Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Documenting and Improving Collegiate Learning in the USA

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Assessment of Learning Outcomes in Higher Education

Part of the book series: Methodology of Educational Measurement and Assessment ((MEMA))

  • 1345 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter examines the expansion and current features of learning outcomes assessment in the US higher education. It begins with an overview of the diverse and stratified higher education system, including the multiple layers of state and federal influence but lack of centralized tightly linked control mechanisms. It describes the changing context of, and increased interest in, learning outcomes in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, including the roles of various external actors. In so doing it highlights the regional and national accrediting bodies that serve as gateways to federal financial aid funds and therefore serve as important means of affecting change. Although assessment is important for institutional accountability, its true value lies in its as-yet-unrealized potential to fundamentally improve the teaching and learning at the campus level. As such, the chapter concludes with considerations of on-campus actors at the heart of assessment processes and the evidence of changing practices that have been revealed through recent national surveys by research and voluntary membership groups.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges-Western Association of Schools and Colleges. (2014). Accreditation standards. Retrieved from http://www.accjc.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Accreditation_Standards_Adopted_June_2014.pdf

  • Allen, C. (2016, July). Alverno College: Lessons from an assessment pioneer (NILOA examples of good assessment practice). Urbana: University of Illinois and Indiana University, National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment. Retrieved from http://www.learningoutcomesassessment.org/AlvernoCaseStudy.html

  • American Association of State Colleges and Universities. (2011). A guide to major U.S. college completion initiatives. A policy matters report. Washington, DC: American Association of State Colleges and Universities. Retrieved from http://www.aascu.org/policy/publications/policymatters/2011/collegecompletion.pdf

  • American Bar Association Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar. (2014). Revised standards for approval of law schools. Retrieved from http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/legal_education_and_admissions_to_the_bar/council_reports_and_resolutions/201406_revised_standards_clean_copy.authcheckdam.pdf

  • Association of American Colleges & Universities. (1985). Integrity in the college curriculum: A report to the academic community. Washington, DC: AAC&U.

    Google Scholar 

  • Association of American Colleges & Universities. (2013). AAC&U responds to President Obama’s proposed college ratings system. Retrieved from https://www.aacu.org/about/statements/2013/ratings

  • Association of American Universities. (2013). AAU survey of undergraduate student objectives and assessment. Retrieved from http://www.aau.edu/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=14849

  • Bastedo, M. N., & Bowman, N. A. (2010). U.S. news & world report college rankings: Modeling institutional effects on organizational reputation. American Journal of Education, 116, 163–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bastedo, M. N., & Bowman, N. A. (2011). College rankings as an interorganizational dependency: Establishing the foundation for strategic and institutional accounts. Research in Higher Education, 52, 3–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bastedo, M. N., & Jaquette, O. (2011). Running in place: Low-income students and the dynamics of higher education stratification. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33, 318–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, M., & Brady, J. (2012). A radical critique of the learning outcomes assessment movement. Radical Teacher, 94, 34–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berrett, D. (2016, October 16). The next great hope for measuring learning. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://www.chronicle.com/article/The-Next-Great-Hope-for/238075?key=BFxeuhOx7Lbr_3ptAXUCm5IIvJor4pwKHkHrDm8SaDLaNDCvMwyM9Hw1sJcurlnNVzF5c0o2U2NLLW5Wa1RoZ2llUzUzMU55SFQtQVRKY1E4aDJocjZlZUtuZw

  • Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cain, T. R. (2014, November). Assessment and academic freedom: In concert, not conflict (NILOA Occasional Paper No. 22). Urbana: University of Illinois and Indiana University, National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment. Retrieved from http://learningoutcomesassessment.org/occasionalpapertwentytwo.html

