Academic Rigor – Departmental Reports
Note: This document represents the independent submissions of the various departments and units listed prior to the
Madison Institute on Academic Rigor held on June 16 and 17, 2011, and therefore do not reflect ideas that may have
emerged during that process. This information should not be viewed as position statements, but rather as ideas and
department ideologies which are open to revision following review of other faculty thoughts as well as discussions in the
Madison Institute sessions.
(References to departments/colleges have been removed)
1.
For the xxxxx Department, academic rigor begins with strict adherence to our Undergraduate Educational Goals,
Objectives, and Course Requirements. They are listed below.
GOALS
Knowledge:
Students will acquire knowledge of the world's great literary, philosophical, religious, and artistic traditions.
Students will comprehend the historical and social context of major political, intellectual, religious, economic,
and cultural developments.
Students will evaluate the evidence, ideas, and models needed to perceive how people relate to each other, to
institutions, and to communities and to make judgments about the world.
Students will comprehend the major achievements in the fine arts in world civilizations and the historical, social,
and cultural context in which they were created.
Students will discern the values, ethics, and legal issues in world civilizations, including their own, and how these
issues relate to Western ideas of a free society.
Skills:
Students will read, write and speak critically, mastering how to make informed judgments based on existing
evidence.
Students will critically evaluate evidence: identify a thesis, identify sources used in the argument, identify the
conclusions, and determine the perspective, bias, and reliability of the argument.
Students will solve problems and communicate persuasively.
Students will demonstrate proficiency in using a computer and a facility for communicating in a foreign
language.
Experience:
Students will take on responsibility to become independent, creative and self-directed learners and complete
projects of orderly study.
Students will thoughtfully consider a number of positions before deciding which to support and to develop ways
of perceiving, evaluating, and behaving within cultural systems different from their own.
1
Students will understand the importance of change and continuity over time, how people responded to change,
and the importance of cause and effect in xxxxx.
Students will discern the dynamics of an increasingly multi-cultural society.
OBJECTIVES:
Content: Students will demonstrate in all xxxxx classes and in assessment data collected by the Department
knowledge of the major events, themes, individuals, and issues in world xxxxx.
Chronology: Students will demonstrate in all xxxxx classes and in assessment data collected by the Department
the importance of change and continuity over time, and how people throughout xxxxx have reacted to such
change. This will include the importance of cause and effect in xxxxx, and the significance of historical context.
Collection: Students will demonstrate the ability collect historical evidence in XXXX 395 and 400 level xxxxx
classes and in assessment data collected by the Department. Students will demonstrate through the research
process in these courses an awareness of how historians gather evidence using bibliographical materials
available in printed, electronic and computerized formats.
Analysis: Students will demonstrate in XXXX 395 and 400 level xxxxx courses and in assessment data collected by
the Department an understanding of the different approaches employed by historians in approaching this
evidence and how historical perspectives have changed over time. Central to the analysis of evidence is the
critical selection and evaluation of evidence. For historians, thinking critically might be described as:
1) Identifying the thesis of an argument
2) Identifying how sources have been used in an argument
3) Identifying the conclusions of an argument
4) Determining the perspective, bias and reliability of an argument
5) Evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of their peers' arguments.
Synthesis: As the culmination of the critical thinking process, students will demonstrate in XXXX 395 and 400
level classes and in assessment data collected by the Department an ability to produce a final written and oral
synthesis of evidence. This will be achieved through the critical examination of arguments and synthesis of
these arguments into a coherent product with a thesis and conclusion(s) based on responsible use of the
evidence. Writing skills would be reinforced through an emphasis on writing, editing, proofreading, and word
processing (computer) skills. Students will demonstrate the ability to articulate a thoroughly researched,
carefully thought, and well organized positions in both written and oral formats.
COURSE REQUIREMENTS
The department has implemented course requirements for each level of course. These requirements
appear on course syllabi.
100 level courses include XXXX 101 and 102. These courses offer broad interpretive overviews of world
xxxxx (to 1650 and since 1650 respectively). Taught primarily as lecture with some discussion, the courses
combine lecture and discussion to permit students to learn the content and chronology of world xxxxx, to learn
how historians collect, analyze and synthesize evidence and engage in introductory exercises that require them
to conduct analysis and synthesis. Readings in 100 level courses generally consist of a narrative text, primary
source readings, and a number of monographs which specifically deal with major issues in world xxxxx. Faculty
2
generally assign short written assignments (precises, book reviews, out of class essays) that amount to roughly
10-15 pages of formal, out of class writing.
200 level courses are organized on the basis of world regions (i.e. U.S., Europe, Africa). Classes at the
200 level are taught primarily as lecture with some discussion. The 200 level courses introduce students to the
major historical issues of a region and demonstrate how this particular region fits into the context of world
xxxxx. Students gain a general knowledge of the content and chronology of the region studied, learn how
historians collect historical evidence for later synthesis and analysis, and engage in introductory exercises which
require them to conduct historical analysis and synthesis. Readings for a 200 level class generally consist of a
central text, a book of either primary sources and/or historiographical readings, and two or more monographs
which specifically deal with major issues in the region's xxxxx. Faculty generally assign several short written
assignments (precises, book reviews, out of class essays) which amount to roughly 10-15 pages of formal, out of
class writing.
300-level courses are taught as a combination of lecture and discussion. Students gain an in depth
knowledge of the content and chronology of the theme or time period studied, learn to exhaustively collect
historical evidence, and learn advanced methods of historical analysis and synthesis. Students are expected to
deal with historiographical interpretations in this level class. Students demonstrate an ability to use the
computer for word processing and learn how to locate source materials on the Internet. Students read between
800 and 1600 pages of material and write 11-20 pages of formal, out of class writing (book reviews, term papers,
annotated bibliographies) for each 300 level class they take.
400-level courses are usually taught as seminars. Courses at this level are essentially capstones where
students are expected to show an advanced ability to meet all department objectives. Students gain an in depth
knowledge of the content and chronology of the topic or historical period studied, will continue to develop their
ability to exhaustively collect evidence, which will be rigorously analyzed before the presentation of a
sophisticated synthesis of that evidence. Toward this end, students are expected to deal with primary source
materials as much as possible, to address historiographical nuances, to write a research paper, or precis, or
series of papers. Ability to use a computer for word processing and to locate source materials is required.
Students read between 1000 and 2000 pages of material and write 15-25 pages of formal, out of class writing
(book reviews, term papers, annotated bibliographies) for each 400 level class they take.
These goals, objectives, and course requirements reflect the department’s high academic standards.
These standards are premised upon substantial reading and writing requirements for each course.
Consequently, faculty members have also been encouraged to include an essay component in examinations to
test not only students’ factual knowledge of assigned material but also their critical thinking abilities and writing
skills.
In addition to implementing the abovementioned goals and objectives, the maintenance of high
academic standards also includes: an emphasis on holding all classes and office hours; periodically reviewing
syllabi to ensure that all faculty adhere to the fundamental departmental requirements; gathering data on ways
to improve courses via student evaluations and surveys; and reviewing the CFI website to keep abreast of
innovative pedagogical strategies.
Clearly, the Xxxxx Department would consider any program academically rigorous that closely adhered to its
own specific goals, objectives, and course requirements. However, there are two policies that the Xxxxx
Department has instituted that may prove useful to other programs that are interested in maintaining academic
rigor. First, the Xxxxx Department requires the review of a syllabus before allowing transfer of credit from
another college or university. In most instances, course descriptions alone do not provide sufficient information
to determine whether or not a particular course from another institution meets all departmental requirements.
3
Second, for the transfer of upper division courses that are not taken in conjunction with an approved study
abroad program, xxxxx majors are allowed to transfer a maximum of two courses toward completion of the
major. Each course transfer request is approved by the department’s Majors Committee on a case-by-case basis.
The Xxxxx Department maintains that if a student’s degree is coming from JMU and the department is certifying
its rigor, the upper-division classes taken for the major should be courses offered at JMU.
Finally, our departmental discussion also produced three general suggestions that would enhance the
academic culture at JMU. These suggestions are that the university should: 1) encourage more open scholarly
forums for faculty; 2) support more travel to conferences and for research; and 3) work toward smaller classes
to consistently improve the quality of instruction. Though these suggestions are not new, they remain essential
to a rigorous academic environment.
2.
In its department meeting on April 13, 2011 the xxxxx Department had a wide-ranging, hour long discussion on
academic rigor. The discussion addressed the questions posed by Dr. Benson but also went beyond them.
Academic rigor in xxxxx is seen as involving providing students with challenging assignments that are graded
using explicit standards which distinguish between different levels of performance along with providing students
with meaningful feedback. In addition to our internally-focused discussion of both grade inflation and punitive
grading, we also thought it was important to look at broader issues of curriculum instruction. While it was
recognized that large classes could be taught it a rigorous fashion given the goals of the department and the
academic skills we were trying to teach, it was also felt that large classes worked against this. Many faculty
reported that they had to change or drop assignments (particularly those that are writing intensive) they found
to be effective in promoting critical thinking skills because of the size of their classes.
It was noted that exit interviews with graduating seniors repeatedly brought forward comments by our better
students on the importance of rigor in their studies. They also noted that not all students felt this way and that
this often had a negative impact on classes. To succeed, an added emphasis on academic rigor must be
embraced by students as well as faculty. Increasing academic rigor is not a matter of adding more honors
courses for our better students but changing the broader curriculum.
Our discussion of academic rigor also stressed the point that no department could succeed in strengthening the
rigor of its program without a university-wide effort. One point made by several faculty members was the need
for the university to reexamine its mission statement and re-articulate an emphasis on academic rigor that is
supported by its allocation of resources and the priority given to academics in the university. Additionally, it was
noted that an emphasis on rigor would lead to lower grades for students and perhaps a higher failure rate. This
is something the university must be willing to acknowledge and accept.
Academic rigor in xxxxx was also felt to require students to take courses in a prescribed sequence. When this
does not occur students enter into upper level courses without having been exposed to concepts and skills they
need to succeed and it requires that instructors adjust the content of these courses to make time to go over this
material. The department is adjusting the structure of the major to establish a clearer sequencing of courses for
students. The ultimate success of this strategy is highly dependent on the number of students in the major and
the size of the faculty. Historically our problem has been too many students entering the major as juniors and
seniors trying to complete the major in a total of 3 semesters. This results in their taking all of their xxxxx
courses together rather than in sequence.
The department’s discussion of academic rigor also led to a suggestion that the general education program
might be reexamined. Currently there is little connection between the academic skills taught in general
4
education and the needs of majors. Several examples were given. One faculty member noted the need for
students to develop an ability to understand the nature of social science inquiry so that they might be able to
frame paper topics more effectively in upper level classes. Social science critical thinking classes in general
education do not do this. Many noted that the single greatest writing need for our major is for students to learn
how to write review of the literature essays that emphasize skills in synthesizing, organizing and evaluating ideas
from multiple sources. These are foundational writing and thinking skills that are necessary for our students to
master prior to learning how to conduct a social science literature review in our major. This does not occur in
General Education for many students who have successfully completed General Education requirements.
Research methods courses depend upon Xxxx 220 to provide a foundation for instruction but no communication
takes place between the Xxxx Department and research methods instructors as to what is taught in Xxxx 220. In
the absence of a strong link between general education and majors it forces majors to cover topics and skills at
the expense of material in their disciplines.
3.
(1) What constitutes academic rigor in xxxxx?
 High development of ability to think abstractly and independently with the material, as opposed to a
mere transfer of factual knowledge
 Demanding amount of reading assigned
 Excellence in writing: conceptual, grammatical, compositional
 Significant and demanding writing assignments
 No grade inflation
o No “A’s” or “B’s” for light amounts of work
o “C” should signify “average”. Currently at JMU, “B” seems to be the default “average” signifier,
rather than indicating truly superior performance
(2) Academic rigor elsewhere in the University
 At least a minority of JMU students somehow have internalized the notion that General Education
courses are supposed to be “easy.” In student narrative evaluations of our professors teaching General
Education sections, the “complaint” most frequently registered (with all due indignation) by students is:
“This class was too hard for a GenEd course!”
 We regard grade inflation at JMU is a problem. Across the University 80%+ grades assigned are “A’s” or
“B’s.” Professors who enforce higher standards run the risk of incurring student backlash because some
students have not experienced a series of honest appraisals of their reasoning and writing capabilities.
 Based on faculty experience in other universities, control of grade inflation is only effective if it is a
university-wide expectation and accountability is enforced from the top down. If it is not identified and
publicized as a priority at the highest levels of university administration, efforts to control it become ad
hoc and piecemeal. In xxxxx scrutiny of grade distributions is a stated factor in the annual evaluation of
faculty, and, we believe, in some other xxxxxx departments.
 Large class sizes often complicate the implementation of demanding assignments, since such
assignments often entail that students seek assistance.
 One professor reports hearing numerous movies being shown in the classroom next door to where he is
teaching, and besides the noise interfering with his class, cannot help doubting the academic integrity of
such a course.
4.
The Department of xxxxx discussed several dimensions of academic rigor at its 4/15/11 department meeting.
We focused on trying to identify principles that we think are applicable both to our department’s programs and
to other academic programs at JMU. The following five core principles had considerable support in that
discussion:
5
1] PREPARATION – Preparation here involves ensuring that curricular designs provide a suitable academic
foundation in lower-level courses that permits instructors and students to explore material in greater depth in
upper-level courses.
2] RESPONSIBILITY – Responsibility here refers to the need for students to take full personal responsibility for
their learning and to the need for instructors to work to identify areas of strong performance, areas of
satisfactory performance, and areas that need improvement when evaluating students’ work.
3] CRITICAL THINKING – Per Bloom’s taxonomy regarding the cognitive domain, students in all courses should be
asked to perform both lower-order cognitive tasks (involving knowledge, comprehension, & application) and
higher-order cognitive tasks (involving analysis, synthesis, and evaluation). Different disciplines (and different
subfields within disciplines) will have distinctive specific tasks in both portions of the cognitive domain, but all
college-level courses should involve some higher-order tasks involving critical thinking as envisioned by this
taxonomy.
4] DIVERSITY of SKILLS – As they move through a rigorous academic program, students should be developing a
diversity of skills via both their ungraded work (in and out of the classroom) and their graded assignments (in
and out of the classroom).
5] EXPLORATION – Exploration here refers to exposure to distinctive learning styles and to new subject matter. A
rigorous, college-level education should aspire to assist students to develop a passion for lifelong learning by
modeling exploration across the curriculum.
5.
Opening comments:
This committee was charged with the task of identifying some determinants of academic rigor that exist in our
department. From an email written by Dr. Benson, we were to consider the following:
“…we also realize there are probably some general principles/parameters that are useful in
defining academic rigor. We wish to go about identifying those general parameters…As a
first step; we are asking that each academic unit provide (1) what they see as determinants
of academic rigor within their program/unit and (2) elements that they would consider/see
as crucial in identifying academic rigor in another perhaps dissimilar academic
program/unit.
The motivation to form this committee comes from a series of conversations with faculty sponsored by the Vice
President for Academic Affairs, the Speaker of the Faculty Senate, and the Interim Provost, Dr. Jerry Benson. The
following points are worth bearing in mind with respect to this issue:
 Dr. Benson’s motivation stems from faculty concern; it is supported by the administration
 Dr. Benson does not seek to standardize “academic rigor” across all departments
 Dr. Benson is content to let individual departments define/implement standards of rigor as/if needed
The issue of academic rigor arose due to faculty concerns pertaining to one or more of the following issues:
 Over the past several decades grades have gone up but it’s not clear if students are actually learning more
now than in the past; this trend possibly reflects grade inflation
 Technological advances have made it easier for students to cut-corners and/or outright cheat on assignments
 There is an on-going, often pessimistic national discussion on the value of a collegiate education
6
 Evidence indicates that students expect more challenges in college than they are actually given
 Faculty are overcommitted research/service-wise and with increasing class sizes, it is often difficult to
provide a level of involvement and rigor that might be desired
Attempts at a definition:
Prior to identifying “determinants of academic rigor” in our department and elsewhere, we need some working
definition, or components thereof, of “academic rigor.” There was a consensus on the committee that a single
definition of academic rigor was bound to be imperfect due to the diversity of classes, class sizes, assignments,
teaching styles, grading systems, and other pedagogical factors. That said, key components of any definition
might include:
1. Demand high-level performance.
2. Demand student-motivated responsibility for learning.
3. Demand expectations beyond the “comfort-zone.”
4. Demand critical thinking.
5. Demand mastery of the baseline knowledge of the discipline.
Determinants of rigor in xxxxx:
The committee noted that several standards of rigor already exist in the department. Faculty performance in
attaining class goals and establishing a rigorous learning environment is the ultimate responsibility of the
individual faculty member but is shared by the corporate body of faculty and administrators that oversee the
academic program involved. To that end:
1. It is the responsibility of each program to evaluate and hire faculty who have the qualifications needed
to meet and prepare specific curricular needs.
2. There are annual evaluations across all professorial levels; these evaluations include the assessment of
teaching performance and classroom rigor.
3. In their third year each faculty member is fully critiqued in their performance, with developed teaching
skills and rigor being major topic areas.
4. The acquisition of tenure assumes the assessment of an accumulated period of performance in which
teaching quality is assessed in terms of the rigor for courses taught.
Other ways to implement rigor in the classroom:
Despite the list given above, the committee identified various additional methods/strategies that might be
adopted in order to impose more rigor in the classroom.
Departmental-level:
 Simply inducing a “culture” of rigor among faculty within and across departments via discussions, informal
meetings, and perhaps the occasional workshop might go a long way to instilling a more rigorous classroom
environment—many committee members felt that an ongoing dialogue concerning academic rigor is likely to
be beneficial
 Individual faculty can work with personnel at the Center for Faculty Innovation regarding specific ways to
implement rigor in the classroom
 Faculty might mentor/assess other faculty members regarding rigor on a request basis
 Departmental changes to number/type of assignments and grading scales might be considered for particular
courses based on faculty feedback
University-level:
 If students are to “hit the ground running” in terms of a rigorous academic environment, then perhaps higher
standards of acceptance to JMU might be needed
 In some cases, smaller class sizes might allow faculty to better implement a rigorous classroom environment
 The administration along with faculty input might rethink the role of “General Education.” This might include
creating a system that allows more student responsibility for choosing courses; presently, some students view
7
these courses as an obligatory “laundry list” rather than a meaningful curriculum that comprises a
fundamental part of their education. Other issues regarding GenEd also came up, including modifying course
content/requirements, and having better articulation and dialogue between GenEd and specific
departments/programs.
Conclusion on instilling academic rigor within the university
Education is a dynamic and diverse process of enlightenment; as such it is difficult to come up with a single
definition of rigor that applies across the entire university curriculum. Further, mandating a list of
strategies/tasks that are designed to implement rigor in the classroom is more likely to erode faculty morale than
actually improve classroom rigor. Instead, it might be wise to have the administration in conjunction with other
university-wide organizations set a “tone of rigor” for the university. Students across JMU, independent of their
major or course of study, should hear a credible, coherent, and consistent voice from “above,” a voice that
emphasizes (and reemphasizes) academic rigor and the centrality of the academic and scholarly mission of the
university. So long as the tone is credible, coherent, and consistent, it will also keep the issue of rigor on the
collective mindset of the faculty. This solution avoids the usual problems associated with implementing a
homogenous university or departmental-wide policy on a concept that is necessarily heterogeneous and
diversely deployed across different classrooms.
6.
Grade Inflation is a significant problem for 4 interrelated reasons:
 Many students expect an “A” just for trying. It has ceased to be perceived as a measure of the
QUALILTY of that work. Today’s generation of college students have grown up in a culture where
everyone is rewarded for trying. All kids get a trophy just for playing. Everyone gets a gold star just for
trying. While there are merits to that in some regards, many have not known a culture in which
awards/accolades/grades are earned. One way to begin to combat this is to require faculty to include in
their syllabus/assignments a detailed rubric explaining exactly what constitutes an “A” (etc.) on that
assignment and in that course. Faculty then must stick to that rubric, even in the face of pressure. In
addition, syllabi could explain that the concept of "working hard," while valued, does not guarantee an
excellent grade. One can "work hard" on something and still do average (C) work. It is the end product
that is evaluated/graded. (These concept are important to stress to students during orientation as well.)
 Similarly universities need to move away from a student services orientation that inadvertently also
perpetuates a belief that students (parents) are paying tuition, and therefore are entitled to high grades.
It’s a customer service mentality that situates faculty as service providers not experts/educators. The
customer is paying and demands a particular service. It is no longer a question of earning the grade. It’s
a question of getting what you pay for. This situation has become more pronounced as tuition rates (at
universities across the country) have risen. At JMU, this is particularly pronounced among out-of-state
students (parents) who are paying a great deal for tuition, and who expect returns on that. The
university should educate students on what tuition actually pays for. There are staggering statistics
available that delineate how little tuition actually covers the cost of each student's education. Making
students (and parents) aware of these statistics could help in altering the concept that student’s tuition
pays for their instructor's salary.
 While the above two factors relate to the culture in which our students have grown up/live, the next
contributing factor is related to the way that faculty are evaluated. While there are any numbers of
ways to evaluate teaching, student evaluations tend to carry a heavy weight. They are convenient
because they reduce everything to a single, easy-to-compare number and easy-to-quote anecdotes.
One way to deal with this is to pair student evaluations with grade distributions during the annual
review process. Are the faculty with the highest evaluations also the ones most likely to give the highest
grades? Pair them also with syllabi and other measures of academic rigor such as assignments, reading
lists, etc. There should be a standard question (or series of questions) required to be included in all
8

