Eberly Center

The program has a syllabus for every course (minimally, for the required courses of the degree program) that includes student learning objectives that correspond to each course. The objectives should be specific, demonstrable (measurable), and learner-centered.

Examples of effectively articulated course learning objectives are available. Why these outcomes should be transparent to students and how they support learning are explained.

The program has a list of student learning outcomes for the degree program. 

Generally, programs have about three to seven outcomes that articulate what graduates should be able to do or know as a result of their experiences in the program.  Like course objectives, program-level outcomes should be transparent to students, as well as being specific, demonstrable (measurable), and learner-centered.

Strategic plans at the university-, college-, department-, or program-levels; external requirements (e.g., discipline-specific accreditation criteria); and survey and other data (e.g., alumni or employer surveys, alumni employability metrics, peer or aspirational program comparisons) often inform the development of program-level outcomes.

Samples of effectively articulated program learning outcomes are available. 

CONTACT US to get support from an Eberly colleague to develop your program outcomes.

The program has a curriculum map (in matrix format) of course learning objectives to program learning outcomes.

For faculty, the process of curriculum mapping facilitates understanding of how courses are sequenced and “fit” together and shifts the focus from “my course” to “our degree program.” Mapping also supports curriculum revision, as the activity often reveals curricular strengths, gaps, necessary and unnecessary overlaps, and needs (e.g., Do students have enough practice to achieve an outcome?).

For students, curriculum maps facilitate understanding of how (1) each course is intended to contribute to specific knowledge or skills of the program; (2) elective courses could be strategically selected to further strengthen knowledge or skills or to explore new areas of interest; and (3) identify specific work products that could be included in their portfolios or résumés.

For academic advisors, curriculum maps help to (1) focus discussion on students’ academic and professional goals and identify intersections of those goals with the curriculum; (2) identify opportunities for additional majors or minors that can be achieved without undue overload; and (3) determine where and how transfer credit might support students’ and curricular goals.

For deans, department or program heads, curriculum maps may (1) inform resource allocation (fiscal, human, technological, space); (2) identify potential growth or specialization areas; and (3) support Presidential Advisory Board, discipline-specific accreditation, or other reporting. 

A blank mapping tool and sample maps and instructions to complete the tool are available.

CONTACT US to get support from an Eberly colleague to facilitate your curriculum mapping process.

The program’s curriculum mapping (from Level 3) guides assessment and iterative improvement of teaching and learning.

The curriculum mapping process can make assessment more efficient when it is used to identify course assessments (also known as embedded assessments) that can be used to assess one or more program-level outcomes. These assessments are direct measures of student performance (e.g., papers, projects, exam questions, performances, presentations, artistic work products, capstones). The process can also identify where indirect measures (e.g., student, alumni, and employer surveys or focus groups, university surveys) could be used to assess one or more outcomes.

Program faculty typically gather to review and discuss the program’s curriculum map (created in Level 3). This meeting can be one to several hours in duration, and they can be the topic for a half-day or full-day retreat.  

A sample agenda and facilitation guide are available. 

CONTACT US to get support from an Eberly colleague to facilitate your curriculum mapping and assessment meeting. 

 Best practices in program-level assessment and iterative improvement

• Faculty-led: Assessment processes are led by faculty committed to enhancing teaching and learning. Faculty commitment to these processes is paramount to their success.
• Supported and resourced: Deans, Department and Program Heads enable these processes by embedding them into university-, college-, or department-level practices, by tracking and celebrating improvements, and by providing resources to conduct them. 
• Various points and measures: Assessment is done at various points in the program (early, late) using a variety of direct and indirect measures.
• Same rubrics for same outcomes: Faculty agree on and use the same rubrics or criteria to assess the same outcomes.
• Ongoing: Faculty engage in an ongoing cycle of assessment—using assessment results to develop strategies to improve teaching and learning, and assessing these strategies, once implemented, to determine their effectiveness.
• Transparent and connected: Curriculum maps are made public to students. Faculty make several explicit connections between course and program outcomes in their courses and explain how their courses will help students to apply their knowledge and skills.