What’s With These Rubrics? 6: Linking CLOs to Assignments

Implementing ILO-PLO-CLO Assessment in Your Courses

By Monica Sanford

Navigation:

  1. Why Does This Matter?
  2. Learning Outcomes
  3. UWest’s Institutional Learning Outcomes
  4. Rubrics
  5. Creating Course Learning Outcome Rubrics
  6. Linking CLOs to Assignments ← YOU ARE HERE
  7. Recording CLO Rubrics in Taskstream
  8. Conclusion

Linking CLOs to Assignments

The final two columns of the CLO template are “Assessment Methods” and “Target Outcome.”  Assessment methods pertains to both class assignments and other measures, such as participation and observation of student behavior.  Assignments, tests, papers, presentation slides, video or audio recordings, or anything that can be ‘handed in’ are considered direct measures.  Indirect measures are things that can’t be easily recorded like participation, observation of student behavior, discussion, or unrecorded oral presentations.  In either case (direct or indirect) assessment methods are referred to as “artifacts” in the TaskStream software system (discussed next).  A single CLO may have multiple assessment methods.  For example, a class with two papers, three quizzes, and an exam may use all to assess the student’s knowledge of the subject matter.  Likewise, a single assignment may be used to assess multiple CLOs.  For example, a paper may be used to assess the student’s knowledge, critical thinking skills, and written communication skills.  A class presentation may assess knowledge, critical thinking skills, relationship skills (in answering questions or responding to feedback), and oral communication skills.  Some CLOs will be assessed with methods other than assignments, such as attendance, participation in classroom discussions, honesty (not cheating), and general observations of student behavior.

UWest recommends that professors designate two or three major assignments as their “assessment methods” along with the catchall ‘observation.’  This is because students will need to upload these assignments into the new TaskStream assessment software (see 7. Recording CLO Rubrics in Taskstream).  Once students upload these “artifacts,” professors will log in to “evaluate” them by scoring them according to there CLO rubrics.  UWest will offer tutorials and training so faculty know exactly how to do this.

The target outcome for each CLO is the standard by which a professor measures success.  It is important to remember this is not a grade.  It is also NOT A MEAN.  Due to the qualitative nature of assessment, the target outcome, for example, cannot be that students average a score of 3.5 on a scale of 1 to 5.  Rather, the target outcome should be what percentage of students achieves a 3 or higher.  For example, a target outcome could be that 80% of students achieve a 3 or better.  This may change for each CLO.  For example, in ethics, no student is ever expected to cheat (this is measured on a scale of 1 or 5 with no intermediary numbers), so the target outcome is that 100% of students achieve 5.  In the long run, this outcome may be difficult, if not impossible to achieve at a course, program, or institutional level since some students do inevitably cheat.  However, the goal remains that no student will do so.

 

Assessment Method & Target Outcome, the last two columns of the CLO Rubric

University of the West has issued the following guidance for the use of student work in assessment via a Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Assessment Theory, Practice, and Implementation at UWest.  This memo was formally adopted by the University Wide Assessment Committee meeting on November 7, 2011, and signed by the Dean of Academic Affairs, Dean of Administration, Assistant Dean of Academic Assessment, and President of the Faculty Senate.  It sets forth what faculty are assessing, how they are assessing it, what their responsibilities are, what student responsibilities are, and what theoretical models underpin this methodology (i.e. Bloom’s Taxonomy & Nichols Institutional Effectiveness Model).

The memo states the following:

  1. What are faculty assessing? A desired learning outcome as evidenced by an assessment artifact (i.e. student work) or by student participation
    • Direct measures- Course assignments, papers, performance pieces, oral presentations, exams, portfolios, capstone projects, & class projects.
    • Indirect measures- Student behavior, class participation, etc.
  2. Faculty will complete an assessment of the artifact (i.e. student work) as prescribed by the Course Learning Outcomes (CLO) and their rubrics. Faculty will ensure that Course Learning Outcomes (CLO) and assessment artifact (i.e. student work) are included in their syllabi.
  3. Bloom’s taxonomy will be adopted for Course Learning Outcome (CLO) language. Meaningful progression of Bloom’s taxonomy needs to be incorporated in Course Learning Outcomes (CLO.)
  4. The same assessment artifact (i.e. student work) can be linked to more than ONE Course Learning Outcome. NOTE: The capacity of artifact storage, in the Taskstream® system, is limited to SIX per course by design. This would entail reworking the wording (of what is asked of students) for the SIX assessment artifacts (i.e. student work) in order to elicit the data needed to complete the CLO rubrics linked to that assessment artifact.
  5. MULTIPLE assignment artifacts (i.e. student work) can also be linked to ONE Course Learning Outcome (at the discretion of the faculty member.) NOTE: It is highly recommended that only ONE assessment artifact (i.e. student work) be assigned to ONE Course Learning Outcome (CLO) per course.
  6. Faculty will directly link individual assessment artifact (i.e. student work), as individual assessment artifact, with Course Learning Outcomes.
  7. Student assessment artifact (i.e. student work) will be scored according to the Course Learning Outcome (CLO) rubric. A third party receiving the same assessment artifact (i.e. student work) and applying the same rubric should be able to arrive at a similar score.
  8. Students will directly upload their assessment artifact (i.e. student work) onto the Taskstream® software system. This process must be outlined in the syllabus distributed to students. Faculty will log into the system and assess the artifacts. A summary report will be generated at the end of the semester.
  9. Course Learning Outcomes assessment need to be manageable, meaningful, and measurable. Faculty can use the “What’s up with these rubrics” [which you are reading now] guide to help create their Course Learning Outcomes (CLO.) It can be accessed via the UWest faculty & professional development website at www.uwest.edu under the “Faculty and Staff” tab.
  10. Nichols Institutional Effectiveness model will be adopted (and implemented) to model our assessment cycle and for the use of our assessment outcome results.

Furthermore, professors are encouraged to create grading rubrics for individual assignments so students can have a better understanding of what is expected.  However, these rubrics are for the instructor’s personal use in that class only.  They do relate directly to grading.  CLO rubrics and assessments are mandatory and will be recorded as part of the Taskstream software system.  Individual assignment rubrics will not be part of Taskstream and are not mandatory.

5. Creating Course Learning Outcome Rubrics ← Last Section ¦ Next Section → 7. Recording CLO Rubrics in Taskstream