Interoperable interactive geometry for Europe
I forgot my login data

Report a bug

Fan club

Quick Intro Videos
click to start movie
Create A Simple
GeoGebra Resource (25Mb)
click to start movie
Filing a review
click to start movie
Find a Resource

This platform is brought to you by the intergeo project, funded under the eContent Plus programme of the European commission and by partners

About Quality Evaluation

Quality Evaluation has two main objectives: allow teachers to quickly find resources they can trust, and allow authors of resources to identify through users feedbacks improvement axes.

Finding on I2geo

In order to evaluate a resource, you first have to find it. Look for a resource by typing a few words about what you are looking for in the red "search..." field in the right top corner of your window, looking like the following:

Wait a few seconds for proposals to popup. A list of skills and topics related to your query are proposed. You can as well search for your query as text, but it is not as accurate.

Add a review

Once you've found a resource that matches your need at first sight, click on it in order to get a more precise description and the list of previous evaluations, or to see whether you will be the first to review this resource, under the "Quality" link on the bottom right corner. Examine thoroughly the resource, imagine how you would use it in the classroom, then, add a review by clicking on the blue button:

If you want to see in advance what are the review-questions, see: an empty review or a review to play with (requires login).

Come back to it!

After having taught with it in the classroom, come back to the evaluation, revise it and inform us in the general comments about the evaluation on how it went, in which conditions you used it (beamer in front of the classroom, students in front of their individual computer, homework...) and your general impression in your own words for your colleagues to get a feeling about the resource.

The questionnaire

This questionnaire is based on 8 main topics, in the form of a sentence, with which to disagree (on the left) or agree (on the right).

Here is a link to a tutorial video.

This evaluation should be done in a cooperative way, be multilingual, be both massive and precise at the same time.

To this effect, we have developed a questionnaire that can be both quick to take and thorough when needed.

This questionnaire deals with eight main themes, verbalized as sentences with which to agree or disagree, from "I completely agree" (on the right) to "I completely disagree" (on the left).

If you want to be more accurate, you can unfold a given theme, it will then be replaced by half a dozen of more precise statements on the theme.

A thorough questionnaire will weight more, in the final average mark given to the resource, than a shallow one.

You can as well give textual comments but whereas the questionnaire is numerical hence multilingual by nature, the author of the resource might not understand your statements because he might not speak your language.

You can choose a user profile that sets weights to the eight themes according to their importance in your eyes. Therefore your vision of quality might differ from another colleague. Each resource is thus marked and it affects ranking: at similar pertinence with respect to a search query, a resource with better evaluation will come first.

Didactical contract

An implicit contract binds the needs of the author and the needs of the teacher. The later needs resources of good quality and the former needs recognition for the work that was put in creating the resource.

Users are bound by interest, not interest for money, but interest for knowledge. The use of the platform, although provided for free, in the sense that you don't have to pay for it, is not provided without moral obligations. Respect for the work of others is the main pillar of our philosophy. Tokens of respect is the currency that we exchange in the intergeo project. That means that

  • if you upload an educational resource, it should have some interesting facets; half-baked resources are ok if it is explicitly labeled as an idea begging from improvement by others. It means as well to respect fellow teachers opinions on your work; if they invested time reporting on your resource, please consider it in good faith as venues for improvement for your resource. If you don't act on it, or if you disagree with the opinions of users, don't be upset if others modify them whenever the license allows them to do so. The project is here to foster your resources like growing evolving organisms.
  • if you use an educational resource in your classroom, you are expected to report on that use. We are expecting this quality report from users, in order for the project to be useful for everybody; and authors are expecting this feedback from their fellow teachers, as a sign of respect. It is especially the case for groups releasing their work. Please consider that we value your feedback and you should value it as well, not giving it lightly but giving it eagerly.
Respect for good work means as well that quality reviews are not always praises. When reporting, you should assume good faith from the author and should be constructive in your critics but weak points should be pointed out for the author to be able to iron them out.