V7I1: Letter from the President

Student Learning Outcomes and Assessment-Based Education  

Sonny Ramaswamy, President, NWCCU

“Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm.” Winston Churchill

The mantra we read about in scholarly journals, newspapers and other media, and books or hear about in panel discussions and keynotes at conferences, in hearings at the United States Congress, and during discussions at the United States Department of Education, is of higher education’s critical role in promoting student success and closing equity gaps. In recent years, state funding has been tied to student outcomes, via performance-based budget models.

In my experience, the recipe for promoting student success includes a suite of approaches that advance community and group interactions to ensure student achievement and outcomes. This includes focusing on the fundamentals of education and high-impact practices – intrusive advising, offering experiential learning opportunities and inculcating technical, cognitive skills along with non-cognitive, core competencies, such as critical thinking, problem solving, and communication skills – combined with single-minded use of data-informed predictive analytics and other digital tools. In addition to academic support, advancing student success will require that students, particularly those from marginalized and underserved communities, are provided help with financial aid, just-in-time grants, supportive social networks, food, housing, child- and health-care support, and mental health counseling. These latter supportive efforts should be focused, not just on students from particular racial or ethnic groups, but on ALL students requiring the same, so as to promote access, belonging, and success, which can help further democratize higher education and contribute to the well-being of our democracy.

Postsecondary institutions that have made demonstrable and significant progress in promoting student success, particularly amongst students from marginalized and disadvantaged communities, take a purposeful approach to advancing student success, which includes many, if not all, of the practices I have listed above.

We have learned in recent years that highly successful institutions use explicit and well-defined student learning outcomes, rubrics, and assessments, where learning outcomes and assessment are part of a continuous improvement process, i.e., the assessment cycle, which includes a multistep, cyclical process of, for example, identifying goals, designing processes, assessing, implementing, collecting and analyzing data, evaluating, synthesizing reports and sharing, and using the knowledge to promote continuous improvement. These learning outcomes and assessments are undertaken at the course, programmatic, and institutional level.

Student learning outcomes are the specified knowledge, skills, abilities or attitudes that students are expected to attain by the end of a learning experience or program of study.

Assessments are a series of activities designed to test student competence in the learning outcomes of a course or program, while supporting students to improve their learning. Assessments are also used to inform instructors of the effectiveness of their teaching practices. There are three types of assessment: diagnostic (use of pre- and post-tests to evaluate student knowledge before and after going through a course or program), formative (use of ungraded or low-stakes activities), and summative (use of graded assignments).

Rubrics are statements that articulate the expectations by listing criteria for what is particularly important and by describing levels of quality on a defined scale.

Defining and using learning outcomes and assessment in support of student success efforts are becoming more common as institutions collect and use student learning outcomes data and assessment instruments for continuous improvement. These efforts have been driven externally by state and federal governments, accreditors, and other third-party interests. Internally these efforts have been driven by college and university administrators. What is needed, however, is more faculty engagement and involvement in establishing and assessing student learning outcomes is essential.

The suboptimal faculty involvement in use of learning outcomes and assessment, reminded me of my experience a few years ago. This is the gist of my conversation, recreated from memory and with license, with a professor at an unnamed institution of higher learning about student learning outcomes and assessment:

Me: Do you define student learning outcomes and assess achievement of the same in the courses you teach?

Prof: Oh yeah, of course. During the very first class at the beginning of the term, in the course syllabus handout, I specify the course objectives, term paper and other requirements, and also provide the dates for quizzes, midterms, and final exams. I also inform the students I may include surprise quizzes.

Me: Hmm. How do you know the students have developed the knowledge required in your course and the discipline and that they’re able to think critically and solve problems, rather than rote-learn facts and technical content?

Prof: Hmph. I don’t worry if the students have gained the knowledge and can think critically. To me what’s important is they know the facts. Without the facts, they can’t go further.

Me: But …, aren’t you concerned they may not develop the depth of disciplinary knowledge that would allow them to be successful? And, how do you know if student learning is improving?

Prof: No, that’s not for me to be concerned about in my course. It’s an administrative requirement, which may be for the program coordinator, department chair, or dean to be concerned about. I am just too busy.

Me: Shouldn’t you as a professor be concerned about student learning and be able to compare year to year and with other sections of the course being taught by other professors?

Prof: Like I said, it’s for the administrators to be concerned with. I am here to teach my courses and do my scholarly research. I just do not have the time to do what you are talking about.