  • Cain, T. R., & Hutching, P. (2015). Faculty and students: Assessment at the intersection of teaching and learning. In G. D. Kuh, S. O. Ikenberry, N. A. Jankowski, T. R. Cain, P. T. Ewell, P. Hutchings, & J. Kinzie (Eds.), Using evidence of student learning to improve higher education (pp. 95–116). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chronicle of Higher Education Almanac. (2016). Retrieved from http://www.chronicle.com/interactives/almanac-2016#id=2_101

  • Clark, B. R. (1979). The many pathways of academic coordination. Higher Education, 8, 251–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Commission on Institutions of Higher Education. (2016). Standards for accreditation. Burlington: Commission on Institutions of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://cihe.neasc.org/sites/cihe.neasc.org/files/downloads/Standards/Standards_for_Accreditation.pdf

  • Curtis, M., & Gulliford, M. (2016, October 26). The “state of affairs” of assessment in higher education: Preliminary survey findings [Webinar]. New York: Taskstream.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, W. R. (2010). Changes in institutional aid, 1992–2003: The evolving role of merit aid. Research in Higher Education, 51, 789–810.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ewell, P. T. (2002). An emerging scholarship: A brief history of assessment. In T. W. Banta & Associates (Ed.), Building a scholarship of assessment (pp. 3–25). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewell, P. T., & Ikenberry, S. O. (2015). Leadership in making assessment matter. In G. D. Kuh, S. O. Ikenberry, N. A. Jankowski, T. R. Cain, P. T. Ewell, P. Hutchings, & J. Kinzie (Eds.), Using evidence of student learning to improve higher education (pp. 117–145). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feal, R. G., Laurence, D., & Olsen, S. (2011). Where has assessment been in the modern language association? A disciplinary perspective. In D. Heiland & L. J. Rosenthal, with C. Ching, (Eds.), Literary study, measurement, and the sublime: Disciplinary assessment (pp. 9–24). New York: Teagle Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Field, K. (2013, August 22). Obama plan to tie student aid to college ratings draws mixed reviews. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://www.chronicle.com/article/obama-plan-to-tie-student-aid/141229

  • Finkelstein, M. J., Conley, V. M., & Schuster, J. H. (2016). The faculty factor: Reassessing the American academy in a turbulent era. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gannon-Slater, N., Ikenberry, S, Jankowski, N., & Kuh, G. (2014, March). Institutional assessment practices across accreditation regions. Urbana: University of Illinois and Indiana University, National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment. Retrieved from http://www.learningoutcomeassessment.org/documents/Accreditation%20report.pdf

  • Gaston, P. L. (2014). Higher education accreditation: How it’s changing, why it must. Sterling: Stylus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graff, G. (2008). Assessment changes everything. MLA Newsletter, 40(1), 3–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart Research Associates. (2015). Bringing equity and quality learning together: Institutional priorities for tracking and advancing underserved students’ success. Washington, DC: AACU. Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/sites/default/files/files/LEAP/2015AACUEquityReport.pdf

  • Hart Research Associates. (2016a). Recent trends in general education design, learning outcomes, and teaching approaches. Washington, DC: AACU. Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/sites/default/files/files/LEAP/2015_Survey_Report2_GEtrends.pdf

  • Hart Research Associates. (2016b). Trends in learning outcomes assessment. Washington, DC: AACU. Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/sites/default/files/files/LEAP/2015_Survey_Report3.pdf

  • Hearn, J. C. (2015). Outcomes-based funding in historical and comparative contexts. A Lumina issue paper prepared for HCM strategists. Indianapolis: Lumina Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.luminafoundation.org/files/resources/hearn-obf-full.pdf

  • Hearn, J. C., & Deupree, M. M. (2013). Here today, gone tomorrow? The increasingly contingent faculty workforce. A report prepared for the Advancing Higher Education publication series of the TIAA-CREF Institute, March. New York: TIAA-CREF Institute. Retrieved from http://www.tiaa-crefinstitute.org/institute/research/advancing_higher_education/contingentfaculty0313.html.

