Close
Close
Search this website

Stage 2: Develop an Assessment Strategy

An effective assessment strategy establishes a clear plan for determining whether an outcome has been achieved. It identifies:

  • WHAT evidence will be collected
  • WHO or what will be assessed
  • WHEN assessment will occur
  • WHERE evidence will be collected, when applicable
  • HOW evidence will be evaluated or analyzed
  • WHAT level of performance will indicate success

The assessment strategy should align directly with the outcome established in Stage 1 and generate meaningful evidence that can be used to understand performance and guide improvement.

Regardless of the type of outcome, an assessment strategy should:

  • Use a measure that directly or appropriately addresses the outcome
  • Identify the population being assessed
  • Explain how evidence will be collected and evaluated
  • Establish measurable criteria for success before results are analyzed
  • Use the entire population or a representative sample, when appropriate
  • Produce evidence that can support interpretation and improvement

A complete assessment strategy demonstrates alignment among:

Outcome → Assessment Method → Evidence → Minimum Criteria for Success

Major Steps

Developing an assessment strategy involves the following major steps:

  1. Identify the appropriate type of measure
  2. Develop the assessment method
  3. Describe how the assessment will be conducted
  4. Determine who or what will be included
  5. Establish minimum criteria for success
  6. Check the alignment of the assessment strategy

After selecting an appropriate measure, explain how the assessment will be implemented.

The method should address, as applicable:

  • The assignment, instrument, data source, or activity that will provide the evidence
  • The population being assessed
  • Who will collect or provide the evidence
  • Who will evaluate or analyze the evidence
  • The rubric, scoring guide, scale, benchmark, or analytical approach that will be used
  • When and how frequently assessment will occur
  • The course, activity, program, service, or setting in which assessment will occur
  • Relevant instructional modalities or locations

The strongest assessment methods identify the evidence, population, setting, timing, and evaluation process.

Determine Who or What Will Be Included

Assessment should provide meaningful evidence about the population to which the outcome applies.

Whenever practical and appropriate, the entire population may be included. Examples include:

  • All students completing a capstone course
  • All graduating students
  • All students enrolled in selected courses
  • All transactions processed during a reporting period
  • All available institutional records for the population being assessed

When reviewing the entire population is not necessary or practical, a representative sample may be used.

Sampling as a Best Practice

Sampling allows programs and units to examine a manageable amount of evidence while maintaining a systematic and credible assessment process.

A well-designed sample can:

  • Allow for more in-depth evaluation of individual artifacts or records
  • Support consistent application of rubrics or evaluation criteria
  • Reduce unnecessary assessment workload
  • Provide sufficient evidence to identify patterns in performance
  • Make assessment sustainable across repeated assessment cycles

The purpose of sampling is not simply to assess fewer cases. The goal is to select enough evidence, using an appropriate process, to support meaningful conclusions about the population being assessed.

Samples should therefore be purposefully designed and justified rather than selected solely for convenience.

When a sample is used, the assessment method should identify:

  • The population from which the sample is drawn
  • The number or proportion included in the sample
  • The method used to select the sample
  • Why the sample is appropriate for the assessment
  • Relevant courses, sections, modalities, locations, or other groups that should be represented

Appropriate approaches may include random sampling, stratified sampling, systematic sampling, or another representative selection method.

Programs should avoid selecting only the easiest, most accessible, or strongest examples of performance because this may produce evidence that does not adequately represent the population.

Sampling and Student Learning

Using a sample to assess a Student Learning Outcome does not change the expectation for student achievement.

Student Learning Outcomes describe what all students for whom the outcome is intended are expected to achieve. Sampling determines which student artifacts are examined for program-level assessment.

For example, a program may expect all graduating students to demonstrate effective written communication while faculty evaluate a representative sample of graduating students' work to determine how well the program is supporting achievement of that outcome.

Sampling Example

Poor:
A sample of student papers will be assessed.

Better:
Twenty research papers from graduating students will be assessed.

Best:
A randomly selected sample of 20 research papers from students completing the senior capstone course will be assessed each spring. The sample will be drawn from all capstone sections offered during the assessment period and will include applicable instructional modalities to provide representative evidence of student performance.

  • Student Learning Outcomes

    Student Learning Outcomes describe what students are expected to know or be able to do as a result of their educational experience. They should be assessed primarily through direct measures of student learning.