7.
student evaluation forms in which students are asked to comment on the academic challenge/rigor of
the course. Right now, many departments rely on outdated, useless questions like: “What did you like
best/least about this course?” “What are the strengths/weaknesses of the instructor.” Such questions
generate answers like: “I hated that it was at 8am.” “The instructor was hot.” “The instructor was
knowledgeable.” (I should hope so!) Unit heads need to be able to read between the lines of student
comments. For example, there’s a big difference between: “The instructor created a learning
environment in which we all felt comfortable to speak and learn” versus “The instructor was more like a
friend than a professor.”
Faculty should be encouraged to make classes reading- and writing-intensive (or project-intensive if
more appropriate for the class). However, the university must support faculty in that endeavor.
Teaching loads are high. Morale is low. (No raises in how many years?) There is no incentive for faculty
to make classes more grading-intensive and more rigorous. Increasing the academic rigor of a class
(especially when it relates to the assignments), increases the workload of faculty. In many cases the
opposite pressure exits from the above mentioned vicious cycle of faculty feeling that if they are too
rigorous in their expectations/grading/assignments, they will receive bad evaluations, which will bring
disfavor in Personnel Action Committees reviews and annual evaluations by their department heads. If
the university is committed to academic rigor, then it needs to be prepared to support faculty in that
endeavor—raises, academic leaves, smaller class sizes, etc. The university and academic units also, as
mentioned in the previous bullet point, need to support rigorous faculty by altering how we evaluate
faculty for tenure/promotion and merit raises.
xxxxx engaged in discussions about academic rigor at two faculty meetings. From those discussions, the
following themes emerged...
- Challenging reading load.
- Challenging writing assignments & projects.
- Professional standards: competence.
- Grading rubric that makes it clear that A work is exceptional and spells out expectations for each grade.
- Avoiding grade inflation.
- Do not rely too much on student evaluations; find other measures.
8.
xxxxx defines academic rigor in two ways.
The first refers to the requirements, demands, or challenges of a task or activity. The second way refers to
“extreme strictness or stringency of standards, conduct, scrupulousness or rigidity in the application of rules,
principles, or precepts” (Oxford English Dictionary). In this second way, rigor includes a strict sense or
interpretation, precision, exactness; the quality or condition of being highly detailed, accurate, and thorough.
We achieve academic rigor by these means:

A sequenced curriculum that culminates in an internship required for fulfillment of the BA/BS and the
MA/MS in xxxxxx

Highly developed habits of mind: inquiry, critical thinking, critical procedures, and responsible behavior,
all of which are required for accountability to professional standards and for vigorous citizenship.
9

Curricular connections (which courses are taken, the order in which they are taken, and crossdisciplinary connections among courses)

Faculty knowledgeable and conversant with leading contemporary theory and practice. We expect
students to follow our example.

