2023 Scholarship Documents/Application evaluation rubric
From Code4Lib
Revision as of 22:05, 12 January 2023 by SoojeongHerring (Talk | contribs)
2023 Scholarship Committee Documents
Application components
Evaluation process
3 of 3 members of the scholarship committee reviewed and rated applications according to the rubric below (20 possible points). A group of 3 met to review and discuss scores. We identified (number) top candidates based on highest average score, as well as a (number)-person waitlist ranked by averaged application score.
Evaluation rubric
| Category | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eligibility no points. answered as yes or no |
Under 18 and/or does not self-identify as a member of a group not well represented in the code4lib community. | 18 and older AND self-identifies as member of a group not well represented in the code4lib community. | |||
| Financial need 4 pts possible |
Does not cite a financial need for this scholarship. | Cites a financial need for this scholarship. | Explains current personal circumstances that support a need for this scholarship, including but not limited to (and in no particular order): family responsibilities; full- or part-time student status; lack of employment; part-time work or other contingent employment; lack of employer-funded professional development; expenses or other circumstances that create a financial need. | ||
| Rationale - what you are looking forward to in Code4Lib 2023 4 pts possible |
Does not express interest in participating in Code4Lib 2023 | Expresses interest in participating in Code4Lib 2023. | Expresses interest in participating in Code4Lib 2023 and provides reasons for this interest. Discusses plans for participation in Code4Lib 2023. | Expresses interest in participating in Code4Lib 2023 and discusses plans for participation. Links interest in Code4Lib 2023 to personal and/or professional goals, interests and/or activities. Links interest and plans to specific elements of Code4Lib 2023 (e.g. Pre-conference, lightning talks, range of session topics, childcare). | Clearly, persuasively, and critically expresses interest in participating in Code4Lib 2023; describes plans for participation; links interest in Code4Lib 2023 to personal and/or professional goals, interests and/or activities; and links interest and plans to specific elements of Code4Lib 2023 (e.g. Pre-conference, lightning talks, range of session topics, childcare). |
| Rationale - how it may meet your professional goals 4 pts possible |
Does not discuss professional goals. | Discusses professional goals. | Discusses professional goals and links personal interests and/or activities. | Discusses professional goals, interests, and/or activities. Links benefits of participating to specific elements of Code4Lib 2023 (e.g. Pre-conference, lightning talks, range of session topics, childcare). | Clearly persuasively, and critically discusses professional goals, interests, and/or activities; and links benefits of participating to specific elements of Code4Lib 2023 (e.g. Pre-conference, lightning talks, range of session topics, childcare). |
| Rationale - how you may participate in the conference and/or the Code4Lib community 4 pts possible |
Does not express interest in participating in the general Code4Lib community OR discuss reservations about participating. | Expresses interest in participating in the general Code4Lib community and/or discusses reservations about participating. | Expresses interest in participating in the general Code4Lib community. Discusses plans for participating in the general Code4Lib community. | Expresses interest in participating in the general Code4Lib community. Discusses plans for participating. Links interest in the general Code4Lib community to personal and/or professional goals, interests and/or activities. Links interest and plans to specific elements of the general Code4Lib community (e.g. CodeOfConduct4Lib, conferences, local meetups, journal, online community, wiki). | Clearly, persuasively, and critically expresses interest in participating in the general Code4Lib community; describes plans for participation; links interest in the general Code4Lib community to personal and/or professional goals, interests and/or activities; and links interest and plans to specific elements of the general Code4Lib community (e.g. CodeOfConduct4Lib, conferences, local meetups, journal, online community, wiki). |
References & Sources
Annotated list of evaluation examples (helpful and unhelpful) that we consulted while designing the rubric above:
Northeastern University Scholars Independent Research Fellowship
- Application guidelines
- project- and output-focused
- emphasis on clarity & feasibility
Grand Island Public Schools Career Pathways Institute
- evaluates applications for demonstration of financial need
- multiple opportunities for applications to build a case through personal experience
Donald D. Myers Scholarship Scoring Rubric (Missouri University of Science & Technology)
- expresses values like quantitative over qualitative data, the importance of "passion"
Kappa Delta Pi 2016 Scholarship Review Rubric
- asks evaluators to rate 1-5 without explaining criteria for each rating
Keego Harbor Optimist Scholarship Rubric
- Gives overall definitions of 1-5 first, then lists areas for evaluation
Elks National Foundation Scholarship Judges Manual - Evaluating Applications 🦌🦌🦌
Learning Forward Foundation Scholarships and Grants Scoring Rubric
- separate section for application completeness
- each scoring categories addresses multiple criteria
Research Institute for Public Libraries Scholarship Application Rubric
- in addition to rating answers to application questions, includes 3 overall categories for evaluating applications: written communication skills, commitment to learning about data, commitment to incorporating research and evaluation into workflow, "passion for making data sing"
- rewards specificity
- writing skills weighted equivalent to experience
AAUW Selected Professions Fellowships Criteria for Selection and Application Review
- gives percentages rather than point values for weighting criteria
AAUW Campus Action Project Grant Instructions
- public-facing list of selection criteria rather than a table/rubric structure
ACRL Liaison Grant Funding Evaluation Rubric
- evaluation seems to address both grant application and project outcomes
- note at the bottom: If a proposal is scored “0” in any category or earns a total score of “0-5” the applicant will receive feedback from the Chair or Vice-Chair.
ACRL Immersion Program Characteristics of Successful Applicants
- rubrics for specific tracks (Teacher, Program, Intentional Teaching, Assessment, Teaching with Technology) no longer online
- current scholarships page lists criteria rather than a rubric
American Association of School Librarians Innovative Reading Grant
- Grant Rating Sheet
- Rating Rubric
- space for comments in rating sheet
National Organization for Human Services Rubrics for Awards, Scholarships, and Grants
- Howard Harris Professional Development Award Rubric
- Research Grant
- little explanation for what each rating means
