Program Learning Outcomes Design Rubric (Note: External review may be used to judge content)
Criterion
Observable and
Measurable*
Developed (3)
Emerging (2)
All primary and secondary outcomes are
clearly observable and measurable (e.g.
use action verbs aligned with the modified Most primary and most secondary
version of Bloom's taxonomy [Anderson
outcomes are observable and
and Krathwohl, 2001]).
measureable.
Initial (1)
Most outcomes are not measureable or
observable (e.g. use language such as know,
be aware, appreciate, learn, understand,
comprehend or become familiar ).
The list of outcomes appears complete,
organized and most of the outcomes
indicate how students can demonstrate
their learning. .
The list of outcomes appears incomplete,
overly detailed, disorganized and/or confuses
learning processes with outcomes (e.g.
completing a course rather than
demonstrating learning).
All outcomes are written in language
Comprehension suitable for the level of the students (e.g.
avoid technical jargon where possible,
understandable by non-experts).
Most outcomes are written in language
suitable for the level of the students.
Most outcomes are not written in language
suitable for the level of the students (e.g. BS
outcomes written in a way that would not be
understandable by a novice).
Commonalities and differences in learning
outcomes between different programs
Degree Specificity within various degree levels are explicit
and clear (e.g. two BS degrees in the same
discipline have significantly different
outcomes).
Commonalities and differences in
learning outcomes between different
programs within various degree levels
can be inferred by a non-specialist in the
field.
Commonalities and differences in learning
outcomes between different programs within
various degree levels are not clear (e.g. two
different BS degrees in the same discipline
have nearly identical outcomes).
Distinctions between undergraduate and
graduate expectations can be discerned.
Learning outcomes appear to vary in
scope and by cognitive level by degree.
There are few distinctions between
undergraduate and graduate expectations. It is
not clear that learning outcomes vary in scope
and by cognitive level by degree.
Each outcome clearly describes how
Student Centered* students can demonstrate their learning
(e.g. Graduate students can make original
contributions to their discipline).
Degree
Differentiation
There are clear distinctions between
undergraduate and graduate expectations.
Learning outcomes clearly vary in scope
and by cognitive level by degree. National
disciplinary standards are referenced
where applicable.
Alignment
Supporting learning outcomes are clearly
aligned with and support program
outcomes.
Institutional
Outcomes
* Must score 3
Connections between learning goals and
University and College goals are explicit.
Must score 15/21 to pass rubric
Supporting learning outcomes appear to
be aligned with and support program
outcomes. Underlying outcomes are
sufficiently specific that they can be
connected to the program outcome
measured.
Connections between learning goals and
University and College goals are easily
inferred.
Supporting learning outcomes do not appear
to be aligned with or support program
outcomes. Underlying outcomes are overly
specific (e.g. correctly answer 5 questions on
an exam) or overly vague.
Connections between learning goals and
University and College goals are not easily
inferred.
Total Score
Score