Nightlife in Poly Canyon
http://cla.calpoly.edu/polyland/topics/florafauna/Hum330b/
Scoring: 5=excellent; 4=good; 3=adequate; 2=inadequate 1=absent
Each of the four criteria below is worth 1/4 of the grade for this project, which counts for 40% of the class grade. Scores can be improved by additional work on the sites before the time scheduled for the Final Exam.
Final Score: 5 = A
| criteria |
June 9 |
| I. Thesis or purpose of your siteÑ What do want your audience to learn? a. Statement of purpose, either explicit on the top page, or implicit but easy for user to determine, see for example, http://polyland.lib.calpoly.edu/overview/ThisProject/index.html b. Everything on the site supports this purpose. c.Items irrelevant to the thesis or purpose d.Value and validity of this purpose |
5 This is a challenging and ingenious topic that you succeeded in finding more than enough material to develop. Front pageÕs index makes purpose and content obvious without explicit statement. Site index is helpful for orienting user at any time and place. Fine combination of fact, creativity and original research. The information here about wildlife and other subjects greatly enriches what weÕve learned in guest lectures and whatÕs available in the Field Guide. Diurnal Plants doesnÕt fit here, but the material is valuable |
| II. Integration with Cal Poly Land projectÕs purposes and design format |
4.9 Format: left justify rather than center prose passages to avoid ragged margin. As indicated below, documentation formats need work. |
| III. Extent and Navigation properties a. Is there enough material to require 5 to 8 minutes for the user to navigate through the site and absorb what it has to offer. b. Are there clear , consistent, logical and interesting ways to navigate through the site, for example ÒExplore Cal Poly Land by place or theme or collection using the navigation bar to the left of every page. Each of the links there leads to further subdivisionsÓ |
5 The stories and poems are varied, entertaining and informativeÑa wonderful feature! Pages also get long and a little ragged. But good use of links to sections within pages The site is too big for me to fully absorb and comment on before this weeks deadlines. IÕm looking forward to spending more time on it. |
| IV. Quality of Material Presented a. TextÑclarity, sufficiency, conciseness, elegance, accuracy, including documentation b. Images or multimedia elements c. Integrations of text and imagesÑtheir relevance and mutual illumination |
4.9 Documentation is there but incomplete. Though material is well assimilated from reference sources, the specific rather than generic webpages that it comes from need citation. Picture crediting is flaky. And the sources of sounds are not provided. Original photography, film, sound files and writing is extremely generous and high quality. |