The above is in many ways reflective of the disconnect between the boots-on-the-ground course instructor and the institutional level efforts to promote learning outcomes and assessment at the course and program level driven by external requirements imposed by accreditors and government agencies.

Indeed, in querying data for our NWCCU member institutions that went through our Year-Seven, comprehensive Evaluation of Institutional Effectiveness during Fall 2022, Spring 2023, Fall 2023, and Spring 2024 peer evaluation seasons, approximately 75 percent received Recommendations related to Standards 1.C.5 and 1.C.7.

Specifically, NWCCU’s Standards for Accreditation related to Student Learning, which focus on student learning outcomes and assessment, include:

• 1.C.1 The institution offers programs with appropriate content and rigor that are consistent with its mission, culminate in achievement of clearly identified student learning outcomes (emphasis added here and below in italics) that lead to collegiate-level degrees, certificates, or credentials and include designators consistent with program content in recognized fields of study.
• 1.C.2 The institution awards credit, degrees, certificates, or credentials for programs that are based upon student learning and learning outcomes that offer an appropriate breadth, depth, sequencing, and synthesis of learning.
• 1.C.3 The institution identifies and publishes expected program and degree learning outcomes for all degrees, certificates, and credentials. Information on expected student learning outcomes for all courses is provided to enrolled students.
• 1.C.4 The institution’s admission and completion or graduation requirements are clearly defined, widely published, and easily accessible to students and the public.
• 1.C.5 The institution engages in an effective system of assessment to evaluate the quality of learning in its programs. The institution recognizes the central role of faculty to establish curricula, assess student learning, and improve instructional programs.
• 1.C.6 Consistent with its mission, the institution establishes and assesses, across all associate and bachelor level programs or within a General Education curriculum, institutional learning outcomes and/or core competencies. Examples of such learning outcomes and competencies include, but are not limited to, effective communication skills, global awareness, cultural sensitivity, scientific and quantitative reasoning, critical analysis and logical thinking, problem solving, and/or information literacy.
• 1.C.7 The institution uses the results of its assessment efforts to inform academic and learning-support planning and practices to continuously improve student learning outcomes.

During the last few years, NWCCU has offered a series of workshops and webinars to support our institutions develop and deploy effective learning outcomes and assessment, such as, for example, the Spring 2023 webinar entitled, Best Practices in Assessment, and the Mission Fulfilment Fellowship, which is in its sixth year of existence and has “graduated” over 150 Fellows. In addition, we have provided resources on demystifying our Standards related to assessment.

Prospectively, NWCCU will create a series of coordinated efforts to support our member institutions to meet or exceed the Standards related to student learning, cited above, including workshops, webinars, training, feedback, mentoring, and other resources and materials.

For example, in the first of a series through the next few years, at NWCCU’s upcoming 2024 Annual Conference, November 20-22, Jillian Kinzie, Associate Director, National Survey of Student Engagement, Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, will present a day-long workshop for faculty and institutional leaders. Dr. Kinzie will focus on actionable approaches to program-level learning outcomes assessment, with an emphasis on equitable, student-centered assessment practices. The intent is to connect program-level assessment with both course-level and institution-level learning outcomes assessment (Standards 1.C.3, 1.C.5, 1.C.6) and help teams design processes to meaningfully use assessment results for improvement of student learning (Standard 1.C.7).

In addition, henceforth, starting with this issue of The Beacon, our intent is to spotlight articles on student learning outcomes and assessment by national experts, along with articles on best practices and how-to, written by representatives from NWCCU member institutions.

For example, in this issue of The Beacon three institutions that participated in NWCCU’s Mission Fulfilment Fellowship, Shoreline Community College, College of Southern Nevada, and College of Southern Idaho, share their experiences in developing and deploying learning outcomes and assessment to improve student achievement and success on their respective campuses.

We hope that the combination of articles and workshops are helpful for our member institutions to develop learning outcomes- and assessment-informed approaches to promote student success.

Postscript:

After I wrote my essay on student learning outcomes and assessment, I decided on querying OpenAI’s GPT-4, the generative artificial intelligence (AI) application.

GPT-4’s response to my query “What should I take into consideration as I develop student learning outcomes, rubrics, and assessments?” is copied and pasted below verbatim:

When developing student learning outcomes (SLOs), rubrics, and assessments, there are several key considerations to ensure they are effective, meaningful, and aligned with both educational goals and student needs. Here’s what you should take into account:

1. Alignment with Program Goals and Institutional Mission

• Coherence: Ensure that SLOs align with the broader goals of the program, department, and institution. Each outcome should contribute to the overall educational objectives.
• Curriculum Integration: Consider how each SLO fits within the course sequence or curriculum map. Outcomes should be integrated and scaffolded across courses to build skills progressively.

