Peters Evaluation Report

Evaluator #1:

Evaluator #1 Survey

Emily is one of my students in my 6th grade class. She is someone that uses my videos when she needs them but uses the daily announcement and other things on my Google Classroom daily. She has been in my class and gives opinions on things that I do and use on a regular basis. She used a Dell Chromebook to view my website and complete her evaluation survey.


Overall Emily liked the navigation of the website the most. She thought that how the links were laid out and going from page to page was fluid. She didn’t really like the home page layout very much. She thought that the page was kind of “clunky”. The background and the font color worked well together but thought some of the links were “some of the links are not highlighted and hard to see.”


Emily really liked the content that was on and going to be on the website. She thought that this content would be relevant and useful for herself and her parents. Each pages links worked and had content that was related to the webpage and title. She felt that, “the content on here I will use every day. It has my question, announcement, and homework here.”


Emily didn’t quite know what credibility and validity meant but felt the content and links all worked.

Evaluator #2:

Evaluator #2 Survey

Stephanie is Emily’s mother and also works in my administration building. She is our director of curriculum and wants to see that a teachers content is easily accessible for our students and parents. She used a MacBook Pro and Safari web browser to access my website and do the evaluation survey.


Stephanie liked the layout of the webpages and their links. She felt that each page has a purpose and that is useful for her daughter and other parents. Stephanie suggests, “background is a little dark and contrasts on some of the links. The home page also seems a little crowded. I would maybe have the twitter feed on its own page.”


Stephanie strongly agreed that the content of the website and pages were relevant, easily accessible, and labeled correctly. She felt that the information would warrant students to go back day after day. She didn’t know if it created in depth thinking but did feel that, “I strongly agree that this website has a purpose and fits it’s audience. The students and parents would want to be able to have access to something like this.”


Stephanie said that this content was all original, made by Mr. Peters, and up to date.

Evaluator #3:

Evaluator #3 Survey

Jill is a teacher that I work with in 6th grade. She teaches Social Studies but helps these kids on any missing work during our intervention time. She needs to be able to help the students find homework and videos so that they can get caught up in school.


Jill thought the website was very inviting, easy to access, and laid out simple. She liked how everything was placed on its own webpage and had a purpose. A suggestion would be that the background of the pages was a little dark. She also felt that the students would be able to easily navigate the pages but, “parents might need some training.”


Jill felt that what was on each page was relevant, up to date, and important for the kids to have access to. She felt that the content “can allow students to be able to reflect.” Also, that the target audience would, “be able to get good use out of it.” A suggestion or observation was that some links were hard to tell whether they were links or tabs.


Jill knows that all the videos and content were made by me. She also said the links and materials were up to date and working.

Evaluator Scores Table

Name Design Content Credibility
Emily 4.125 4.67 4.6
Stephanie 3.75 4.67 5.00
Jill 4.75 4.83 5.00
Average 4.21 4.72 4.87
Website Average 4.60

Use Cases:

All three evaluators thought that the website fit the purpose of what I wanted for my website. They agreed that my website would allow:

  1. Students and Parents access to worksheets and notes.
  2. Students would have access to the daily announcement.
  3. Students and Parents would be able to view the videos I made for the homework.

Any suggestions made weren’t technical issues with the code but more on the layout or colors of the webpages. The issues didn’t keep them from using the website for its main purpose. They all thought that:

Recommended or Planned Changes:

The changes I will make, though few, should make my website look a little cleaner and clearer to see. I plan on:

  1. Making my home page a little easier to look at by making a new tab to a twitter feed page: This way the page might look less clunky. All evaluators thought the layout of that page didn’t look as organized.
  2. Change the background color to a little lighter color since the evaluators all thought it was a little dark.
  3. Change the links on each of the pages to highlight a different color than the tab but also not contrast with the background color. All evaluators thought these links were a little hard to tell were there.

Hopefully these three changes will make my website look a lot better and make it easier to find the information the user needs.

Reflection on the Evaluation Process:

This process of having the evaluators use the website and give me feedback was really uplifting and helpful. It was great to see the usefulness of my website but also different types of users. I liked to see how my students would use it or what worked for them and didn’t but at the same time the parent’s perspective. The teacher perspective was good because we all teach and see things differently.

This feedback lets me make a website that will benefit my audience and make sure that my website has a purpose. I want to make sure that what I am making, though time consuming, will be worth the trouble. In my classroom, we are always doing CCI (continuous classroom improvement) so evaluation fit right in with the process of plan, do, study, act.

Valid CSS!

Valid CSS!