This article describes the use of a conventional grading rubric as an objective tool for assessing educational outcomes in a for-credit Information Resources class. The tool was evaluated in the context of the assessment process at the University of Mississippi. To assure objectivity, two librarians independent of the librarian-instructor scored student reflection papers using a 5-point scale. Rubric items were considered successful if 75 percent of the students received an average score of three or higher. The results showed that weak areas of comprehension are those that require higher level thinking, such as the ability to distinguish between the popular and academic press. The librarian-instructor will place more emphasis on these topics in future classes and reword rubric items of questionable design.


Additional Information

Print ISSN
pp. 563-575
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.