  • Hearn, J. C., & Holdsworth, J. M. (2002). Influences of state-level policies and practices on college students’ learning. Peabody Journal of Education, 73(3), 6–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hearn, J. C., & Rosinger, K. O. (2014). Socioeconomic diversity in selective private colleges: An organizational analysis. Review of Higher Education, 38, 71–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heiland, D., & Rosenthal, L. J. (2011). Introduction. In D. Heiland & L. J. Rosenthal, with C. Ching, (Eds.), Literary study, measurement, and the sublime: Disciplinary assessment (pp. 9–24). New York: Teagle Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, N. (2016). Why performance-based college funding doesn’t work. Report forThe Century Foundation. Retrieved from https://tcf.org/content/report/why-performance-based-college-funding-doesnt-work/

  • Hovey, H. A. (1999). State spending for higher education in the next decade: The battle to sustain current support (National Center Report 99-3). Washington, DC: National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchings, P. (2011). From department to disciplinary engagement. Change, 41(3), 26–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hyde, A. (2014). Tuning and teaching history as an ethical way of being in the world. AHA Today: A Blog of the American Historical Association. Retrieved from http://blog.historians.org/2014/07/tuning-teaching-history-ethical-way-world/

  • Ikenberry, S. O., & Kuh, G. D. (2015). From compliance to ownership: Why and how colleges and universities assess student learning. In G. D. Kuh, S. O. Ikenberry, N. A. Jankowski, T. R. Cain, P. T. Ewell, P. Hutchings, & J. Kinzie (Eds.), Using evidence of student learning to improve higher education (pp. 1–23). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaschik, S., & Lederman, D. (2016). The 2016 Inside Higher Ed survey of faculty attitudes on technology. Washington, DC: Inside Higher Ed & Gallup. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/system/files/media/2016%20IHE%20Faculty%20Tech%20Survey.pdf

  • Kinzie, J., Ikenberry, S. O., & Ewell, P. T. (2015). The bigger picture: Student learning outcomes assessment and external entities. In G. D. Kuh, S. O. Ikenberry, N. A. Jankowski, T. R. Cain, P. T. Ewell, P. Hutchings, & J. Kinzie (Eds.), Using evidence of student learning to improve higher education (pp. 160–180). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuh, G. D., Jankowski, N., Ikenberry, S. O., & Kinzie, J. (2014). Knowing what students know and can do: The current state of learning outcomes assessment in U.S. Colleges and Universities. Urbana: University of Illinois and Indiana University, National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuh, G. D., Ikenberry, S. O., Jankowski, N. A., Cain, T. R., Ewell, P. T., Hutchings, P., & Kinzie, J. (2015). Using evidence of student learning to improve higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maki, P. L. (2010). Assessing for learning: Building a sustainable commitment across the institution (2nd ed.). Sterling: Stylus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maranville, D., O’Neill, K., & Plumb, C. (2012). Lessons for legal education from the engineering profession’s experience with outcomes-based accreditation. William Mitchell Law Review, 38, 1017–1093.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marinara, M., Vajravelu, K., & Young, D. L. (2004). Making sense of the “loose baggy monster”: Assessing learning in a general education program is a whale of a task. Journal of General Education, 53, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McInerney, D. J. (2016). The American historical associations tuning project: An introduction. The History Teacher, 49, 491–501.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLendon, M. K., & Hearn, J. C. (2009). Viewing recent U.S. governance reform whole: “Decentralization” in a distinctive context. In J. Huisman (Ed.), International perspectives on the governance of higher education: Alternative frameworks for coordination (pp. 161–181). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Center for Higher Education Management Systems. (2016). College-going rates of high school graduates-directly from high school-2010. Retrieved from http://www.higheredinfo.org/dbrowser/index.php?measure=32