    Appropriate Measures

    Direct measures require students to demonstrate the knowledge, skills, or abilities identified in the outcome.

    Examples include:

    • Exams or embedded exam questions
    • Written assignments or research papers
    • Projects
    • Portfolios
    • Oral presentations
    • Performances or demonstrations
    • Case studies or simulations
    • Capstone projects
    • Theses or dissertations
    • Clinical or field-based evaluations
    • Licensure or certification examinations

    The measure should directly elicit the learning identified in the outcome. For example, an outcome focused on written communication should include student writing, while an outcome focused on oral communication should require students to demonstrate their skills through an oral presentation or similar activity.

    Indirect measures, such as satisfaction surveys or student self-assessments, should not be used as the primary evidence for Student Learning Outcomes because they do not directly demonstrate what students know or are able to do.

    Assessment Method

    The assessment method should identify:

    • The assignment, exam, project, or other activity that will provide the evidence
    • The students who will be assessed
    • The course, program, or setting in which assessment will occur
    • When and how frequently assessment will occur
    • The rubric, scoring guide, or other evaluation method that will be used
    • Who will evaluate the evidence
    • The performance level that will indicate success

    Example

    Poor:
    Student papers will be assessed.

    Better:
    Research papers completed by graduating students will be assessed using a faculty-developed rubric.

    Best:
    Research papers completed by students in the senior capstone course will be evaluated each spring using a common faculty-developed rubric measuring argument development, use of evidence, organization, and disciplinary writing conventions.

    Minimum Criteria for Success

    For Student Learning Outcomes, the expectation is that all students for whom the outcome is intended will achieve the outcome.

    The Minimum Criteria for Success establish the program-level benchmark used to evaluate the extent to which that expectation is being achieved. The criterion should generally identify:

    1. The level of performance expected of an individual student
    2. The proportion of assessed students expected to demonstrate that level of performance

    Poor:
    Students will perform well on the rubric.

    Better:
    Students will earn a score of 3 or higher on the rubric.

    Best:
    At least 80% of assessed students will earn a score of 3 or higher on a 4-point rubric measuring the identified Student Learning Outcome.

    A benchmark such as 80% does not mean that achievement is expected of only 80% of students. The learning outcome remains an expectation for all students. The benchmark establishes the minimum program-level standard for evaluating current performance and determining whether further analysis or improvement is warranted.

  • Program Outcomes

    rogram Outcomes describe broader results associated with an academic program. They may address student progression, completion, satisfaction, professional preparation, enrollment, or overall program effectiveness.

    Program Outcomes may be assessed using indirect measures, program performance measures, or a combination of evidence types, depending on the outcome.

    Appropriate Measures

    Indirect Measures

    Indirect measures capture perceptions, experiences, satisfaction, attitudes, or self-reported preparation.

    Examples include:

    • Student satisfaction surveys
    • Exit surveys
    • Alumni surveys
    • Employer surveys
    • Interviews
    • Focus groups
    • Student self-assessments
    • Stakeholder feedback

    These measures are appropriate when the outcome focuses on student experience, perceived preparation, satisfaction, or stakeholder perspectives.

    Program Performance Measures

    Program performance measures use institutional, program, or external data to examine the overall effectiveness of an academic program.

    Examples include:

    • Graduation rates
    • Retention or persistence rates
    • Time to degree
    • Excess hours
    • Enrollment or recruitment data
    • Employment or placement rates
    • Graduate or professional school placement
    • Licensure or certification rates
    • Internship or experiential-learning participation
    • Advising or service utilization
    • Student participation rates
    • Faculty qualifications or development
    • Institutional databases and records

    These measures are appropriate for outcomes focused on student progression, completion, professional preparation, enrollment, or overall program effectiveness.

    Assessment Method

    The assessment method should identify:

    • The program outcome being assessed
    • The survey, interview, institutional data source, or other measure used
    • The population being assessed
    • Who will collect or provide the evidence
    • When and how frequently assessment will occur
    • How the evidence will be analyzed
    • The performance level that will indicate success

    Example

    Poor:
    Students will be satisfied with advising.

    Better:
    Students will report satisfaction with advising.

    Best:
    At least 85% of graduating students responding to the program exit survey will indicate that they are satisfied or very satisfied with academic advising.

    Minimum Criteria for Success

    The criterion should establish a measurable standard that is appropriate for the type of program outcome being assessed.

