Frequently Asked Questions about the VALUE Rubrics
Frequently Asked Questions about the VALUE Rubrics
As faculty and other academic and student affairs professionals have begun using the
VALUE rubrics are essential tools for evaluating student learning, yet they have prompted numerous inquiries regarding their purpose, structure, and implementation This article presents the nine most common questions asked about VALUE rubrics, accompanied by concise answers Many of the concerns highlighted here are discussed in greater detail in the following chapters.
1 Why was this particular set of rubrics developed?
The Valid Assessment of Learning in Undergraduate Education (VALUE) project, part of the Liberal Education and America’s Promise (LEAP) initiative by the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U), aims to evaluate Essential Learning Outcomes The VALUE rubrics serve as a tool for assessing these critical educational goals established by the LEAP initiative.
Educators and employers agree on the essential learning outcomes that students require to effectively engage in civic life and thrive in the global economy.
When the VALUE rubrics were created, it was believed that many LEAP Essential Learning Outcomes related to knowledge were sufficiently addressed by existing assessments, negating the need for new rubrics However, a reading rubric was incorporated due to faculty emphasis on the significance of evaluating student reading as a foundational skill that enhances writing, critical thinking, and quantitative literacy Recently, a new rubric for global learning has been introduced, with plans for additional rubrics focusing on scientific literacy and other interdisciplinary outcomes in the future.
2 How were the VALUE rubrics developed, and by whom?
The VALUE rubrics were created by collaborative teams of faculty, academic and student affairs professionals, and experts from various public and private higher education institutions in the U.S., including both two-year and four-year colleges For a comprehensive overview of the development process, refer to the Introduction section above.
3 How were the VALUE rubrics’ descriptors or labels determined for each level of achievement?
The objective was to find neutral descriptors for student achievement that align with academic terminology Consequently, "capstone" was chosen to represent the highest level of achievement, while "benchmark" signifies the initial learning level of incoming students Additionally, "milestones" denote progressively advancing stages in the learning process.
The development of the fifteen VALUE rubrics involved a dedicated team, whose members can be found online at http://www.aacu.org/value/rubric_teams.cfm These rubrics are designed to assess students' performance as they progress from benchmark to capstone levels, allowing for the substitution of terms based on individual campus preferences.
The numerical scores in the VALUE rubrics do not correlate with college years or letter grades; instead, a score of "4" signifies the achievement level expected for a bachelor's degree, while "1" reflects the performance level observed in entering students Scores "2" and "3" indicate intermediate milestones, showing progress towards more advanced learning demonstrations Community colleges often view "2" and "3" as the expected achievement levels for associate degrees and transfers, although many students exceed these expectations Initially, the VALUE rubrics featured six levels of achievement, but faculty feedback led to the decision to streamline them to four levels for more effective programmatic and institutional assessments.
5 How do the VALUE rubrics fit within the national accountability frameworks associated with accreditation requirements and standardized testing regimes?
The VALUE rubrics have gained acceptance from all regional accrediting bodies as a viable method for evaluating student learning, serving as a valuable alternative to standardized testing These rubrics offer a more comprehensive and detailed insight into students' strengths and weaknesses across a broader range of outcomes than traditional standardized tests like the ETS Proficiency Profile and the Collegiate Learning Assessment Additionally, they align with the expectations of both faculty and employers regarding the competencies that college graduates should demonstrate Public institutions can now utilize the VALUE rubrics to showcase student learning within the framework of the Voluntary System of Accountability.
6 How are the VALUE rubrics being used on campuses?
The VALUE rubrics serve various purposes, including summative assessments for graduation and accreditation, as well as both formative and summative evaluations of student learning for program achievement and progress These rubrics are applied within specific disciplines and across general education programs Additionally, modified versions of the rubrics are utilized for grading at the individual course level.
7 Can I use the VALUE rubrics in grading student work?
The VALUE rubrics were designed as meta-rubrics for institutional or programmatic assessment of overall student learning over time, rather than for grading individual assignments While these rubrics can be adapted into grading tools for specific courses, they maintain consistent criteria and dimensions for evaluating learning outcomes.
The Voluntary System of Accountability, developed through a collaboration between the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges and the American Association of State Colleges and Universities, with support from the Lumina Foundation for Education, offers standardized information on the undergraduate experience at public colleges and universities across the U.S To ensure relevance, the performance descriptors must be adjusted to align with the specific course content and assignments being evaluated, while maintaining the core learning dimensions outlined in the original rubric.
8 Are the VALUE rubrics valid and reliable?
The VALUE rubrics have undergone a rigorous development process that established their face and use validity, which has been validated by their implementation across over three thousand campuses since fall 2010 Consistent campus-level calibration analyses show high agreement among evaluators, while a national reliability study and various campus consortia have demonstrated acceptable reliability levels in projects utilizing these rubrics.
9 Do the VALUE rubrics have to be used as they are, or can they be modified?
The VALUE rubrics are designed to be customized to align with the unique mission, program offerings, and student demographics of each institution The performance criteria within these rubrics capture the key dimensions of learning identified by development teams through surveys of existing rubrics Many campuses have adapted the language to incorporate local terminology, and some have introduced additional dimensions or criteria to better reflect specific learning outcomes relevant to their environment.
However, modifications should be considered carefully; the more modifications made to a VALUE rubric, the more difficult it becomes for the institution to place its findings within a broader national context.
Who Is Accessing the VALUE Rubrics, and Why
Who Is Accessing the VALUE Rubrics, and Why
Since January 2010, AAC&U has gathered visitor information on the VALUE website, requiring users to provide an email address to access the VALUE rubrics First-time visitors must also submit minimal personal information and their interests, but this is only necessary during the initial visit For future access, the email address functions as a password for downloading the rubrics.
Between June 2010 and June 2012, the VALUE website experienced a remarkable 520 percent increase in first-time visitors, highlighting its growing appeal across diverse institutional affiliations primarily within higher education This surge in visitors encompassed individuals from all fifty US states and territories, including both domestic and international affiliations, such as university system offices and government agencies The accompanying figures illustrate the overall growth in first-time visitors, as well as the specific increase among those affiliated with colleges and universities, showcasing the broad spectrum of institutional types represented.
Figure 2 Total number of first-time visitors
Figure 3 Total number of institutions, and colleges and universities represented by first-time visitors
Total Institutions Total Colleges and Universities
Figure 4 College and university affiliations by Carnegie classification and minority-serving status (June 2012)
Doctoral/Research Master’s Baccalaureate Associate’s Other Minority-Serving
Between June 2010 and June 2012, over 17,000 individuals visited the VALUE website, with 44% being instructional staff, including faculty and adjuncts, 33% mid-level administrators such as deans and directors, and 6% upper-level administrators like provosts and chancellors The remaining 17% comprised librarians, students, graduate assistants, administrative assistants, and student affairs professionals.
