1. School/curricular: Is there evidence that the site supports learning and school goals?
  • Is it age and grade appropriate?
  • Is it connected to content area learning?
  • Does it display evidence of collaboration with classroom teachers?
  • Is there evidence of student collaboration?
  • Does it promote reading?

2. Navigation: Does the site facilitate access? Is it clear and logically organized? Intuitive?
  • Is the site readable at student audience level?
  • Is the site legible? Is the font readable and consistent? Do color choices present clear reading?
  • Does the site avoid use of library jargon? See Kupersmith's Library Terms that Users Understand
  • Does the site use embedded explanations--rollovers, pop-ups, simple text, etc., to explain confusing terms and names?
  • Are the links annotated to facilitate student decision making?
  • Is the site logically structured and organized?
  • Is screen real estate used effectively? Is the important stuff "front and center"? How much scrolling must be done on the first page?
  • Are there any errors in spelling or grammar?
  • Do the links on the site work?
  • Do all the design elements (graphics, art, buttons, color etc.) enhance the message of the site? Is there consistency in the basic formats of each page?
  • Do the pages appear clean, uncluttered?
  • Are page titles clear and consistent across the site?
  • Does the site feature a site map or site index?
  • Is download time acceptable?

3. Aesthetics / Appeal for the Audience
  • Is the site attractive, professional looking? Does it reflect the design choices of the audience?
  • Does it use graphics, photos, media to convey message in appealing manner, a non-gratuitous way?
  • Does it include any of the following?
    • Images of students
    • Images of materials
    • Images of library events, activities
    • Original art—photographs, drawings, paintings
    • Effective, attractive clip art
    • Animations, video elements
  • Does the site use an original design?
  • Does the site have personality/presence/friendliness/sense of humor? (Comment on how you can determine this.)

4. Level of Interactivity: Opportunities for collaboration, feedback, involvement
  • Does the site present opportunities for student collaboration, feedback through wikis, blogs, forums?
  • Does the site include elements of student work?
  • Does it include:
    • wikis (browser-based tools for online collaboration model that allow any user to edit content):
    • blogs (weblog, a browser-based regular and chronological publication of posts and comments
    • podcasts (multimedia files—usually audio--distributed over the Web using syndication feeds—often described as a Web radio broadcast.)
    • forums (threaded discussion used for such purposes as book or issue discussion)
    • slideshows (Flickr, PowerPoint presentations) Displays of images and text in sequence, usually for instructional or artistic purposes
    • video presentations or lessons or other multimedia elements
    • interactive forms (feedback forms, suggestion forms, etc.)?
  • Does the site represent an overall Web 2.0 approach? Does site use a content management system (CMS--like Drupal, Wordpress, Moodle), that would allow the librarian/webmaster to add and edit content without need for an HTML editor or knowledge of code?
  • Does the site include opportunities for personalization / opportunities to “push” content? (Push is content that is delivered to a receiver without their explicit request.)

5. Freshness
  • Does the site display regular updates and revisions?
  • Does the site present new content to keep users coming back?
  • Do the links work?
  • Does the site speak the current visual language? Does it resemble a site produced in 1996?