Coursework challenging students with contingency—wanting them to see themselves as authorities and
challenging them to find their own answers to questions.

Information management and information literacy—sifting through tons of material in all areas and
selecting information of value.
Academic rigor in xxxxxx is judged by standards of precision and by high expectations, by intensity of
engagement, by excellent critical thinking and critical procedures, by mastery of professional standards of
communication and forms of writing, and by professional codes of conduct.
9.
The Department of xxxxx believes that the following five core principles form the foundation of academic rigor.
Principle #1 – Rigor is a Commitment that should be Articulated in a Program’s Mission & Values
Faculty in the Department of xxxxx collectively developed a Mission and Values statement that clearly articulates
a commitment to an active, experiential learning environment that prepares students to apply their knowledge.
The department emphasizes the high value placed on continuous improvement, collaboration, the promotion of
individual strengths, and stakeholder relationships. Attached is a copy of the Mission and Values for the
Department of xxxxx.
Principle #2 – Rigor is Defined within a Program’s Learning Outcomes
Program-level learning outcomes that traverse individual courses promote a culture of academic rigor.
Integrated coursework where prerequisite courses enable higher level learning in subsequent courses promotes
faculty collaboration and the development of consistent, systematic and measureable standards. Courses in the
Department of xxxxx contribute to two different sets of Program Learning Outcomes: (1) College of xxxxxx
Core, and (2) the B.B.A. in xxxxxx. Accreditation of the undergraduate xxxxx program by the Computing
Accreditation Commission (CAC) of ABET gives external validation of these learning outcomes.
Principle #3 – Rigor is Refined through Continuous Improvement and Assessment
Faculty members utilize feedback from systematic assessment in order to continuously improve the curriculum
content and meet the needs of our stakeholders. Employers, alumni and the xxxxx Executive Advisory Board
are actively engaged in a formal process of feedback and improvement. This formal feedback mechanism is
essential for ABET and AACSB accreditation.
Principle #4 - Rigor is a Collective Faculty Value
Ultimately individual faculty members are responsible for the rigor within their classroom. In the Department
of xxxxxx, each course has a faculty leader. This faculty member is responsible for working with other faculty
members to ensure that learning objectives are met and a reasonable level of consistency in academic rigor
exists across sections.
Principle # 5 - Rigor is Refined through Faculty Evaluation
As part of the faculty evaluation process, the academic unit head (AUH) and members of the PAC give faculty
10
members feedback regarding how well they are meeting expectations of academic rigor and, if needed, offer
suggestions on how to increase academic rigor in their classroom.
Department of xxxxxxxx
Mission Statement
The Department of xxxxxx is committed to: (a) educating students by creating an active, experiential learning
environment that prepares them to apply knowledge of information systems, operations, management science,
and business for the betterment of organizations and society; and (b) serving the academic community and
business communities through appropriate research and service.
Our faculty
 maintain current and relevant curricula focused on information systems and analytical problem solving
in a business context within the major and minor degree programs in xxxxxxx and the minor in xxxxxxx
 support other programs in the College of xxxxxx and the university by providing undergraduate and
graduate courses in information systems, statistics, quantitative analysis, and operations and supply
chain management.
We value
Continuous improvement
Our faculty utilizes feedback from systematic assessment in order to continuously improve the curriculum
content and meet the needs of our students and other stakeholders in a rapidly changing world.
Diversity of academic fields and research among our faculty
Our department includes faculty in computer information systems, management science, and operations and
supply chain management who participate in their respective fields through scholarly research. The faculty
strive to integrate this research into the educational process and curriculum.
Collaboration, teamwork, and the promotion of individual strengths
We maintain a collegial and supportive culture within the department, a respect for each individual’s talents and
ideas, and an environment the supports success and the pursuit of excellence.
Stakeholder relationships
We build mutually beneficial relationships with students, business, government, and alumni communities in
order to increase our value to all constituents and supplement our resource base.
Service to diverse group of stakeholders
We provide leadership and perform service to all levels of the university, for academic and professional
organizations, and in the business community. We utilize our professional knowledge, skills, and talents to the
betterment of the community at large.
10.
1. Determinants of academic rigor
 Currency and dynamic nature of the program, consistent with a continually changing economic and
global environment.
 Expectations of professors.
 Projects that require research and analysis of actual companies, industries, or the economy.
 In-depth case work, both individual and group.
11




Testing that requires not only objective questions, but other forms of testing, such as essays and
spreadsheet analyses, that emphasize critical thinking.
Testing and evaluation that requires knowledge of what is going on in the markets, the economy, and
the world.
Experiential learning requiring engagement with the community.
Breadth and depth of the materials covered in the course should be consistent with the course learning
outcomes:
o Breadth allows the students to develop a broad perspective of the subject, achieving higherorder learning that includes a basic understanding and synthesis.
o
Depth enables the students to develop a more thorough understanding of the subject, achieving
higher-order learning that includes application, analysis, and evaluation.
2. Elements for academic rigor in another, dissimilar academic program/unit
 Same as above
Other notes on rigor:
1. Academic rigor is not equivalent to low grades. An instructor could cover very few topics and details, yet
still give difficult/tricky tests to create a false impression of academic rigor.
2. Student feedback should be an important element in identifying academic rigor. If the students feel a
course is either too easy or too difficult, the course instructor should address the "rigor" issue. This does
not mean that if the course is perceived as difficult that the instructor deviates from learning outcomes;
it does mean that the instructor examines the course’s pedagogy and seeks ways of helping students
achieve the learning outcomes.
11.
Over the past month, the faculty in xxxxxx has met on a couple of occasions to discuss the two questions
regarding academic rigor. Beyond the faculty meetings, I also requested further input from the faculty if they
felt that is was warranted. Below, you will find our responses to the questions.
What do you see as determinants of academic rigor within our program/unit?
Academic rigor could be influenced, or determined, but to the degree to which learning objectives are clearly
expressed, approached, and assessed. A rigorous academic program might have: cleanly defined learning
objectives, a challenging and thought provoking approach to achieving these learning outcomes, and reliable,
standard measures to assess the success of producing these outcomes. Further, our faculty was in agreement that
rigor could be defined as, “an experience for students to receive the appropriate level of challenge and support in and
out of the classroom that promotes and encourages learning.” It was unanimous among the faculty that academic
rigor is not based solely on grade distribution. Rigor, however, is about creating an environment where students are
willing to take risks, be vulnerable, and think introspectively.
Within our programs, we believe to have created rigor by:
1) Establishing high, yet reasonable and relevant, goals and expectations
2) Explaining those goals and expectations to the students
3) Preparing to teach the most significant components (and if time, all components) required for the students
to attain those goals and expectations
4) Expecting students to “study” the classroom and assigned material outside of class
12
5) Teaching the material in diverse ways, without being unnecessarily redundant, to attempt to reach as
many different learning styles as possible
6) Requiring/forcing the students to apply and think critically about the material provided and the goals and
expectations of the class through both in-class and out-of-class case studies
7) Giving pertinent, diverse and challenging assignments and assessments which reinforce and assist in the
learning and critical thinking process
8) Providing timely and relevant feedback to those assignments and assessments in a manner calculated to
assist in learning as opposed to simply providing the correct or better response and/or just “giving a grade”
9) Providing a classroom environment of mutual respect conducive to learning and open discussion
10) Providing practical learning experiences outside a traditional classroom where a student can apply theory
(practicum and internship experiences, as well as our senior capstone “theme dinner experiences”.
Elements that we consider/see as crucial in identifying academic rigor in another, perhaps dissimilar, academic
program/unit.
This was a difficult question for me and our faculty to answer, given that we don’t know other disciplines as well as
our own. Our response to this question is based on our perception of other disciplines, and may not be completely
accurate. However, we do believe that there are elements of academic rigor that do transfer from one discipline to
another. For example, having strong learning objectives and challenging students to achieve those objectives is
transferable. Having said that:
Rigor in an academic setting is relative. What may be seen as rigorous in one program, may not be seen as
rigorous in another program. It is hard to define other programs rigor because of how we stereotype one
another. I heard the following from faculty:
1) Academic rigor in other departments, such as the sciences, translates into high workload and regurgitation.
There is a great deal of memorization, identifications of facts or terminology, weekly quizzes, and multiple
choice exams.
2) Academic rigor in music translates into actual performances. This, we believe, is similar to the hospitality
program in that there is an applied component to the program.
3) Academic rigor in nursing is a standardized test, where it is an oral defense in philosophy.
4) Academic rigor in other areas (communication, etc.) is difficult progression guidelines (i.e., having a gpa
requirement to enter the major)
12.
Faculty in the xxxxx Program were asked to provide their input on determinants of academic rigor in the
program. Please note that since the xxxxx Program has no dedicated faculty, some of comments may be
included in other departmental statements.
Below please find a general summary of our collective thoughts.
(1) Challenge: Students should be challenged and encouraged to learn. They should also be held
accountable for their performance.
(2) Academic rigor applies to the breadth and depth of coverage of the subject matter. Breadth refers to
the number and scope of topics covered in class, and allows the student to develop a broad perspective
of the subject. Depth refers to the details and to the theories and models that are covered in class. An
appropriate combination of breadth and depth should be chosen in order to challenge the student and
encourage learning.
13
It was also suggested that there was an order to increasing academic challenge. From low to high, this
order would include: (a) survey of subject: a general overview of the topic, (b) method of the subject:
exposing the student to the dominant methodologies used in the discipline and allowing the student to
know “where the practitioner is coming from”, (c) methodological practice: requiring the student to
apply the material to demonstrate understanding, and (d) methodological application: requiring the
student to apply the course material to situations that differ significantly from the discussions in class.
(3) An academically rigorous course should not only expand a student’s knowledge, it should also expand a
student’s critical thinking about the subject matter and awaken their academic curiosity.
The above should apply to any class. For the xxxxx Program, rigor is also provided by specific demands of
the program – the foreign language and the semester abroad requirement.
13.
Note: In lieu of a meeting the statement below on academic rigor was drafted by the academic unit head for the
Xxxxx Department’s consideration. It was circulated to all the faculty and feedback was solicited. Almost all
feedback was positive and supportive. One faculty member wanted to stress “higher order” thinking as part of
rigor. However, the AUH felt that would confound two very different, and important, dimensions. While he does
not think all 22 faculty would wholly agree with this, all of them have had a chance to comment and most of
them would mostly agree.
(1) Academic rigor is simply challenging students and holding them accountable for their performance. As long
as it is tied to course objectives the form or context of that challenge does not matter much, a classroom
discussion can be as intellectually challenging as a project or exam. Practice in the xxxxx department has
focused on grade distributions and student self reports of challenge on student evaluations as a starting point
in discussing rigor with faculty in annual evaluations.
(2) Objective indicators (elements) of rigor, especially across academic disciplines are problematic. While a
useful starting point may be grade distributions (NOT just average grade levels) and student self reports, we
doubt there is a “high level comparable” indicator that universally reaches the issue of challenge. Ultimately,
the only guarantee of academic rigor is the professionalism and dedication of the faculty.
14.
The Xxxxx Program’s perspective on Academic Rigor
The Xxxxx discipline is the science of measuring and communicating information about performance. Although
commonly thought of in terms of financial performance, nonfinancial measures are critical to evaluating the
performance of many entities. Regardless of its form, performance information is valuable only if it has decision
relevance which stems primarily from its predictive ability.
The Xxxxx profession is the only private profession with a public trust. Although accountants are often paid by
the organizations whose reports they are preparing, it is readily recognized that those reports are not for the
benefit of the organization or its management. Rather, reports are being provided for the benefit of third parties
who are trying to base a decision on the reported information. Such decisions may be whether to extend credit,
invest capital, or provide donations to the entity being reported upon. The public trust which we hold compels
xxxxx professionals to focus on the information needs of these third parties, rather than the self-interests of the
organization or individuals. Unbiased and discriminating information benefits the capital markets by efficiently
directing resources to the most worthy prospects.
14
The Xxxxx faculty view the practice of assigning grades to students as an extension of this public trust. Grades
are merely a mechanism for measuring and communicating information about performance. Further, our view is
that grades are not solely for the benefit of the student. Rather grades provide information to third parties who
use the reported grade information to make decisions. Such decisions include whether to extend a particular
student an offer of employment or admission to graduate school. We have succeeded in our measurement
objectives if these third parties find they can use grades to distinguish between high and low performers.
Academic rigor is merely a consequence of this general philosophy. We provide challenges to students. These
challenges are designed to measure student performance. To be useful in a comparative sense, the challenges
must distinguish between varying levels of student performance. The process culminates with the assigning of a
grade. Since xxxxx employers persistently base employment decisions on students’ reported grades, we may
infer that this information is useful in helping them predict performance in the workplace. If most or all students
receive the same grades, the information we are providing would not have predictive ability and would be of no
value. Therefore academic rigor benefits the most deserving student by allowing the marketplace to efficiently
identify and reward their superior ability and performance.
15.
Rigor in xxxxx curriculum at James Madison University can be described through the learning objectives given
below:
1. Demonstrates knowledge of the scope, methods, and limitations of economic analysis; as well as of
alternative economic methods, theories and their respective applications and implications.
Rigor means the ability to fully formulate and apply economic models in diagrammatic and mathematical form,
as opposed to only summarizing their conclusions in words. Economic models can be developed (1)
mathematically, (2) graphically, and (3) descriptively. In xxxxx academic rigor implies using all three of these
methods, beginning in principles courses. The goal is to achieve deeper learning so the instructional challenge is
not just to use these different methods but to integrate them effectively.
2. Demonstrates knowledge of neoclassical microeconomic theory and its applications.
Rigor means the ability to fully formulate and apply the models of microeconomic theory including models of
individual choice and markets.
3. Demonstrates knowledge of macroeconomic theory and its applications.
Rigor means the ability to apply aggregate models that allow a full understanding of economic problems on a
national and international scale.
4. Demonstrates understanding of the roles of economic theory and institutions (including cultural
values) in public policy formation.
Rigor means the ability to fully articulate and apply the insights of the leading schools of thought on institutional
xxxxx.
5. Demonstrates knowledge of the basic mathematical skills, quantitative methods and econometric
tools used by economists in analyzing models, quantifying empirical relationships, and testing
hypotheses.
Rigor means the ability to formulate and test econometric models, and to accurately interpret econometric
models in published research. Academic rigor can be found through applications of economic theories through
15
modern econometric techniques and software. While many students find econometric theories and applications
difficult, the literature is not comprehensible without at least a basic understanding of econometrics. Students
must also be made aware of the shortcomings inherent in econometric techniques and methods.
6. Demonstrates the ability to comprehend and critically evaluate economic arguments presented in the
(print and on-line) media.
Rigor means the ability to test popular economic arguments by reference to the findings of theoretical and
empirical xxxxx. A key element is promoting content acquisition through critical thinking. The essential idea is to
carefully review underlying assumptions in a model, noting how key model features depend on certain
assumptions. It also means thinking about the policy conclusions implied by a theory and also comparing
theories to master the nuances in content. Finally rigor involves emphasizing competing theories so that
students are aware that the discipline of xxxxx does not always provide simple answers.
7. Demonstrates awareness of contemporary national and international economic conditions.
Rigor means the ability to describe current economic indicators, to specify their value within a narrow range,
and to identify the major explanations of current conditions. Policy debates often fall back on economic
theories, and students must understand how abstract theories deepen their understanding of the world they
inhabit.
16.
The degree of rigor in a course (or program) is generally a function of two factors: the difficulty and the
magnitude of the task a student is asked to accomplish. A task may be difficult but of limited scope. For
example, most students find it difficult to create a predictive model using regression. But once they understand
how to do it, the task has well defined parameters and can be successfully accomplished in just a few minutes.
Conversely, a task may be easy but require a lot of time to complete. For example, a student might be asked to
apply an extensive list of formatting specifications to a lengthy document. The task is not difficult but it requires
a lot of time to complete. The most rigorous, challenging courses combine difficulty with magnitude.
Like rigor, difficulty can be viewed as being a function two factors: the complexity and boundedness of a task.
Our Xxxxx Analytics course teaches students to do CHAID (Chi Square Automatic Interaction Detection) and RFM
(Recency, Frequency, Monetary Value) Analysis, procedures that have many moving parts . It is difficult for
students to understand how all the different aspects of CHAID and RFM fit together. But the boundaries of what
they must learn are well defined.
On the other hand, in the several Xxxxx courses that involve client projects, the boundaries of the task are not
well defined, e.g., in our Google Challenge course, students compete with tens of thousands of other students
around the world to develop the most outstanding online xxxxx campaign. The scope for creativity and effort in
this course is unbounded. Part of the challenge is to self-define the scope of the undertaking so as to complete
a well-done project in the allotted time.
An important indicator that a course is rigorous is an approximately normal distribution of grades. This
distribution typifies courses that challenge all students who are enrolled. An approximately normal distribution
indicates that course work was sufficiently challenging that even the more able students had to stretch to
distinguish themselves. When there is a ceiling effect in the distribution of grades, i.e., when the tail of the
distribution on the high side is truncated, it is a sure sign that the more able students were not fully challenged
by the course.
16
We encountered an example of apparently insufficient rigor when developing new XXXXX academic progression
standards this past year. Members of the XXXXX leadership council expressed some interest in using General
Education Cluster 1 courses as part of our mix of required courses for admission to the XXXXX. The skills taught
in Cluster 1 are highly relevant to success in business. But upon examination, we found that the diagnosticity of
Cluster 1 grades was dubious because such a high proportion of students earned A or A- grades. We thus
abandoned the idea of using Cluster 1 and instead used only courses in the XXXXX lower-division core where the
rigor is such that grades are normally distributed.
The first courses students take in a curriculum tend to establish expectations with respect to rigor and required
effort. In the XXXXX, we are fortunate that our lower division courses establish the expectation that students
must work hard to be successful in the various business majors. That expectation is reinforced by XXXXX 300,
the first upper division business course which is distinguished by the scope and complexity of the business plan
assignment it puts to students.
Thanks primarily to the lower division XXXXX courses and XXXXX 300, Xxxxx majors come to us primed to work
hard in their major courses. While classes taught in our department vary in their degree of perceived rigor, all
students then take courses that are almost universally rated as being challenging, i.e., both analytical,
quantitative courses and courses in which students work on unbounded client projects that have unlimited
scope for the exercise of creativity and effort.
17.
What determines Academic Rigor in this program?