First-time visitors to the website must provide their institution's name and specify their intended use of the VALUE rubric(s) by selecting one or more options from a provided list before downloading.
• to help specify learning outcomes within academic departments
• to help specify institutional learning outcomes
• to help with accreditation efforts
• to serve as models in order to establish department or campus-specific rubrics
• to facilitate faculty development efforts
• to assist students in reflection on their learning and learning development
First-time visitors expressed a strong interest in using rubrics as frameworks for creating local assessments or defining departmental learning outcomes, as well as tools for facilitating student reflection on these outcomes Additionally, many respondents who chose "other" highlighted their interest in general education and assessment practices.
Figure 5 Reasons for accessing the VALUE rubrics
Help Specify Departmental Learning Outcomes
Help Specify Institutional Learning Outcomes
The VALUE rubric for critical thinking is the most frequently viewed, while the reading rubric is the least popular Among the rubrics addressing personal and social responsibility, those for intercultural competence, civic engagement, ethical reasoning, and lifelong learning receive less attention Notably, the intercultural competence rubric ranks seventh in viewership among the fifteen VALUE rubrics, making it the most viewed of this group In contrast, the ethical reasoning and lifelong learning rubrics are the least viewed, ranking thirteenth and fourteenth, respectively.
Low rankings in assessments do not indicate a disregard for personal and social responsibility outcomes Campus-level evaluations often prioritize intellectual and practical skills, as well as integrative learning abilities However, with the rising national emphasis on civic learning and the need to link knowledge with global problem-solving, it is expected that institutional assessments will increasingly concentrate on students' civic and social competencies in the future.
In 2011, AAC&U conducted an online survey to explore the usage of VALUE rubrics on college and university campuses The survey targeted a random sample of first-time visitors to the VALUE website, inquiring about their actual use of the rubrics, the specific rubrics utilized, and their application within the curriculum or cocurriculum Participants were also questioned about any modifications made to the rubrics and whether data collected from their use contributed to the improvement process The survey aimed to gain insights into how specific campuses, particularly those not involved in the initial VALUE project, were implementing the rubrics, rather than providing a comprehensive national overview.
Of the 214 survey respondents, 14 percent indicated that the rubrics were being used
A significant portion of respondents reported varying levels of rubric usage on campus, with 21 percent indicating "a fair amount" and 27 percent stating that rubrics were not used at all Among those who utilized rubrics extensively, the most frequently employed were related to intellectual and practical skills, such as critical thinking and communication The ethical reasoning rubric emerged as the most commonly used for personal and social responsibility outcomes, followed closely by the intercultural knowledge and competence rubric.
Survey results reveal that most respondents utilized the rubrics with minor modifications, maintaining their original structure In certain instances, elements from multiple rubrics were merged into a single outcome Faculty members were identified as the primary users of these rubrics, followed by staff from campus assessment centers and campus administrators.
A survey revealed that 59% of respondents from campuses utilizing rubrics reported collecting data primarily for general education or course-level assessments However, about half of these respondents admitted that the data had not yet contributed to program-level improvements Many indicated plans to utilize this data in the future to evaluate learning outcomes in both general education and their specific majors, with 39% considering the use of rubrics for major assessments as a future goal Conversely, the majority had not employed rubrics for assessing co-curricular learning and did not plan to do so moving forward.
All twelve campus case studies are available online: www.aacu.org/value/ casestudies.cfm
Since the release of the VALUE rubrics in fall 2010, recognition among faculty and campus administrators has significantly increased, highlighting the importance of direct assessment of student learning Many institutions are now integrating these rubrics into their assessment portfolios, acknowledging their effectiveness in enhancing educational evaluation As the adoption of VALUE rubrics expands across colleges and universities, exemplary practices are emerging and will be disseminated through national platforms like the AAC&U website and the Collaborative for Assessment.
Authentic Assessment and Learning, a planned national repository devoted to the aggrega- tion and benchmarking of data drawn from campuses, 1 as well as through reporting from the
Voluntary System of Accountability, which has approved the use of the VALUE rubrics as one of several accountability measures
1 For more information about the Collaborative for Authentic Assessment and Learning, see http://www.aacu.org/caal.
Validity and Reliability
As campuses strive to demonstrate genuine student gains and skill acquisition, there is heightened scrutiny on learning measures that adhere to validity and reliability standards Various standardized assessments, such as the Collegiate Learning Assessment, ETS Proficiency Profile, and ACT’s Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency, are available to evaluate essential learning outcomes related to intellectual and practical skills, including written communication and complex reasoning These instruments are meticulously designed to ensure high reliability and meet established validity criteria However, the VALUE rubrics, which were not intended as standardized tools, raise questions about their adherence to these methodological standards This chapter provides evidence supporting the validity and reliability of the VALUE rubrics, drawing on national and campus-level findings.
To ensure that an assessment instrument accurately reflects its intended outcomes, it is essential for the instrument to exhibit multiple types of validity The process of developing a rubric plays a crucial role in achieving this goal.
The VALUE rubrics demonstrate significant face validity, as they were developed by national teams of faculty who are directly involved in student learning and outcomes assessment at colleges and universities This credibility is reflected in the extensive interest and distribution of the rubrics, with over 17,000 individuals from more than 4,000 institutions and organizations—both domestic and international—accessing them between June 2010 and June 2012.
The involvement of faculty and national experts in specific outcome areas enhances the content validity of the VALUE rubrics These experts ensure that the measures comprehensively cover the full range of the concept's meaning As the VALUE rubrics fulfill at least two criteria for establishing validity, users can be confident that the rubrics effectively capture the intended learning outcomes.
Effective assessment tools must demonstrate high levels of validity and reliability Validity ensures that the tools accurately measure the intended outcomes, while reliability guarantees consistent results across different contexts and over time.
Statewide studies in Massachusetts are currently assessing the validity and reliability of the VALUE rubric These studies aim to adhere to established methodological standards, and their findings will enhance the evidentiary support for VALUE rubric assessments.
2 Daniel F Chambliss and Russell K Schutt, Making Sense of a Social World: Methods of Investigation (Thousand Oaks,
A widely used approach to ensure the reliability of rubrics is inter-coder or inter-rater scoring This method involves multiple coders assessing the same work sample using a shared rubric, allowing for the calculation of a reliability score to verify consistency in evaluations.
In the fall of 2012, the AAC&U conducted a national inter-rater reliability study to establish preliminary reliability scores for the VALUE rubrics focused on critical thinking, integrative learning, and civic engagement The study involved forty-four faculty members from diverse disciplinary areas, including humanities, natural sciences, social sciences, and professional and applied sciences Each participant evaluated three samples of student work corresponding to each of the three rubrics.
The faculty involved in this study did not participate in a traditional calibration training session due to geographic constraints, opting instead for individual scoring rounds and one-on-one discussions with the project manager for clarification While this virtual approach may have theoretically affected reliability, the faculty achieved perfect score agreement 32% of the time Assessment experts often consider close scores as valid agreement, and when applying a rule of approximate agreement, the average rose to 57% to 80%, depending on the category's proximity Furthermore, low standard deviations indicated minimal variation among scorers, despite their diverse disciplinary backgrounds.
