Assessment Overview at Chandler-Gilbert Community College

At Chandler-Gilbert Community College, assessment is a collaborative, faculty-driven process focused on improving student learning and success. It takes place at the course, program, and institutional levels using clearly defined learning outcomes to evaluate what students know and can do.

Faculty assess student work using rubrics aligned with course competencies and General Education Student Learning Outcomes (GESLOs). Results are collected through Canvas and used to reflect on instruction, identify learning trends, and inform curriculum planning.
​
The Center for Teaching, Learning, and Assessment (CTLA) works with faculty and staff across campus to evaluate instruction, support assessment efforts, and engage in a cycle of continuous improvement that strengthens teaching and promotes equitable student outcomes.

What is Assessment?

​Assessment is the systematic, ongoing process of improving student learning by establishing measurable learning outcomes, collecting and analyzing data, and using that data to make informed decisions about teaching and curriculum. Effective assessment ensures that students have sufficient and equitable opportunities to achieve those outcomes.
​
At Chandler-Gilbert Community College (CGCC), assessment is aligned to outcomes and indicators selected at the institutional, district, division, or discipline level. Faculty and staff use a range of instruments to produce objective data, which is then analyzed to identify areas of strength and improvement in student learning.

​Purpose, Philosophy, and Commitments of Assessment at CGCC

At Chandler-Gilbert Community College, assessment is more than a compliance requirement—it is a reflective, faculty-driven process grounded in our mission to empower student growth through learning and community engagement. The purpose of assessment is to support student learning and success through continuous improvement, not to evaluate individual performance.
​
Our assessment work is aligned with CGCC’s core values:

• Collaboration – Assessment is developed and sustained through dialogue among faculty, staff, and departments to address shared goals for learning.
• Advocacy – We use assessment to identify and remove barriers, ensuring equitable opportunities for all students to succeed.
• Excellence – We strive for ongoing improvement by using evidence to enhance curriculum, instruction, and support systems.

Culture of Assessment

CGCC fosters a culture of assessment in which all academic units engage in thoughtful, sustained reflection on student learning. This culture emphasizes:

• Data-informed decision making
• Transparent practices
• Institutional alignment from course to program to college-level goals

​

Steps Toward Creating a "Culture of Assessment" at an Institution*

Where is your unit in developing a culture of assessment?

 STEP

 ATTITUDE

 Denial

It’s a fad. If I ignore it, it will go away.

 Acceptance 

OK. I guess we have to do it.

 Resistance

I feel threatened. My department feels threatened. My campus feels threatened. Can I subvert it by not participating in the process or in some other way?

 Understanding 

Maybe we can learn something useful. Can we use what we’ve already been doing?

 Campaign

We have a plan. Maybe it’s not perfect, but let’s get moving!

 Collaboration

We have a plan with long-range objectives that are clearly defined, and based on our experiences with assessment, we believe it works.

 Institutionalization 

We can’t imagine working without assessment. It’s a permanent part of our institutional culture.

*Adapted from Allen, M. J. (2004). Assessing academic programs in higher education, p.7. Anker Publishing Company: Bolton, MA.

Institutional Commitment

CGCC affirms the following institutional commitments to guide our assessment work:

• Non-punitive Use: Assessment results will never be used to make staffing, hiring, or evaluative decisions about faculty or staff.
• Faculty Autonomy: Faculty retain professional judgment over instructional methods and curriculum design.
• Respect for Complexity: Assessment is not expected to capture every dimension of every student's experience.
• Internal Value First: While we meet external accountability requirements, our assessment efforts are primarily for internal improvement and reflection.

Program Review and Program Assessment

Program Review is a five-year cyclical process designed to evaluate the quality, effectiveness, and direction of academic programs. It integrates assessment findings into planning efforts and ensures alignment with strategic priorities and resource decisions.

• Reviews are evidence-based and include both qualitative and quantitative data.
• Programs are encouraged to prioritize improvements that can be made with existing resources. Requests for additional resources must be clearly justified.
• Program Review is closely tied to institutional planning, budgeting, and decision-making processes.