First – rigor where – is it in the Admittance process, the Journey, Graduation, or Career success?

Student/Class Measures
o Not Grade distribution - Academic rigor is not equivalent to low grades. An instructor could cover
very few topics and details and still give tough tests to create a false impression of academic rigor.
This would not help the students learn.
o Students report they “worked a lot” - Student feedback should be the most important element in
identifying academic rigor. If the students feel a course is either too easy or too difficult, the course
instructor should address the "rigor" issue.
o Measure the degree of challenge - An instructor should choose an appropriate combination of
breadth and depth for a specific class to challenge and encourage the students to learn. This
combination varies with the level of the course and course objectives.
o Program Metrics – perhaps measuring the AOL each year and seeing if the metrics demonstrate
growth
o Students can view problems from multiple perspectives and choose the appropriate model
o 1) start with meaningful objectives, 2) decide how I will know if students have achieved those
learning objectives, 3) design instruction and authentic assignments that will demonstrate mastery
of material, and 4) hold students accountable for demonstrating mastery through feedback and
grading.

Career Metrics
o Career tracking – watching and comparing graduates of our programs compared to other schools
o Survey the value of the programs with Young Alums
o Ask host companies about the value of the graduates that have gone through it
17

Objective Measures
o Compare content of these programs with programs at other institutions
o “CPA” exam – are there certified tests that can be used to measure output?
o “Certificates” – same idea – have students pass some comprehensive external assessments that are
administered by standard bodies
What elements are crucial in identifying academic rigor in another dissimilar academic program?
 “CPA” exam – are there certified tests that can be used to measure output?
 “Certificates” – same idea – have students pass some comprehensive external assessments that are
administered by standard bodies
18.
The need and assessment of academic rigor is an integral component of the Department of Xxxxx (XXXXX), not
only to maintain its institutional credibility at James Madison University but it must also satisfy professional
accreditation by the Council on Academic Accreditation in XXXX (XXX) of XXXX Association. For this national
accreditation XXXXX must conduct continuous self-study, including an intensive on-campus site visit by XXX
every eight years and the submission of annual progress reports each year during the eight year accreditation
cycle. A component of the national review requires the department to demonstrate that students pass
prescribed undergraduate course work in the following areas: biological sciences, physical sciences,
social/behavioral sciences, and mathematics as well as an appropriate academic program of study in
professional coursework for both undergraduate and graduate students (e.g., speech-language pathology
requires 75 semester credit hours in a course of study addressing knowledge and skills including 36 hours at the
graduate level). In addition to the review of didactic classes, an extensive variety of clinical opportunities and
experiences across the entire breadth and depth of the professional scope of practice must be available to our
students that include clinical exposure to patients in all disorder areas across the life span. As part of evaluating
the clinical component, the students must not only pass the course but be able to demonstrate acquired clinical
knowledge and skills. For speech-language pathology students they must acquire 400 clinical clock hours and if
they wish to work in public schools 100 of the 400 clinical hours must be obtained in a public school setting. For
audiology, students must acquire 1820 clinical clock hours. All students must participate in both formative and
summative assessments throughout their academic training to demonstrate that they are acquiring and have
acquired knowledge in specific areas and that they are developing and have developed clinical skills. Finally to
assure that a speech language pathology and audiology program includes sufficient academic rigor all graduates
of the program must pass a national examination prior to beginning their professional career.
To assure all our students first have the opportunity to gain entrance into a graduate program and subsequently
pass all graduate coursework and the national examination, XXXXX uses assessment markers along the student’s
academic career path to evaluate progress. XXXXX uses the JMU assessment day to demonstrate the acquisition
of knowledge in the professional areas between the sophomore year and the senior year using an examination
format similar to the national examination. As stated above, at the graduate level the students must pass the
national exam and our accreditation standards require all academic programs to make public on department
websites the results of all graduates of the program on the national examination. In addition to the national
aggregate score, there are subsection scores available that demonstrate the student’s acquisition of knowledge
in distinct professional areas. For XXX the areas are: Basic Human Communication Processes, Phonology and
Language Disorders, Speech Disorders, Neurogenic Disorder, Audiology/Hearing, Clinical management, and
Professional Issues/Psychometrics/Research. For Audiology the subsections are: Basic Human Communication
Processes, Prevention/ID, Behavioral Assessment/Interpretation, Electrophysiological
Measurements/Interpretation, Rehabilitation Assessment, Rehabilitative Technology, Rehabilitative
Management, and Professional Issues, Psychometrics, Research.
18
19.
Learning to program is an essential component of Xxxxx education, but it is the ability to solve complex
problems and communicate those solutions that is critical. A rigorous curriculum teaches students to
incorporate theoretical and practical knowledge to solve problems in the small and in the large.
Creating a rigorous Xxxxx curriculum involves the identification of problems where the application of theoretical
concepts provides the development of a solution and key principles are necessary for an accurate and efficient
implementation. Elements of assignments that can improve rigor are listed below.