Campus-based case studies demonstrate strong support for the reliability of the VALUE rubrics, with local analyses consistently showing high inter-rater reliability Institutions such as Carroll Community College, DePaul University, Midland College, and Texas A&M University reported impressive inter-rater reliability results among faculty scorers following calibration training Additionally, previously published case studies on the VALUE rubrics have also highlighted favorable reliability outcomes.
To ensure the ongoing affirmation of the VALUE rubrics, it is crucial to conduct local tests of reliability at individual campuses These tests will not only validate the rubrics but also foster trust among faculty members, who are the primary users While local efforts are underway, there is already a compelling argument supporting the validity and reliability of the rubrics.
In her article, “How Reliable Are the VALUE Rubrics?” Ashley Finley conducts a comprehensive review of the methodology used in the AAC&U inter-rater reliability study, as published in "Assessing Liberal Education Outcomes Using VALUE Rubrics" in Peer Review This examination highlights the effectiveness and consistency of the VALUE Rubrics in assessing liberal education outcomes.
4 See Shelley Johnson Carey, ed., “Assessing Liberal Education Outcomes Using VALUE Rubrics,” special issue, Peer Review 13/14, no 4/1 (2012)
Attainment of oral communication skills should not rest solely with the completion of one freshman-level course
– Anne Lowery, University of Mobile
Rubric Modification
The VALUE rubrics encapsulate key characteristics of student learning across sixteen widely recognized outcomes These dimensions were established through a thorough analysis of existing rubrics, literature reviews, and collaboration with faculty experts and research centers focused on student learning Designed to assess student performance, the VALUE rubrics align with national expectations for liberal learning that are universally acknowledged by faculty from various types of institutions.
Learning expectations can vary significantly between campuses, necessitating adaptations in the language of VALUE rubrics to suit local contexts The primary goal of modifying these rubrics is to enhance both faculty and student comprehension of the criteria, ensuring that assessments accurately represent the actual learning outcomes specific to each institution.
Individual campuses can enhance their assessment criteria by incorporating elements that reflect their institutional mission and program variations This allows for the unique aspects of a campus's student experience to be integrated within a unified learning framework For instance, at Lewis University, the College of Business initiated a new assessment plan while the VALUE rubrics were still being developed Upon their release, these rubrics—focusing on quantitative literacy, critical thinking, written communication, and oral communication—were utilized to validate the college's chosen criteria The existing rubric for oral communication was revised to align with the VALUE rubric, while the other three VALUE criteria were already encompassed in the college's developed rubrics.
“based on the VALUE rubrics” and used throughout all business programs—including com- mon core courses and capstones
In 2009, Winston-Salem State University's provost initiated a faculty review of the general education curriculum, leading to a revamped framework for the university's general education requirements and the establishment of seven key institutional learning outcomes: critical thinking, scientific literacy, critical reading, quantitative literacy, written communication, information literacy, and oral communication By 2011, the review committee created assessment rubrics to evaluate these newly revised outcomes effectively.
In addition to other sources, for six of the outcomes the committee relied on the corre- sponding VALUE rubrics, with slight modifications For the seventh, scientific literacy, the
In 2012, a new rubric was developed by utilizing VALUE rubrics focused on problem-solving, inquiry, and analysis as foundational references This new rubric is part of a comprehensive set of seven modified rubrics designed to enhance educational assessment.
The VALUE rubrics have been officially approved and are now mandatory for all courses included in the new general education curriculum Faculty members responsible for teaching these general education courses must develop their own rubrics in alignment with this requirement.
After each round of scoring, we solicit feedback
Linda Siefert from the University of North Carolina Wilmington oversees assignments that utilize rubrics to evaluate student performance based on new outcomes, with all assessment data systematically recorded in the university's electronic assessment data system.
Figure 6 Oral presentation assessment rubric (School of business scan-enabled format)
SCore organization Organizational pat- tern is minimally observable or not observable
Organizational pattern is clearly observable
Organizational pat- tern is clearly and consistently observ- able and is skillful
Content of the pre- sentation cohesive language Language choices are unclear and either minimally sup- port or do not sup- port the effectiveness of the presentation
Language is not ap- propriate to audience
Language choices generally support the effectiveness of the presentation
Language is appro- priate to audience
Language choices are imaginative, memorable, and compelling
Language choices enhance effective- ness delivery Delivery techniques detract from the understandability of the presentation
Style and manner of dress detract from presentation
Delivery techniques make the presenta- tion understandable and interesting
Style and manner of dress are appropri- ate for presentation
Delivery techniques make the presenta- tion compelling
Speaker appears pol- ished and confident
Style and manner of dress enhance pre- sentation
Insufficient or non- existing supporting materials
Either non-existing references or the ref- erence to information or analysis minimally supports the presen- tation or establishes credibility
Reference to infor- mation or analysis that generally sup- ports the presenta- tion or establishes credibility
Supporting materials more than sufficient
A variety of types of supporting materials used
Reference to infor- mation or analysis that significantly supports the presen- tation or establishes credibility
Either non-existing central message or the central mes- sage is not explicitly stated, but can be deduced
Central message basically clear and understandable
Central message consistent with sup- porting material
Central message strongly enhanced by supporting material
Figure 7 Oral communication VALUE rubric for general education, with addition of single criterion (highlighted in yellow)
Oral communication includes the use of appropriate language, conventions, elocution, poise, organization, sup- porting evidence, and content to effectively communicate through the spoken word for the purpose and audience
Speaker skillfully adapts style and message to the context (e.g., public speaking, interper- sonal, small group and teams) and consistently demon- strates respect and sensitivity for diverse audiences
Speaker adapts to the context (e.g., public speaking, interpersonal, small group and teams) and demonstrates respect and sensitiv- ity for diverse audi- ences
Speaker attempts to adapt to the context (e.g., public speak- ing, interpersonal, small group and teams) and incon- sistently demon- strates respect and sensitivity for diverse audiences
The speaker struggles to adapt to various contexts such as public speaking, interpersonal communication, and small group interactions, showing cultural bias and a lack of sensitivity towards the diverse needs of the audience In contrast, an effective organizational pattern is essential, as it should be clearly structured and consistently observable, ensuring that the content of the message remains cohesive and engaging for all listeners.
Organizational pat- tern is observable within the message
Organizational pat- tern is attempted within the message
Organizational pattern is not ob- servable within the message delivery Speaker consis- tently demonstrates mastery of delivery techniques and ap- pears polished and confident
Speaker demon- strates mastery of delivery techniques and appears com- fortable
Speaker demon- strates some mas- tery of delivery tech- niques and appears hesitant
The speaker struggles to effectively utilize delivery techniques, displaying noticeable discomfort In contrast, the language used is imaginative, memorable, and compelling, significantly enhancing the overall effectiveness of the message.