  • National Governors’ Association. (1986). Time for results: The governors’ 1991 report on education. Washington, DC: National Governors’ Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Institute of Education, The (NIE). (1984). The involvement in learning: Report of the commission on quality in American higher education. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, F. (1987). Choosing quality: Reducing conflict between the state and the university. Denver: Education Commission of the States.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palomba, C. A. (2002). Scholarly assessment of student learning in the major and general education. In T. W. Banta (Ed.), Building a scholarship of assessment (pp. 201–222). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palomba, C. A., & Banta, T. W. (2001). Assessing student competence in accredited disciplines: Pioneering approaches to assessment in higher education. Sterling: Stylus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, C. (2013). Accreditation, assessment, and compliance: Addressing the cyclical challenges of public confidence in American higher education. Journal of Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness, 3, 54–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Provezis, S. (2010). Regional accreditation and student learning outcomes: Mapping the territory. Urbana: University of Illinois and Indiana University, National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Public Agenda. (2016). Public opinion on higher education: Our new survey suggests public confidence in higher education is waning. Report released September 12, 2016. Retrieved from http://www.publicagenda.org/pages/public-opinion-higher-education-2016

  • Rhodes, T. L., & Finley, A. (2013). Using the VALUE rubrics for improvement of learning and authentic assessment. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges & Universities. Retrieved from https://www.aacu.org/value

  • Schmidtlein, F. A., & Berdahl, R. O. (2011). Autonomy and accountability: Who controls academe? In P. G. Altbach, P. J. Gumport, & R. O. Berdahl (Eds.), American higher education in the 21st century: Social, political, and economic challenges (pp. 69–87). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuster, J., & Finkelstein, M. (2006). The American faculty: The restructuring of academic work and careers. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shavelson, R. J. (2007). A brief history of student learning assessment: How we go where we are and a proposal for where to go next. Washington, DC: AACU. Retrieved from http://cae.org/images/uploads/pdf/19_A_Brief_History_of_Student_Learning_How_we_Got_Where_We_Are_and_a_Proposal_for_Where_to_Go_Next.PDF

  • Sims, S. J. (1992). Student outcomes assessment: A historical review and guide to program development. New York: Greenwood Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. A. (2015). Uniting to regulate for-profits. Inside Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/10/12/federal-agencies-join-forces-regulate-profit-colleges.

  • Trow, M. A. (1984). The analysis of status. In B. R. Clark (Ed.), Perspectives on higher education: Eight disciplinary and comparative views (pp. 132–164). Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trow, M. (2007). Reflections on the transition from elite to mass to universal access: Forms and phases of higher education in modern societies since WWII. In J. F. Forest & P. G. Altbach (Eds.), International handbook of higher education (pp. 243–280). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Census Bureau. (2016). Current population survey. Available at: http://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps.html

  • U.S. Department of Education. (2006). A test of leadership: Charting the future of U.S. higher education. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/hiedfuture/reports/final-report.pdf

  • U.S. Department of Education. (2014). Digest of education statistics, 2014. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2016/2016006.pdf

  • Wiley, J. (2016). Hitting an unclear target: The impact of ambiguous ‘student outcomes’ on technology. Retrieved from http://www.eduventures.com/2016/10/hitting-an-unclear-target-the-impact-of-ambiguous-student-outcomes-on-technology/

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA

    Timothy Reese Cain & James C. Hearn

Authors
  1. Timothy Reese Cain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. James C. Hearn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Timothy Reese Cain .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany

    Olga Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia

  2. Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany

    Miriam Toepper

  3. Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Hans Anand Pant

  4. Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Corinna Lautenbach

  5. Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany

    Christiane Kuhn

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Cain, T.R., Hearn, J.C. (2018). Documenting and Improving Collegiate Learning in the USA. In: Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, O., Toepper, M., Pant, H., Lautenbach, C., Kuhn, C. (eds) Assessment of Learning Outcomes in Higher Education. Methodology of Educational Measurement and Assessment. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74338-7_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74338-7_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-74337-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-74338-7

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation