Read Reviews
& Comments
Skip navigation Digital Library for Earth System Education
Digital Library for Earth System Education
Search tips
Annotation: Tally of Rubrics

Title:  The Global Water Sampling Project
ID:   DLESE-000-000-001-641


# of Teacher Reviews:   11  
# of Learner Reviews:   0  



Robustness as a Digital Resource

Bugs and Technical Difficulties
(4)







(7)

4.
I/we experienced no technical difficulties.
3.
I/we encountered a minor bug or technical difficulty, but I don't think it interfered with learning.
2.
I/we encountered many bugs or substantial technical difficulties that interfered with learning.
1.
The resource didn't work at all in my learning environment.
N/A
Not applicable or no opportunity to observe.


Scientific Accuracy

Factual Errors
(10)







(1)

4.
I noticed no errors of fact in the resource.
3.
I found one or two minor errors of fact, but I don't think they inhibited learning.
2.
I found several errors of fact, enough to seriously mislead learners.
1.
The resource is riddled with factual errors.
N/A
Not applicable or not enough expertise to judge.


Documentation & Supporting Information

Technical: How to use the digital resource
(10)

(1)







4.
Technical documentation was clear and complete.
3.
Technical documentation was sufficient to use the resource.
2.
Technical documentation was misleading or confusing or otherwise not helpful.
1.
No technical documentation was provided and I/we needed it badly.
N/A
Not applicable: technical documentation was not needed.

Practical: Materials list, where to obtain supplies, time estimates, safety tips, etc.
(4)
(7)



4.
Practical documentation was clear and complete.
3.
Practical documentation was sufficient to use the resource.
2.
Practical documentation was misleading or confusing or otherwise not helpful.
1.
No practical documentation was provided and I needed it badly.
N/A
Not applicable: practical documentation was not needed.

Pedagogical: Information about misconceptions, common errors, etc.
(6)
(3)


(2)
4.
Pedagogical documentation was clear and complete.
3.
Pedagogical documentation was sufficient to use the resource.
2.
Pedagogical documentation was misleading or confusing or otherwise not helpful.
1.
No pedagogical documentation was provided and I needed it badly.
N/A
Not applicable: pedagogical documentation was not needed.

Scientific: Reference list, links to related Web sites, etc
(6)

(5)







4.
Scientific documentation was clear and complete.
3.
Scientific documentation was sufficient to use the resource.
2.
Scientific documentation was misleading or confusing or otherwise not helpful.
1.
No scientific documentation was provided and I needed it badly.
N/A
Not applicable: scientific documentation was not needed.


Ease of Use for Teachers and Students

Preparation by Teacher
(5)
(5)

(1)

4.
Preparation time and effort were easily accomplished under normal circumstances.
3.
Preparation time and effort were feasible under normal circumstances.
2.
Prep time and effort were difficult to achieve under normal circumstances.
1.
Preparation time and effort were excessive. Heroic effort required.
N/A
Not applicable.

Adaptability
(6)
(5)



4.
Easily adaptable to students' and teachers' individual differences, interests, abilities, and needs.
3.
Can be adapted to students' and teachers' individual differences, interests, abilities, and needs.
2.
Difficult to adapt to students' and teachers' individual differences, interests, abilities, and needs.
1.
Nearly impossible to adapt to students' and teachers' individual differences, interests, abilities, and needs.
N/A
Not applicable.

Site Organization and Layout
(4)

(6)





(1)

4.
I found the site's organization and layout to be exemplary; an excellent model for other sites.
3.
The site's organization and layout did not inhibit my learning.
2.
The site's organization and layout caused me to struggle and occasionally frustrated me.
1.
The site's organization and layout prevented me from learning the material.
N/A
Not applicable; not intended for use on computer.


Motivational/Inspirational for Learners

Generation of Interest and Attention
(3)

(5)

(2)



(1)

4.
TEACHERS:
Interest was widespread and sustained throughout use of this resource.
3.

Most learners remained interested and on task.
2.