Language choices are thoughtful, ap- propriate, and gen- erally support the effectiveness of the message
Language choices are mundane and commonplace and partially support the effectiveness of the message
Language choices are unclear, inap- propriate to the audience and mini- mally support the effectiveness of the message
The article emphasizes the importance of utilizing diverse supporting materials that effectively reference relevant information or analysis, which significantly reinforces the core message and enhances the speaker’s credibility and authority on the subject matter.
Provides supporting material and makes appropriate refer- ence to information or analysis that gen- erally supports the message or estab- lishes the speaker’s credibility/authority on the topic
Occasionally provides support- ing materials and makes reference to information or analysis that sup- ports the message or establishes the speaker’s credibil- ity/authority on the topic
Fails to provide sup- porting materials or make reference to information that supports the mes- sage or establishes the speaker’s cred- ibility/authority on the topic
Message Central message is compelling and strongly supported
Central message is clear and consistent with the supporting material
Central message is basically under- standable but is not often repeated and is not memorable
Central message is not explicitly stated or understandable
Source: Winston-Salem State University
Daemen College, similar to Winston-Salem State University, has implemented adapted versions of the VALUE rubrics by refining the performance descriptors and incorporating additional criteria Institutions have the flexibility to create extra performance levels to enhance the precision of tracking student progress across various outcomes In some cases, campuses may choose to merge elements from two different rubrics for a more comprehensive assessment approach.
Figure 8 Modification of the VALUE rubric for civic engagement (tracked changes show relabeling of criteria, combination of two criteria, and additional changes to reflect campus context)
Civic Literacy (Knowledge) Connects and ex- tends knowledge (facts, theories, etc.) of civic con- texts, structures and systems within one’s own academic study/field/disci- pline and beyond (multidisciplinary)
Analyzes knowledge (facts, theories, etc.) of civic contexts, structures and systems by making relevant connections to one’s own aca- demic study/field/ discipline.
Begins to connect knowledge (facts, theories, etc.) of civic contexts, structures and systems to one’s own academic study/field/disci- pline.
Begins to identify knowledge (facts, theories, etc.) of civic contexts, structures and systems.
Knowledge serves as a bridge, linking academic studies and disciplines to active civic engagement By applying facts and theories learned in their fields, individuals can enhance their participation in civic life, politics, and government This connection fosters a deeper understanding of societal issues and encourages informed involvement in the democratic process.
This article examines how knowledge acquired from academic studies—encompassing facts, theories, and concepts—can be applied to enhance civic engagement It emphasizes the importance of making relevant connections between one's academic discipline and active participation in civic life, politics, and government, highlighting the role of education in fostering informed citizenship.
Begins to connect knowledge (facts, theories, etc.) to civic engagement and to one’s own participa- tion in civic life, poli- tics, and government.
Understanding the key concepts and theories from your academic discipline is essential for fostering civic engagement By applying this knowledge, you can enhance your participation in civic life, politics, and government, ultimately contributing to a more informed and active society.
Civic Commu- nication and Skills
Tailors communi- cation strategies, participation and advocacy skills and advocacy skills to effectively express, listen, and adapt to others to establish relationships to fur- ther civic action
Effectively commu- nicates, participates and advocates in civic context, show- ing ability to do all of the following: express, listen, and adapt ideas and messages based on others’ perspectives.
In a civic context, effective communication involves actively participating and advocating while demonstrating the ability to express, listen, and adapt ideas and messages according to different perspectives.
Communicates, par- ticipates and advo- cates in civic context, showing ability to do one of the following: express, listen, and adapt ideas and messages based on others’ perspectives.
Civic Responsi- bility (values) Demonstrates ability and commitment to collaboratively work across and within community contexts and structures to achieve a civic aim.
Demonstrates ability and commitment to work actively within community contexts and structures to achieve a civic aim.
Demonstrates ex- perience identifying intentional ways to actively participate in civic contexts and structures.
Demonstrates a willingness for pas- sive but not active participation in civic context and struc- tures
Rubric Calibration
Using rubrics as measurement tools requires a shared understanding of their design and application Calibration involves bringing together users, such as faculty from various disciplines, administrators, and student affairs professionals, to align their interpretations and ensure consistent application of the rubric This collaborative process fosters effective communication and enhances the reliability of assessment outcomes.
The calibration process starts with a thorough examination of the rubric to clarify any ambiguous language, focusing on both its introductory definitions and the outcome criteria Participants carefully review each section, pinpointing discussion areas and formulating specific questions, while refraining from making any changes during the session The discussion centers on reaching a consensus on the interpretation of the rubric's language for scoring purposes After reviewing the rubric, participants evaluate a sample of student work, ensuring that their scoring decisions are backed by concrete references to the provided work.
Practice scoring involves evaluating one criterion at a time, followed by a review of scores to assess consensus among participants The session facilitator plays a crucial role in prompting participants to justify their scores with evidence from the work sample For instance, a faculty member who rated the sample a “2” should highlight specific aspects that influenced their decision, while another who rated it a “1” should provide their rationale After discussing each criterion, participants may adjust their scores, aiming not for a single score but for a range that reflects the majority's agreement This clustering demonstrates a shared understanding of the rubric's application Ideally, at least two practice work samples should be scored for calibration before proceeding to actual evaluations.
Calibration not only ensures consistency in student work scores but also fosters inter-rater reliability among faculty By reviewing and reflecting on the rubric, campuses can achieve high inter-rater scores, as seen in institutions that prioritize calibration sessions before scoring Furthermore, calibration encourages interdisciplinary discussions about shared learning outcomes, demonstrating that despite diverse content areas, faculty can align on common standards for student learning This process also serves as a valuable faculty development opportunity, prompting educators to consider student learning outcomes holistically and emphasizing that all faculty members contribute to student success, regardless of their specific disciplines.
The calibration process fosters meaningful discussions about assignment design, as faculty and campus practitioners analyze student work alongside established learning outcomes like critical thinking and integrative learning This collaborative approach encourages educators from various disciplines, potentially alongside student affairs professionals, to identify diverse criteria for assignment design that promote holistic thinking about learning outcomes The process can be enhanced by utilizing data from the evaluation of student work samples to inform improvements For more in-depth insights on creating effective assignments and the mechanisms for direct assessment, refer to Chapter 6.
Calibration sessions are crucial for effective rubric implementation, yet their facilitation can differ significantly between institutions At Daemen College, the process commenced with faculty submitting ungraded student assignments Subsequently, a random selection of these assignments was assessed by invited faculty members from various departments This collaborative effort allowed for the calibration, or "norming," of the rubric, followed by a discussion of the evaluation results.