Resources and templates for Program Review are available on the Planning and Research website.

Program Assessment Using Course Assessment

Beginning in Fall of 2023, program mapping began to verify mappings from the work of Guided Pathways done at the district level and assess Program Learning Outcomes along with Course Comptencies and GESLOs. This work will continue and become the overarching method of assessment in which the Program Learning Outcomes are assessed through the assessment of course-level outcomes to ensure that at all levels students are learning what they are promised.

The Assessment Cycle

Assessment at Chandler-Gilbert Community College is a faculty-led, collaborative process designed to support student learning and foster continuous improvement. All faculty—including residential, adjunct, and dual enrollment instructors—are responsible for assessing course competencies (CLOs) and General Education Student Learning Outcomes (GESLOs) as defined by their discipline. Beginning in Fall 2023, the college initiated curriculum mapping to align CLOs with Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs), enabling course-level assessment data to inform program-level assessment. This process is currently in beta and will be fully implemented once finalized.
​
Assessment is organized into multi-semester projects mapped over a five-year cycle, ensuring that each course is assessed at least once. Discipline Assessment Teams, supported by the Center for Teaching, Learning, and Assessment (CTLA) and the Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Committee (SLOAC), coordinate the planning, implementation, and analysis of assessment activities. Each project uses multiple measures—such as Canvas Outcomes, shared assignments, and analytic rubrics—across all instructional modalities and term lengths.

Assessment results are used to inform course and program improvements, enhance teaching practices, and contribute to institutional effectiveness. Program-level assessment complements course-level work by documenting where students demonstrate mastery of outcomes across the curriculum. Together, these processes reflect CGCC’s commitment to meaningful, evidence-based assessment that supports educational quality and student success.

​This shared framework creates the foundation for assessing CGCC’s General Education Student Learning Outcomes and course competencies, which represent the college’s promise to students and community stakeholders.

---

Faculty Role in Assessment

All faculty—including residential, adjunct, and dual enrollment instructors—are expected to support and assess both course competencies and CGCC’s General Education Student Learning Outcomes (GESLOs) as defined by their academic discipline. Faculty implement assessment plans developed collaboratively within their departments and are responsible for carrying out these plans across all course modalities, including in-person, hybrid, online, and dual enrollment formats.

• Faculty are responsible for integrating designated SLOs into course design and instruction, following the outcomes and measures determined by their discipline.
• Assessment results are used to inform teaching practices and improve student learning, aligning with CGCC’s commitment to continuous improvement and institutional effectiveness.

Discipline Assessment Teams

​It is recommended that each discipline form an assessment team of key stakeholders for designing assessment projects, interpreting and reporting assessment results, and making changes to courses and curriculum. There is no limit to the number of participants. Each discipline is free to choose the composition of their assessment team according to the conditions unique to each discipline.

The Assessment Project

Each assessment project at CGCC is a faculty-led initiative designed to evaluate student learning using multiple, discipline-defined measures aligned with course competencies and General Education Student Learning Outcomes (GESLOs). Projects are collaboratively planned by Discipline Assessment Teams and implemented within the college’s five-year assessment cycle.

​The Assessment Project Details Template—developed and shared via Google Docs by the CTLA—is the primary tool for planning and documentation. This cloud-based format supports real-time collaboration, transparency, and visibility across faculty and staff. Rather than being “submitted,” templates remain accessible for iterative planning, reflection, and refinement throughout the project lifecycle.
As a public institution, CGCC upholds transparency in assessment processes while maintaining the privacy of individual student data. Aggregated results from assessment projects are used to inform curricular improvements, instructional practices, and institutional planning.

Assessment projects serve as structured collections of direct and indirect measures that provide a holistic view of student learning and development. These projects are intentionally designed to capture student performance and growth in relation to specific learning outcomes and competencies.

Each assessment project includes:​

• The student learning outcomes or objectives being assessed
• The learning processes (e.g., courses, activities, assignments) that support achievement of those outcomes—often documented through a curriculum map
• A long-range timeline for implementation and review
• The location where learning outcomes and goals are published (e.g., course materials, websites, advising resources)

Project planning also includes:

• The purpose of the assessment activities and how results will be used
• The data collection and analysis methods
• The specific outcomes/objectives assessed by each method
• The intervals for evidence collection and review
• The individuals responsible for implementation, review, and dissemination

Adapted from the Northern Illinois University Assessment Glossary

This comprehensive approach ensures alignment with CGCC’s commitment to continuous improvement and faculty-led assessment.

Collecting Assessment Data: Canvas Outcomes Overview

Canvas is the official platform for collecting assessment data at CGCC. It enables faculty to use rubrics embedded with Canvas Outcomes aligned to General Education Student Learning Outcomes (GESLOs), Course Competencies, Program Learning Outcomes, and other Institutional Outcomes. These rubrics are attached to graded assignments in Canvas, and when faculty score them using SpeedGrader, the resulting data is stored in a centralized system.

This centralized structure allows the CTLA to aggregate, analyze, and report assessment results across courses, programs, and instructional modalities.
​
Every course section at CGCC—regardless of format (in-person, hybrid, or online)—has a Canvas shell. This ensures that all instructors, including those who may not use Canvas for regular instruction, can participate fully in assessment activities.

Rubrics: Primary Data-Collection Instrument

At CGCC, rubrics serve two complementary purposes within the Canvas LMS:

1. Data Collection Rubrics
   These rubrics are directly connected to Canvas Outcomes—standardized indicators loaded into Canvas by the CTLA from official institutional sources (e.g., MCCCD and CCTA). They are used to collect assessment data for institutional reporting and must be built using the correct imported Outcomes to ensure accurate tracking and aggregation.
2. Analytic Rubrics for Instruction
   Faculty may also use or develop analytic rubrics to communicate performance expectations to students and maintain consistent scoring across course sections. These rubrics help clarify mastery levels for learning outcomes and support actionable feedback.

Using rubrics in this dual way allows faculty to meet institutional assessment goals while preserving academic freedom in instructional design. Faculty can build discipline-specific rubrics or adapt ready-made templates from the SLOAC Canvas course.

Canvas Outcomes: How They Work

​Canvas Outcomes form the structured backbone of CGCC’s assessment data system:

• Pre-Loaded by CTLA – Institutional Outcomes (GESLOs, competencies) are maintained and updated in Canvas.
• Imported by Faculty – Instructors must import the correct Outcomes into their courses and embed them into rubric rows.
• Used for Reporting – When assignments are scored using these rubrics, Canvas stores the results, enabling CTLA to generate college-wide assessment reports.

The integration of Canvas Outcomes has significantly improved participation in assessment and streamlined data collection.

