Quadrennial Review Rubric
The Quadrennial Review Rubric provides a structured framework for evaluating General Education assessment reports submitted every four years, ensuring alignment with institutional standards and continuous improvement in student learning outcomes.
Legend
- Exemplary — 🟩 Green
- Good — 🟨 Yellow
- Developing — 🟧 Orange
- Needs Improvement — 🟥 Red
Download the Quadrennial Review Rubric S25
| Exemplary | Good | Developing | Needs Improvement | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Outcomes | ||||
| Learning Outcomes | Instructions: The Learning Outcomes for General Education are determined by the General Education Committee and may be reviewed here: (Link). While reviewers will not evaluate these outcomes, they should review them for context before evaluating the quadrennial reports. | |||
| Connection | Connection from course to general education is clearly expressed. | Connection from course to general education is loosely expressed. | Connection from course to general education is unclear. | No connection from course to general education. |
| Methods | ||||
| Outcome-Method Alignment | Clearly defined alignment between the outcome(s) and selected method(s) as described in the report. | Somewhat clearly defined alignment between the outcome(s) and selected method(s) as described in the report. | Alignment between outcome(s) and method(s) is not clear. | No evidence of alignment between outcome(s) and method(s). |
| Method & Method Type | Method(s) are clear; have face validity for specific purpose and student learning; use both direct and indirect method(s). | Method(s) are clear; have face validity for specific purpose and student learning; use ONLY direct OR indirect method(s). | Method(s) are clear; lack face validity for specific purpose OR student learning; use ONLY direct OR indirect method(s). | Method(s) lack clarity; lack face validity for specific purpose OR student learning; use ONLY direct OR indirect method(s). |
| Method Target | Clear student-focused target (i.e., rubric percentages by category; overall test and item performance; licensure exam scores; etc.). Rationale for choosing target is articulated (e.g., based on local standards, historical trends, external standards, etc.). | Clear student-focused target; target is not delimited (i.e., lacks rubric percentages by category; overall test and item performance; licensure exam scores; etc.). Rationale for choosing target is articulated (e.g., based on local standards, historical trends, external standards, etc.). | Clear student-focused target; target is not delimited (i.e., lacks rubric percentages by category; overall test and item performance; licensure exam scores; etc.). No rationale for choosing target is articulated (e.g., based on local standards, historical trends, external standards, etc.). | Unclear target OR not student-focused target; target is not delimited (i.e., lacks rubric percentages by category; overall test and item performance; licensure exam scores; etc.). No rationale for choosing target is articulated (e.g., based on local standards, historical trends, external standards, etc.). |
| Findings | ||||
| Data Reported (e.g., data collection/method of sampling, item analysis, frequency counts, instrument norming statistics, etc.) | Results presented include explanation of data collection method, sample size, background of students, item analysis, frequency counts, instrument norming where appropriate, etc. | Results presented include most of the following: explanation of data collection method, sample size, background of students, item analysis, frequency counts, instrument norming where appropriate, etc. | Results presented include some of the following: explanation of data collection method, sample size, background of students, item analysis, frequency counts, instrument norming where appropriate, etc.and/or the data reported is not clearly connected to the outcome. | Results are not presented, or the data reported does not connect to the outcome. |
| Analysis & Reflection | Interpretation of results clearly presented and appropriate based on analysis of the data; if possible, combines analysis of direct and indirect measures. | Interpretation of results is somewhat clear and appropriate based on analysis of the data. | Interpretation of results is unclear or inappropriate based on analysis of the data. | Interpretation of results not reported. |
| Action Plan | Clearly identifies plans for action based on assessment results, including timeline for implementation and persons responsible for implementation; action plans may include the following scenarios: 1) Target Exceeded—Consider longitudinal data and whether the assessment method should change, 2) Target Met—Continue to monitor over an identified timeline, 3) Target Not Met—Improvement Plan articulated, OR recognition of invalid/unreliable assessment process changes needed. | Evidence of plans for action tied to assessment results, but may not identify a timeline for implementation or persons responsible for implementation and/or all possible scenarios of assessment results. | Evidence of plans for action not clearly tied to assessment results and does not identify a timeline for implementation or all scenarios of assessment results. | Does not specify plans for action based on assessment results. |
| Evidence (e.g., raw data, rubrics, meeting minutes, student artifacts (free of all identifying information), etc.) | Sufficient evidence is provided to corroborate all data reported, such as rubrics; spreadsheets with rubric scores; interrater reliability information; aggregated test/item analysis; test psychometric statistics; disaggregated test/item analysis by groups of students with relevant characteristics; licensure exam scores; surveys; survey results; focus group themes/transcripts; meeting minutes; advisory board feedback or analysis; etc. Evidence is a mixture of direct and indirect measures. Findings are disaggregated by modality. This is true for ALL findings. | Supporting evidence provided is linked to data, but partially substantiates data reported and is a mixture of direct and indirect measures; this is true for MOST findings. Findings are disaggregated by modality. | The link between finding and supporting evidence is difficult to determine; this is true for SOME findings. There is not a mixture of direct and indirect measures. Findings are disaggregated by modality. | No substantiating evidence provided. |
| Quadrennial Summary | ||||
| Overall Action Plan for Next Quadrennial Cycle | Clearly identifies plans for action based on cumulative assessment results, including timeline for implementation and persons responsible for implementation. | Evidence of plans for action tied to assessment results but may not identify a timeline for implementation or persons responsible for implementation. | Evidence of plans for action not clearly tied to assessment results and does not identify a timeline for implementation or persons responsible for implementation. | No specified plans for action based on assessment results. |