Skip to Main Content

Program-level, Student- Learning Outcomes for SCC Library Instruction: Rubric

Rubric for assessing Program Learning Outcomes for SCC Library’s Information Literacy Instruction Programming

Created 5/18/2022. This rubric was finalized for use during Spring ‘22. As a work in progress, it may be continuously updated.

 SCC Library faculty maintain a running list of suggestions for further development.

OUTCOMES: STUDENTS WILL …


(Research process) Practice strategic processes of inquiry to find appropriate information sources 

 

4 Exemplary

Accesses information using effective, well-designed search strategies and appropriate research tools 

Demonstrates ability to refine a search and finds authoritative voices in multiple disciplines

Example indicators:

  • Defines a workable research question of appropriate scope
  • Demonstrates proficiency in employing multiple, advanced search strategies including controlled vocabulary, Boolean operators, limiters, database filters, use of multiple types of search tools, or searching collections at other institutions and demonstrates the ability to develop the question in response to new information gleaned during the research process
  • Selects sources that provide strong support for the research question
  • Selects sources that represent widely diverse, unexpected, or alternative perspectives
3 Proficient

Accesses information using a variety of search strategies and some relevant research tools

Demonstrates ability to refine a search and finds authoritative voices within a discipline

Example indicators:
  • Defines a workable research question of appropriate scope
  • Replaces everyday language search terms with controlled vocabulary
  • Uses simple strategies for refining search results like combining two concepts using “AND,” date filters, or domain limiting in a web search
  • Selects sources that support the research question
  • Selects sources that represent diverse perspectives
2 Developing

Accesses information using simple search strategies; retrieves information from limited and similar sources

Example indicators:
  • When searching, defines a research question that is incomplete, or extremely broad or narrow in scope
  • Demonstrates ability to develop simple searches by varying vocabulary or using multiple tools
  • Selects relevant sources that don’t provide strong support
  • Selects information sources that represent limited perspectives 
1 Beginning

Accesses information randomly; retrieves information that lacks relevance and/or quality

Example indicators:

  • When searching, does not define a workable research question
  • Conducts a single search instead of developing a search by trying a variety of search terms or tools
  • Selects sources of questionable relevance 
  • Selects resources that represent a single perspective

(Evaluation)  Evaluate information in order to select sources appropriate for their research needs and that represent a variety of perspectives.

 

4 Exemplary

Chooses a variety of superior* information sources for the scope and discipline of the research need

All sources meet the evaluative criteriaRelevance, Authority, Timeliness

Example indicators:

*Examples:

  • sources from highly authoritative authors, journals, or publishers
  • sources from multiple perspectives or disciplines
  • sources representing changes over time
3 Proficient

Chooses an appropriate variety of information sources for the scope and discipline of the research need

Example indicators:
  • All sources meet evaluative criteriaRelevance, Authority, Timeliness
2 Developing

Chooses an insufficient variety of information sources for the scope and discipline of the research need  AND/OR

Some sources minimally meet evaluative criteriaRelevance, Authority, Timeliness

1 Beginning

Chooses an insufficient variety of information sources for the scope and discipline of the research need

Several sources don’t meet evaluative criteria: Relevance, Authority, Timeliness


(Citation)  Following appropriate citation guidelines, ethically integrate the work of others into their own information production

 

4 Exemplary

Demonstrates a clear understanding of many of the ethical, legal and socio-economic issues surrounding information use (i.e., attribution, plagiarism, copyright, & privacy)

Example indicators:
  • Provides consistently correct citation style and formatting for sources, both in-text and references
3 Proficient

Demonstrates an understanding of many of the ethical issues surrounding information use

Example indicators:
  • Provides sufficient information to identify and locate sources but may not use correct citation format
  • Demonstrates the ability to correctly apply the citation format, both in-text and bibliographically, with minor errors
2 Developing

Demonstrates a rudimentary understanding of the ethical issues surrounding information use

Example indicators:
  • Provides some identifying information, but not enough to reliably locate sources
  • Demonstrates the ability to apply the citation format, both in-text and bibliographically, with major errors and/or missing citation components
1 Beginning

Demonstrates a lack of understanding of the ethical issues surrounding information use

Example indicators:
  • Does not provide citation for sources

(Lifelong Learning) Use college and/or public library resources to support their information needs.

 

4 Exemplary

Uses library resources beyond supporting information needs to enrich their lives or those of their community

3 Proficient

Uses library resources to support their information needs

2 Developing

Values or shows interest in using library resources to support their information needs

1 Beginning

Is unaware of value or usefulness of library resources that support their information needs

Notes for future development of rubric

Suggestions/ideas for subsequent rounds of editing:

  • Apply Bloom’s: View through lens of Bloom’s taxonomy by mirroring stages (UNDERSTANDING to CREATION) with progressive evaluative criteria levels 1-4.
  • Application of ACRL Framework: Reconsider using additional concepts and language from the Framework in our outcomes and evaluative criteria.