior knowledge knowledge and
and previews to some effectively prepares the
extent what the lesson is learner by foreshadowing
about. what the lesson is about.
Task (The task is the end result of student efforts... not the steps involved in getting there.)
Connection of 0 points
Task to The task is not related to
Standards standards.
Cognitive Level 0 points
of the Task Task requires simply
comprehending or
retelling of information
found on web pages and
answering factual
questions.
Process (The process is the step-by-step description of how students will accomplish the task.)
Clarity of 0 points
Process Process is not clearly
stated. Students would
not know exactly what
they were supposed to
do just from reading this.
Scaffolding of 0 points
Process The process lacks
strategies and
organizational tools
needed for students to
gain the knowledge
needed to complete the
task.
Activities are of little
significance to one
another and/or to the
accomplishment of the
task.
2 point
The task is referenced to
standards but is not
clearly connected to what
students must know and
be able to do to achieve
proficiency of those
standards.
3 points
Task is doable but is
limited in its significance
to students' lives. The
task requires analysis of
information and/or
putting together
information from several
sources.
2 points
Some directions are
given, but there is
missing information.
Students might be
confused.
3 points
Strategies and
organizational tools
embedded in the process
are insufficient to ensure
that all students will gain
the knowledge needed to
complete the task.
Some of the activities do
not relate specifically to
the accomplishment of
the task.
4 points 1
The task is referenced to
standards and is clearly
connected to what
students must know and
be able to do to achieve
proficiency of those
standards.
6 points
Task is doable and
engaging, and elicits
thinking that goes
beyond rote
comprehension. The task
requires synthesis of
multiple sources of
information, and/or
taking a position, and/or
going beyond the data
given and making a
generalization or creative
product.
4 points
Every step is clearly
stated. Most students
would know exactly
where they are at each
step of the process and
know what to do next.
6 points
The process provides
students coming in at
different entry levels with
strategies and
organizational tools to
access and gain the
knowledge needed to
complete the task.
Activities are clearly
related and designed to
take the students from
basic knowledge to
higher level thinking.
Checks for understanding
are built in to assess
whether students are
getting it.
 Richness of 0 points 1 points 2 points
Process Few steps, no separate Some separate tasks or Different roles are
roles assigned. roles assigned. More assigned to help students
complex activities understand different
required. perspectives and/or
share responsibility in
accomplishing the task.

Resources (Note: you should evaluate all resources linked to the page, even if they are in sections other than the Process block.
Also note that books, video and other off-line resources can and should be used where appropriate.)

Relevance & 0 points 2 point 4 points

Quantity of Resources provided are
Resources not sufficient for students
to accomplish the task.
OR
There are too many
resources for learners to
look at in a reasonable
time.
There is some connection There is a clear and
between the resources meaningful connection
and the information between all the resources
needed for students to and the information
accomplish the task. needed for students to
Some resources don't accomplish the task.
add anything new. Every resource carries its
weight.

Quality of 0 points 2 points 4 points

Resources Links are mundane. They
lead to information that
could be found in a
classroom encyclopedia.
Some links carry Links make excellent use
information not ordinarily of the Web's timeliness
found in a classroom. and colorfulness.
Varied resources provide
enough meaningful
information for students
to think deeply.

Evaluation

Clarity of 0 points 3 points 6 points

Evaluation Criteria for success are Criteria for success are at Criteria for success are
Criteria not described. least partially described. clearly stated in the form
of a rubric. Criteria
include qualitative as well
as quantitative
descriptors.
The evaluation
instrument clearly
measures what students
must know and be able
to do to accomplish the
task.

Total Score 40/50

Original WebQuest rubric by Bernie Dodge.

