Certificate Program Assessment

Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) describe the knowledge, skills, competencies, and behaviors students are expected to demonstrate as a result of completing the certificate.

Because certificate programs are typically shorter and more focused than degree programs, SLOs should identify the most significant learning expected across the credential rather than attempt to represent every course, topic, or learning objective included in the curriculum.

Certificate curricula may also provide students with multiple course options or pathways for completing the credential. In these cases, assessment should focus on learning that is common to the certificate as a whole and should use methods that allow students to demonstrate achievement regardless of the specific combination of courses completed.

SLOs guide curriculum, instruction, and assessment by making expected student learning explicit. Faculty review and interpret assessment results to determine whether students are achieving the intended outcomes and to identify curricular, instructional, or other improvements when warranted.

Each certificate Student Learning Outcome (SLO) is mapped to the learning component of FIU’s Institutional Learning and Administrative Outcomes (ILAO) Framework using the most relevant domain and competency.

The Institutional Learning Outcome domains are:

• Cognitive & Analytical
• Communication & Interpersonal Skills
• Innovation & Professional Practice
• Civic & Ethical Citizenship
• Digital & Technological

Within these domains, certificate SLOs are mapped to the competency that best reflects the knowledge, skills, abilities, or behaviors students are expected to demonstrate upon completion of the certificate. SLOs are also identified, as applicable, with Community Engagement, Leadership for Public Purpose, and Sustainability indicators to support institutional data collection for the Carnegie elective classifications pursued by FIU.

Assessment of Learning Outcomes

SLOs should be assessed using methods that are clearly aligned with the learning described in the outcome.

At least one direct measure of student learning is required for every SLO.

Direct measures provide observable evidence of what students know or can demonstrate. Depending on the certificate, examples may include:

• portfolios;
• projects or applied assignments;
• papers or research products;
• presentations;
• performances or creative works;
• clinical or professional demonstrations;
• capstone experiences;
• examinations or quizzes; or
• other student work evaluated using established criteria.

Portfolios may be particularly appropriate for certificate programs with flexible curricula or multiple course options because they allow programs to assess evidence of learning accumulated across different course pathways.

When portfolios are used for program-level assessment, the contents should be evaluated using common criteria or a rubric aligned with the certificate SLOs so that student learning can be assessed consistently across students.

Each assessment method should include a clearly defined criterion for success identifying the expected level of student achievement.

Assessment methods, criteria, and sampling strategies should provide sufficient and appropriate evidence to support interpretation of student learning and improvement decisions.

Learning Expectations and Certificate Level

Certificate learning expectations should be appropriate to the academic level, purpose, scope, and curriculum of the credential.

Because certificates are generally shorter and more focused than degree programs, they are not expected to demonstrate the same breadth of learning as a full undergraduate or graduate degree. They should, however, demonstrate learning appropriate to the level of the coursework and the specialized purpose of the certificate.

FIU follows Florida's Statewide Course Numbering System (SCNS), which identifies the academic level of courses. Course numbering provides an important indicator of the depth and complexity of learning represented within a certificate.

• 1000–2999 courses: lower-division undergraduate coursework
• 3000–4999 courses: upper-division undergraduate coursework
• 5000–5999 courses: beginning graduate-level coursework
• 6000–6999 courses: advanced graduate-level coursework
• 7000–7999 courses: doctoral-level coursework

Undergraduate Certificates

Undergraduate certificate SLOs should reflect the level of the coursework comprising the certificate.

Certificates composed primarily of upper-division coursework should require greater depth, specialization, application, and disciplinary complexity than certificates composed primarily of introductory or lower-division coursework.

Graduate Certificates

Graduate certificate SLOs should reflect advanced disciplinary or professional learning beyond the undergraduate level.

Depending on the curriculum, graduate certificate learning may emphasize greater depth, specialization, integration, independence, advanced application, research, professional practice, or other discipline-specific competencies.

Certificates With Multiple Course Options

Some certificate programs allow students to select from a broad range of courses rather than requiring a single common sequence.

In these cases, assessment should focus on learning that all certificate completers are expected to demonstrate, regardless of the particular courses selected.

Programs may:

• identify common assessment points across multiple eligible courses;
• collect comparable artifacts from different course pathways;
• use a portfolio containing evidence from multiple courses;
• use a common culminating project or experience; or
• identify another common assessment method that provides direct evidence of certificate-level learning.

The assessment method should provide comparable evidence of the certificate SLOs even when students complete different combinations of courses.

Program Outcomes (POs) assess meaningful aspects of certificate effectiveness that are distinct from students' direct demonstration of learning.

Each certificate Program Outcome (PO) is mapped to the Program and Administrative Outcomes component of FIU’s ILAO Framework using the most relevant domain and outcome area.

The Program and Administrative Outcome domains are:

• Assessment, Planning & Continuous Improvement
• Student Success & Learning Environment
• Workforce & Career Readiness
• Organizational Sustainability & Resource Management
• Human Capital & Workplace Environment
• External Partnerships & Public Impact

POs are also aligned, as applicable, with the FIU Strategic Plan. In addition, POs are identified with Community Engagement, Leadership for Public Purpose, and Sustainability indicators, as applicable, to support institutional data collection for the Carnegie elective classifications pursued by FIU.

Assessment of Program Outcomes

POs may address areas such as:

• enrollment and participation;
• certificate completion;
• time to completion;
• student or completer satisfaction;
• perceived preparation;
• continued education or professional development;
• career relevance or professional advancement, when applicable;
• curriculum or certificate quality;
• advising or student support; or
• other indicators of certificate effectiveness.

When directly relevant to the purpose of the certificate, a PO may also address licensure, professional certification, or another external credential.

POs may include indirect or aggregate indicators related to student learning, such as surveys of students' perceptions of their learning, preparation, or educational experience.

Programs should select POs that provide useful information for evaluating and improving the certificate.

To demonstrate that the rigor and quality of each educational program are consistent regardless of modality, location, or other differentiating factors, FIU assesses student learning and program effectiveness across the methods of delivery (e.g., online, hybrid) and instructional locations (e.g., downtown, FIU I-75) through which certificate programs are offered. 

As aggregate results alone may conceal meaningful differences among these groups, disaggregating assessment results by program location and method of delivery enables faculty to determine whether students are achieving the same program learning outcomes across face-to-face, online, hybrid, main-campus, and off-campus offerings. When differences are identified, faculty can evaluate their causes and determine whether targeted curricular, instructional, technological, staffing, or student-support improvements are appropriate. 

Disaggregation does not require programs to establish different learning outcomes for each location or modality. Rather, it provides evidence that common program expectations are being met consistently wherever and however the program is delivered. When subgroup sizes are too small to support a reliable or privacy-protective comparison, the program may document the limitation and combine data across appropriate assessment cycles, with the approval of the Institutional Effectiveness team. 

When separate reporting is required, programs assess the applicable Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) and Program Outcomes (POs) for that method of delivery or instructional location. The same degree program should maintain the same or equivalent program-level learning expectations regardless of method of delivery or instructional location, while the assessment results provide evidence of achievement for the students represented in each report. Assessment methods should also be the same or equivalent, when appropriate, so that achievement of the program's outcomes can be meaningfully evaluated across the ways in which the degree is delivered. Programs should review results across applicable methods of delivery and instructional locations to identify meaningful differences in student learning or program effectiveness and determine whether targeted improvement strategies are warranted. 

Separate assessment reporting may therefore apply to:

• Face-to-Face
• Online
• Online LIVE
• Hybrid
• Off-Campus instructional locations, including locations such as FIU at I-75 and Downtown at Brickell
• Offshore programs

Representative Assessment Evidence

When assessment evidence is drawn from selected courses, sections, students, participants, or artifacts, programs should ensure that the sample appropriately represents the populations, methods of delivery, and instructional locations included within the scope of the assessment.

For certificates that admit both degree-seeking and non-degree-seeking students, the assessment design should provide appropriate evidence of the students served by the certificate. Programs should document the population included and how assessment evidence or samples were selected.

For certificates with multiple course options, representative assessment may require collecting comparable evidence across different course pathways rather than relying on a single course that not all certificate students complete.

For certificate programs that do not meet the threshold for separate reporting by method of delivery or instructional location, assessment evidence should still appropriately represent applicable populations when those students are included in the certificate.

Programs using sampling should consult FIU's Sampling Guidelines for Assessment for guidance on selecting, documenting, and interpreting samples.

Certificate programs required to follow the academic assessment cycle and maintain a separate assessment report must provide systematic evidence of both student learning and certificate effectiveness.

Direct and Indirect Measures

SLOs must include direct evidence of student learning.

Indirect measures, such as surveys, interviews, focus groups, and self-assessments, are incorporated into Program Outcomes when they assess students' perceptions, experiences, preparation, satisfaction, or other indicators of certificate effectiveness.

Indirect measures do not substitute for direct assessment of an SLO.

Each measure must include a clearly defined criterion for success indicating the expected level of student achievement, performance, or benchmark.

Use of Results and Follow-Up

For both SLOs and POs, faculty and program leaders are expected to:

• analyze assessment results in relation to established criteria for success;
• identify strengths and opportunities for improvement;
• document improvement strategies informed by the findings; and
• follow up on prior strategies to document implementation and, when appropriate, evaluate their effectiveness.