At Texas A&M University, thirty faculty members engaged in a daylong calibration session as part of the Writing Assessment Project, utilizing a modified VALUE rubric to evaluate student papers Each paper received scores from two faculty members, with a third member stepping in to ensure agreement when necessary, thereby enhancing inter-rater reliability Meals were provided throughout the session.
The result of the project is meaningful information
– Ryan McLawhon, Texas A&M University session, and each faculty member received an honorarium for participation Overall, the
The Writing Assessment Project provided valuable insights into the writing abilities of students across participating departments Each department received a tailored report that compared its students' performance with peers in their college and the overall university, highlighting areas of strength and opportunities for improvement.
At Midland College, approximately 75% of the academic technology faculty participated in the calibration process, with expert faculty and administrative volunteers serving as evaluators across five key assessment areas: reading, writing, speaking, listening, and critical thinking During a comprehensive professional development workshop, evaluators scored artifacts in pairs, and in cases of disagreement, a third evaluator was brought in to resolve the issue To enhance the validity and reliability of the grading, evaluators incorporated theoretical frameworks along with benchmarks and milestones from the VALUE rubrics.
Assignments
Many educational institutions have utilized the VALUE rubrics for assessing student learning, leading to a significant realization among faculty members Upon evaluating student work through these rubrics, educators often find that the assignments did not effectively prompt students to meet the intended learning outcomes A key advantage of implementing VALUE rubrics is the increased awareness of the necessity for well-designed assignments that not only require students to demonstrate mastery of content but also to apply their knowledge in problem-solving, analysis, communication, ethical reasoning, and other relevant outcomes in real-world contexts.
Many faculty members excel at creating assignments that assess content knowledge, but they often struggle to design tasks that encourage students to integrate and apply their knowledge to analyze new situations or tackle complex real-world problems To address this challenge, faculty at numerous institutions are collaborating with staff from teaching and learning centers, faculty development offices, and student affairs divisions to develop engaging assignments that promote deeper learning and application beyond mere recall.
At Daemen College, the assessment process aligns student assignments with adapted VALUE rubrics, generating artifacts that showcase student achievement Customized grading rubrics have been created for specific assignments to reflect the development of critical thinking and writing skills Faculty now utilize these rubrics to emphasize the competencies expected of graduates within their disciplines.
Aligning assignments and rubrics has provided several advantages for faculty, allowing them to distinguish between evaluation and assessment while viewing assessment as a tool for enhancing instruction and learning Initially skeptical of the rubrics' clarity, faculty learned to tailor rubric language to meet the specific needs of their disciplines and courses This process highlighted the essential connection between assignments and their outcomes Additionally, it sparked discussions on the meaning of competencies, the implementation of a competency-based core curriculum, and effective communication of this curriculum as a cohesive whole rather than a mere checklist The overlap of certain rubrics was crucial in emphasizing the importance of competencies in undergraduate education.
Many campuses are increasingly utilizing VALUE rubrics for both formative assessment of student learning and for accreditation and accountability reporting This trend has led to the establishment of signature assignments, which allow faculty members to intentionally design learning experiences aimed at enhancing educational outcomes.
Rubrics … demonstrat[e] the necessary linkage between assignment and product
Robert Morace and Intisar Hibschweiler from Daemen College emphasize the importance of "signature" assignments in addressing specific learning outcomes This term signifies the intentional design of assignments used for assessment at both institutional and programmatic levels Regardless of the terminology—such as "key" or "core"—the goal remains the same: to establish clear areas in the curriculum and co-curriculum where student work demonstrates competency in targeted learning outcomes These signature assignments can either be adapted from existing tasks or newly created, and they may involve collaboration among faculty within a department, across disciplines, or in partnership with student affairs professionals.
When designing signature assignments, educators should thoughtfully consider the desired outcomes and how to effectively engage students in applying these outcomes to relevant knowledge areas within the course To enhance the effectiveness and significance of the assignment, it is essential to utilize four guiding questions during the development process.
When creating signature assignments, it's essential to identify the specific dimensions of the desired outcomes Developers should thoroughly review the scoring rubric to understand the criteria that will evaluate the assignment This review can be conducted individually or as a group, as collaborative discussions can clarify ambiguities and enhance collective understanding.
2 How should students be guided to use the material in order to meet the outcome criteria?
Signature assignments should empower students to apply their knowledge in meaningful ways, going beyond mere factual recall It is essential to incorporate action verbs in these assignments, such as "synthesize" and "demonstrate," to encourage deeper engagement and understanding of the material.
3 Is the assignment intended to meet more than one outcome?
When designing an assignment aimed at assessing student competency in critical thinking and writing, it is essential to incorporate relevant components of each learning outcome Neglecting this consideration may result in an excessive number of "n/a" (not applicable) marks, which do not provide meaningful feedback or scores.
4 What types of learning experiences and associated assignments will be most help- ful in allowing students to demonstrate their learning on a particular outcome?
Faculty members should critically evaluate how to engage students through assignments, considering their role in fostering innovative thinking Creativity among educators is essential for crafting effective assignments Collaborating with colleagues from different departments, teaching and learning resource centers, or technology specialists can also lead to the development of fresh ideas for assignments.
Adapting the integra- tive learning rubric increased consis- tency in guiding and assessing students’ learning
– Gretchen Wilbur, Kathryn Wozniak, and
HARVESTINg dATA FROM SIgNATURE ASSIgNMENTS
After establishing signature assignments, it's essential to create selection criteria to collect a representative sample of student work A curriculum map serves as a visual tool to identify courses linked to specific learning outcomes By employing an "assignment map" to outline signature assignments within courses, faculty can concentrate on particular course elements, alleviating concerns about the time invested in developing direct assessments and signature assignments.
To effectively gather student artifacts for assessment, programs or departments should establish a sampling protocol that balances quantity and quality Carroll Community College exemplifies this approach by developing five signature assignments aligned with key learning outcomes, strategically placed at five points in the curriculum to monitor student learning across the general education program Those responsible for analyzing these artifacts must consider the optimal sample size necessary for meaningful institutional improvement, as collecting insufficient data may lead to skepticism among faculty and staff, while excessive data could hinder thorough analysis and trend identification Assessment coordinators are advised to strategically determine the amount of evidence required to foster constructive discussions aimed at enhancing student learning outcomes.
Figure 9 Assignment map for general education (five signature assignments utilized across the general education program)
CoUrSe learning outcome First-year
Communication Assignment 2 Assignment 1 Assignment 2 Assignment 5
At Drake University, the collection of student artifacts from the first-year seminar program and co-curricular activities highlights the challenges of using a single assignment to evaluate all aspects of a rubric, particularly in lower-division general education courses For instance, a laboratory report in an introductory biology class may not require students to choose a topic or summarize existing knowledge, indicating that while scoring certain dimensions provides valuable insights, it is crucial to gather evidence from diverse courses and assignments to obtain a comprehensive understanding of student capabilities.