Students learn languages or systems new to them independently and apply them to solve substantial
problems.
Students write programs of several hundred lines (longer in more advanced courses) in a language
students already know
Students design substantial software systems that meet minimal standards of design quality (such as
hiding information, reducing coupling, maintaining coherence, etc.).
Students apply discrete mathematics to analyze computational problems and find solutions.
Students read technical literature and are able to apply what they learn to solve substantial problems
Students write technical documents that are grammatically and orthographically correct, and describe
technical matters correctly, completely, and clearly.
Students write substantial programs at different language levels, such as microcode, assembler, and
high-level languages
Students test their programs thoroughly enough to find bugs that would manifest themselves in regular
use.
Problems are assigned for which students cannot readily find the solution, e.g., cannot Goggle the
answer.
Students design, create, implement, test, or analyze an algorithm, program, system, or research
document that:
o addresses/solves a large problem (students need to discover/handle complex interactions)
o addresses/solves a very specific, narrow problem (students need to master intricate details of a
solution)
o addresses/solves a problem they have never seen before (students apply what they have
learned to new, unknown problems, or discover new ways of solving a problem)
Assignments stress the importance of non-xxx factors (and consider those when grading) that go into
creating an assignment solution: correct use of language, proper structure, and quality of presentation.
Course offerings and classroom environment are also important components in a vigorous curriculum. Not only
should each course provide the breadth and depth of material for the course subject matter but courses should
build upon one another to teach the interrelationships and intricacies of fields in CS.
Rigor in other academic units
Though unique to the field of study, each department must have assignments and a curriculum that is both
challenging and thought provoking. Students must be intrigued to find solutions and not simply asked to repeat
material presented in the classroom. Student application of knowledge is essential for all units to provide
curriculum rigor.
19
20.
(Xxxxx) Response to Academic Rigor Questions 5/25/11
(This statement is not necessarily representative of the department as a whole, but rather represents
individual(s)’ thoughts on this topic.
Statements from Academic Culture Report

Academic rigor or establishing a learning environment that appropriately challenges our students.
Much of this discussion revolved around the academic rigor to which students are or are not exposed
through their classes. Grade inflation came up frequently as a shorthand way of expressing concern
about this issue. There were also variations in definition by discipline/academic program. In moving
forward, we believe it would be worthwhile to share ideas about what makes a course of study rigorous.
With increasing public focus on what it is that students are actually learning in college, this is a concern
that extends to all of higher education. We acknowledge this topic is complex. As a starting point to
addressing this issue, we propose a method for analysis and developing possible actions that respects
differences among individual programs but recognizes the value of identifying general aspects of
academic rigor that can be used by individual faculty and programs in assessing the learning
environment they have or wish to establish. Our proposed methodology will begin with deliberations
and reporting from the individual academic unit level. We hope to accomplish this prior to the end of
May. Then we will invite nominations and select 50 individuals to participate in a two day Madison
Institute this summer to identify those general aspects of academic rigor that can lead to constructive
conversations among programs and productive analysis at the program level.
Questions the Provost wanted answered:
I. What do we see as determinants of academic rigor within our program/unit?
II. What elements do we consider/see as crucial in identifying academic rigor in another perhaps
dissimilar academic program/unit? Be sure and think about those structured learning events outside of
the on-campus classroom – e.g., on-line, experiential, etc.
Xxxxx Response to Question I:
1. There is a great deal of debate when trying to define academic rigor. (See article below**)
2. There are societal factors as well as internal policy factors that are in play.
A. Students are coming to JMU with a sense of entitlement. This problem begins in elementary
school with social promotion, honor rolls, bumper stickers, the rewarding of effort rather
than results, and a continual bombardment of, often times, unearned positive feedback. “A”
students are graduating from high school without having developed adequate writing skills.
Yet these students have been told they are “A” students.
B. Universities are being forced to graduate a certain percentage of students.
C. There is a societal notion that “everyone is entitled to a college education”.
D. The JMU Faculty Handbook requires the use of student course evaluations when
determining teaching effectiveness. This process may be causing faculty members to
decrease rigor in order to attain satisfactory ratings from students (entitled students!)
E. By allowing certain programs to have gateway requirements, the university is forcing the
more marginal students into the few remaining programs that are not gated. These ungated programs are, by default, facing an unusually high number of potentially low grades
(and the possibility of low student course evaluations), possibly resulting in the dumbing
down of the curriculum.
20
F. Within JMU there appears to be an uneven distribution of faculty positions across programs.
The uneven distribution is most likely the result of a dramatic change in student interests
over the past ten years. There exists an untenable situation within the programs in xxxxx
that are not subjected to external accreditation/licensure. Within the B.S. in Xxxxx
programs, we have a student major to faculty ratio of 100:1. Fall 2010 enrollments in HTH
classes indicate an average class size of 68 students. Faculty members carry a 4/4 load.
Assessing writing and critical thinking skills takes time and energy. The department ratios
previously mentioned do little in the way of creating an academic environment conducive to
the fostering of writing and critical thinking skills.
As indicated by former Harvard President Bok, “The quality of education for
college graduates also seems in peril, Bok said. Recently, 500 U.S. colleges
administered the Collegiate Learning Assessment test to their undergraduates,
Bok said. The test measures students’ writing and critical thinking skills. Results
showed that 36 percent of students tested made no progress between there
freshman and senior years in those skills.
Another study shows that the amount of hours college students are spending on
homework has dropped by 40 percent since 1960. Students now study about 14
hours a week, Bok said. About one-third of undergraduates have never taken a
course with more than 40 pages of reading per week; and half haven’t taken any
courses requiring them to write more than 20 pages over the course of the
semester.” (Former Harvard President Calls for Major Shift in Teaching in Higher
Education, Ioana Patringenaru | May 2, 2011).
3. It seems some are assuming that rigor is defined by grades (See highlighted section above). The
greater the class rigor, the lower the grades…..Bad, bad assumption. Most of our programs have an
external review process leading to accreditation/certification. Part of that process is to ensure that we
are successfully producing course outcomes. Based on the first time pass rates for the students in many
of our programs, we are leading the pack in producing students who achieve success. For example, one
of our programs has had students achieving a 90% pass rate on the national certifying exam, while the
national first time pass rate is around 50%. The JMU students achieving this 90% pass rate had a fall
2010 program specific GPA of 3.55. Grade inflation? We don’t think so.
4. If a large percentage of professors are complaining about grade inflation they need only look in the
mirror to find the culprits. This is an easy fix…..If you think your grades are inflated, change the way you
grade. If only a small percentage of professors are complaining about grade inflation, then those that
think grades are a measure of rigor and that grades at JMU are inflated, need to convince the majority
that grade inflation is a problem.
5. We do our students no good if our grading is out of line with the rest of the universities across the
country (The data indicate JMU grades are within the national norm). In the graduate/professional
school application process, our students are compared to other students. Often, grades are a major
factor. If we decide that a “C” really means “average”, then our students will suffer once they leave
JMU. Employers, graduate schools admissions committees, etc. will not look favorably on a bunch of C’s
and B’s.
6. We are assuming, with a certain degree of arrogance, that faculty members have the ability to truly
measure learning. And we are assuming grades reflect the rigor of a class. A vast majority of university
faculty members came through “rigorous” doctoral programs that offered little in the way of best
teaching practices, assessment and measurement, etc. We are assuming that our tests and assignments
have acceptable reliabilities and validities. Yet, few if any professors analyze their measuring
21
instruments. Grades can reflect attendance and participation. Is attendance and participation reflective
of academic rigor?
Xxxxx Response to Question II:
After considerable discussion we decided we could possibly react to a defense of rigor presented by a
dissimilar unit. But we are not at all comfortable suggesting rigor standards for some other department.
** Academic Rigor: An Explanation or an Apology? James Lubker
Academic rigor is a topic that elicits some rather strong feelings. I’ve heard students complain that the
courses they are taking are too easy and that we don’t demand enough of them. Those students want
more rigor in their courses. I’ve heard faculty complain that students are poorly prepared, have
distressingly short attention-spans, and seem to be more interested in parties than in studying. Those
faculty don’t think that students want or will tolerate increased academic rigor. I’ve heard parents
demand that we refund their money for a course because their child didn’t really learn anything and
that faculty are anything but rigorous in the classroom. I have also listened to all manner of views and
opinions across the spectrum on this topic. So, a discussion, or a series of discussions, around this topic
of academic rigor is certain to be interesting, perhaps contentious and, hopefully, helpful and
illuminating. It would be especially helpful if any insights generated by the discussions could be used to
actually improve what we do as teacher/scholars.
With that in mind I was delighted to learn that the first issue of Universitas was to be devoted to the
topic of academic rigor. I was also delighted to be invited to write a piece for that inaugural issue, since I
do, in fact, feel rather strongly about the topic. My delight diminished somewhat as I began to think
about writing the piece. Upon reflection, it seemed a strangely daunting task. Then I saw a very
straightforward question raised by Scott Cawelti: “What IS academic rigor”? Cawelti’s question served as
a catalyst for what follows.
“Introduction to Linguistics” (Liberal Arts Core) was my most favorite course to teach at the University of
Vermont. When I began teaching it I had fifteen students enrolled. Eleven years later, there were more
than 110 students. In my opinion there were at least two reasons for that increase. For one thing, I was
a good teacher. I was three times nominated for the best teacher of the year award and was once first
runner-up for that high honor. My student evaluations were uniformly strong and I loved teaching that
course. The second reason for the increase in enrollment was, I am sure, that it had a well-deserved
reputation for being an easy course. It was perceived to lack academic rigor. I taught it that way on
purpose, with malice aforethought. I “could” have made it extraordinarily difficult. I approached some of
Naom Chomsky’s theories, and used as a non-required reference Chomksy and Halle’s book The Sound
Pattern of English (Cambridge, 1968) along with the more recent (and more readable) book by Steven
Pinker The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language (New York, 1994). These are not
transparent theories. I had a whole set of lectures on acoustic theory, which has some real complexity. I
opened the doors to neural functions in language production. However, I did everything I could to keep
it simple. You see, some of the students in this course were enrolled because it was a requirement of
their major, that is in Communicative Disorders and Psychology. I held Professorial rank in both of those
departments. Some pre-med and nursing students were enrolled because they knew I took a medical
approach to much of the course, and that I held Professorial rank in the Department of Neurology in the
College of Medicine. All of those students were looking at a good many courses down the road that
would involve plenty of rigor. As the students in Communicative Disorders and Psychology would be
taking more work in the future that involved Linguistics, I intended my course for those students to be a
very basic introduction to the beauties of this field of study. The great bulk of the students in that
course, however, were likely never to take a course in Linguistics again and I wanted to awaken in them
22
an interest in thinking about issues we discussed in class. My hope was that sometime, as an adult, they
might open up an issue of the New Yorker and come across an article about Chomsky (there was a great
series fifteen years ago) or a piece by Pinker and then they would say: “Hey, I had this crazy old prof
back at Vermont who lectured about this stuff and it was pretty cool,” and they would be motivated to
read the piece and, perhaps, ask some questions about it. If my cream-puff course awakened some
