ASSIGNMENT 03
Collection Evaluation

Purpose

THE PURPOSE of this assignment is to analyze the library collection in terms of quantity, age, circulation, quality, diversity, number of titles to weed, and estimated funding needed for improvement.

NOTE: This assignment meets the following ALA/AASL/CAEP School Librarian Preparation Standards (2019). Save and revise all assignments to use in the SLM 550 Portfolio course.

ALA/AASL/CAEP Components

4.2 Information Resources. Candidates use evaluation criteria and selection tools to develop, curate, organize, and manage a collection designed to meet the diverse curricular and personal needs of the learning community. Candidates evaluate and select information resources in a variety of formats.
4.3 Evidence-Based Decision Making. Candidates make effective use of data and information to assess how practice and policy impact groups and individuals in their diverse learning communities.

Resources

ackground

NOTE: EARLY IN THIS COURSE ASK YOUR SCHOOL LIBRARIAN TO RUN THE NECESSARY REPORTS. IF YOU ENCOUNTER ANY DIFFICULTIES, LET YOUR INSTRUCTOR KNOW RIGHT AWAY. AND DON'T FORGET TO THANK YOUR LIBRARIAN ENTHUSIASTICALLY AND SINCERELY!

Please allow your librarian ample time to gather the data; these reports take more than ten minutes. In some cases, you may be able to sync your Titlewave account with your school’s account and generate the reports yourself.

You might need to upload MARC records or title lists into platforms like Titlewave, Mackin, or TeachingBooks.net to access their diversity analysis tools. Comparing their results can be eye-opening!

f you’re analyzing a library that isn’t your own, be discreet with your findings—keep them confidential.

Your Task

  1. Complete the “Collection Analysis” worksheet.
  2. Combine all parts of your work into a single Word document before submitting it in Blackboard for grading.

Upon Completion

The assignment is due at the end of Module 3, on Sunday night at 11:59 p.m. On or before the due date, post it in Blackboard by clicking on the Menu Bar's "Turn In Assignment" and following the instructions.

 
Collection Evaluation Rubric
Exemplary
Proficient
Developing
Unsatisfactory

Part 1 Collection Overview

3 Points

(1) Overview chart is complete, accurate, comprehensive, and useful. (2) Includes number of items, average age, circulation totals, number and percentage of books with no circulation, the percentage of the total collection, and section improvement decisions.

2 Points

Meets 80% of exemplary criteria.

1 Point

Meets 70% of exemplary criteria.

0 Points

Meets 60% or less of exemplary criteria.

Part 2 Analysis to Determine Quality

3 Points

(1) Candidate selects a section of approximately 1,000 books. (2) Reviews 100 titles using Wilson’s or a comparable database. (3) Correctly enters totals and percentages into the Excel chart for “Essential” titles. (4) Chart is fully and accurately completed, with no errors in data entry or calculations.

2 Points

Meets 80% of exemplary criteria.

1 Point

Meets 70% of exemplary criteria.

0 Points

Meets 60% or less of exemplary criteria.

Part 3 Analysis to Improve Collection Age

3 Points

(1) Candidate uses Excel to identify average age of books in all Dewey sections. (2) Correctly calculates the number of titles needing replacement to improve age. (3) Accurately completes all relevant fields in the Excel chart. (4) All entries are clear, correct, and aligned with the instructions.

2 Points

Meets 80% of exemplary criteria.

1 Point

Meets 70% of exemplary criteria.

0 Points

Meets 60% or less of exemplary criteria.

Part 4 Analysis to Estimate Cost for Improvement

3 Points

(1) Candidate uses Excel to estimate book costs based on the most recent SLJ average. (2) Global book cost is entered correctly. (3) “Books to Purchase” column and estimated cost totals are correctly calculated. (4) All fields in the cost estimation chart are accurate and complete.

2 Points

Meets 80% of exemplary criteria.

1 Point

Meets 70% of exemplary criteria.

0 Points

Meets 60% or less of exemplary criteria.

Part 5 Diversity Analysis

3 Points

(1) Candidate chose 8 important diversities and correctly analyzed the collection. (2) Chart has been accurately completed with the number of titles in the collection, the age of those titles, and (3) how many “Essential” titles published in the last 2 years are available for the 8 diverse topics. (4) Selects 3 highly reviewed (essential if possible) diverse titles.

2 Points

Meets 80% of exemplary criteria.

1 Point

Meets 70% of exemplary criteria.

0 Points

Meets 60% or less of exemplary criteria.

Reflection

9, 9.5, 10 Points

(1) Reflection demonstrates deep thinking and clear engagement with all 5 parts of the project. It thoughtfully addresses key findings, insights, and surprises; connects data to curriculum needs and student interests. (2) The collection overview includes thoughtful analysis (e.g., comparison to Kerby’s Chart, ideal books-per-student ratio, sections needing attention, and strategies to improve circulation). (3) The weeding analysis is approached with realistic evaluation and sound reasoning. (4) The cost analysis considers whether funding needs are manageable and offers practical ideas for budget proposals. (5) The diversity analysis identifies the chosen tool, selected topics, and explains challenges in finding current, essential titles. (6) Overall, the reflection shows insight, self-awareness, and professional growth. Writing is clear, organized, and supported with specific examples.

8-8.5 Points

Meets 80% of exemplary criteria.

7-7.5 Points

Meets 70% of exemplary criteria.

0-6.5 Points

Meets 60% or less of exemplary criteria.

Writing

4.5-5 Points

(1) Writing is polished and engaging. (2) Word choice is precise. (3) Grammar, spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and formatting are correct. (4) Contains 0–2 minor errors.

4 Points

Writing is mostly clear and correct. Contains 3–4 minor errors in sentence construction, grammar, word choice, spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and/or formatting.

3.5 Points

Writing is somewhat unclear or inconsistent. Contains 5–6 errors affecting clarity, grammar, word choice, sentence construction, spelling, punctuation, and/or capitalization.

0-3 Points

Writing lacks clarity and correctness. Contains 7 or more errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and/or sentence construction.

ALA/AASL 4.2 Information Resources

2 Points

Candidate (1) integrates evaluation criteria and (2) uses selection tools relevant to data and information resources in support of instructional design (3) that meets the diverse curricular, professional, and personal needs of the learning community.

1 Point

Meets 80% of the exemplary criteria.

.5 Points

Meets 70% of the exemplary criteria.

0 Points

Meets 60% of the exemplary criteria.

ALA/AASL 4.3 Evidence-Based Decision Making

2 Points

(1) All parts demonstrate that candidate (2) collects, assesses, and applies data and information (3) to transform practice and policies in school libraries to positively impact groups and individuals in their (4) diverse learning communities.

1 Point

Meets 80% of the exemplary criteria.

.5 Points

Meets 70% of the exemplary criteria.

0 Points

Meets 60% of the exemplary criteria.

Writing

3.5-4 Points

(1) Polished writing engages the reader. (2) Precise word choice, correct grammar, spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and/or formatting. (3) 0-2 minor errors.

3 Points

3-4 minor errors in sentence construction, grammar, word choice, spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and/or formatting.

2 Points

5-6 errors in sentence construction, word choices,
grammar, spelling, punctuation, and/or capitalization.

0-1 Points

7 or more errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, and/or capitalization.