At DePaul University’s School for New Learning, students complete a capstone assignment called the Advanced Project, which summarizes their learning at graduation This project is developed independently over time with guidance from a committee, which also assesses the final work To enhance consistency and transparency in evaluation, the faculty implemented the VALUE rubric for integrative learning, aligning it with existing assessment criteria and the curriculum’s meta-competences This nationally validated tool allows for comparison of student achievement against national standards, while the rubric's language was tailored to reflect DePaul’s unique expectations for its graduates.
E-portfolios
An e-portfolio is a digital tool that enables students to collect and showcase evidence of their learning over time and across various contexts Recent advancements in e-portfolio technology have made them more accessible and user-friendly, with a range of commercial and open-source options available to institutions These improvements allow educators to incorporate e-portfolios into their courses without needing to build them from scratch As frameworks like the Lumina Foundation’s Degree Qualifications Profile emphasize the importance of demonstrating diverse learning outcomes, e-portfolios have emerged as an effective means for students to exhibit their knowledge integration, problem-solving skills, civic engagement, and social responsibility.
The integration of rubrics with e-portfolios represents a highly effective assessment strategy, as rubrics clearly outline expected learning outcomes, enabling both faculty and students to recognize essential learning over time By providing a shared vocabulary, rubrics foster meaningful discussions and evaluations The VALUE rubrics, developed through a national initiative, help educators align their assessments with established national learning benchmarks This clarity benefits students by articulating faculty expectations for evidence of learning and enhancing their understanding of personal strengths and weaknesses through reflective analysis of their educational journey.
The University of Minnesota Duluth has been utilizing e-portfolios for over a decade, transitioning from a traditional teaching-centered approach to a more interactive, learning-centered educational model This shift has fostered significant changes in values and teaching methods, encouraging students to engage actively in diverse learning environments and collaborate with peers to achieve key learning outcomes Students are now tasked with documenting their educational progress through e-portfolios, which may include multimedia artifacts and reflections on their learning experiences For both students and faculty, the use of a shared rubric has proven essential in effectively collecting and assessing evidence of learning.
1 See Hart Research Associates, It Takes More Than a Major: Employer Priorities for College Learning and Student Success
(Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities, 2013).
Rubrics will be utilized in classes beyond general education
– Carolynn Berry, Winston-Salem State University
The Center for Experiential Learning at Loyola University Chicago has adapted VALUE rubrics for civic engagement and integrative learning to effectively document and assess experiential learning outcomes These rubrics are utilized by the center's staff, professionals in the Division of Student Development, and faculty members to evaluate service-learning courses, community-based research, academic internships, and other impactful educational practices Many academic courses employing these rubrics fulfill the civic engagement and leadership requirements of the university's general education program, assessing various assignments, projects, and culminating e-portfolios across multiple disciplines Additionally, the Center conducts program-level assessments to identify strengths and opportunities for future program development.
E-portfolios can be structured around learning outcomes at various levels, including institutional, programmatic, and course-specific Students can showcase their achievements by including work from both the curriculum and cocurriculum, as well as evidence from internships and community-based research Faculty can conveniently review these e-portfolios for grading or performance assessment on key learning outcomes Early research indicates that engaging students in presenting and reflecting on their work through e-portfolios enhances their learning experience.
At Virginia Tech, students utilize a digital portfolio system to document grades, comments, and assessments through multimedia platforms like Facebook This approach connects classroom learning with external communities, while faculty members employ rubrics to evaluate student achievement across various learning outcomes The assessment results, particularly for Facebook communication, can be easily aggregated for reporting, highlighting best practices in educational assessment.
As e-portfolio use has expanded around the country and, indeed, around the world, several best practices have emerged In particular, e-portfolios should
• be purposeful collections of student work, scaffolded and organized around learning outcomes at progressively more accomplished levels of achievement;
• include multiple types of assignments and modes of demonstrated learning;
Encouraging student self-assessment and reflection is essential for fostering deeper learning By providing intentional opportunities for students to integrate their academic and cocurricular experiences, they can effectively connect their formal education with broader community participation This holistic approach enhances their overall educational journey.
• build direct evidence of an empowered, informed, responsible learner that can be easily shared with employers, graduate programs, family, and colleagues.
E-portfolios are portable and flexible, allowing for cumulative learning and assessment that encompass other high-impact practices associated with deep learning The digital medium
2 The Inter/National Coalition for Electronic Portfolio Research provides multiple examples of campus projects assess- ing the impact of e-portfolios on student learning (See http://ncepr.org.)
The adapted integra- tive learning rubric is utilized to evaluate the final portfolios
– Patrick Green and Ashley Kehoe, Loyola
The University of Chicago's e-portfolio effectively showcases diverse student learning experiences through various formats, such as texts, videos, performances, and graphics from both individual and group projects By encouraging students to compile evidence of their best work, the e-portfolio fosters their ability for self-assessment and reflection on their academic achievements.
While traditional resumes remain prevalent in recruitment and graduate programs, students are increasingly leveraging e-portfolios to enhance their job and educational prospects The digital resume format enables reviewers to access links that showcase students' work, highlighting their skills and competencies Additionally, some institutions establish employer advisory boards that utilize rubrics to evaluate student e-portfolios and offer constructive feedback These external assessments provide valuable insights for both students and faculty regarding employers' perceptions of student performance.
E-portfolios may not be the ultimate solution for integrating student learning, but they stand out as one of the most effective approaches available today They enable direct assessment of student work by both faculty and peers, fostering a collaborative learning environment By utilizing VALUE rubrics, e-portfolios assess the growth and development of student learning outcomes, promoting a common language and shared expectations for academic achievement.
Figure 11 Screen shot from student e-portfolio, followed by performance descriptors from the associated VALUE rubric for integrative learning (highlighted in yellow)
Transfer/Integrated Communication: Assessed at Performance Level 3
Rubrics scoring continued on next page
Connects relevant experience and aca- demic knowledge
This article emphasizes the importance of integrating experiences beyond the traditional classroom setting, such as internships and international travel, to enhance one’s understanding of academic disciplines and to expand personal perspectives.
The article emphasizes the importance of selecting and developing diverse life experiences, such as those from family life, artistic participation, civic involvement, and work experience, to effectively illustrate concepts, theories, and frameworks across various fields of study.
This article explores the interplay between personal life experiences and academic knowledge, highlighting both their differences and similarities while recognizing diverse perspectives It emphasizes the connections between individual experiences and academic texts, identifying themes and ideas that resonate with personal interests.
Sees (makes) con- nections across disciplines, perspec- tives
Independently cre- ates wholes out of multiple parts (synthesizes) or draws conclusions by combining examples, facts, or theories from more than one field of study or perspective.
Independently con- nects examples, facts, or theories from more than one field of study or perspective.
When prompted, connects examples, facts, or theories from more than one field of study or perspective.
When prompted, presents examples, facts, or theories from more than one field of study or perspective. transfer
Adapts and applies skills, abilities, theories, or meth- odologies gained in one situation to new situations
When prompted, presents examples, facts, or theories from more than one field of study or perspective.