This is Version 1.03. Modified by Laura Bellofatto, Nick Bohl, Mike Casey, Marsha Krill, and Bernie Dodge and last updated on June 19, 2001.
 2. Evaluation:Erosion WebQuest
Beginning
Overall Aesthetics (This refers to the WebQuest page itself, not the external resources linked to it.)
Overall Visual 0 points
Appeal There are few or no
graphic elements. No
variation in layout or
typography.
OR
Color is garish and/or
typographic variations
are overused and
legibility suffers.
Background interferes
with the readability.
Navigation & 0 points
Flow Getting through the
lesson is confusing and
unconventional. Pages
can't be found easily
and/or the way back isn't
clear.
Mechanical 0 points
Aspects There are more than 5
broken links, misplaced
or missing images, badly
sized tables, misspellings
and/or grammatical
errors.
Introduction
Motivational 0 points
Effectiveness of The introduction is purely
Introduction factual, with no appeal to
relevance or social
importance
OR
The scenario posed is
transparently bogus and
doesn't respect the
media literacy of today's
learners.
Cognitive 0 points
Effectiveness of The introduction doesn't
the Introduction prepare the reader for
what is to come, or build
on what the learner
already knows.
Developing Accomplished Score
2 points 4 points
Graphic elements Appropriate and thematic
sometimes, but not graphic elements are
always, contribute to the used to make visual
understanding of connections that
concepts, ideas and contribute to the
relationships. There is understanding of
some variation in type concepts, ideas and
size, color, and layout. relationships. Differences
in type size and/or color
are used well and
consistently.
2 points 4 points
There are a few places Navigation is seamless. It
where the learner can is always clear to the
get lost and not know learner what all the
where to go next. pieces are and how to get
to them.
1 point 2 points
There are some broken No mechanical problems
links, misplaced or noted.
missing images, badly
sized tables, misspellings
and/or grammatical
errors.
1 point 2 points
The introduction relates The introduction draws
somewhat to the the reader into the lesson
learner's interests and/or by relating to the
describes a compelling learner's interests or
question or problem. goals and/or engagingly
describing a compelling
question or problem.
1 point 2 points
The introduction makes The introduction builds
some reference to on learner's prior
learner's prior knowledge knowledge and
and previews to some effectively prepares the
extent what the lesson is learner by foreshadowing
about. what the lesson is about.
Task (The task is the end result of student efforts... not the steps involved in getting there.)
Connection of 0 points
Task to The task is not related to
Standards standards.
Cognitive Level 0 points
of the Task Task requires simply
comprehending or
retelling of information
found on web pages and
answering factual
questions.
Process (The process is the step-by-step description of how students will accomplish the task.)
Clarity of 0 points
Process Process is not clearly
stated. Students would
not know exactly what
they were supposed to
do just from reading this.
Scaffolding of 0 points
Process The process lacks
strategies and
organizational tools
needed for students to
gain the knowledge
needed to complete the
task.
Activities are of little
significance to one
another and/or to the
accomplishment of the
task.
2 point
The task is referenced to
standards but is not
clearly connected to what
students must know and
be able to do to achieve
proficiency of those
standards.
3 points
Task is doable but is
limited in its significance
to students' lives. The
task requires analysis of
information and/or
putting together
information from several
sources.
2 points
Some directions are
given, but there is
missing information.
Students might be
confused.
3 points
Strategies and
organizational tools
embedded in the process
are insufficient to ensure
that all students will gain
the knowledge needed to
complete the task.
Some of the activities do
not relate specifically to
the accomplishment of
the task.
4 points 1
The task is referenced to
standards and is clearly
connected to what
students must know and
be able to do to achieve
proficiency of those
standards.
6 points
Task is doable and
engaging, and elicits
thinking that goes
beyond rote
comprehension. The task
requires synthesis of
multiple sources of
information, and/or
taking a position, and/or
going beyond the data
given and making a
generalization or creative
product.
4 points
Every step is clearly
stated. Most students
would know exactly
where they are at each
step of the process and
know what to do next.
6 points
The process provides
students coming in at
different entry levels with
strategies and
organizational tools to
access and gain the
knowledge needed to
complete the task.
Activities are clearly
related and designed to
take the students from
basic knowledge to
higher level thinking.
Checks for understanding
are built in to assess
whether students are
getting it.
 Richness of 0 points 1 points 2 points
Process Few steps, no separate Some separate tasks or Different roles are
roles assigned. roles assigned. More assigned to help students
complex activities understand different
required. perspectives and/or
share responsibility in
accomplishing the task.

