Project Proposal - Presentation - Grading Guidelines
Students are required to submit a proposal for an information service, resource or system.
The proposal should contain the following:
(i) Rationale for the development of an information resource, service or system within a user-centered framework
(a) definition of the user group
(b) analysis of the information needs of the user group;
(c) analysis of gaps in information provision for that group;
(d) criteria for the evaluation of information to be provided to that group; this should include criteria related to the information itself, and criteria related to user group characteristics;
(e) specifications for the information resource, service, or system that will meet the information needs, fill the gap and match the criteria for evaluating information for the targeted user group.
(ii) Statement of objectives (for the project as a whole), and for the information resource, service or system.
(iii) Description of how the resource, service or system will be built, developed (restructured or repackaged). This should include a listing of the specific tasks associated with the project.
(iv) Plans for field testing and disseminating the product.
(v) Timetable for implementation.
(vi) Criteria for evaluating the information resource, service or system.
Length: Maximum 20 pages, including appendices.
(a) an accurate and logical rationale based on sound understanding and analysis
(b) careful analysis of the user group needs and information behaviors
(c) clearly expressed and measurable objectives
(d) project plan based on a sound understanding of the information consolidation process, user centered design and the value added model
At the end of the quarter students will present the prototype information resource, service or system that they have developed to members of the INFO 414 class and invited guests. The seminar presentation will identify the interplay of information behavior theory, process and practice that underpin the design of the resource, service or system that has been developed.
Presentations will be peer reviewed. The assessment criteria will include:
(a) ability to critically evaluate the outcome (resource, service or system) and the process used
(b) ability to document and communicate the process and outcomes in a meaningful way for information professionals
(c) ability to link theory and practice
(d) ability to effectively communicate ideas in an oral presentation
| Range | Quality of Performance |
|
3.9 - 4.0 (A) |
Superior performance in all aspects of the course with work exemplifying the highest quality. Unquestionably prepared for subsequent courses in field. |
|
3.5 - 3.8 (A-) |
Superior performance in most aspects of the course; high quality work in the remainder. Unquestionably prepared for subsequent courses in field. |
|
3.2 - 3.4 (B+) |
High quality performance in all or most aspects of the course. Very good chance of success in subsequent courses in field. |
|
2.9 - 3.1 (B) |
High quality performance in some of the course; satisfactory performance in the remainder. Good chance of success in subsequent courses in field. |
|
2.5 - 2.8 (B-) |
Satisfactory performance in the course. Evidence of sufficient learning to succeed in subsequent courses in field. |
|
2.2 - 2.4 (C+) |
Satisfactory performance in most of the course, with the remainder being somewhat substandard. Evidence of sufficient learning to succeed in subsequent courses in field with effort. |
|
1.9 - 2.1 (C) |
Evidence of some learning but generally marginal performance. Marginal chance of success in subsequent courses in field. |
|
1.5 - 1.8 (C-) |
Minimal learning and substandard performance throughout the course. Doubtful chance of success in subsequent courses. |
|
1.2 - 1.4 (D+) |
Minimal learning and low quality performance throughout the course. Doubtful chance of success in subsequent courses. |
|
0.9 - 1.1 (D) |
Very minimal learning and very low quality performance in all aspects of the course. Highly doubtful chance of success in subsequent courses in field. |
|
0.7 - 0.8 (D-) |
Little evidence of learning. Poor performance in all aspects of the course. Almost totally unprepared for subsequent courses in field. |
|
0.0 (E) |
Complete absence of evidence of learning. Totally unprepared for subsequent courses in field. |