Institutional Learning Outcomes
Implementation Plan
October 2013
Context and History
Institutional Learning Outcomes are increasingly common at institutions of higher
learning in the US and internationally. They represent the knowledge, skills and
dispositions that all students graduating from an institution are expected to have
when they receive a particular degree. They emphasize the level of learning
(bachelor’s v. master’s, etc.) and the distinctiveness of a Saint Mary’s degree
(compared to another university’s similar degree), and also serve as a means to
communicate with faculty, students and parents about the meaning of a degree. In
addition, institutional learning outcomes:
 Orient students in their learning process;
 Guide faculty and staff as they review and create new programming;
 Provide a foundation for meaningful assessment; and
 Represent the College’s mission through the central activity of the faculty:
teaching and learning
WASC is interested in these issues in two primary ways:
1. It now requires all of its institutions going through reaccreditation to write
an essay on the “meaning, quality and integrity” of its degrees: the “goals,
coherence, sequencing, alignment, resourcing, and overall quality of the
educational experience leading to the conferral of the degree.” This essay
essentially requires ILOs as support for statements made in the essay about
the meaning of the degree; SMC’s 2013 essay on this subject appended its
draft ILOs as demonstration that we are thinking together about the meaning
of our degrees.
2. The new WASC Standards going into effect in 2013 contain the following
Criteria for Review:
“2.2 All degrees—undergraduate and graduate—awarded by the institution
are clearly defined in terms of entry-level requirements and levels of student
achievement necessary for graduation that represent more than simply an
accumulation of courses or credits. The institution has both a coherent
philosophy, expressive of its mission, which guides the meaning of its
degrees and processes that ensure the quality and integrity of its degrees.”
“2.3 The institution’s student learning outcomes and standards for
performance are clearly stated at the course, program, and, as appropriate,
institutional level.”
1
The master’s degree learning outcomes were drafted by Vice Provost Sindt in
August 2012 and discussed and revised by the graduate program directors and
deans at two meetings in the fall of 2012. The draft ILOs were then delivered to the
GPSEPC in December 2012. The GPSEPC discussed and revised them substantially
over several meeting in the spring of 2013.
The bachelor’s degree learning outcomes were drafted by Vice Provost Sindt in
spring 2013. (The core curriculum learning outcomes constitute the vast majority
of the ILOs, so the work was much less substantial.) The UEPC discussed the issue in
a meeting in late April 2013 and assigned a task force including Vice Provosts Carp
and Sindt, the director of Institutional Research, the director of Educational
Effectiveness and three representatives from the UEPC. This group delivered a
recommendation to the UEPC in September 2013.
Implementation Plan
Once the ILOs are approved by the Academic Senate, the outcomes will be assessed
through routine learning outcomes assessment cycles and through program review.
Using the assessment cycles already in place and supported by the Office of
Institutional Research, programs and departments will be asked to “map” their
current learning outcomes to the degree/major learning outcomes already
established. For undergraduate degrees, this will involve mapping only the ILO
related to disciplinary expertise (the core curriculum assessment covers the rest).
For master’s level programs, all of the ILOs will be mapped to the program degree
outcomes (i.e., the learning outcomes for the MS in Accounting degree will be
mapped to the master’s level ILOs). The Office of Institutional Research will draft a
map of each program’s ILOs by January 2015, and each program will be asked to
revise and submit that map by September 2015. Assessment of the ILOs will be
integrated into routine program outcome assessments and captured in the program
review process starting in 2015-2016.
If the outcomes mapping exercise reveals a gap between a particular ILO and a
particular program’s learning outcomes, then that program will be asked to address
the gap in the next assessment report. Closing the gap would likely involve building
in a learning outcome demonstrating the missing ILO in a way appropriate to the
particular field or discipline in question. If the Academic Senate finds through the
mapping or assessment process that a particular institutional learning outcome
needs reconsideration or revision, then the GPSEPC or UEPC can be asked to revise
the ILOs through routine Academic Senate approval processes.
2