interest and caused students to enjoy, at least a little bit, the act of thinking and asking questions and
seeking answers to their own questions, then I absolutely did not care if they could go to the board and
re-create Gunnar Fant’s “Acoustic Theory of Speech Production.” No academic rigor, right? On the
other hand, I also taught a course while on the faculty of the Institute of Linguistics at the University of
Stockholm, on Research Methods. Now, that one had some rigor to it. The nature of the beast, Research
Methods, demands doing certain things by the book. Academic rigor, right?
The operational definition of academic rigor in the classroom is going to depend a great deal upon the
particular class being taught. The two courses I mention above may have both been quite rigorous, but
in very different ways.
In my introductory course I didn’t want them to memorize detail and I didn’t want to force-feed theory
to them. I wanted them to ask questions. I began the course by explaining that I expected them to ask
me these two questions, and to do so often: “What do you mean?” and “How do you know.” Some of
them did – and that was all I needed to feel that I was on the right track. Getting first-year students to
do that may just require a little rigor.
I once had the great pleasure of sitting in a corner of a room high up in the Wenner-Gren building in
Stockholm, talking with Morris Halle, co-author of the seminal book by Chomsky and Halle. He spoke at
length of his belief that we spend too much time in the classroom teaching as if all the answers are in
the back of the book; as if what is accepted as fact and truth today will remain so forever and we must
teach it, rigorously, as some sort of dogma. In fact, he said, what wins a Nobel Prize today may elicit only
a ho-hum in twenty years because what we do in research is strive to disprove theories. So, he said, his
work with Chomsky, in Sound Patterns of English, was bound to be shown to be wrong in many of its
facets, and his goal as a Professor was not to rigorously force his theories upon students but, rather, to
rigorously encourage them to question his theories and find the errors in them. A rather different kind
of rigor.
As we consider academic rigor on our campus, and I very much hope we do take up that discussion, we
must keep that basic question raised by Scott Cawelti very much in mind: What IS academic rigor? It
may be in the eye of the beholder. It may, surely it must, vary with the course and sometimes vary
within a given course. For me, rigor will always be doing whatever is needed to enable our students to
ask good questions, to seek their own answers, to embrace change, to be comfortable with ambiguity,
and to express themselves well and clearly in their writing and speaking. For others, classroom rigor may
be something entirely different and much more explicitly defined.
This is why it was so difficult for me to begin writing on this topic. I can only paraphrase the Supreme
Court justice (was it Potter Stewart?) by saying that I can’t define academic rigor but I know it when I see
it; however at least it puts the issue out on the table. Now, hopefully, we can begin to take a closer look
and pose some questions of our own.
James Lubker is Interim Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs at the University of Northern
Iowa
http://www.uni.edu/universitas/fall05/pdf/jameslubker.pdf
23
21.
…how academic rigor would be defined by that unit and what they would look for in deciding that
some other unit representing a very different discipline or area of study was rigorous.
What constitutes rigor and how to achieve it has been a topic of frequent conversation in xxxxx, especially in
relation to setting standards and outcomes in clinical teaching where performance is more difficult to measure.
Because we did not have time in the final faculty meetings of the year to revisit this topic, I set up a Blackboard
discussion board forum during the month of May. This response incorporates both recent faculty input and my
own perceptions about how we view rigor in xxxxx education.
We view rigor in terms of both learning processes and learning outcomes, and are systematically “tuned in” to
both of these areas. Our programs are guided by specific competencies at both undergrad and grad levels, and
these professional competencies (called “Essentials”) were recently updated by the AACN. So we map our
curricula for all programs to the BSN and MSN Essentials for Xxxxx Education. We also systematically gather
program outcomes data related to program benchmarks for program accreditation. As our programs have
developed and grown, it has been a priority to develop and use standard definitions and measures across
courses. We have standard tools for student scholarly writing, presentations, peer evaluation, and portfolios. Of
course the guidelines can be tailored to course needs; but our outcomes measures do reflect core standards we
all use.
With that as background, we have struggled with “rigor” in both process and outcomes areas:
- We have had a lot of new faculty and novice teachers, so setting standards/expectations for student
performance, holding students accountable, and engaging students actively in learning in ways the
faculty are able to evaluate (especially clinically in a busy ever-changing environment) requires
experience, confidence, and knowledge of pedagogy. New faculty also struggle to balance being helpful
and supportive with setting clear boundaries and expectations with students. Nurses are nurturing, so
that boundary setting can be a real challenge for many new faculty. The faculty has spent a lot of energy
during the past year revising the BSN Practicum Evaluation Tool (PET) that is used across all practicum
courses in order to help faculty focus and communicate clear standards for student clinical performance.
So rigor in teaching is one component.
- Faculty are adding a fair amount of web-enhancement and on-line components to classroom courses.
This creates special challenges for assuring and assessing the depth and accountability of student
learning. Even faculty with exemplary teaching abilities have struggled with this.
- There is considerable concern and debate regarding grade inflation and faculty inability to maintain
clear learning standards. The xxxxx faculty perceives that students expect A’s (especially in experiential
courses with more qualitative and subjective evaluative components). Faculty stress about student
course evaluations so are reluctant to give direct feedback regarding student learning challenges,
especially in clinical courses. As a result, faculty complain that students are unprepared, etc. clinically,
but some practicum course grades have little variability and do not reflect the range of student learning
outcomes the faculty report. Faculty prefer a mastery, criterion based approach to practicum learning,
but worry that “rigor” will decrease if we stop grading those courses. The conversation is ongoing,
especially as the BSN faculty are working on some curriculum revision in the coming year.
- A related theme is questions about student expectations for their own achievements, student
entitlement, and student pressure on faculty. All related, of course, to faculty role development and
identity.
I got very little feedback on what xxxxx faculty would look for in assessing rigor in another discipline. However,
based on our discussions, I would say criteria to evaluate rigor in any program must include learning and
performance standards, well developed and high quality teaching/learning processes, congruent measures
24
and/or benchmarks to provide evaluation data. Also, this evaluation process must include standards and
measures of faculty teaching.
22.
Academic rigor in the XXXXX Department was identified as being the production of accomplished graduates. An
accomplished, successful XXXXX graduate is one who demonstrates both a set of skills and body of knowledge,
and a certain quality of mind. Key to this is the complementarity of these two dimensions to excellence: an
XXXXX graduate should demonstrate both these sets of characteristics, not one without the other. A list of these
characteristics is found below on the right side of the summary diagram.
To reach this high standard of academic rigor in the form of quality graduates, the Department identified an
exacting educational process that emphasizes the performance of both faculty and students. Again, key to this
conceptualization (seen on the left of the diagram below), is the notion of education being an iterative process
where both dimensions are important.
Rigor, in short, is something that is achieved when our graduates demonstrate a certain depth of mind and
depth of skills; this is the priority. The route to that end is one that emphasizes these qualities via the iterative
development of learning.
23.
The faculty of the Department of Xxxxx agree that a discussion of “academic rigor” is important and appropriate,
but we feel the word “rigor” insinuates the wrong concern. Dictionary definitions of rigor do not match what we
think is important. We do feel it is important that within courses, programs, and across all college experiences,
students are engaged and challenged in ways that promote their development. Rather than focusing this
conversation around “rigor,” we prefer the conversation focus on “engagement” and “challenge.” Experiences
that promote student development do not have to be strict, harsh, or tough as suggested by the definition of
the word rigor. We do, however, feel we need to cultivate student development by providing an environment
that promotes growth.
25
The assessment of engagement and challenge is difficult for many reasons. Firstly, the college
experience promotes development along many dimensions. Students advance during college intellectually,
emotionally, socially, spiritually, and ethically. They develop a wider appreciation for things and ideas that
extend beyond their more limited and self-focused earlier-life experiences. They develop skills that are useful in
their professions and personal lives. Adding complexity to the problem of assessing engagement and challenge,
students vary in their initial state along all of these dimensions. They differ in their self efficacy and motivation
for development. Further, teaching and learning strategies vary in effectiveness across learners and teachers
and for different educational objectives.
Grade distributions are sometimes an indicator of challenge, but they often fall short. For example,
grades are generally high for experiences that take a mastery approach, requiring students to perform, receive
feedback, and repeat until they achieve a high level of competence. However, if instructors have high
performance expectations and require students to work hard to reach their standards, they are providing
experiences that we would consider to be challenging.
To evaluate engagement and challenge, it is necessary to conduct a comprehensive review of courses,
program curricula and other college experiences that consider the objectives of the experience, the activities
required, and whether most students advance to a new level as a result of the experience. The questions
addressed in this analysis will vary depending on the goals of each college experience. For some experiences
reference to Bloom’s taxonomy (http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/bloomtax.htm) can be useful.
Sometimes Bloom’s taxonomy may fail to fully capture the objectives of a college experience. For some
experiences we might ask whether students have advanced in their ability to competently perform particular
tasks. We might ask if activities help them develop a deeper level of appreciation for creative works or natural
beauty. For other experiences we might ask if they become more tolerant or compassionate.
In the end this discussion shouldn’t really be about “rigor.” Desirable college experiences encourage
student development through “engagement” and “challenge.” Are we doing all we can do to promote growth?
This statement was created by xxxxx based on a discussion during the April 4, 2011 meeting of the Department
of Xxxxx and subsequent discussion by e-mail.
24.
The following is an attempt to capture faculty discussion regarding academic rigor. First noted as an indication
of academic rigor was a list of requirements in the Xxxxx Program including:
 Use of a departmental grading scale
 Professional behavioral standards cited on each syllabus and in the Xxxxx Student Handbook
 Admission to the SW Program and Contracts with individual students should he/she not meet the standards
 Program-driven assignments (assignments that are linked to specific courses regardless of instructor)
including
o Challenging writing assignments - professional documentation assignments across courses
o Challenging reading load
 Program sequencing:
o Designed to be developmental in nature (Bloom’s Taxonomy)
o Program of study not just a group of courses
 Multi-method outcome measures to address educational competences (objectives) of the program
 As a professional program, the culminating field practicum (internship) should demonstrate the soon to be
graduate has walking around knowledge of the discipline
26
Discussion captured the following ideas which are more significant than the list above. Academic rigor:
 Is attached to difficulty, magnitude, complexity of assignments
 Should result in defined competency by end of academic of career
 Includes engaging students cognitively and affectively and expecting professional behaviors
 Should reflect multi-methods in pedagogy and requirements and outcome assessment strategies
 Involves moving from learning to simulating to applying knowledge
 Includes development of observational skills, interpretative skills and communication skills
 Involves moving up in levels of learning
 Need to know how to help students learn to interpret data; how to strike intellectual curiosity so that
student start to mine data for themselves
 Would be helpful to have rubrics that could be used across instructors so that all know the standards to
which students are being held (ex. Writing rubrics)
Noted that rigor at the undergraduate level should be different than that at the graduate level.
25.
The xxxxx department came up with the following:
The determinants of academic rigor within and beyond the Xxxxx program are twofold:
1. The ability of students to analyze, synthesize, and critically evaluate the content under study, and to apply the
knowledge to new situations.
2. The development and utilization of the appropriate evaluation methods for the above.
26.