Assessment Key Terms

Alignment	The degree to which student experiences, assignment(s) and instrumentation (rubrics) align to the Student Learning Outcome(s).
Analytic Scoring	Scoring that divides the student work into elemental, logical parts or basic principles. Scorers evaluate student work across multiple dimensions of performance rather than from an overall impression (holistic scoring). In analytic scoring, individual scores for each dimension are determined and reported; however, an overall impression of quality may be included. (P.A. Gantt; CRESST Glossary) See also: Holistic Scoring. Example: analytic scoring of a history essay might include scores of the following dimensions: use of prior knowledge, application of principles, use of original source material to support a point of view, and composition.
Anchors	A sample of student work that exemplifies a specific level of performance. Raters use anchors to score student work, usually comparing the student performance to the anchor. Example: if student work was being scored on a scale of 1-5, there would typically be anchors (previously scored student work) exemplifying each point on the scale. (CRESST Glossary)
Application	The minimum level of design requirement to attain the outcome of SLO assessment. Application requires students to take what they know and can do (knowledge and skills) and apply that to a circumstance set up in the assignment. This creates the condition of transfer, a necessary condition for valid conclusions of student performances.
Artifacts	Documents or assignments that provide the raw data for assessment.
Assessment	"Assessment is the systematic collection, review, and use of information about educational programs undertaken for the purpose of improving student learning and development." (Palomba & Banta, 1999)
Assessment for Accountability	The assessment of some unit (could be a program, department, or entire institution) conducted to satisfy external stakeholders. Results are summative and often compared across units. (Leskes, A., 2002). Example: to retain state approval, graduates of the school of education must achieve a 90 percent pass rate or better on teacher certification tests.
Assessment for Improvement	Assessment that feeds directly back into revising the course, program, or institution to improve student learning results. (Leskes, A., 2002)
Assessment Plan	A document that outlines the program mission/goals desired student learning outcomes (or objectives) learning processes (e.g., courses, activities, assignments) that contribute to students' abilities reach the program's outcomes (this may be shown in the form of a curriculum map) long-range timeline location of the mission/goals and student learning outcomes (e.g., web site, brochure, advising session) A plan for a specific assessment activity/project will include the following: the purpose or goal of particular assessment activities how the results will be used and who will use them brief explanation of data-collection methods and the analysis methods an indication of which outcome(s)/objective(s) is/are addressed by each method, the intervals at which evidence is collected and reviewed the individual(s) responsible for the collection/review of evidence and dissemination of assessment results (adapted from the Northern Illinois University Assessment Glossary)
Assignment	The tasks assigned to students for the purpose of assessing student performances and origination of artifacts.
Authentic Assessment	Determining the level of student knowledge/skill in a particular area by evaluating his/her ability to perform a "real world" task in the way professionals in the field would perform it. Authentic assessment asks for a demonstration of the behavior the learning is intended to produce. Example: asking students to create a marketing campaign and evaluating that campaign instead of asking students to answer test questions about characteristics of a good marketing campaign.
Benchmark	A point of reference for measurement; a standard of achievement against which to evaluate or judge performance.
Capstone Course/Experience	An upper-division class designed to help students demonstrate comprehensive learning in the major through some type of product or experience. In addition to emphasizing work related to the major, capstone experiences can require students to demonstrate how well they have mastered important learning objectives from the institution's general studies programs. (Palomba & Banta, 1999)
Closing the loop	Using assessment results for improvement and/or evolution.
Competency	The demonstration of the ability to perform a specific task or achieve specified criteria. (James Madison University Dictionary of Student Outcomes Assessment)
Continuous Improvement	Consistently implementing changes based on assessment that lead to improvement by meeting chosen outcomes.
Course Assessment	Assessment to determine the extent to which a specific course is achieving its learning outcomes.
Criteria for Success	The minimum requirements for a program to declare itself successful. Example: 70% of students score 3 or higher on a lab skills assessment.
Criterion-referenced	Assessment where student performance is compared to a pre-established performance standard (and not to the performance of other students). (CRESST Glossary) See also: Norm-referenced.
Curriculum Map	A matrix showing the coverage of each program learning outcome in each course.
Direct Assessment	Collecting data/evidence on students' actual behaviors or products. Direct data-collection methods provide evidence in the form of student products or performances. Such evidence demonstrates the actual learning that has occurred relating to a specific content or skill. (Middle States Commission on Higher Education, 2007). See also: Indirect Assessment Examples: exams, course work, essays, oral performance.
Embedded Assessment	Collecting data/evidence on program learning outcomes by extracting course assignments. It is a means of gathering information about student learning that is built into and a natural part of the teaching-learning process. The instructor evaluates the assignment for individual student grading purposes; the program evaluates the assignment for program assessment. When used for program assessment, typically someone other than the course instructor uses a rubric to evaluate the assignment. (Leskes, A., 2002) See also: Embedded Exams and Quizzes.
Embedded Exams and Quizzes	Collecting data/evidence on program learning outcomes by extracting a course exam or quiz. Typically, the instructor evaluates the exam/quiz for individual student grading purposes; the program evaluates the exam/quiz for program assessment. Often only a section of the exam or quiz is analyzed and used for program assessment purposes. See also: Embedded Assessment.
Evaluation	A value judgment. A statement about quality.
Focus Group	A qualitative data-collection method that relies on facilitated discussions, with 3-10 participants who are asked a series of carefully constructed open-ended questions about their attitudes, beliefs, and experiences. Focus groups are typically considered an indirect data-collection method.
Formative Assessment	Ongoing assessment that takes place during the learning process. It is intended to improve an individual student's performance, program performance, or overall institutional effectiveness. Formative assessment is used internally, primarily by those responsible for teaching a course or developing and running a program. (Middle States Commission on Higher Education, 2007) See also: Summative Assessment
Goals	General expectations for students. Effective goals are broadly stated, meaningful, achievable, and assessable.
Grading	The process of evaluating students, ranking them, and distributing each student's value across a scale. Typically, grading is done at the course level.
