Abstract Review Rubric
Abstracts will be reviewed using the criteria below. Each criterion is evaluated on a three-point scale. The rubric is intended to support a consistent review process and help prospective presenters understand what reviewers will be looking for in submitted abstracts.
| Criterion | 3 – Strong | 2 – Meets Expectations | 1 – Needs Development |
|---|---|---|---|
| Purpose & Relevance | Clearly articulates a focused purpose or research question and demonstrates a meaningful connection to teaching and student learning. The abstract is clearly grounded in SoTL. | Identifies a purpose or research question and demonstrates a connection to teaching and student learning, though some aspects could be more clearly articulated. | Purpose or research question is unclear, or the connection to teaching and student learning and/or SoTL is limited or not sufficiently demonstrated. |
| Approach | Clearly describes an appropriate and systematic approach to investigating the stated purpose or research question. The level of detail is appropriate for the project's current stage. | Describes an approach that is generally appropriate for the purpose or research question, but some details or rationale may be unclear. | The approach is unclear, insufficiently described, or not well aligned with the stated purpose or research question. |
| Contribution & Takeaways | Offers meaningful findings, insights, questions, or implications and identifies clear, relevant takeaways for conference participants. | Identifies a potential contribution and takeaways for participants, though their significance or relevance could be more clearly articulated. | The contribution or participant takeaways are unclear, limited, or not sufficiently connected to the proposed work. |
| Clarity & Conference Fit | Abstract is clear, coherent, and well suited for a multidisciplinary SoTL audience. | Abstract is generally understandable and appropriate for the conference, with minor issues in clarity, organization, or accessibility to a multidisciplinary audience. | Abstract is difficult to follow, or its fit for a multidisciplinary SoTL conference is unclear. |