Document Type : Articles


1 Department of Knowledge & Information Sciences AlzahraUuniversity, Tehran, Iran

2 Alzahra university, Tehran, Iran


University websites play an important role in disseminating educational and research information to universities. They are a vital port for accessing the universities' scientific information for researchers, faculty members, and students. The goal of this study was to compare evaluation methods such as Web Assessment Index (WAI), Web Quality Evaluation Method (WebQEM), and webometrics for evaluating Iranian state university websites. In this analytical survey, the data collection tools were checklists prepared by the WebQEM ,WAI, and webometrics. Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) and analytic statistics (Spearman's rank-difference correlation coefficient) were used for data analysis. The results indicated that Iranian state university websites were in a good condition (mean=75.14) according to four main criteria in WebQEM, in a good condition (mean=69.52) according to five main criteria in WAI, and in a very good condition (mean=88) according to five main criteria in webometrics. Also, differences can be seen in ranking of university websites. Only Ferdowsi University of Mashhad was in first place in terms of the three assessment methods. The hypotheses assumed that there was a positive correlation between WebQEM, WAI, and webometrics. Using the results of this study could help university website designers to fix weaknesses in order to to reach an active participation in these websites

  1. Farajpahlu, A.H. (2004).Content analyses of Iranian academic & research websites.Faslname kebab, 65(1), 261-277.
  2. Ghane, M.R. (2009). The final report of the research project of the Evaluation system websites of the Ministry of Science Research& Technology, Ministry of Health and Medical Education, Islamic Azad University.Reginal Information Center for Science & Technology, 1-34.
  3. GharibeNiazi, M. (2013).Evaluating Iranian state university websites using webQEM&WAI and comparing result of them.Dissertation of librarianship & information science.Faculty of Education & Psychology.Alzahra University.
  4. Heidari, G.R (2004). Criteria for evaluating electronic resources emphasized on the Websites. Science and information technology, 20 (3,4), 17-32.
  5. Mateos M., Mira, A.,Gonza´ lez, F., Lopez, O. (2001). A new Web assessment index: Spanish universities analysis. Internet Research .Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, 11(3), 226-234.
  6. Militaru, T. (2001).The evaluation of the website quality; application for the website of universities.The 3rd International Conference: Institutional Strategic Quality Management - ISQM2011.July 14–16, 2011, Sibiu, Romania Paper ID: 062-ISQM2011,236-242.
  7. Mohammad Esmael, S. (2004).Application Industrial university websites of Iran.Faslname kebab,61(1), 107-136.
  8. Nourozi, A. (2005).Web impact factor and its measurement in some Iranian academic websites.Eduacational& Psychology studied in Ferdowsi Mashhad university, 2(5), 105-121.
  9. Olsina, L., Godoy, D., Lafuente, G.J., Rossi, G. (1999).Assessing the Quality of Academic Websites: a Case Study.New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia (NRHM) Journal.Taylor Graham Publishers. UK/USA, 5, 81-103.
  10. Pashazadeh, F. (2010).Qualitative Evaluation of Central Library's Web Sites of Medical Universities in Iran with WEBQEM.M.A.Dissertation of librarian ship&informationscience.Medical information science &managment.Iran University of Medical Sciences.
  11. Regional Information Center for Science and Technology (2013). Evaluating Iranian university and research institutions websites. [ONLINE] Available at: [Last Accessed January 10, 2013].
  12. Webometrics Ranking of Web Universities (2014). Research Group Belonging to the Consejo Superior InvestigacionesCientificas. [ONLINE] Available at [Last Accessed June 2, 2014].
  13. Vultur,S., &Marincas, D. (2007) . Web site project evaluation : a case study of Romanian faculty of economics web sites. Applied quantitative methods, 2(3), 289-301.