Resources (Note: you should evaluate all resources linked to the page, even if they are in sections other than the Process block.
Also note that books, video and other off-line resources can and should be used where appropriate.)

Relevance & 0 points 2 point 4 points

Quantity of Resources provided are
Resources not sufficient for students
to accomplish the task.
OR
There are too many
resources for learners to
look at in a reasonable
time.
There is some connection There is a clear and
between the resources meaningful connection
and the information between all the resources
needed for students to and the information
accomplish the task. needed for students to
Some resources don't accomplish the task.
add anything new. Every resource carries its
weight.

Quality of 0 points 2 points 4 points

Resources Links are mundane. They
lead to information that
could be found in a
classroom encyclopedia.
Some links carry Links make excellent use
information not ordinarily of the Web's timeliness
found in a classroom. and colorfulness.
Varied resources provide
enough meaningful
information for students
to think deeply.

Evaluation

Clarity of 0 points 3 points 6 points

Evaluation Criteria for success are Criteria for success are at Criteria for success are
Criteria not described. least partially described. clearly stated in the form
of a rubric. Criteria
include qualitative as well
as quantitative
descriptors.
The evaluation
instrument clearly
measures what students
must know and be able
to do to accomplish the
task.

Total Score 26/50

Original WebQuest rubric by Bernie Dodge.