An academically rigorous course is recognized as being one that is
Comprehensive
Its subject matter is addressed in a way that gives a complete picture of the topics covered.
Challenging
Students will be exposed to and are expected to master material that significantly exceeds
the prior knowledge limits of the average enrolled student and that requires a focused
student effort to be successful.
Appropriate
It builds on its pre-requisites and fulfills its role as a pre-requisite to higher-level courses.
The grades earned by students in the class closely reflect their mastery of subject matter.
Professional
The instructor has an educational background in an overlapping field of study and is able to
explore details of the topic well beyond the usual course boundaries so that the context
and meaning of each concept or technique can be explored without limits.

The rigorous curriculum is
Integrated
It relies on the expertise and rigor of other departments in the university to provide their
students with service courses and cognates of breadth and depth.
Productive
It empowers our students to successfully take the next step in their lives and careers
through employment, graduate, or professional school in the same or related fields, thus
27
fulfilling JMU’s goal of preparing “educated and enlightened citizens who lead productive
and meaningful lives”.
27.
Academic Rigor in the JMU Department of Xxxxx and Xxxxx
Although there are a variety of definitions of academic rigor, the interpretation generally employed by the
Department of Xxxxx and Xxxxx at JMU (hereafter termed “Xxxxx Department”) is that the instructional mission
should seek to provide a competitive national edge for any students successfully completing coursework from
this department. The Xxxxx Department offers a curriculum guided by the national organization of professional
chemists known as the American Chemical Society (ACS). The ACS Committee on Professional Training never
stops evaluating both the specific courses in xxxxx offered throughout the nation and each ACS-certified college
and university xxxxx department to maintain quality. As a result, throughout the nation, xxxxx course sequence
and content have been reviewed and scrutinized for decades. As a long-standing ACS-certified program, the JMU
Xxxxx Department has been recognized as offering a challenging and rigorous curriculum. In the 1950s and
1960s when JMU was Madison College, Drs. Wilbur Chappell, Raymond Cool, and Liberty Casali established a
climate of integrity and thoroughness for coursework that has guided the department to the present day. Rigor
is maintained in the Xxxxx Department by employing the following approaches (in no particular order):
1. General climate of rigor. Although it is not possible to demonstrate a metric for this climate, it is always
in evidence. Faculty members frequently discuss classes, student performance, content, and rigor both
in formal and informal gatherings and as part of the constant development of coursework and curricula.
2. Retention and hiring of the best faculty. It has been said that the best and most capable faculty will
produce the best and most capable students. The Xxxxx Department thus recruits the best faculty for
each subdiscipline that can be found when faculty jobs are opened. Considerable time, resources and
effort are spent in the recruitment process with the expectation that new faculty (who are the best
trained Ph.D.s available) will strengthen the rigor and quality of the department.
3. Careful consideration of student evaluations. The Xxxxx Department does not take student evaluations
lightly. However, it has long been a standard in the department that student coursework evaluations do
not serve as a primary criterion for advancement and promotion. The xxxxx faculty have been concerned
that excessive dependence on student evaluations may lead to evaluations becoming a popularity
contest and result in grade inflation. Rather the department places much greater emphasis on the
reports provided by post-graduation students who have been asked to evaluate faculty performance
when they have gone into the job market, or on to graduate study.
4. Undergraduate research and other activities. The involvement of undergraduates in active research
projects mentored by faculty members has been a long-standing tradition in the Xxxxx Department.
Publication in top-tier science journals and maintaining external funding with undergraduate
researchers is only possible by establishing an academically rigorous environment.
5. An eye to the competition. The Commonwealth of Virginia is fortunate to have a number of highly-rated
universities and colleges that excel in undergraduate chemical education. The JMU Xxxxx Department is
not blind to need to establish a strong and rigorous curriculum in order to recruit competitively for the
best students. Having strong and capable students helps ensure that coursework is offered with at a
high level of rigor.
6. The success of students in the job market and graduate school. The JMU Xxxxx Department pays
attention to the success of students applying for post-graduate work, professional school or in entering
the job market. In the current year, more than one-third of the graduates were successful in gaining
admission to graduate programs, some of which are among the most competitive in the nation.
Feedback on how the students performed in post-graduate vocations and other activities is continually
28
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
collected to ensure that the rigor of coursework was appropriate for JMU students being competitive
and successful.
Structured and cumulative curriculum. Success in the discipline requires that students master
foundational material including content knowledge, problem solving, and laboratory skills. The
curriculum is structured so that students must demonstrate competence in pre-requisite coursework
before being able to continue to do more advanced work in the field. Courses in the Xxxxx Department
beyond the introductory level have numerous pre-requisites, including in some cases courses in
mathematics and physics. They are held accountable for prior learning in future courses and must
constantly revisit it to achieve mastery.
Maintaining a statistical profile of introductory-level courses. XXXXX 131 and XXXXX 132 (General xxxxx
I and II, respectively) are the gateway courses to the xxxxx major as well as many other majors on
campus in the STEM fields. We have maintained detailed grade statistics since 1997 for XXXXX 131 and
2004 for XXXXX 132 on the performance of students in these classes. This allows us to compare the
content knowledge of cohorts over many years, uphold standards, and hold the line against grade
inflation. To date, we have data on over 9000 students. Statistics include average GPA (2.15 for XXXXX
131, 2.27 for XXXXX 132), DFW % (32.0% and 22.4%, respectively), A/B% (35.1% and 35.4%,
respectively), high and low GPA given for different sections of the class recorded each semester, etc.
Having a detailed running statistical profile enables us to see that rigor is maintained in these critical
courses, but is also helpful for junior faculty members to give them a perspective when they are
assigning grades for the first time teaching these classes.
ACS final examinations given in many xxxxx classes. The ACS has an active exams committee who
prepare assessment examinations for all of the core lower and upper division undergraduate courses in
a xxxxx major. Each different subject exam – which is comprehensive within its subdiscipline – has a
committee composed of national experts in their field, and each of the exams have undergone rigorous
testing to determine national norms at a cross-section of universities around the nation. Most Ph.D.
programs in xxxxx in the United States use these exams as placement exams for graduate courses and, if
necessary, for remedial undergraduate work for Ph.D. students. Many of core xxxxx courses (lower and
upper division) at JMU use the standardized ACS exams as the final course assessment. This enables
comparisons of JMU students against national norms, across different sections of a class, and from yearto-year ensuring academic rigor.
External checks through professional examinations. Many of the students enrolled in xxxxx courses are
preparing for highly competitive pre-professional programs such as medicine. The need to prepare
students for rigorous placement exams such as the MCAT for pre-medical students and the xxxxx GRE
exam for prospective Ph.D. students ensures rigor in our curriculum.
Working to have students produce professional quality materials. The laboratory experience is a
significant part of any xxxxx major. In these courses, we help students to achieve professional-level
results. Students are able to demonstrate competence in laboratory work through measurement.
Students use modern, research-grade instrumentation and are expected to be able to run the
instrumentation and interpret the results. Students are expected to present their results – both context
and analysis – in accordance with the norms of the field by writing professional memos or laboratory
reports in the style of a peer-reviewed journal article. Students are able to interpret advanced scientific
information by presenting their own research and/or research from the literature as a scientific talk.
Elements that the Department of Xxxxx and Xxxxx would identify as crucial in identifying academic rigor in a
dissimilar program.
While it is difficult to assess rigor in dissimilar departments or units across campus, several factors should be
considered (again in no particular order):
29
1. Distribution of grades given in large population courses—particularly in introductory courses. While
the average GPA in a course cannot tell the entire story, if the average GPA in course with a large
enrollment (particularly 100-level courses), is exceptionally high, then the rigor of the course is
immediately suspect. This is particularly true if the standard deviation in the course GPA is small. A high
GPA with a small standard deviation implies that there has been no distinction made between excellent,
average and weak students. This is problematic for maintaining rigor in a program and is actually a
serious demotivator for hard working students.
2. Amount of reading/homework assignments required of a student. The sciences generally have
homework/problem sets/laboratory reports required for outside of the classroom work, while many
other disciplines have external reading, term-papers, projects, portfolios or case-studies required. The
rigor and quality of these external assignments are a good proxy for the rigor in a course. If success in a
course or discipline requires significant reading, reflection, problem solving and synthesizing of ideas
outside of the designated lecture time, it is generally a good indication of the rigor of a course. There are
no disciplines that can be learned in 3 hours a week for 15 weeks. A true appreciation and
understanding for any discipline will require a significant amount of external work.
3. Courses or programs that build on prior knowledge and the activities that assess this. Student
development should be apparent in courses and programs. Students should be able to carry over
knowledge and skills from other courses and apply them later in their career, and over the course of a
semester, demonstrate gains in subject material. This could take the form of demonstrating mastery of
skill, having to integrate prior knowledge in more advanced coursework, or using a wide variety of skills
or methods to interpret data/materials from different courses in the curriculum to develop new ideas,
or being able to independently produce professional-quality work. Students should be required to take
comprehensive exams where they are held accountable for integrating all course knowledge rather than
just reporting back on a small part of the semester. Students should be required to do more than
memorize facts to be successful in college-level coursework.
4. Programs in which student evaluations largely determine tenure and promotion are problematic. If
the advancement, rank and salary of a faculty member is largely determined by student evaluations,
academic rigor will undoubtedly suffer. Student evaluations can be easily manipulated my making an
unwritten and unspoken agreement with students—“you participate in my class, and you will receive a
high grade”. There is no quicker way to lower academic rigor than tying professional academic staff
success to student evaluations.
5. External recognition of a program. Student success after JMU is the best indicator of the rigor of specific
programs at JMU. We are in a competitive marketplace of providing employment or
graduate/professional school opportunities for our students. The degree to which JMU students are able
to receive offers to and ultimately to be successful after graduation is a testimony to the rigor of an
individual program. If the program is perceived to be weak, employers and post-graduate programs will
quickly figure that out and will no longer recruit and hire JMU graduates.
28.
Each academic unit was asked to provide (1) what they see as determinants of academic rigor within their
program/unit and (2) elements that they would consider/see as crucial in identifying academic rigor in
another perhaps dissimilar academic program/unit. I engaged the Department of Xxxxx faculty to help answer
these questions. Below is a summary statement as well as the raw results of our discussion.
1.
What academic heads see as determinants of academic rigor within their program/unit
There are short and long views on academic rigor in the Department of Xxxxx. A shorter view of rigor
measure examines rigor at the course level and looks at guidelines for content based on external
agency standards, the stated goals and objectives of the course (as demonstrated through assessment
30
techniques), assessing student abilities of higher order thinking and critical thinking in the course, and
the integration lab and field work that supplement/augment lecture material. A longer view of rigor
is measured by student success once they leave us and go on to graduate school and employment.
Essentially, if our program is rigorous, then our student should be successful and external
stakeholders (employers, graduate schools, APR evaluators, other departments) should recognize our
program as producing high quality graduates, which is part of our mission statement.
Raw faculty opinion














Whether the material covered corresponds to the professional guidelines of the accrediting agency
Higher order of thinking: higher on Bloom’s Taxonomy (synthesis, applications….)
Integration of field, lab, theory in teaching & learning
Development of observational skill, interpretative skills, & communication skill towards a professional
level.
Required learning experiences outside of class hours (i.e. field trips, lab/research)
Requirements to take courses in other departments (i. e. Math, Chem, Phys)
Every student meets learning objectives of our Assessment Plan/Exam
Success in students in the major-jobs, grad school
Fulfillments of Mission Statement for dept
Retention of problem solving skills; understanding of importance of lifelong learning; understanding of
scientific method & its advantages & disadvantages; can student thin outside the box
Determined by external review, such as the APR. It is empirically observed by student success in
continuing to graduate school and/or finding gainful employment in similar or related fields
That our students can demonstrate a consistently high level of mastery in applying, synthesizing, and
evaluating the knowledge, skills, & habits of mind in the geosciences.
Ability to integrate knowledge from subdiscipline to subdiscipline. Ability to recognize the common
thought processes, data bases, thinking strategies that are common of all geosciences problems solving.
Ability to encounter a problem in the discipline and know the kinds of data necessary to solve it,
strategies for thinking about it, what solutions might look like.
What tells me that our dept has a rigorous program is when I observe success among our recent (1-4
years out) graduates. That success may be in gaining admission to a respected graduate program,
especially if it is a program that is widely known as source of skilled proficient individuals upon
graduation. That success may be in additional research, publications, etc.
2. Elements that academic heads would consider/see as crucial in identifying academic rigor in another
perhaps dissimilar academic program/unit.
This is a much harder concept to get one’s head around. Rigor may be defined differently by different
programs, and I likely do not know enough to recognize it fully in greatly different departments. That
said, if a program has well defined goals and objectives, if those goals and objectives are agreed upon
by the faculty and by the internal/external stakeholders in that program, and if those goals and
objectives are being met, then I consider it to be a rigorous program. I think that many times we fall
into the trap of defining rigor too narrowly. If I judge an allied science program’s rigor based upon
how my department’s students do in a cognate course that is designed and focused for an audience
that is theoretical and not applied, or vice versa, then I may erroneously judge the rigor of the
course/program. It would depend upon whether I had the preconceived notion that students should
come out with theoretical knowledge or practical ability.
Raw faculty opinion
31









