Group+2++Taxonomy+of+characteristics+of+websites


 * 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?