Send the exact assignment or rubric from your classroom and a custom sample written to it lands in 24 to 48 hours, the first one free. EN 111 is Herzing’s Information Literacy course. It centers on information literacy, where the assessed work is the search and the judgment behind it rather than the sources that survived. Searches like "en 111 unit 4 assignment example", "EN111 sample paper", and "EN 111 unit samples" land on this page.
What EN 111 is really about
This course grades a process most students perform invisibly. EN 111 assignments ask what was typed, into which database, with what limits, and how many results came back, because the search is the artefact being assessed and a list of good sources tells an instructor nothing about how they were found. Evaluation criteria are applied explicitly rather than intuited, so a source is judged on authorship, currency, publisher, evidence and purpose, and the judgment is written down. Students who treat the assignment as source-gathering produce a bibliography and lose most of the available marks. A bibliography answers a question this assignment did not ask.
The second thing this course teaches is that convenience is not a criterion. A source reached in one click is frequently worse than one behind two, and assignments increasingly ask why a promising-looking result was discarded, since rejecting well is harder than accepting. Database mechanics carry real weight: subject headings, Boolean operators, truncation and filters all change what a search returns, and a submission using none of them is describing a web search. Citation practice sits alongside it, and which style governs is set by the section rather than by the subject matter. Interfaces differ between libraries, so the mechanics have to be learned on the system the student actually has.
What EN 111’s assessments ask for
Prompts usually require a topic narrowed into a searchable question, a documented search across named databases, a set of sources evaluated against stated criteria, and an annotated list or a reflection on the process. What separates the bands is documentation: terms as entered, combinations, filters, dates and result counts at each stage. Evaluation prompts want the criteria named before any judgment appears, and the strongest submissions include a source that failed evaluation with the reason. Where a reflection is required, it wants what the writer changed about their searching rather than a statement that they learned a great deal. Sections vary in how much of the grade sits on the search record against the sources themselves.
Where students lose points in EN 111
The reliable loss is a bibliography submitted where a search record was requested, which answers a question the assignment did not ask. Second is search terms described rather than reproduced, so nobody can repeat the work. Third is evaluation by impression, where a source is called credible with no criterion attached. Fourth is a single database, or a general web search presented as one. Fifth is no rejected source, which suggests every result happened to be suitable. Sixth is citation style applied inconsistently, which in a course partly about citation is marked more heavily than elsewhere. Convenience is the criterion nobody states and almost everybody applies, and it is the one this course is built to remove.
The EN 111 drawers
EN 111 Unit 1 topic narrowing exercise example
Unit 1 typically turns a broad subject into a searchable question. On request, free, 24-48h.
EN 111 Unit 2 database search log example
Unit 2 usually records terms, operators, filters and result counts at each stage. On request, free, 24-48h.
EN 111 Unit 3 source evaluation worksheet example
Unit 3 tends to apply named criteria to several sources including one rejected. On request, free, 24-48h.
EN 111 Unit 4 scholarly versus popular comparison example
Unit 4 commonly sets two sources on the same topic against each other. On request, free, 24-48h.
EN 111 Unit 5 annotated bibliography example
Unit 5 usually summarizes, evaluates and states relevance for each retained source. On request, free, 24-48h.
EN 111 Unit 6 citation practice exercise example
Unit 6 typically applies the section's style consistently across source types. On request, free, 24-48h.
EN 111 Unit 7 academic integrity case example
Unit 7 usually works a plagiarism or attribution scenario against policy. On request, free, 24-48h.
EN 111 Unit 8 research process reflection example
Unit 8 generally reports what the writer changed about how they search. On request, free, 24-48h.
Your classroom shows something else?
Herzing University revises courses; unit counts and deliverables shift between terms. Send what your classroom shows and the desk matches it exactly.
Using a EN 111 sample the right way
Study the example for the level of detail in the search record and for how the evaluation criteria are stated before any source is judged. Those two moves carry most of the marks and both are invisible in a finished bibliography, which is why students so often submit one instead. Databases and interfaces differ from one library to the next, so confirm what yours actually licenses before following any example, since a search record built on tools you cannot reach helps nobody. Tell us which databases you have and the sample uses those.
How these samples are written
The discipline behind every paper here: the rubric is the outline, each row gets its section, NP case work holds the clinical voice, and anything proctored stays prep-only because the sit is always yours. Send your unit's instructions with a request and the sample matches them, revisions included.
EN 111 questions, answered
Why record the search at all?
Because it is the assignment. The sources you end up with are the residue of a process, and the process is what demonstrates information literacy: which terms you tried, what failed, how you narrowed, what you filtered out. A submission listing only what survived shows an instructor the outcome and nothing about the skill being assessed.
What are the evaluation criteria?
Whichever set your course specifies, applied explicitly. Most reduce to authorship and credentials, currency for the topic, publisher or venue, evidence offered, and purpose or bias. Name them, then judge each source against each one. Calling something credible without saying which criterion it met is exactly the impression-based evaluation the course exists to replace.
Should I include a source I rejected?
Yes, and it is one of the easier ways into the higher band. Rejecting a plausible-looking result, and saying which criterion it failed, demonstrates judgment that accepting five suitable sources cannot. Choose something that looked authoritative at a glance, because those are the ones the skill actually exists to catch.