Some learners were interested and engaged; others seemed bored.
1.

Learners were generally bored, inattentive, or restless while using this resource.
N/A

Not applicable or no opportunity to observe.
LEARNERS:
I was fascinated by this resource.

I was interested by this resource.

It was OK.

I was bored by this resource.

No opinion.

Generation of Curiosity
(3)

(3)

(2)

(1)

(2)

4.
TEACHERS:
Learners asked many substantive questions, and actively sought out additional information about the content.
3.

Learners asked some questions, and thoroughly explored the information embedded within the resource.
2.

Learners asked few questions, and only looked superficially through the information embedded in the resource.
1.

Learners asked no substantive questions, and barely looked at the information provided with the resource.
N/A

Not applicable or no opportunity to observe.
LEARNERS:
Using this resource very much increased my curiosity to learn more about this and related topics.

Using this resource increased my curiosity to learn more about this topic.

Using this resource did not increase my curiosity to learn more about this topic.

After using this resource, I was even less curious about the topic than before.

No opinion.

Generation of Motivation to Perform at a High Level
(1)
(6)
(1)
(1)
(2)
4.
Resource inspired all of my students to do their best work.
3.
Resource inspired most of my students to do their best work.
2.
Resource inspired some of my students to do their best work.
1.
Resource spoke only to a small subset of my students.
N/A
Not applicable or no opportunity to observe.


Pedagogical Effectiveness

Recommended Instructional Strategies
(4)
(4)
(1)

(2)
4.
The recommended instructional strategies worked very well for me in teaching the central concept, process, or skill of the resource.
3.
The recommended instructional strategies worked pretty well for me in teaching the central concept, process, or skill of the resource.
2.
The recommended instructional strategies worked OK, but I would make some changes before doing this again.
1.
The recommended instructional strategies just didn't work for me or my learners. I would never do it this way again.
N/A
No instructional strategies were given.
or
I didn't use the recommended strategies.

Ability to Assess
(3)
(5)
(1)

(2)
4.
The assessment strategies included with the resource gave me valuable insights into what had and had not been learned.
3.
The assessment strategies provided with the resource gave me some insight into what had and had not been learned.
2.
The assessment strategies included with the resource gave me little insight into what had and had not been learned.
1.
The assessment strategies included with the resource gave me no insight into what had and had not been learned.
N/A
No assessment strategies were included.
or
I didn't use the provided assessment strategies.

Level of Difficulty
(3)
(6)


(2)
4.
Level of difficulty was well-matched to the majority of my learners.
3.
Level of difficulty was adequately matched to the majority of my students.
2.
Too hard for many of my learners.
or
Too easy for many of my learners.
1.
Too hard for most of my learners.
or
Too easy for most of my learners.
N/A
Not applicable, or not able to judge.
or
I didn't use the provided assessment strategies.

Evidence of Student Learning
(5)

(2)

(2)



(2)

4.
TEACHERS:
I have evidence that deep and lasting learning occurred as a result of using this resource.
3.

In my professional judgement, significant learning occurred as a result of using this resource.
2.

In my professional judgement, some learning occurred as a result of using this resource.
1.

I have no reason to think that any learning pertinent to the central concept, process, or skill of this resource occurred.
N/A

Not applicable or not able to judge.
LEARNERS:
I learned a lot from this resource.

I learned a fair amount from this resource.

I learned a little from this resource.

I learned nothing from this resource.

No opinion.

Effective Use of Instructional Time
(5)
(2)
(2)

(2)
4.
The ratio between instructional time required and amount learned was much better than the resources I usually use.
3.
The ratio between instructional time required and amount learned was typical of the resources I like to use.
2.
The ratio between instructional time required and amount learned was towards the low end of resources I would consider using.
1.
This resource used much too much instructional time for the amount learned.
N/A
Not applicable or not able to judge.

nsf logo

Community Review System

nsf grant info

nsdl logo