Skip to Main Content

Shain Library Research Prize: Evaluation Criteria

The official site for the Connecticut College Prize for Undergraduate Library Research.

Evaluation Criteria

 

In general, the library prize committee looks for student work that demonstrates rigorous, innovative, and/or unique approaches to engaging with library collections and services.

The research process, as evidenced in the application form (see Application Form), is the primary focus for evaluating submissions. Specifically, each submission will be evaluated according to this rubric (viewable as a Google Doc here):

 

  1 2 3 4 5

CENTRALITY OF LIBRARY COLLECTIONS AND SERVICES TO RESEARCH PROCESS

Does not mention Connecticut College library services or collections in research process

Mentions role of library services or collections minimally in research process Indicates relevance of library collections and/or services to research process References importance of library’s collections and/or services in many of the stages of the research process Prominently showcases the centrality of the library’s collections and services in all stages of the research process
CREATIVE AND RELEVANT USE OF AN ARRAY OF RESOURCES Little to no mention of specific library resources Identifies or misidentifies only general search tools Utilizes appropriate but limited resources for research process Demonstrates expanded and creative usage of available resources and tools Creative and experimental selection of a wide array of resources and research tools spanning multiple modes of media, disciplines, and locations

SOPHISTICATION OF TARGETED RESEARCH STRATEGIES

 

No mention of intentional search strategies Limited search strategies and minimal mention of search mechanisms Use of basic search strategies; Some reflection on how research process or strategies changed Use of advanced search strategies; Thoughtful reflection on refining the research process Exemplary use of exploratory and iterative search strategies; Sophisticated reflection on the evolution and refining of the research process
EVALUATION OF RESOURCES INCORPORATED INTO PROJECT Little to no evidence of evaluation or synthesis of resources Some discussion of selection process and identification of relevant information sources OR some evidence of synthesis of evaluated materials (but not both) Satisfactory discussion of selection process and identification of relevant information sources; Evidence of some synthesis of evaluated materials Communicates rigorous selection process and mentions germaneness of information sources; Appropriately synthesizes evaluated materials Communicates sophisticated and rigorous selection process and reflects on germaneness of information sources; Original synthesis of evaluated materials that meaningfully contributes to the scholarly conversation

DEMONSTRATION OF ETHICAL AND VERIFIED USE OF INFORMATION SOURCES

 

Lack of citation and attribution of most or all source material Inconsistent and insufficient citation and attribution practices Consistent use of a non-recognizable or non standard citation style OR inconsistent use of a recognizable or standard style; Appropriate attribution of information sources Consistent and accurate adherence to a recognizable, standard citation style; Application conveys ethical use and attribution of information sources Perfect adherence to a recognizable, standard citation style; Application conveys ethical use and attribution of information sources

 

Source: Adapted from Temple University, Library Prize for Undergraduate Research.

Contact

If you have questions, please email the Library Prize Committee at LibPrize@conncoll.edu