Using Outcomes for both grading and accreditation

[ghinck]

Hi- I am trying to figure out how to utilize outcomes for assessment tracking as well as grading so that students don't have to upload an assignment twice.  Our criteria scores and the assignment scores are different.  It looks like there used to be a checkbox where you could select which criterion in a rubric applied to the score in the gradebook but this is no longer present.  Our 5 point assignment shows up in the gradebook at 16 points if we include the outcomes criteria.

Thanks for any ideas or workarounds!

Glori

[Stef_retired]

 @ghinck ‌, I'm puzzled by the statement "there used to be a checkbox where you could select which criterion in a rubric applied to the score in the gradebook but this is no longer present," because that hasn't changed. Please refer to How do I align an outcome with a rubric in a course? , and scroll down to the Import Outcome section. At the time an outcome is imported into a rubric, the rubric creator has the option to select or deselect "Use this criterion for scoring." Can you clarify what obstacle you are encountering?

[ghinck]

Thanks for the response Stephanie.  I found the criterion check box but still can't make the outcomes do what I would like them to.  When I unclick 'Use this criterion for scoring' I am not able to assign a score at all which means I can't select their level of mastery for the outcome.  So, I'm back to needing two assignment uploads- one for the outcomes and one for the grade. Our outcomes in this case are for accreditation, not for assignment scoring.  Am I missing something?

Glori

[Stef_retired]

 @ghinck ‌, when an outcome is aligned to a rubric and the "Use this criterion for scoring" checkbox is disabled, the instructor should still be able to click on the appropriate mastery boxes when grading the assignment. The points associated with each cell will not populate the grade for the assignment, but the levels of mastery will be visible in the Learning Mastery Gradebook.

Could you provide screenshots of your rubric settings and outcomes? That would help us get closer to a resolution.

[ghinck]

Hi Stephanie, I have been exploring many changes in the settings and cannot figure out where to enter the criterion score for 'not used for scoring'.

Gradebook view:

Openness to self-evaluation

was set for 'use this criterion for scoring' and Internalized commitment was not.

Rubric view:

Thanks for any insights!

Glori

[Stef_retired]

 @ghinck , those screenshots really help! You'll need to disable the free-form comments option in order to be able to assign points to specific mastery levels.

[ghinck · Accepted solution]

Hi Stephanie, it looks like this will work!  I don't add points but I click on the appropriate rubric cell.

Thanks!

Glori

[tue58800]

We're doing this another way by nesting our grading criteria as Outcomes within Outcome Groups that are used for assessment (and accreditation), and then building the rubric entirely out of Outcomes instead of Criteria. In this example, Financial Acuity is what we are tracking for assessment, and Ratios and Rate of Return are things we want to grade an assignment on.

Here's what the rubric looks like. The things for assessment don't show up, so the instructors just grade on the things they normally grade on...

On the back end, Financial Acuity and other Outcomes Groups we are assessing are attached to each of the rubric items and appear when the data is exported from the Learning Mastery view or accessed via the API.

It would be interesting to know if anyone else is trying anything like this or in other ways!

[kmcalvage]

Mary, we've been using the nested folders of outcomes, too, so that they can easily be embedded in any assignment rubric without totaling the assessment criteria points.  So far, it's been working great, as long as faculty remember to "uncheck the box" for points totaling when they add the criteria to their rubrics.  I say that phrase a lot in trainings!

The only difference in what we did -- at Canvas' excellent advice -- was to code our assessment criteria and its associated folders.  We have both university-wide and program-specific assessment that we are managing all at once, and the coding has made both the available folder structure in any given course site and the CSV report much more clear.

For example, we use the AAC&U "VALUE" rubrics for undergraduate general education assessment, while our Art Therapy Counseling program has a specialized accreditor called CAAHEP that has provided us with outcomes criteria.

So, if I'm looking at a report, a code of MU.VALUE.IL.C1 tells me that I'm looking at campus wide (MU), VALUE criteria, the Integrative Learning rubric (IL), and criteria one on that rubric (C1).

Contrast that with ATC.CAAHEP.SLO.A tells me that I'm looking at the Art Therapy Counseling department (ATC), CAAHEP criteria, a student learning outcome (SLO), criteria A (A).

[tue58800]

Nice. That definitely sounds like a best practice, Katherine!

For us, we just couldn't get past the points totaling confusion on rubrics that had both Outcomes and Criteria. That's why we're turning all possible rubric criteria values into Outcomes instead. Or at least that's what sounds like the best idea right now. So every assignment used for program assessment/accreditation will have an Outcomes-only rubric like the one above. So instead of faculty grading on Financial Acuity in addition to grading on Ratios, they'll just grade on Ratios. Thanks to the competency groups, that data will already be tied to Financial Acuity in the background. That way we hope we can keep our energy focused on encouraging faculty to use the rubrics for grading!

[John_Lowe]

 @kmcalvage ‌, Thanks for this great info.  As a quick follow-up, are you saying that you use the codes in the main name field?  For example, in this screenshot below, I changed the name of "1. Diversity of Communities and Cultures" to "BU.VALUE.CE.1" to mimic what I believe is your suggestion. 

If I'm understanding this correctly, does this confuse your faculty when they may not know what BU.VALUE.CE.1 is and just see your code instead of the more traditional name?  Or are you using the codes somewhere else rather than in the name?  I'd love to see a screenshot example of how you have your AAC&U VALUE rubrics in Canvas.  I've also attached a sample Outcomes Report (using fake data) to show the coded name vs the normal name.  Is this what your reports look like too, or are you doing something different to identify these in your Outcomes Reports?

Basically, I love the idea of using codes somewhere to help sort and organize the reports, but I'm just not sure if I'm doing it right by using the code as the name of the outcome.

[MelanieThompson]

kmcalvage,

My institution is trying to find the best way to implement the AAC&U GE Value Rubrics into our Canvas courses.

Would you be available to help us set it up?

[Boekenoogen]

Instructure needs to fix Outcomes. The easiest solution is to allow for two rubrics attached to an Assessment: One for grading the assessment and the Second for Outcomes. There is already a request and I believe it has over 200 "yes" votes.