CORE Outcomes

CORE Outcomes – Where did they come from?

Background. In the early 2000s CSP’s undergraduate University Outcomes and rubrics were developed collaboratively by the Assessment Council, then-associate dean of academic affairs, and faculty groups to provide assessable student learning outcomes, particularly within the general education curriculum. These broad, overarching academic and personal skills were taken directly or adapted from the faculty-approved (1996) Framework for Learning. Groups of faculty who had expertise or discipline-related interest in each Outcome were gathered to develop the rubrics for each outcome. Each discipline area from the general education course requirements (e.g., Fine Arts, Mathematics, Social & Behavioral Science, etc.) was required by the General Education Committee to choose two of the Outcomes to address and assess in any approved general education course. This became a means of assessing learning in general education courses, necessary for our 2008 HLC Visit, and has been part of our student learning assessment since.

About 12 years have passed since the University Outcomes were instituted. All were reviewed in 2014 and several have had revisions since then. In 2018, the General Education Task Force re-named them CORE Outcomes (C=CSP; O=Outcomes; [for] R=Relevant, Responsive, Real; E=Education). The Spiritual Outcome became the Christian-Lutheran Outcome and the Civic Outcome became the Urban-Civic Outcome as a reflection of CSP’s Promise Statement. The Global Outcome was expanded extensively to include intercultural components and incorporate elements from best practices in the field of intercultural and international education. In preparation for the transition to using Blackboard tools for assessment, all the CORE Outcomes were reviewed and revised by faculty teams. The most recent versions are found below.

CORE Outcomes and Descriptions

Integration of CORE Outcomes into General Education Course Requirements

Integration of CORE Outcomes into Undergraduate Majors

Because CORE Outcomes reflect learning across the undergraduate experience, they are also addressed and assessed in the major. The form used to outline the program learning outcomes includes a section where the program outlines the CORE outcomes they will measure in their major courses. PSLOs and CORE Outcomes in the Major-Form

Rubrics for CORE Outcomes (Undergraduate)

Rubrics for Graduate School Outcomes

CSP’s Framework for Learning (Basis for CORE Outcomes)

Faculty Team Leaders for CORE Outcomes

  • Aesthetic – Monica Murray
  • Christian-Lutheran – Mark Schuler
  • Critical Thinking – Debra Beilke
  • Global-Intercultural – Monica Murray
  • Information Literacy – Rachel Wightman
  • Interpersonal – Nancy Harrower
  • Oral Communication Presentation – Kim Flottemesch
  • Physical – Lana Huberty
  • Problem-Solving (new) – Mandy Brosnahan
  • Quantitative Reasoning – Sarah Jahn
  • Writing – John DuFresne

Reference Chart Comparing Standardized Tests of Some CORE Outcomes