Adapts and ap- plies skills, abilities, theories, or meth- odologies gained in one situation to new situations to solve problems or explore issues.
Uses skills, abilities, theories, or method- ologies gained in one situation in a new situation to contrib- ute to understand- ing of problems or issues.
Incorporating skills and methodologies from one context into a new situation is essential for effective communication By selecting appropriate formats, languages, or visual representations, individuals can enhance the clarity and meaning of their assignments This approach emphasizes the interconnectedness of language, thought, and expression, ultimately enriching the overall communication process.
Fulfills the assignment(s) by choosing a format, language or graph (or other visual repre- sentation) to explic- itly connect content and form, demon- strating awareness of purpose and audi- ence.
To effectively complete the assignment, select a format, language, or visual representation that clearly links the content being communicated with the manner in which it is presented.
Fulfills the assignment(s) (i.e., to produce an essay, a poster, a video, a powerpoint presenta- tion, etc.) in an ap- propriate form. reflection and Self assessment
Using Results for Improvement
The implementation of VALUE rubrics aims to provide meaningful evidence of student learning, yet the assessment process is compromised by unused data As institutions adopt these rubrics, they discover effective ways to utilize gathered evidence to enhance various aspects of student learning and campus practices, including curriculum development and program improvement These enhancements often focus on refining the assessment process, modifying rubrics, creating best practice recommendations, and redesigning assignments The following examples illustrate how colleges and universities have successfully collected data, analyzed findings, and pursued evidence-based improvements.
At institutions utilizing rubric-based assessment, faculty have initiated discussions regarding student learning across diverse curriculum areas and co-curricular activities These conversations have led to a valuable opportunity for enhanced faculty development While discussing rubrics, educators are also exploring key topics related to learning outcomes, pedagogy, assessment practices, and overall student learning.
At Daemen College, faculty development sessions centered on the VALUE rubrics for assessment prompted a broader discussion about the significance of the competencies being evaluated and the essence of a competency-based curriculum The aim was to integrate these competencies as a fundamental aspect of undergraduate education Faculty members emphasized the need to communicate the cohesive nature of this curriculum effectively, highlighting that it transcends a mere checklist of requirements Likewise, Carroll Community College employs rubric data in its faculty development initiatives to inform and enhance instructional improvement strategies.
PROgRAM dEVELOPMENT FROM gENERAL EdUCATION TO THE MAJORS
Utilizing rubrics to assess student learning can significantly enhance program development, as demonstrated by Lewis University and Texas A&M University At Lewis University, the implementation of VALUE rubrics for written communication, quantitative literacy, and critical thinking has resulted in notable improvements in student outcomes within the school of business Similarly, Texas A&M University employs VALUE rubrics to facilitate enhancements across various academic departments, where assessment results are disaggregated by major Each department receives detailed reports that compare the performance of its majors against both college-wide and university-wide student achievements, thereby informing continuous improvements in their respective programs.
At the University of Mobile, the implementation of VALUE rubrics provides essential data that initiates a cycle of improvement for the general education program In the fall of 2011, a university assessment committee analyzed these results to enhance educational outcomes.
Our use of the writing rubric and writing portfolio has had a positive impact throughout the institution
Kirk Robinson from Calumet College of Saint Joseph aims for an overall mean score of 3.0 or higher across the five dimensions of the VALUE rubric for oral communication: organization, language, delivery, supporting material, and central message Although all evaluated student work achieved this target, the committee pinpointed language (3.0) and delivery (3.06) as areas needing improvement To address these issues, the committee recommended that faculty emphasize discipline-specific language and enhance delivery components in both first-year orientation and upper-level major courses.
At the University of North Carolina Wilmington, the VALUE rubrics facilitate advanced assessment processes with clearly defined methods for disseminating results Following a thorough review, the Learning Assessment Council provides targeted recommendations aimed at enhancing student learning, which are communicated directly to both the provost and the faculty senate Final reports are shared with faculty via the faculty senate, published on a general education assessment findings website, and utilized to inform workshops organized by the university’s Center for Teaching Excellence.
IMPROVEMENT AT THE COURSE LEVEL
At Midland College, evidence obtained by using the VALUE rubrics to score student work led to the development of a series of specific action steps:
• Systematically analyze sophomore-level courses to determine whether they reflect additional rigor above the freshman level; discuss with faculty how to infuse rubric content into the curriculum.
• Offer professional development training to faculty in the “art” of teaching general edu- cation knowledge and skills.
Professional development training is essential for educators to understand the connection between reading skills and student success across all general education courses It is important to ensure that the reading rubric is effectively integrated into the curriculum, promoting a comprehensive approach to literacy that enhances student learning outcomes.
• Investigate a broader range of core and general education courses, thus ensuring a more diverse group of artifacts to select from.
• Ensure that faculty are familiar with the content and structure of the VALUE rubrics so that assignments can be aligned properly.
• Provide faculty professional development for recording speaking assignments in core courses with the goal of providing ample artifacts for evaluation
The implementation of VALUE rubrics for evaluating reading and writing skills at Midland has highlighted key discrepancies between course objectives and their assessment methods Notably, some departments have more clearly defined learning outcomes than others, with only a few emphasizing internal measurement This analysis has prompted recommendations for enhanced professional development focused on the effective use of assessment tools.
At DePaul University, the implementation of the VALUE rubric for integrative learning in the School for New Learning has significantly enhanced the assessment of capstone projects This process has resulted in the establishment of standardized language and criteria for the Advanced Project (AP) program, fostering shared expectations for self-assessment and reflection among students.
Assessment efforts … help determine if and what instructional strategies are most fruitful
– Anne P Davis and Janet L Ohlemacher,
Carroll Community College have been built into the AP process, and greater consistency in guiding and assessing stu- dent learning has been achieved
IMPROVEMENT IN SPECIFIC OUTCOMES ANd AREAS
Many educational institutions have implemented the VALUE rubrics to enhance direct assessment of specific learning outcomes, particularly within certain curriculum areas or programs A notable example is Texas A&M University, which has initiated projects aimed at improving written communication and intercultural competence This effort is part of the university's reaccreditation process, demonstrating its commitment to fostering essential skills among students.
VALUE rubrics play a crucial role in promoting lifelong and integrative learning, enhancing student access to high-impact experiences At Lewis University, these rubrics have been instrumental in refining the College of Business By analyzing rubric data, the university identified key problem areas and established targeted goals for improvement Specifically, to enhance critical thinking skills, the business faculty has created a comprehensive three-year plan that incorporates fifteen distinct activities aimed at boosting student achievement in this challenging domain.
Implementation of the VALUE rubrics has also helped campuses address targeted outcomes that had been under-assessed or that were not clearly articulated For example,
Loyola University Chicago, Texas A&M University, and Calumet College of Saint Joseph are leveraging the VALUE rubrics for civic engagement, intercultural knowledge, and lifelong learning to enhance student success in fostering personal and social responsibility.