This is Version 1.03. Modified by Laura Bellofatto, Nick Bohl, Mike Casey, Marsha Krill, and Bernie Dodge and last updated on June 19, 2001.
 3. Evaluation:Ecosystem WebQuest
Beginning
Overall Aesthetics (This refers to the WebQuest page itself, not the external resources linked to it.)
Overall Visual 0 points
Appeal There are few or no
graphic elements. No
variation in layout or
typography.
OR
Color is garish and/or
typographic variations
are overused and
legibility suffers.
Background interferes
with the readability.
Navigation & 0 points
Flow Getting through the
lesson is confusing and
unconventional. Pages
can't be found easily
and/or the way back isn't
clear.
Mechanical 0 points
Aspects There are more than 5
broken links, misplaced
or missing images, badly
sized tables, misspellings
and/or grammatical
errors.
Introduction
Motivational 0 points
Effectiveness of The introduction is purely
Introduction factual, with no appeal to
relevance or social
importance
OR
The scenario posed is
transparently bogus and
doesn't respect the
media literacy of today's
learners.
Cognitive 0 points
Effectiveness of The introduction doesn't
the Introduction prepare the reader for
what is to come, or build
on what the learner
already knows.
Developing Accomplished Score
2 points 4 points
Graphic elements Appropriate and thematic
sometimes, but not graphic elements are
always, contribute to the used to make visual
understanding of connections that
concepts, ideas and contribute to the
relationships. There is understanding of
some variation in type concepts, ideas and
size, color, and layout. relationships. Differences
in type size and/or color
are used well and
consistently.
2 points 4 points
There are a few places Navigation is seamless. It
where the learner can is always clear to the
get lost and not know learner what all the
where to go next. pieces are and how to get
to them.
1 point 2 points
There are some broken No mechanical problems
links, misplaced or noted.
missing images, badly
sized tables, misspellings
and/or grammatical
errors.
1 point 2 points
The introduction relates The introduction draws
somewhat to the the reader into the lesson
learner's interests and/or by relating to the
describes a compelling learner's interests or
question or problem. goals and/or engagingly
describing a compelling
question or problem.
1 point 2 points
The introduction makes The introduction builds
some reference to on learner's prior
learner's prior knowledge knowledge and
and previews to some effectively prepares the
extent what the lesson is learner by foreshadowing
about. what the lesson is about.
Task (The task is the end result of student efforts... not the steps involved in getting there.)
Connection of 0 points
Task to The task is not related to
Standards standards.
Cognitive Level 0 points
of the Task Task requires simply
comprehending or
retelling of information
found on web pages and
answering factual
questions.
Process (The process is the step-by-step description of how students will accomplish the task.)
Clarity of 0 points
Process Process is not clearly
stated. Students would
not know exactly what
they were supposed to
do just from reading this.
Scaffolding of 0 points
Process The process lacks
strategies and
organizational tools
needed for students to
gain the knowledge
needed to complete the
task.
Activities are of little
significance to one
another and/or to the
accomplishment of the
task.
2 point
The task is referenced to
standards but is not
clearly connected to what
students must know and
be able to do to achieve
proficiency of those
standards.
3 points
Task is doable but is
limited in its significance
to students' lives. The
task requires analysis of
information and/or
putting together
information from several
sources.
2 points
Some directions are
given, but there is
missing information.
Students might be
confused.
3 points
Strategies and
organizational tools
embedded in the process
are insufficient to ensure
that all students will gain
the knowledge needed to
complete the task.
Some of the activities do
not relate specifically to
the accomplishment of
the task.
4 points 1
The task is referenced to
standards and is clearly
connected to what
students must know and
be able to do to achieve
proficiency of those
standards.
6 points
Task is doable and
engaging, and elicits
thinking that goes
beyond rote
comprehension. The task
requires synthesis of
multiple sources of
information, and/or
taking a position, and/or
going beyond the data
given and making a
generalization or creative
product.
4 points
Every step is clearly
stated. Most students
would know exactly
where they are at each
step of the process and
know what to do next.
6 points
The process provides
students coming in at
different entry levels with
strategies and
organizational tools to
access and gain the
knowledge needed to
complete the task.
Activities are clearly
related and designed to
take the students from
basic knowledge to
higher level thinking.
Checks for understanding
are built in to assess
whether students are
getting it.
 Richness of 0 points 1 points 2 points
Process Few steps, no separate Some separate tasks or Different roles are
roles assigned. roles assigned. More assigned to help students
complex activities understand different
required. perspectives and/or
share responsibility in
accomplishing the task.

Resources (Note: you should evaluate all resources linked to the page, even if they are in sections other than the Process block.
Also note that books, video and other off-line resources can and should be used where appropriate.)

Relevance & 0 points 2 point 4 points

Quantity of Resources provided are
Resources not sufficient for students
to accomplish the task.
OR
There are too many
resources for learners to
look at in a reasonable
time.
There is some connection There is a clear and
between the resources meaningful connection
and the information between all the resources
needed for students to and the information
accomplish the task. needed for students to
Some resources don't accomplish the task.
add anything new. Every resource carries its
weight.

Quality of 0 points 2 points 4 points

Resources Links are mundane. They
lead to information that
could be found in a
classroom encyclopedia.
Some links carry Links make excellent use
information not ordinarily of the Web's timeliness
found in a classroom. and colorfulness.
Varied resources provide
enough meaningful
information for students
to think deeply.

Evaluation

Clarity of 0 points 3 points 6 points

Evaluation Criteria for success are Criteria for success are at Criteria for success are
Criteria not described. least partially described. clearly stated in the form
of a rubric. Criteria
include qualitative as well
as quantitative
descriptors.
The evaluation
instrument clearly
measures what students
must know and be able
to do to accomplish the
task.

Total Score 11/50

Original WebQuest rubric by Bernie Dodge.

This is Version 1.03. Modified by Laura Bellofatto, Nick Bohl, Mike Casey, Marsha Krill, and Bernie Dodge and last updated on June 19, 2