High Stakes Assessment	Any assessment whose results have important consequences for students, teachers, programs, etc. For example, using results of assessment to determine whether a student should receive certification, graduate, or move on to the next level. Most often the instrument is externally developed, based on set standards, carried out in a secure testing situation, and administered at a single point in time. (Leskes, A., 2002) Examples: exit exams required for graduation, the bar exam, nursing licensure.
Holistic Scoring	Scoring that emphasizes the importance of the whole and the interdependence of parts. Scorers give a single score based on an overall appraisal of a student's entire product or performance. Used in situations where the demonstration of learning is considered to be more than the sum of its parts and so the complete final product or performance is evaluated as a whole. (P. A. Gantt) See also: Analytic Scoring
Indicators	Specific criteria adopted by CGCC that expand the SLOs into measurable performance statements by which students demonstrate proficiency with any one Student Learning Outcome. The indicators serve as a structure for SLO measurement.
Indirect Assessment	Collecting evidence/data through reported perceptions about student mastery of learning outcomes. Indirect methods reveal characteristics associated with learning, but they only imply that learning has occurred. (Middle States Commission on Higher Education) See also: Direct Assessment Examples: surveys, interviews, focus groups.
Learning outcomes	Statements that identify the knowledge, skills, or attitudes that students will be able to demonstrate, represent, or produce as a result of a given educational experience. There are three levels of learning outcomes: course, program, and institution.
Levels of Quality	The range of student performance quality is described in the rubric. Each ‘cell’ includes a descriptor of quality. The descriptors have consistent instrumentality in the language of student performance; a requirement for a valid and reliable instrument.
Norm-referenced	Assessment where student performances are compared to a larger group. In large-scale testing, the larger group, or "norm group" is usually a national sample representing a wide and diverse cross-section of students. The purpose of a norm-referenced assessment is usually to sort or rank students and not to measure achievement against a pre-established standard. (CRESST Glossary) See also: Criterion-referenced.
Norming	Also called "rater training." The process of educating raters to evaluate student performance and produce dependable scores. Typically, this process uses criterion-referenced standards and analytic or holistic rubrics. Raters need to participate in norming sessions before scoring student performance. (Mount San Antonio College Assessment Glossary)
Objective	Clear, concise statements that describe how students can demonstrate their mastery of program goals. (Allen, M., 2008) Note: on the CTLA Assessment web site, "objective" and "outcome" are used interchangeably.
Outcomes	Clear, concise statements that describe how students can demonstrate their mastery of program goals. (Allen, M., 2008) Note: on the Mānoa Assessment web site, "objective" and "outcome" are used interchangeably.
Performance Assessment	The process of using student activities or products, as opposed to tests or surveys, to evaluate students' knowledge, skills, and development. As part of this process, the performances generated by students are usually rated or scored by faculty or other qualified observers who also provide feedback to students. Performance assessment is described as "authentic" if it is based on examining genuine or real examples of students' work that closely reflects how professionals in the field go about the task. (Palomba & Banta, 1999)
Portfolio	A type of performance assessment in which students' work is systematically collected and carefully reviewed for evidence of learning. In addition to examples of their work, most portfolios include reflective statements prepared by students. Portfolios are assessed for evidence of student achievement with respect to established student learning outcomes and standards. (Palomba & Banta, 1999)
Program Assessment	An on-going process designed to monitor and improve student learning. Faculty: a) develop explicit statements of what students should learn (i.e., student learning outcomes); b) verify that the program is designed to foster this learning (alignment); c) collect data/evidence that indicate student attainment (assessment results); d) use these data to improve student learning (close the loop). (Allen, M., 2008)
Reliability	In the broadest sense, reliability speaks to the quality of the data collection and analysis. It may refer to the level of consistency with which observers/judges assign scores or categorize observations. In psychometrics and testing, it is a mathematical calculation of consistency, stability, and dependability for a set of measurements.
Rubrics	A tool often shaped like a matrix, with criteria on one side and levels of achievement across the top used to score products or performances. Rubrics describe the characteristics of different levels of performance, often from exemplary to not-evident. The criteria are ideally explicit, objective, and consistent with expectations for student performance. Rubrics are meaningful and useful when shared with students before their work is judged so they better understand the expectations for their performance. Rubrics are most effective when coupled with benchmark student work or anchors to illustrate how the rubric is applied. Rubrics are instruments that can be used to score student performance artifacts. These scores become the data for assessment.
Standard	In K-12 education, Education, and other fields, standard is synonymous with outcome.
Student Learning Outcomes (SLO)	The general education outcomes adopted by CGCC are: Critical Thinking, Oral Communication, Information Literacy, and Personal Development. In general, they are statements of what students will be able to think, know, do, or feel because of a given educational experience.
Student Products	The specific artifacts such as papers, performances, constructs or other means that student display their levels of performance against the SLOs.
Summative Assessment	The gathering of information at the conclusion of a course, program, or undergraduate/graduate career to improve learning or to meet accountability demands. The purposes are to determine whether or not overall goals have been achieved and to provide information on performance for an individual student or statistics about a course or program for internal or external accountability purposes. Grades are the most common form of summative assessment. (Middle States Commission on Higher Education, 2007) See also: Formative Assessment
Transfer	A condition included in the design of courses and assignments in which students are required to apply knowledge and skills in a manner different from how students acquired that knowledge and those skills. The degree of difference in the transfer and application of knowledge and skills produces a range of rigor for student to attain the products.
Triangulation	The use of a combination of methods in a study. The collection of data from multiple sources to support a central finding or theme or to overcome the weaknesses associated with a single method.
Validity	Refers to whether the interpretation and intended use of assessment results are logical and supported by theory and evidence. In addition, it refers to whether the anticipated and unanticipated consequences of the interpretation and intended use of assessment results have been taken into consideration. (Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, 1999)
Value-Added Assessment	Determining the impact or increase in learning that participating in higher education had on students during their programs of study. The focus can be on the individual student or a cohort of students. (Leskes, A., 2002). A value-added assessment plan is designed so it can reveal "value": at a minimum, students need to be assessed at the beginning and the ending of the course/program/degree.