At certain universities, the evaluation of student learning outcomes is integrated with co-curricular activities, fostering student participation in discussions about outcomes-based assessment For instance, at Drake University, the Office of Student staff plays a crucial role in this alignment.
Involvement and Leadership work together with members of the Student Activities Board in using the VALUE rubric for teamwork as a foundation for cocurricular assessment
Drake students use a self-rating instrument as a pre- and post-measurement tool and discuss their progress in relation to the criteria with student life staff Similarly, at Calumet
The College of Saint Joseph utilizes the VALUE rubric for foundations and skills for lifelong learning to engage students in discussions about persistence and retention Additionally, the VALUE rubric for writing is employed to evaluate student work in first-year writing portfolios, playing a crucial role in enhancing student success initiatives.
Beyond a Single Campus
All higher education institutions, regardless of their type, are focused on awarding degrees or certifications; however, there is growing uncertainty among policymakers and employers regarding the true meaning of these degrees in terms of graduate preparedness The Lumina Foundation’s Degree Qualifications Profile (DQP) has emerged as a framework that redefines degree value, shifting the focus from mere credit hours and GPAs to the quality of learning achieved The DQP outlines five essential areas of learning—specific and general knowledge, intellectual abilities, application of learning, and civic learning—establishing suggested attainment levels for associate’s, baccalaureate, and master’s degrees to ensure student success in a global environment.
The VALUE rubrics serve as a valuable tool in the ongoing testing and refinement of the DQP, clearly defining the expected levels of learning for students and faculty By offering a standardized language and reference points, these rubrics enable faculty to compare performance expectations across various courses, programs, and institutions Additionally, they guide students by outlining the learning outcomes they need to achieve as they work toward their degrees or credentials.
The VALUE rubrics were originally created for institutional assessment of learning, but their adoption has revealed that they also offer a common framework for faculty and students to discuss learning and achievement across different institutions A significant insight gained from this, in relation to the DQP framework, is that the VALUE rubrics facilitate a unified method for assessing desired learning outcomes, irrespective of the degree's origin or its specific disciplinary focus.
Several cross-campus consortia have used the VALUE rubrics to examine student learning on their respective campuses Through a grant from the Institute of Museum and Library
The American Council of Research Libraries, a consortium of ten institutions, utilizes a modified version of the VALUE rubric for information literacy to promote professional development, improve student learning, support faculty development activities, and enhance assessment and accountability.
Through the Rubric Assessment of Information Literacy Skills (RAILS) project, these ten institutions joined together from July 2010 to June 2013 to investigate the potential
1 Lumina Foundation for Education, Degree Qualifications Profile (Indianapolis, IN: Lumina Foundation for Education,
The RAILS project implemented a rubric-based approach to assess information literacy in higher education, utilizing the VALUE rubric as a foundational tool Participating institutions contributed modified versions of the rubric on the project's website, fostering collaboration Lead librarians collected one hundred student artifacts for evaluation and organized calibration sessions with faculty members to ensure consistent scoring The project produced customizable resources that highlight the value of academic libraries, enhance accountability, strengthen instructional programs, and ultimately improve student learning outcomes in partnership with faculty.
A three-year project funded by the Fund for the Improvement of Post-Secondary Education and coordinated by La Guardia Community College is developing models for using rubrics alongside e-portfolios across a network of twenty-two colleges and universities Titled “Connect to Learning: ePortfolio, Engagement, and Student Success,” the initiative emphasizes reflective pedagogy and aims to correlate rubric-based assessments with student success metrics, including retention rates The VALUE rubric for integrative learning is utilized by participating institutions to enhance the integration of student learning across various educational contexts Additionally, the adoption of VALUE rubrics addresses the challenge of student transfer by establishing consistent performance expectations, facilitating smoother transitions between institutions The South Metropolitan Higher Education Consortium in Chicago, comprising twelve diverse campuses, has implemented a common writing assignment to promote shared standards and improve student success in cross-campus coursework.
To enhance the understanding of student performance across institutions, it is essential to contextualize assessment results within broader frameworks The AAC&U has initiated collaboration between the e-portfolio and learning management system communities to develop a repository of findings from nationwide VALUE rubric assessments If funding is secured, this initiative will lead to the establishment of the Collaborative for Authentic Assessment and Learning, which aims to create national benchmarks for student learning Furthermore, aggregating results from institutions utilizing VALUE rubrics will offer a comprehensive overview of learning trends, enabling any institution or state to effectively benchmark their local student achievement.
2 For more information about the Collaborative for Authentic Assessment and Learning, see www.aacu.org/caal. performance with relevant peer groups
Two statewide initiatives are currently assessing student work using selected VALUE rubrics: one in Massachusetts targeting public institutions, and another in Minnesota encompassing both public and private institutions Additionally, several other states are planning to adopt VALUE rubrics as a common standard for evaluating student achievement and faculty assessment through a collaborative multi-state effort.
The ongoing evolution of the VALUE rubrics will be shaped by the rising trend in higher education towards authentic assessment methods linked to the LEAP Essential Learning Outcomes This movement has reinforced the VALUE project's comprehensive assessment strategy, which relies on faculty judgment and collective standards for evaluating student achievement and competence.
After reading the article provided, write two paragraphs In your first paragraph, discuss the author’s argument
What evidence does the author provide to support his argument? What position is he responding to? Cite examples from the text to support your answer.
The author's strongest claim is that effective communication is essential for fostering collaboration in the workplace This assertion is compelling because it highlights how clear dialogue can lead to improved teamwork and productivity For instance, the article illustrates this by citing a case where a lack of communication resulted in project delays and misunderstandings among team members By emphasizing the pivotal role of communication in achieving common goals, the author effectively underscores its importance in creating a cohesive work environment.
After you have written your paragraphs, proofread and make appropriate revisions.
This assignment is to be completed for both of the following readings:
1 “What You Eat is Your Business” by Radley Balko
2 “We, the Public, Place the Best Athletes on Pedestals” by William Moller
Following are the agreed criteria for the assignment:
■ Students may not discuss their essays
■ Students may discuss the assignment.
■ Students are to be given one week to complete each assignment (out of class).
■ Students should revise their essays on their own within the one-week timeframe.
Source: South Metropolitan Higher Education Consortium
Terrel L Rhodes serves as the vice president for the Office of Quality, Curriculum, and Assessment at the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U), where he co-directs the annual AAC&U General Education and Assessment Institute and the Integrative Learning and the Departments Institute He earned a PhD in political science from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and has 25 years of experience as a faculty member prior to his national higher education role Ashley Finley is the senior director of assessment and research at AAC&U and serves as the national evaluator for the Bringing Theory to Practice project She holds a PhD in sociology from the University of Iowa and previously worked as an assistant professor of sociology at Dickinson College.