Evaluating annotated bibliographies in a first-year writing and rhetoric course based off 4-weeks of scaffolded instruction

This study evaluates the effectiveness of using a rubric to assess information literacy (IL) skills in a scaffolded first-year writing and rhetoric course at the University at Buffalo. The research focuses on the integration of the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) Framework for Information Literacy into the curriculum and its impact on student learning outcomes. A team of instruction librarians developed and implemented a rubric to evaluate annotated bibliographies, a common assignment in the course. The rubric assessed four key criteria: citations, source types, relevance and support of the topic, and authority of sources. Data from 200 annotated bibliographies were analyzed, revealing that while students generally performed well in identifying authoritative sources, they struggled with ensuring the relevance and support of their chosen sources. The study highlights the need for more intensive instruction on connecting sources to research topics and suggests that a scaffolded, multi-session approach to IL instruction is more effective than one-shot sessions. The findings advocate for the inclusion of librarians in the curriculum as integral educators to enhance students' IL skills comprehensively.