Student learning outcomes are statements that describe what students will know or be able to do or demonstrate as a result of completing courses within a program. The MGCCC faculty who teach courses in our academic, career, technical and health science programs are responsible for developing and assessing the core general education and program-specific student learning outcomes.
When developing Student Learning Outcomes statements, these statements should be:
- Consistent with the instructional program mission and goals
- Focused on student learning- Not teaching or some other aspect of the program
- Clearly stated
- Realistic- Can potentially be achieved by a significant portion of students
- Actionable – Can be used to continually improve the program
General Education Student Learning Outcomes
The five general education student learning outcomes that all instructional programs are responsible for assessing include critical thinking, mathematical problem solving, oral communication, written communication, and application to technology. The rubrics associated with each of the general education student learning outcomes can be referenced by clicking the links below.
Program-Specific Student Learning Outcomes
The MGCCC faculty have the autonomy to develop Program-Specific Student Learning Outcomes that are unique to their program. The data collected should be used to drive continual improvement and optimize student learning in the course or program.
Reporting Template & Online Student Learning Outcome Submission Form
At the end of the academic year, the MGCCC faculty are asked to submit an Online Student Learning Outcome Form for every instructional program and supply the following pieces of information:
Components of the Student Learning Outcomes Reporting Template
5 General Student Learning Outcome Statements + Program-Specific Statements
- Student Learning Outcome Statement – Each program should report 5 General Education SLO statements + Program-Specific SLO statements
- Expected Outcome
- Assessment Instrument
- Student Type That Was Assessed – Online vs Traditional/Hybrid
- Number of Students Who Were Assessed
- Number of Students Who Successfully Met the Expected Outcome
- Use of Results – Make a meaningful analysis of the data and identify how you are going to use the results to improve student learning outcomes. Assess the extent to which each statement achieves these outcomes and provide evidence of improvement based on the analysis of the results.
Student Learning Outcomes Reporting Template | Download Here
A Student Learning Outcomes Reporting Template is available for instructional programs and can be used throughout the year. The template mirrors the actual online student learning outcome form that needs to be submitted at the end of each academic year. While the use of this template is optional, using this template can make it easy be transfer SLO data to the online form.
MGCCC Online Student Learning Outcome Submission Form | Click Here to Begin
This MGCCC Online Student Learning Outcome Submission Form should be completed at the end of the data cycle to submit instructional unit learning outcomes.
Deadline for Submitting the Online Student Learning Outcomes for 2017-2018
♦ All MGCCC Online Student Learning Outcome Forms must be submitted by no later than the Wednesday, May 9th, 2018.
Student Learning Outcomes – Training Video Tutorials
♦ Video Tutorial#1 – What is a Student Learning Outcome?
♦ Video Tutorial#2 – How to Write a Meaningful Student Learning Outcome Statement?
♦ Video Tutorial#3 – Tips for Collecting and Managing Student Learning Outcome Data
♦ Video Tutorial#4 – How to Submit Student Learning Outcome Data Using the Online Student Learning Outcome Form
Timothy S. Brophy – The Basics of Student Learning Outcomes Assessment
Timothy S. Brophy. (2014) The Basics of Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Online Training Module. Director of Institutional Assessment at the University of Florida.
Timothy S. Brophy. (2014) A Guide for Writing Student Learning Outcomes. Director of Institutional Assessment at the University of Florida.
A Guide for Writing Student Learning Outcomes
References & Literature
— Adelman, C., Ewell, P., Gaston, P., & Schneider, C. G. (2011, January) The degree qualifications profile. Indianapolis, IN: Lumina Foundation
— Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., & Cruikshank, K. A. (2000). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. London, England: Pearson.
— Association of American Colleges & Universities. (2010). Essential learning outcomes. Washington, DC: Author. Available online: http://www.aacu.org/leap/vision.cfm
— Bain, K. (2004). What the best college teachers do. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
— Barkley, E. F., & Major, C. H. (2016). Learning assessment techniques: A handbook for college faculty. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
— Carnevale, A. P., Smith, N., & Strohl, J. (2013, June). Recovery: Job growth and education requirements through 2020. Washington, DC: Georgetown University, Georgetown Public Policy Institute, Center on Education and the Workforce.
— Costa, A. L., & Kallick, B. (2009). Learning and leading with habits of mind: 16 essential characteristics for success. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
— Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
— Gallup, Inc. (2014, February 25). The 2013 Lumina study of the American public’s opinion on higher education and U.S. business leaders poll on higher education: What America needs to know about higher education redesign. Omaha, NE: Author.
— Hart Research Associates. (2013, April 10. It takes more than a major: Employer priorities for college learning and success. Retrieved fromhttp://www.aacu.org/leap/documents/2013_EmployerSurvey.pdf
— Marzano, R. J., & Kendall, J. S. (2008). Designing and assessing educational objectives: Applying the new taxonomy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
— Quality Matters Program. (2011). Quality Matters rubric workbook for higher education. Annapolis, MD: MarylandOnline, Inc.
— Sharp, M. D., Komives, S. R., & Fincher, J. (2011). Learning outcomes in academic disciplines: Identifying common ground. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 48(4), 481-504. doi: 10.2202/1949-6605.6246
— Shulman, L. S. (2007). Counting and recounting: Assessment and the quest for accountability. Change, 39(1), 20-25.
— Suskie, L. (2014). Five dimensions of quality: A common sense guide to accreditation and accountability. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
— Suskie, L. (In press). Assessing student learning: A common sense guide (3nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
— Walvoord, B. E., & Anderson, V. J. (2010). Effective grading: A tool for learning and assessment in college (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
— Wiseman, P. (2013, June 24). Seeking soft skills: Employers want graduates who can communicate, think fast, work in teams. Star Tribune. Retrieved from