Different Interpretations of “Course Embedded Assessment”

With a significant focus on the evaluation of our institutional general education curriculum/program, one concept I’ve encountered frequently of late is “course embedded assessment.”  However, I’ve discovered at least two different interpretations of the concept. 

Back up a small step . . .

When evaluating the effectiveness of instruction, there are direct and indirect methods; the Texas A&M Office of Institutional Assessment defines those two concepts fairly well, for reference as needed.  Direct methods are those which “require students to produce work so that reviewers can assess how well students meet expectations.”  As a direct measure, “course embedded assessments” are those that students complete during a course; that is in contrast to assessment methods like certification/licensure exams, other standardized exams, student portfolios, or other work that students may do – in addition to coursework – for the purpose of assessment and evaluation.  However, in conversations focused on institutional evaluation of general education outcomes, I have noticed two different levels of the extent to which assessments are embedded.

First, some institutions are leveraging only the artifacts students produce during a course; they sample a number of sections of a particular course and all student work from a particular assignment.  For example, to evaluate general education outcomes, a lab report assignment from 15 different sections of a microbiology course may be sampled.  Those assignments are collected and graded by a group of faculty (other than the faculty teaching the course) against a rubric measuring level of student attainment regarding critical thinking.

Second, other institutions are leveraging the artifacts students produce during a course AND the assessment of the work also occurred during the course.  For example, to evaluate general education outcomes, the same lab report assignment from 15 different sections of a microbiology course may be sampled.  Those assignments AND the assessment of the work by the faculty member – against rubric criteria or an entirely separate rubric measuring level of students attainment regarding critical thinking – are aggregated.  In short, the assignment is not regraded outside the scope of the course; the institutional assessment effort relies on the grading of work by faculty teaching the course.

If you work with evaluation of general education program/outcomes in your institution, what is your understanding of “course embedded assessment?”  Which interpretation represents your institution’s approach?  What are the pros and cons of implementing each approach?