Skip to Main Content

Lynn Haggard Undergraduate Library Research Award

This is the submission guide for the Lynn Haggard Undergraduate Library Research Award scholarship. This guide includes submission guidelines and a link to the submission form

EVALUATION


The overall submission will be evaluated based on the following 50 point system:

  • Reflective Essay (30 points)
  • Bibliography (15 points)
  • Faculty Support Form (5 points)

REFLECTIVE ESSAY RUBRIC (30 POINTS)


The reflective essay details the research process and how skills developed.

RESEARCH STRATEGIES – 5 points

DEVELOPING

(1-2 points)

PROFICIENT

(3-4 points)

ACCOMPLISHED

(5 points)

  • Provides little to no detail about overall research
    strategies.
  • Research strategies are described, but the description is
    overly broad or general.
  • Research strategies and their rationale are clearly described.

LIBRARY TOOLS – 5 points

DEVELOPING

(1-2 points)

PROFICIENT

(3-4 points)

ACCOMPLISHED

(5 points)

  • Discussion of decisions about which library research tools to use is absent or is superficial.
  • Discusses reasons for choice of library research tools, but some highly appropriate tools are not selected.
  • Utilizes the most appropriate library research tools and explains why those tools were chosen.

SEARCH AND RETRIEVAL – 5 points

DEVELOPING

(1-2 points)

PROFICIENT

(3-4 points)

ACCOMPLISHED

(5 points)

  • Searching techniques are either not mentioned or are inappropriate for the information need.
  • Does not address processes used for obtaining information sources.
  • Describes searching techniques but shows no evidence of using or considering advanced techniques.
  • Addresses some processes used for obtaining information
    sources.
  • Describes and uses advanced search techniques
  • Clearly addresses processes used for obtaining information sources.

INFORMATION EVALUATION – 5 points

DEVELOPING

(1-2 points)

PROFICIENT

(3-4 points)

ACCOMPLISHED

(5 points)

  • Provides no criteria for evaluating sources or presents only superficial criteria.
  • Provides criteria for evaluating sources, but the criteria
    are incomplete or not fully appropriate.
  • Provides complete and appropriate criteria for evaluating sources.

SKILL DEVELOPMENT & UNDERSTANDING – 5 points

DEVELOPING

(1-2 points)

PROFICIENT

(3-4 points)

ACCOMPLISHED

(5 points)

  • Shows no evidence of having learned to conduct library research more effectively.
  • Does not present an understanding of basic library research strategies and techniques.
  • Shows evidence of having learned one new skill or piece
    of knowledge about how to conduct library research.
  • Presents an understanding of basic library research
    strategies and techniques.
  • Shows evidence of having learned multiple new skills or having gained extensive knowledge about how to conduct library research.
  • Presents an understanding of library research that goes beyond basic strategies and techniques.

PROJECT – 5 points

DEVELOPING

(1-2 points)

PROFICIENT

(3-4 points)

ACCOMPLISHED

(5 points)

  • Provides little to no detail about their research project or their need for library research.
  • Research project is described, but the description is
    overly broad or general.
  • Addresses some necessity for library research.

  • Research strategies is clearly described.
  • Addresses specific needs for library research.
         

BIBLIOGRAPHY RUBRIC (15 POINTS)


The bibliography documents wide-ranging research and adherence to the rigors of scholarly work and standards.

DEVELOPING (1-5 points)

PROFICIENT (6-10 points)

ACCOMPLISHED (11-15 points)

  •  Uses exclusively popular, non-scholarly sources (non-authoritative websites, general interest magazines, etc.).

  • May cite sources, but not in a standard or consistent way.

  • Sources represent a mix of scholarly and popular content, but may fall short of complete breadth and depth. Some may lack rigor or relevance.

  • Cites sources in a standard or consistent way.

  • Sources display rich variety; authoritative, scholarly content; and expansive depth of knowledge.

  • Cites sources in a standardized manner consistent with the discipline or field of study.