iRubric: ILST Course Proposal rubric

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...

ILST Course Proposal

Use this rubric to evaluate course proposals for the ILST certificate program.

Rubric Code: UBC38X

By sarahmorehouse

Ready to use

Public Rubric

Subject: Education

Type: Assessment

Grade Levels: Graduate

Enter rubric title Enter rubric description
	Poor Not suitable, even with adjustments. 1 pts	Check with developer Ask for explanation, fleshing out, revision, modification, etc. 2 pts	Good Perfect as is, or close to it. 3 pts
Completeness	Poor The proposal is a general description of the course with some vague learning objectives and scattered readings or activities.	Check with developer Perhaps not enough readings are provided. Perhaps the activities and assessments are not completely fleshed out. But it is obvious that with a little work, the course would be complete.	Good The proposal includes learning objectives, readings, activities, and assessments.
Learning objectives	Poor Learning objectives are not closely tied to the program goals of supporting and creating innovative library services with technology.	Check with developer It is unclear exactly how the objectives relate to the program goals. Or some relate to the program goals, while others seem not to. Or they may not be specific and measurable, but that can be fixed.	Good Learning objectives are all closely tied to the program goals of supporting and creating innovative library services with technology. They are specific and measurable.
Logical organization	Poor There is no sign of dividing or organizing the course - it is all one "blob" of content.	Check with developer The proposal divides and organizes the course's topics, but there is some ambiguity, or there are improvements that can be made.	Good The proposal divides and organizes the course's topics logically.
Activities	Poor There are no learning activities. Or the learning activities are completely in appropriate in terms of content and complexity.	Check with developer There are some learning activities, but there need to be more. Or the learning activities need to be adjusted in terms of complexity, time they take, etc. Or perhaps some need to be combined or eliminated.	Good There are appropriate (in terms of content, complexitiy, time) discussions, learning activities, and projects, either individual or collaborative.
Assessment	Poor No course assessment is included. There are no activities included in the proposal that could be used as an authentic assessment.	Check with developer The course contains only a quiz/exam for an assessment, and authentic assessments need to be developed based on existing activities. Or the course contains authentic assessments, but rubrics need to be developed.	Good The course includes a plan for assessment, which may include quizzes and activities that serve as authentic assessments, and the rubrics needed to grade them.
Readings, etc.	Poor There are no readings or videos. Or readings are completely inappropriate.	Check with developer There are too many readings or videos, and some need to be cut. Or there are a few gaps that need to be filled. Or some readings are behind a paywall and that needs to be addressed.	Good Appropriate readings and videos in terms of content and level. Not too many. All readings are available without a paywall.
Modality	Poor The modality suggested is infeasible in terms of geography, time, technology, and money. Or the modality is inappropriate for the content, and the course can't be readily converted to another modality.	Check with developer The modality suggested seems inappropriate for the content, but it will be possible to convert the course to a better modality.	Good The modality suggested for the course is feasible in terms geography, time, technology, and money. It is also appropriate for the content.
Teaching experience	Poor No teaching experience or no interest in teaching.	Check with developer Has taught a few one-shots, presented at conferences, facilitated online groups/discussions, etc. Has a basic familiarity with the modality (has worked with a LMS/web conferencing before)	Good An instructional librarian, former teacher or professor, etc.

Subjects:

Education

Types:

Assessment

Discuss this rubric