How to Determine the Level of Usefulness of a Site

First Read topic, then read my response, then read two of my classmates responses, and then separately respond to each classmate by answering: If you agree/disagree, what you like/dislike, if anything was similar or different: (You should respond to one classmates per page)
Topic: Take a look at these grammar sites: http://chompchomp(dot)com/
Be sure you have your audio on for Chomp-Chomp!
http://aliscot(dot)com/bigdog/
https://owl(dot)english(dot)purdue(dot)edu/owl/section/1/4/
http://www(dot)esc(dot)edu/online-writing-center/resources/grammar/
Look around the sites carefully. Some of the exercises may be too simple, but others will be helpful. In Your Discussion post, consider these questions
1. What makes a site helpful? Describe the interactivity.
2. Which sites were not helpful? Why?
3. If a site was not helpful, what role did the type of interactivity play in the site? Was the site's layout and design problematic, or helpful?
My response:
In notable grammar websites such as Grammar Bytes!, the user gets lists of terms related to grammar complete with example sentences and explanations. There is a wide range of topic ranging from punctuation to sentence fragments to subordinate conjunctions. There are also some interactive sentences that can test the user's comprehension on several subjects. What makes these grammar sites useful is that the rules are explained excellently. As much as these sites do not cover everything, their content aligns with most of the common core standards for users.
Perhaps the only sites that were not useful are Big Dog's Grammar and ESC Online Writing Center, probably because they do not have much of a wow factor. Their designs are rather basic, while their multimedia materials are not any more compelling when compared to the text. The few PowerPoint presentations and videos contained in them are either too long or just are not sufficiently dynamic. For instance, even in cases where PowerPoint presentations are combined with clip art, they are still mainly about reading. What's more, the quizzes contained in them are not that inventive or fun. In the absence of more interactive elements, these grammar sites may have a hard time getting and maintaining users.
It is worth noting that some user will require certain software in order to view certain parts of these grammar sites. They will need PowerPoint for presentations and Adobe Reader for handouts. Also, certain items come in HTML or PDF versions. Links to the site's YouTube pages could potentially expose users to less educational and inappropriate videos. All in all, the sites are safe and self-contained.
Classmates 1 Response to topic: I think what makes a site most helpful is it's layout. If it is easy to navigate then users will be able to find the information they are looking for. Grammar Bytes is certainly one of my favorite sites to use because of its navigational ease and its interactivity. It's a fun website to use and I think it's a great teaching tool. Perdue OWL is another tried and true site, but it's not as interactive and fun as Bytes; I think they have different targeted audiences, one being towards children and early learners and the other towards more mature users.
I did not find Big Dog and ESC as helpful. Big Dog was very primitive and not as up to date as it could have been, but still more interactive than OWL. You were told whether or not your answer was correct after each try on the quizzes. This is great way for users to track the areas needing improvement. ESC, although more modern than Big Dog, transferred you to another site when trying to complete grammar activities and quizzes, potentially leading to problems for younger users or students on school computers with firewalls.
Classmate 2 Response to topic: Interactivity definitely makes a site helpful. Also the layout of the site and making it easy to navigate makes it helpful as well. The interactivity included self tests, youtube videos, examples, and practice problems. I am not sure if this was just a problem with me or if the OWL at Purdue website did not work for everyone. The exercises were not helpful because I could not type the answers where they told me to type them. That was frustrating and unhelpful, but the information on the website was good and accurate as far as I could tell. The Esc.edu website was not extremely helpful for me because of how boring the format is. They provide you with a lot of information and it isn't broken up into very small chunks. I really liked the Chomp-Chomp website, although the exercises were a bit simple. It does help to refresh and it is fun and entertaining. The layout of the website is very important because it helps the reader to read through the material with ease. The information on OWL and the esc.edu websites were easily accessible and there was really good information, but it was just not very eye-catching. The design on the Chomp-Chomp and aliscot websites were attractive, interesting and easy to maneuver. One of my favorite things was that the Chomp-Chomp website sends you straight back to the home page after an exercise is finished. I liked that because I did not get lost on some subject and it helped me find my way back to the home page.