Curriculum proposals
Presented to Curriculum 12 May 2021. Updated 28 August 2025
Overview of structure with documents
Curriculum committee
IC
and
DAP
A course
Program learning outcome
Course learning outcome
Course learning outcome
Program learning outcome
Course learning outcome
Institutional learning outcome
Institutional learning outcome
Program learning outcome
Course learning outcome
Specific learning outcome
Assessment
strategies
Specific learning outcome
Assessment
strategies
Course outline
Program
T and J
Course
Guide
Specific learning outcome
Assessment
strategies
Specific learning outcome
Assessment
strategies
Course Guide
The Course Guide would be a new document containing the course learning outcomes, specific learning outcomes and recommended assessment methods. This document would be administratively approved.
IC
and
DAP
Specific learning outcome
Assessment
strategies
Specific learning outcome
Assessment
strategies
Course
Guide
Specific learning outcome
Assessment
strategies
Specific learning outcome
Assessment
strategies
Course Guide
The Course Guide contains the Course Student Learning Outcomes, the specific student learning outcomes, and recommended methods of assessment. The document would be approved by the IC and a copy would be kept with the DAP. All faculty teaching a course would be given the guide. The guide would be prepared by the author of the course outline. When the outline goes to the IC for approval, the IC approves the Guide. The Guide does not go to the curriculum committee. Assessment team would have authority to review the assessments on the guide. Sample guide.
Course Outlines
Course outlines simplify in this proposal to contain course learning outcomes and program learning outcomes only. Specific learning outcomes and institutional outcomes do not appear on this document. Each course learning outcome maps to a program learning outcome.
Curriculum committee
A course
Program learning outcome
Course learning outcome
Course learning outcome
Program learning outcome
Course learning outcome
Program learning outcome
Course learning outcome
Course outline
Course Outline
The Course Outline would contain the Course Student Learning Outcomes and the mapping of each to a Program Learning Outcome. In this proposal course learning outcomes map only to program learning outcomes. Institutional learning outcomes would not appear on this document. The course outline would go through curriculum committee for approval. The curriculum committee could focus on the course learning outcomes and the mapping to the program learning outcomes. The simpler format should also reduce workload in the curriculum committee. Sample outline.
Program proposal appendix T and modification J
The mapping from a program learning outcome to an institutional outcome would be specified in program proposals (appendix T) and program modification (appendix J) where these are appendices in the curriculum handbook. Curriculum committee would make recommendations for approval of these forms. These two forms have only very minor modifications to include the mapping from program to institutional outcomes.
Curriculum committee
Program learning outcome
Program learning outcome
Institutional learning outcome
Institutional learning outcome
Program learning outcome
Program
T and J
SC 130: An illustration of how an assignment or course maps to multiple PSLOs and ISLOs
SC 130
GE 3.5
SC 130.3
SC 130.1
GE 3.4
SC 130.2
I8.8
I8.4
GE 3.2
SC 130.4
Specific learning outcomes
Assessment
strategies
Specific learning outcomes
Assessment
strategies
Course outline
Program
T and J
Course
Guide
Specific learning outcomes
Assessment
strategies
Specific learning outcomes
Assessment
strategies
GE 1.1
I5.3
I8.2
I5.1
Laboratory report assignment reports on CSLO 1, 3, and 4 via a rubric
SC 130 under the hood: A view of the mapping from an assessment grid
Moodle and outcomes
Course learning outcomes can be reported out of courses in Moodle
Moodle supports custom scales that can be used in Outcomes.
Outcomes can be attached to assignments and then evaluated when marking an assignment.
The example displayed shows SC 130 Physical Science course learning outcomes in Moodle.
Moodle courses can export learning outcomes
What has this got to do with ISLOs?
Mapping issues for gen ed
There are places where the general education learning outcomes do not map to the present institutional learning outcomes. The gen ed outcomes are the only outcomes all two year degree students possess as they cross the graduation stage, so the institutional outcomes are effectively constrained by the boundaries set by the general education learning outcomes. Thus many schools make the two sets parallel each other. This can be done by combining the gen ed outcomes and using the integer value for the resulting ISLO.
These look reversed, but they are this way in the catalog.�Page 19: Institutional Student Learning Outcomes�1. Effective oral communication: capacity to deliver prepared, purposeful presentations designed to increase knowl-edge, to foster understanding, or to promote change in the listeners’ attitudes, values, beliefs, or behaviors.�2. Effective written communication: development and expression of ideas in writing through work in many genres and styles, utilizing different writing technologies, and mixing texts, data, and images through iterative experiences across the curriculum.�Page 36: General Education Programs Academic Programs�1.1 Write a clear, well-organized paper using documentation and quantitative tools when appropriate.�1.2 Make a clear, well-organized verbal presentation.
Proposed ISLO2
The current ISLO 4 does not have a clearly corresponding general education student learning outcome at present. Current ISLO 4 gets merged into proposed ISLO 2 and is then served by general education PSLOs 2.1 and 2.2.
Note that the far right column needs to rewritten to be course learning outcomes, not whole courses. Whole courses do not serve a single program learning outcomes. Each course outcome serves a program learning outcome, a course can thus serve many program outcomes.
