ILO3 Integrative knowledge assignment guide and rubric
This page has been updated. Click here to go to new page.
Philosophy and practice of assessment at CSUMB
Institutional Learning Outcome 3: Integrative Knowledge
CSUMB graduates synthesize and connect knowledge, skills and experiences across disciplines, allowing them to address new and complex situations.
Integrative knowledge assignment guide and rubric
Quick start
The integrative knowledge (ILO3) assignment guide and rubric were designed to the improve student performance on tasks for which stronger application of integrative knowledge will help students produce better work. Use the assignment guide questions to determine where more specificity and guidance is (or is not) needed for students to understand how to do well on the task. Use the rubric as a guide for creating or improving course- or program-level rubrics that help students understand expectations and help educators evaluate student performance. Assignment guide questions and rubric descriptors should be modified to fit the specific course or program context. It is not expected that in all cases a single task will address all components of the guide and rubric; rather, educators should focus on those components most relevant to the learning they want students to demonstrate. Collaborative development and use of a program-level rubric can promote a shared understanding of integrative learning and how to help students develop and demonstrate it in manner appropriate to the program's context.
The assignment guide is more general, suggesting basic questions instructors can consider when writing or revising assignment guidelines. The rubric describes what student work looks like at increasing levels of student competency.
The assignment guide and rubric were created by an interdisciplinary team of CSUMB faculty to help students develop, apply, transfer, and demonstrate integrative learning across curricular and co-curricular contexts. The rubric was derived from the AAC&U Integrative Learning VALUE Rubric and rubrics developed by California State University, San Bernardino and LaGuardia Community College. Like the AAC&U VALUE rubric, the CSUMB Integrative Knowledge Rubric is developmental and describes expectations for work produced by undergraduate students over a four-year undergraduate program, with level 3 of the rubric describing expectations for a CSUMB graduate.
There is no expectation that a single assignment should explicitly address all questions posed in the assignment guide. Rather, the guide poses questions to help educators make their own decisions about what kinds of prompts to include -- or not to include -- in an assignment. For example, in upper-division courses, there may be tasks students should know to do on their own, without prompting (assuming appropriate and effective scaffolding and prerequisite courses).
The rubric provides language educators can selectively choose and adapt for their own assignments and rubrics. Like the guides, there is no expectation that an assignment should be aligned to a rubric in its entirety or word-for-word. Modifying rubric category labels and descriptors to fit particular course and program contexts is encouraged.
Adapting the rubric for grading
The rubric levels are developmental, but can be adapted for course-level grading. The rubric defines expectations for student development over a four-year undergraduate program. Adapting the rubric for course-level grading requires educators explicitly and clearly communicate to students how rubric scores translate to grades. For example, in a sophomore-level course, for an assignment explicitly aligned the rubric, student work that meets level 2 in all rubric categories might receive a B; student work that meets level 2 in half of the rubric categories and meets level 3 in the remaining might receive a B+; student work that meets level 3 in all rubric categories might receive an A. For a senior-level course, expectations would be higher (e.g. work that meets level 3 in all rubric categories might receive a B). Instructors may also wish to add additional performance levels and criteria and/or modify the rubric language (including the level descriptors) for working with student and grading purposes.