Rigorous GENED courses should include quantitative reasoning, when appropriate.
Demonstrated in past by what students do after they leave JMU (measured by external standards-can
they get quality jobs or get into good grad programs?)
Not in a good position to comment on other depts.
Same thing as number 1. Gen Ed rigor would be based on achievement of learning objectives
Are they effective communicators; do they enjoy learning; are they intellectually curious; are they
capable of independent research?
I strongly believe that academic review like this is only possible by sources outside the university, but
within similar disciplines
Clearly framed learning outcomes, parsed by developmental framework, inclusive of the knowledge,
skills, & dispositions expected through consensus within the discipline.
Ability to integrate knowledge from subdiscipline to subdiscipline. Ability to recognize the common
thought processes, data bases, thinking strategies that are common of all geosciences problem solving.
Ability to encounter a problem in the discipline and know the kinds of data necessary to solve it,
strategies for thinking about it, what solutions might look like.
I would like to see more consistency between programs in terms of basic courses taught by different
instructors, or consistency in terms of what a student, who has taken a course in one program, is unable
to up intellectually with students who took the same course context (e.g. calculus) in another program
and clearly was not instructed at the same level.
I also think that we should not lose track of our JMU mission with regard to rigor in General Education,
and the vital role that academic units play in this part of the university mission. We have a General
Education program that is designed to broaden the experience and the perspectives our graduates. The
General Education program is so important, that it is the Required Education (perhaps a better name for
it) of all JMU students. It is designed so that one may experience the differences and similarities between
programs, departments, and colleges. A JMU graduate leaves as an educated citizen, ready to be
employed or move on to additional education, but foremost one with a well-rounded education that is
enlightened from multiple perspectives. That is the way that I read the rigorous mission of the institution,
and it is our roles as department heads to assure that the rigor of our programs integrate into this
overarching goal of the university.
29.
Description and discussion of academic rigor has been organized under the following four headings:1
1. Meaningful Content
a) Coursework should be designed with very careful attention to the recommendations of the relevant
professional societies, meeting or exceeding content standards.
b) Content should address the needs of students in a way that contributes to their abilities to synthesize
concepts and knowledge across the university.
c) Questions of content of individual courses should not be addressed in isolation but should be
considered as a part of the curriculum of the entire discipline and the curriculum of the university as a
whole.
2. Higher Order Thinking
32
a) All courses as appropriate for the audience and level of the course should require that students
analyze and synthesize new and previously unfamiliar ideas.
b) Higher order thinking in xxxxx is best characterized by the notions of communication, explanation,
deductive reasoning, and proof.
c) Assessment of student success and achievement should reflect higher-order thinking in meaningful
ways.
3. High Expectations
a) As appropriate for the level and audience for individual courses, clearly-stated expectations for
achievement involving both basic skills and higher order thinking should be set in such a way as to be
achievable by adequately prepared students investing time and effort at the appropriate fraction of
“full-time” work.
b) Care should be taken so that course grades remain consistent over time with established standards of
achievement, both internal and external.
4. Active Engagement
a) There is no single universally-applicable “best” approach to instruction, but all courses should both
require and encourage active engagement of students with the course content.
b) Class participation, student presentations, discussions, and other measures of student engagement
should be reflected in assessment of student achievement in a significant way.
1
On the recommendation of several department members, this statement is organized based on categories
adapted from a report by the faculty at SUNY-College at Buffalo.
30.
Xxxxx considers itself to be a program of complex factors related to academic rigor. Our classroom activities,
reflected in a comprehensive production program, are based in a collaborative art form that includes literature,
history, technology, management, music, art, physical acuity, critical thinking and public service engagement.
This broad set of interdisciplinary academic involvements is reflected in our mission statement as copied below.
MISSION
Xxxxx is rooted in the belief that the relevant artist is the thinking artist who couples the mastery and
embodiment of concrete skills with knowledge of and sensitivity to the cultural environments of ideas, artistic
forms, and other persons. The School trains and educates artists, scholars, and teachers in the rich traditions and
current practices of dance, theatre, and musical theatre. Dedicated to the value of the intensive BA, the School’s
programs blend liberal arts education and critical thinking with intensive, pre-professional training and practice.
Faculty foster an environment that values and cultivates creative, passionate, disciplined, curious, innovative,
engaged, articulate, collaborative, and independent-thinking artists and scholars. Committed to a teaching
approach that emphasizes mentorship and individual attention to students, faculty members of the School
empower students in the development of their own personal strengths, provide them with tools and
opportunities to realize their potential, and equip them for successful work in professional environments,
graduate programs, and as lifelong learners.
Rigor in xxxxx is defined as the expectation of excellence by the students in the academic, artistic, and practical
work of the unit; and the expectation of simultaneous involvement in theatrical production and coursework.
33
Toward this end, all production activities are a laboratory extension of work in the formal classroom setting.
Students and faculty spend considerable periods of time outside the traditional classroom in a complex preprofessional learning environment. XXXXX faculty assume leadership roles in theatre and dance professional
organizations. They engage in many professional activities outside of the academic setting that benefit students
directly and indirectly. All XXXXX faculty write papers analyzing and critiquing Mainstage and studio theatre and
dance events. Nearly every course includes a writing component, and writing intensive courses comprise a large
percentage of courses in both the core and specific concentration courses. Laboratory and studio activities are
required outside of the classroom for many courses. Comprehensive analysis and critical thinking skills are
present in all theatre and dance activities and courses.
Theatre, musical theatre and dance concentrations are fully accredited by the National Association of xxxxx and
the National Association of xxxxx.
We would expect that any unit would engage in interdisciplinary studies, critical thinking, research
requirements, writing intensive courses and extensive activities outside of the classroom to be considered
rigorous. We suspect that all academic units already meet or exceed any reasonable expectation of academic
rigor as broadly defined and appropriate both to their disciplines and external accrediting bodies.
31.
1. What are determinants of academic rigor within your program/unit?
Beyond student engagement with the challenging course material in the Xxxxx curriculum, the School of Xxxxx
faculty has identified additional determinants of academic rigor within our program:
 Willingness to engage with Xxxxx content outside the confines of individual classes. We strive to help
students begin to become lifelong learners by abetting their engagement above and beyond class
expectations. We’re also helping them to develop intellectual tenacity, which goes hand in hand with
rigor.
 Focus on mastery learning. We want our students to go beyond individual assignments or exams and
develop competence and mastery with the material to enable them to apply the material in a variety of
areas, as needed.
 Capstone design sequence. Our capstone design sequence is a tangible expression of our commitment
to rigor as these projects require the students to integrate and synthesize the broad and varied content
from across their coursework into a single project.
 Self-reflection. Our definition of rigor also emphasizes students developing their meta-cognitive skills to
reflect on their own learning and where their strengths and challenges lie.
Another determinant of rigor in the School of Xxxxx is developing a consistency of expectation, grading and
feedback amongst the faculty so that students are hearing the same message consistently across the
program. The faculty feel that it’s important to express a consistent set of standards to our students.
As a faculty, we feel our curriculum is challenging and tough, but we strive to be fair in our expectations and
approach. This is our operational definition of rigor.
2. What elements are crucial in identifying academic rigor in another perhaps dissimilar academic
program/unit?
We feel that many of the elements we described above would apply to all academic programs, both similar and
dissimilar to Xxxxx. This is particularly true for the integration of knowledge across classes in a capstone project,
extending learning to a mastery basis and going beyond what’s done in class, as well as the reflective
metacognition focus.
34
We would suggest that all programs consider capstone projects for all students to help students experience the
integration of knowledge and the development/design of new ideas/concepts/devices.
32.
“Academic rigor: To challenge, through a relevant and sophisticated curriculum, those students who accept
responsibility and demonstrably meet high yet achievable faculty expectations.”
33.
What do we see as determinants of academic rigor within our program/unit?
Primarily, the xxxxx support academic rigor by providing customized instruction that “scaffolds” classroom
learning. Learners can achieve more with the expert guidance of our faculty and peer educators, which then
“fades” as students become more capable of autonomous performance. Scaffolding pedagogies reinforce
content and skills by emphasizing practice and metacognition. (Research indicates that learners’ awareness of a
process—for example, how to solve a math problem or how to compose a presentation—brings the most durable,
transferable benefits.) Scaffolding enables increased rigor in the classroom; for example, instructors can assign
more writing or more complex STEM content when supported by xxxxx instruction.
To infuse academic rigor into our pedagogies, we employ active, experiential techniques so that students retain
ownership and responsibility for the learning process. Whatever methods we employ—feedback, explanation,
modeling, or guided practice—we expect students to engage actively and make progress toward goals they
define. Instructional encounters within the xxxxx are rigorous when the learner works as hard or harder than the
consultant/tutor.
The xxxxxx also support academic rigor by researching and developing new pedagogies and sharing expertise
about learning with faculty. Through consultations and workshops, we help faculty increase their effectiveness
and efficiency (with, for example, assignment design and evaluation techniques) which enables them to deliver
more rigorous instruction with better results.
What elements would we consider as crucial in identifying academic rigor in another perhaps dissimilar
academic program/unit?
Academic rigor can be seen as more content or more work, or more demanding content or work. The common
denominator seems to be more learning, which boils down to students making more progress toward desired
learning objectives. Progress can certainly be identified through assessment or classroom evaluation methods,
including more rigorous grading and high stakes testing, for example.
However, we believe that the true measure of rigorous education rests not only with faculty or curriculum but
with learners themselves. In identifying academic rigor elsewhere, then, we would look for how departments
allow, encourage, and support students to establish their own rigorous outcomes in collaboration with faculty
and advisors. For example, what specific expectations and means have departments established for
independent study and research? To what extent can students help shape the curriculum of a course or major?
We find that we can infuse rigor into our instruction by holding students accountable for setting goals, for
monitoring their own progress, and for working independently within and beyond their learning experiences in
our Centers. Authentic academic rigor cannot be imposed but must be facilitated, and eventually developed
within, autonomous learners.
35
34.
XXXXX Faculty Meeting, April 12, 2011
A panel of XXXXX Faculty gave a brief presentation entitled “Dimensions of Academic Rigor,” which was followed
by small group discussions. Each small group was asked to write 2-3 sentences expressing their conception of
academic rigor. Each small group was given a set of the same 3 discussion questions, plus a unique question for
their group. Thus, groups are identified by their “unique question” below even though the “unique question”
was just one of the four questions they discussed.
This document contains:
1. Link to panel presentation slides: Academic Rigor Panel Presentation (ppt)
2. Small Group Expressions of Academic Rigor (2-3 sentences)
3. Appendix A: xxxx thoughts on academic rigor, contributed post-meeting.
Small Group Expressions of Academic Rigor
Group One: “How can we influence academic rigor with our physical spaces?”
Academic rigor is depth; it’s more about quality than quantity.
Time is needed to be rigorous.
Academic rigor is continuing to ask questions. (Intellectual curiosity)
Academic rigor is not easy – telling the truth.
Group Two: “How can we apply principles of academic rigor to our XXXXX material collections?”




Intellectual curiosity, critical and creative thinking.
Students challenging themselves and us (“how do I know that is a good resource?”)
Students able to transfer knowledge and methods from one course or foundational courses across their
college learning experience and into the “real world.”
An understanding of how to build, from scratch, a foundation for knowledge in a new area.
Group Three: “How can we collaborate with teaching faculty to enhance rigorous learning outcomes? “
The library can serve as a central hub for celebrating academic rigor & providing positive reinforcement
to and about both faculty & students; avoid classifying people and focus on behavior (faculty &
students).
XXXXX balances classwork, liberal arts values, and practical application of knowledge, all within the
context of lifelong learning. This is accomplished through efforts such as information literacy, media
literacy, and administrative support for the JMU academic enterprise.
The library vets and curates a large collection of scholarly content. It should also provide a place – an
institutional repository and/or e-portfolio system – where students and faculty can preserve, publish,
share and showcase their scholarly output. The library should continue to promote information and
media literacy to point students to curated collections and encourage them to contribute to a central
repository.
Group Four: “What student characteristics (either actual or perceived) influence academic rigor?”
36
Students will be motivated to learn the subject for its own sake. They will think critically about
information. They will challenge themselves to improve their knowledge and skills.
Group Five: “How can online / blended courses contribute to a foundation for academic rigor?”
Academic rigor is balance between mastery of knowledge, methodology on the one end of a scale; and
communicating, being challenged in order to create new ideas on the other end of the scale
Appendix A: xxxxx thoughts on academic rigor, contributed post-meeting.
Academic Rigor
Knowledge
- Valuing knowledge; commitment to learning; understanding that knowledge is cumulative, ability to
apply existing knowledge to discovery of new knowledge; recognizing that academia is built upon
pursuit of knowledge; developing habits of mind; pursuing a life of the mind
Completeness
– Following all of the steps in the process of gathering information and evidence and developing
conclusions; finishing the job, doing things thoroughly while avoiding short cuts; reading books and
articles before citing them; understanding books and articles before citing them; citing sources
completely and properly; using the whole work rather than the summary; willingness to commit more
than the minimum effort
Openness
- Ability to go where the evidence leads rather than where you think it should go; willingness to challenge
conventional wisdom; ability to throw away everything you’ve done and start all over again if a
hypothesis or idea is proven false or the data don’t lead in the direction you thought they would lead;
ability to recognize what is true and correct and what is not
Persistence
- Not giving up easily; sticking to the task even when it takes more time or effort than you thought it
would take; prioritizing activities, putting first things first; spending the time it takes to do things right;
striving to achieve true understanding rather than superficial knowledge; avoiding the expedient path
Honesty
- Giving credit where credit is due; acknowledging the sources of ideas and building upon the work of
others; not cheating or lying in one’s work; being more interested in doing things right than in getting a
good grade; holding oneself to a higher standard; following one’s own moral compass
37