Sources Consulted:

• Allen, M. (2008). Assessment Workshop at UH Manoa on May 13-14, 2008
• American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education, & the American Educational Research Association. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington DC: American Educational Research Association.
• CRESST Glossary. http://cresst.org/publications/cresst-publication-3137/
• Gantt, P.A. Portfolio Assessment: Implications for Human Resource Development. University of Tennessee.
• James Madison Dictionary of Student Outcomes Assessment. https://www.jmu.edu/curriculum/self-help/glossary.shtml/
• Leskes, A. (Winter/Spring 2002). Beyond confusion: An assessment glossary. Peer Review, AAC&U.org
• Middle States Commission on Higher Education. (2007). Student learning assessment: Options and resources (2nd Ed.). Philadelphia: Middle States Commission on Higher Education.
• Mount San Antonio College Institution Level Outcomes. http://www.mtsac.edu/instruction/outcomes/ILOs_Defined.pdf
• Northern Illinois University Assessment Terms Glossary. http://www.niu.edu/assessment/resources/terms.shtml#A
• Palomba, C.A. & Banta, T.W. (1999). Assessment essentials: Planning, implementing, and improving assessment in higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• University of Hawai'i Manoa. (2017). Assessment Definitions/Glossary. Retrieved from manoa.hawaii.edu/assessment/resources/definitons

Read more about assessment at CGCC:
Assessment Process | Assessment Resources | Learning Outcomes at CGCC