Proposed ISLO3
The non-laboratory science elective courses in gen ed under 3.4 are not necessarily quantitative reasoning courses. They are content courses with content knowledge such as geology. Institutional learning outcome eight is clearly quite sharply focused only on quantitative reasoning, not knowledge such as identifying rock types, plant diversity, or parts of a cell. Identifying the part of a cell is not a quantitative activity.
The same gap applies for 3.5. Not all lab sciences are quantitative. The proposed ISLO reflects the language used in this section of gen ed outcomes.
Proposed ISLO4
Again, there are mapping issues for some of these. Some of these issues might be resolved by the use of expanded definitions or the knowledge that some course level outcomes map to a particular general education outcome. Note that the far right column should really be course learning outcomes and not courses. These tables predate my work this term and were used to inform the general education subgroup of the assessment team. These tables should be reworked to map as the earlier part of the presentation proposes.
Proposed ISLO5
This is the area in which there is the most significant gap in the current institutional learning outcomes and which actually drove some of my initial work on this issue in 2018.
Whither the former ISLO7?
Retired president of the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges and former senior vice president of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges Dr. Richard Winn in a keynote address to California Southern University said, "I've seen many schools in my work with WASC that have put in their catalog 'We will produce lifelong learners,' and I've found that in most cases they haven't a clue what that means." To measure whether a student is a lifelong learner would require measuring the student's knowledge, skills, and competence across a lifetime.
If one wishes, one can argue that the foundations and skills for lifelong learning are communication, critical thinking and problem solving, qualitative and quantitative reasoning, intercultural knowledge and competence, and a healthy body to support a lifetime of learning. Those are the foundations. Those can be measured while the student is in attendance. Whether they continue to use that knowledge and those skills on an ongoing basis is not something the college can guarantee as the student walks across the graduation stage. Institutional outcome seven is encompassed in the evaluation of the five outcomes above.
Five proposed ISLOs that encompass the eight and align with the general education outcomes
Where do the outlines and guides live?
In the Sharkspace shared collegiate drive
Access controls according to authority
Mapping issues
Update addition 22 July 2021
The challenge of mapping from current outlines: everything maps to everything
EN 120a
120a.1 Utilize all stages of the writing process: pre-writing, drafting, revision when composing academic papers.
3.50
120a.2 Write essays in various rhetorical patterns such as example, comparison/contrast classification, cause/effect, and process analysis.
3.75
120a.3 Establish and defend a position in an argumentative essay.
3.38
GenEd
GE 1.1 Write a clear, well-organized paper using documentation and quantitative tools when appropriate.
3.54
GenEd 2.1 Demonstrate the ability for independent thought and expression.
3.625
GenEd 2.2 Demonstrate understanding of the modes of inquiry by identifying an appropriate method of accessing credible information…
3.625
iSLOs
i8.2 Effective written communication
3.625
I8.3 Problem solving
3.54
I8.6 Information literacy
3.54
The multiple lines coming up from the course level represent mappings from specific learning outcomes that are not shown in this diagram
EN 120a outline current example (2021)
This is what is posted on the web site and what any visitor would see.
The mapping details for EN 120a
Note that a mapping for CSLO1 is not specified. The 2., 3., and 4., in the second row are spurious. Each specific learning outcome serves multiple program and institutional outcomes - thereby establishing a mapping for PSLOs to ISLOs that will vary from outline to outline, CSLO to CSLO. Everything gets mapped to everything. The result is a statistical grey goo where all averages will be the same. See also. Note too that the the PSLOs are now relative references 1, 2, and 3 local only to this outline instead of the original numbers with program prefixes, adding to the confusion.
The proposed outline solutions
Section two makes clear the program served. Numbers are replaced by codes such as GE 2.2 This example borrows from MS 150.
Hierarchical mappings
EN 120a
120a.1 Utilize all stages of the writing process: pre-writing, drafting, revision when composing academic papers.
3.50
120a.2 Write essays in various rhetorical patterns such as example, comparison/contrast classification, cause/effect, and process analysis.
3.75
120a.3 Establish and defend a position in an argumentative essay.
3.38
GenEd
GenEd 1.1 Write a clear, well-organized paper using documentation and quantitative tools when appropriate.
3.50
GenEd 2.1 Demonstrate the ability for independent thought and expression.
3.75
GenEd 2.2 Demonstrate understanding of the modes of inquiry by identifying an appropriate method of accessing credible information…
3.38
i8.2 Effective written communication
3.50
I8.3 Problem solving
3.75
I8.6 Information literacy
3.38
i5.1 Effective oral and written communication... 3.50
i5.2 Critical thinking and problem solving... 3.565
Both the existing eight ISLOs and proposed five ISLOs are shown in this diagram.
Mappings are clear and easy to follow
Section four makes crystal clear a mapping from CLSO to a specific PSLO that can easily be read.
The specific learning outcomes are on the guide
Outlines and guides live in college shared drives
End notes
With thanks...
I owe a deep debt of thanks to many who have provided inspiration, insight, and constructive criticism over the years. I really began this journey in earnest in 2006 and there are too many to specifically thank here. These are not all my ideas, a number of groups and committees have contributed to this and my own thinking has shifted over the years as well. I would be remiss if I did not also thank the assessment office at Kansas State University for their online presentations on assessment at KSU which uses Canvas and tools that build the dashboards. Their work was a guiding light to my work this term.
Finis 🌿