Core Reverification Assessment

All Core-designated courses must undergo a reverification assessment every five years. To facilitate this process, courses are organized and assessed by Core Objectives on a rotating schedule:

  • 2025–26 – Core Objectives 9, 13, and 14
  • 2026–27 – Core Objectives 4, 6, 7, and 12
  • 2027–28 – Core Objectives 8, 10, and 11

Departments are encouraged to assess courses outside the scheduled cycle when needed, especially if the course has not been reverified in five years or is unlikely to be offered when its Core Objective(s) is scheduled for assessment. For courses designated with multiple Core Objectives, instructors are welcome to reverify all Core Objectives to streamline the process.

Reporting process

Each semester, during reporting week, the Core Curriculum & Assessment Office will contact departments (Department Chairs and Assessment Coordinators) about the courses that need to be reverified. If the courses are scheduled to be taught during the semester, the Director of University Assessment will launch an Assessment Plan in Watermark for the courses during the final month of the semester (i.e., December and May). The deadline for completing the assessment plan is March 15 for courses taught in the Fall and October 15 for courses taught in the Spring.

In Watermark, the Assessment Plan will be assigned to the Department Chair and/or Department Assessment Coordinator. Departments can determine who is responsible for reporting assessment results, including course instructors, assessment coordinators, curriculum committee members, department chairs, administrative assistants, or associate/assistant Deans. Multiple people can be assigned as “Leads” on assessment plans, so any combination of people can be identified. If course instructors are responsible for reporting the assessment results for their courses, they will need to complete the TeamDynamix Request Form and request the contributor role and include the course(s) they will be assessing.

Assigned leads are responsible for entering outcomes, identifying assessment measures, and reporting results. Each Assessment Plan must include a copy of the current course syllabus, an annotated syllabus highlighting SLOs and relevant assignments related to the Core Objective, a description of the assessment measure(s), associated rubrics or grading criteria, and a completed Assessment Report. The Assessment Report consists of short-answer questions about course design, the student sample, assessment measures, and results, along with a set of guided reflection questions to support continuous improvement. Assessment results may be submitted in various formats, including score counts, using Canvas rubrics, or uploaded files, and should be deidentified. After submitting data, instructors analyze the results to evaluate student achievement of the Core Objective and determine whether learning outcomes were met. This process is intended to support thoughtful evaluation of course design and instructional practices while providing the Core Assessment Committee with sufficient documentation to determine whether the course meets the criteria for reverification.

Evaluation process

After departments submit completed Assessment Plans in Watermark, the Core Assessment Committee conducts a formal review to determine whether each course meets the criteria for reverification. As part of this process, the committee evaluates the alignment between the course content, learning outcomes, and the designated Core Objective, as well as the quality of the assessment methods and analysis. Each committee member completes a structured Reverification Assessment Survey, which is aligned with the Core Reverification Assessment Rubric. Survey responses are then aggregated into “Core Assessment Committee” evaluation scores, which are used to determine the reverification status for the course and are shared as feedback with departments in the form of completed Reverification Assessment Rubrics.

Additionally, to ensure compliance with policy requirements of the Core Curriculum, the Director of University Assessment conducts a technical review of course syllabi, verifying that the designated Core Objective and description are included, and that course descriptions, prerequisites, and SLOs align with the University’s Course Catalog. Instructors are encouraged to consult the Core Curriculum - Syllabus Design Guide for detailed guidance on aligning syllabi with Core Curriculum policy requirements and expectations.

If the committee identifies concerns (i.e., insufficient evidence of student learning, misalignment with the Core Objective, or lack of rigor in assessment practices), the department will be asked to submit additional documentation or describe planned course modifications.

Resources