    Example:
    At least 85% of graduating students responding to the program exit survey will indicate that they are satisfied or very satisfied with academic advising.

  • General Education Outcomes

    General Education Outcomes describe the knowledge, skills, or abilities students are expected to develop through the general education curriculum. Like Student Learning Outcomes, they should be assessed using direct evidence of student learning.

    Appropriate Measures

    Examples include:

    • Embedded exam questions
    • Common assignments
    • Written papers
    • Oral presentations
    • Projects
    • Portfolios
    • Performances
    • Demonstrations
    • Case studies
    • Capstone or integrative assignments

    The measure should directly demonstrate the General Education Outcome. For example, a quantitative reasoning outcome should be assessed through a task requiring students to interpret, analyze, or apply quantitative information.

    Assessment Method

    The assessment method should identify:

    • The General Education Outcome being assessed
    • The courses or activities in which evidence will be collected
    • The assignment, exam question, project, or other direct measure used
    • The students or student work included
    • The instructional modalities and locations represented
    • When assessment will occur
    • How evidence will be evaluated
    • The performance level that will indicate success

    Because General Education Outcomes may be addressed across multiple courses, sections, modalities, and locations, the assessment plan should explain how evidence will be collected across the appropriate instructional contexts.

    Minimum Criteria for Success

    The criteria should identify both the expected level of student performance and the proportion of assessed students expected to meet that level.

    Example:
    At least 75% of assessed students across the selected general education courses will earn a score of 3 or higher on a 4-point rubric measuring quantitative reasoning.

  • Administrative Outcomes

    Administrative Outcomes describe the intended results of a service, process, initiative, or operation. They may address effectiveness, efficiency, quality, compliance, participation, or impact.

    Administrative Outcomes should be assessed using administrative and operational measures that directly address the intended result.

    Appropriate Measures

    Examples include:

    • Service utilization
    • Processing or response times
    • Completion or resolution rates
    • Customer or stakeholder satisfaction
    • Operational records
    • Tracking logs
    • Error rates
    • Compliance rates
    • Participation rates
    • Financial or resource data
    • Productivity or efficiency measures
    • Institutional databases and records

    The measure should directly address the intended result. For example, an outcome focused on improving processing efficiency should use evidence such as processing time, turnaround time, or another measure of efficiency rather than simply reporting the number of transactions completed.

    Assessment Method

    The assessment method should identify:

    • The administrative outcome being assessed
    • The service, process, initiative, or operation being evaluated
    • The data source or operational measure used
    • The population or activity included
    • When and where assessment will occur
    • Who will collect and analyze the evidence
    • The method used to evaluate performance
    • The performance level that will indicate success

    Example

    Poor:
    Requests will be processed efficiently.

    Better:
    The average processing time for requests will decrease.

    Best:
    At least 90% of requests will be processed within five business days.

    Minimum Criteria for Success

    The criterion should establish a measurable standard related to the intended operational result.

    Example:
    At least 90% of requests will be processed within five business days.

Putting the Assessment Strategy Together

A complete assessment strategy should allow the reader to understand:

  1. What evidence will be collected
  2. Who or what will be assessed
  3. When and where assessment will occur
  4. How the evidence will be evaluated
  5. How a sample will be selected and justified, when applicable
  6. What level of performance constitutes success

A well-designed assessment strategy establishes a clear and defensible approach for determining achievement of the outcome and creates the foundation for meaningful data collection, analysis, and continuous improvement.

Before Moving to Stage 3

Before moving to Stage 3, review the assessment strategy to confirm that it is complete, aligned, and ready for implementation.

Use the following checklist:

  • The outcome is clearly stated and measurable.
  • The selected measure directly or appropriately addresses the outcome.
  • The evidence type is appropriate for the outcome.
  • The population or activity being assessed is clearly identified.
  • The assessment timeline and setting are specified.
  • The process for collecting and evaluating evidence is clear.
  • The sample, if applicable, is representative and justified.
  • The Minimum Criteria for Success are specific, measurable, and established in advance.
  • The assessment will produce evidence that can support interpretation and improvement.

If any part of the strategy is unclear, revise it before collecting evidence. A well-defined assessment strategy makes data collection more efficient and ensures that the results will be useful for decision-making and continuous improvement.

Continue to Stage 3: Collect Data