2. Clarity and Precision

• Specificity: SLOs should be clearly articulated, using precise language that leaves no room for ambiguity. Avoid vague terms like “understand” or “learn” and use action verbs that are observable and measurable, such as “analyze,” “design,” or “evaluate.”
• Student-Centered: Frame outcomes from the student’s perspective, focusing on what the student will be able to do, rather than what the instructor will cover.

3. Measurability

• Assessable: Ensure that each SLO can be effectively measured through assessments. The outcomes should lend themselves to evaluation through exams, projects, presentations, etc.
• Quantitative and Qualitative Measures: Consider using a mix of both quantitative (e.g., test scores) and qualitative (e.g., portfolio reviews) measures to capture the full range of student learning.

4. Cognitive Complexity (Bloom’s Taxonomy)

• Diverse Cognitive Levels: Use Bloom’s Taxonomy as a guide to ensure that SLOs cover a range of cognitive levels—from basic knowledge and comprehension to higher-order thinking skills like analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.
• Appropriate Challenge: Ensure that outcomes are appropriately challenging for the level of the course or program, encouraging students to advance in their learning.

5. Inclusivity and Equity

• Accessibility: Ensure that SLOs and assessments are designed with all students in mind, considering different learning styles, abilities, and backgrounds. Avoid language or expectations that might exclude or disadvantage certain groups.
• Universal Design for Learning (UDL): Incorporate UDL principles to create multiple means of engagement, representation, and expression, allowing all students to demonstrate their learning effectively.

6. Rubric Development

• Clear Criteria: Develop rubrics with clear, specific criteria that describe varying levels of performance (e.g., excellent, proficient, needs improvement). Each criterion should be directly tied to the SLOs.
• Consistency and Fairness: Ensure that rubrics provide a consistent and fair method for evaluating student work. Rubrics should be applied uniformly across all students and assignments.
• Transparency: Share rubrics with students in advance so they understand the expectations and can use them as a guide for their work.

7. Variety of Assessment Methods

• Multiple Modes: Use a variety of assessment methods (e.g., exams, projects, presentations, peer reviews) to capture different aspects of student learning and accommodate diverse learning styles.
• Formative and Summative Assessments: Incorporate both formative assessments (ongoing, low-stakes assessments like quizzes or draft reviews) to monitor progress and summative assessments (final projects or exams) to evaluate overall achievement of SLOs.
• Authentic Assessments: Whenever possible, use assessments that simulate real-world tasks or challenges relevant to the discipline, providing meaningful context for students.

8. Feedback and Improvement

• Actionable Feedback: Design assessments that provide students with meaningful, actionable feedback that they can use to improve their learning and performance.
• Continuous Improvement: Use assessment results to refine and improve SLOs, rubrics, and teaching practices. Assessment should be part of a continuous feedback loop that enhances the educational experience.

9. Scalability and Manageability

• Feasibility: Ensure that the number of SLOs and the associated assessments are manageable for both instructors and students. Overly complex or numerous outcomes can lead to assessment fatigue and diminish the quality of evaluation.
• Resource Availability: Consider the resources available, such as time, technology, and support services, when developing assessments. Ensure that the chosen methods are sustainable over time.

10. Stakeholder Involvement

• Faculty Collaboration: Engage faculty in the development and review process to ensure that SLOs and assessments reflect collective expertise and are consistent across the program.
• Student Input: Consider gathering feedback from students on assessments and rubrics to understand their perspective and make adjustments as needed.
• Accreditation and Compliance: Align SLOs and assessments with accreditation standards and institutional requirements, ensuring that your program meets external expectations.

By taking these factors into consideration, you can develop robust and effective student learning outcomes, rubrics, and assessments that enhance student learning and contribute to continuous improvement in your educational program.

In going through this exercise, I was impressed with GPT-4’s response, which is pretty similar to human experts.

Our higher educational institutions have a critical role to play in helping students realize their aspirations through inclusive curricula and opportunities that, instead of drilling and killing, help students thrive.

In the 1995 film Apollo 13, Ed Harris, the actor playing Gene Kranz, NASA flight director, says, “failure is not an option.” To me that line is apropos to the present fraught context where the public is divided on the value of education. By being laser focused on promoting student success, facilitated by use of effective learning outcomes and assessment instruments, our colleges and universities can ensure failure is not an option.