{"id":27893,"date":"2026-11-10T11:17:25","date_gmt":"2026-11-10T00:17:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/educational-innovation.sydney.edu.au\/teaching@sydney\/?p=27893"},"modified":"2026-11-10T11:19:02","modified_gmt":"2026-11-10T00:19:02","slug":"how-do-we-know-our-graduates-have-achieved-what-their-degree-promises","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/educational-innovation.sydney.edu.au\/teaching@sydney\/how-do-we-know-our-graduates-have-achieved-what-their-degree-promises\/","title":{"rendered":"How do we know our graduates have achieved what their degree promises?\u00a0"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

When we award a degree, we are making a significant claim. We are stating that graduates of that degree have developed the knowledge and capabilities described in the course learning outcomes, regardless of the pathway, component, or unit selections they took in their degrees. What evidence allows us to stand behind that claim? Our program-level approach<\/a> for assurance of learning, anchored by the Sydney Assessment Framework<\/a> (the two-lane approach) identifies when and how all students demonstrate the knowledge and capabilities their Sydney qualification promises. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Completing the required number of credit points is clearly important, but it doesn\u2019t Necessarily tell us that a student has demonstrated all course learning outcomes to the required standard. Nor can we simply assume that the accumulated weight of many unit assessments will necessarily assure every outcome of a course. If we want a university qualification to be trusted, we need to know where students have demonstrated the learning that the degree promises. This is the purpose of our work on assurance of learning. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Looking at the degree as a whole <\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The majority of our assessments live within individual units of study. Units are where educators work most directly with students and where students progressively develop their knowledge, skills and capabilities. Most degrees, though, give students a great deal of choice in terms of how they meet their course requirements.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Two students enrolled in the same degree can graduate having taken substantially different combinations of units; different majors or streams, and specialisation or elective selections. This flexibility is one of the real strengths of a Sydney education for many, but it also means we need to look carefully at a whole degree when considering the capabilities that we are guaranteeing a graduate will possess. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Course Learning Outcomes<\/a> (CLOs) express the knowledge and skills that graduates have and the way that they can apply them. CLOs are specific, measurable statements detailing what every student should know, understand, and be able to demonstrate by the end of their degree. In the TEQSA guidance note on course design, they are defined as: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

a statement of what a student will know, the skills they will learn to apply and the level they will be able to demonstrate \u2026 at completion of the course.\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

For each CLO, we need to know that every student pathway includes appropriate progression points at which the outcome is assured and which every student must pass to either progress or graduate.When a degree contains majors, streams or specialisations, mid-level learning outcomes (MLOs) help us connect the learning in each component to the outcomes promised by the degree as a whole. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"An\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/svg>\n\t\t<\/button>
The two main available approaches for program-level assurance, for degrees that do and do not contain mid-level components.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Why this matters now <\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Assurance of learning is not a new expectation. The Higher Education Standards Framework (HESF)<\/a>  has long required universities to specify course learning outcomes, align them with the appropriate Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF)<\/a> level and field of education, and assess students as having demonstrated those outcomes by the end of their course. Recently, of course, the context in which we make these judgements has changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Generative AI can produce sophisticated written, visual and analytical work. A polished submission does not, by itself, necessarily communicate what a student knows or can do. Across a course, we need evidence that students have demonstrated the course learning outcomes documented by its teachers and required by both the HESF and our own policies. This does not mean we should prevent students from using AI throughout their education, quite the opposite is true. Our graduates need experience using contemporary tools critically, ethically and creatively. It does mean, however, that we need credible evidence of the capabilities behind the work. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is why the Sydney Assessment Framework<\/a> classifies assessment tasks under one of the two, open and secure . Open assessment allows students to work with appropriate resources and technologies as they inquire, practise, create and apply their learning. Secure assessment gives us evidence that the student has demonstrated selected capabilities under conditions where their identity and contribution can be assured. A degree needs to both be relevant and to assure learning. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Progression points, not security everywhere <\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Our approach is not to make every assessment secure. That would constrain learning, remove authenticity, create unnecessary workload and make it harder for students to learn how to use AI and other tools responsibly. Instead, an assurance strategy relies on the identification of an appropriate number of progression points. These are points in the course at which students must pass a secure assessment aligned with one or more course learning outcomes. The assessment used at a progression point therefore necessitates a hurdle requirement: students must meet the specified standard to pass the unit, regardless of their results in other assessments. Depending on the capability being assured, a progression point might use a written examination, an interactive oral, an observed practical or performance task, a clinical assessment, or expert observation in a placement or during a research project. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

One progression point may assure several outcomes. It will often be part of a core or capstone unit so that every student encounters it. Placements, projects and other required components may also provide suitable points of assurance. Selective units are less suitable because assurance would need to be built into every permitted pathway, often requiring equivalent assessments across several units and significantly increasing workload for students and staff.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The appropriate number of progression points will depend on the length and structure of the course. A one-year postgraduate degree, for example, may need only one strong point of assurance for each course learning outcome. In a multi-year degree, each outcome will usually be introduced, developed and mastered, with evidence at more than one stage and final assurance at the highest level at which it is taught and assessed – normally the last year of study. Combinations of these two strategies are often desirable. For example, in embedded honours degrees, foundational CLOs will be assessed earlier in the degree and CLOs which address research capabilities may be wholly introduced and assessed in the final year of study.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The aim is to be proportionate; enough evidence to be confident, without turning the degree into a succession of hurdles. Judicious use of hurdles ensures that students demonstrate significant parts of their learning at appropriate points, without causing any unnecessary stress.The only workable alternative for most degrees would be to require units to use 100% secure tasks, which in most cases is not good for learning and effectively introduces a hurdle requirement anyway. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Starting with the outcomes <\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The process starts with course learning outcomes, not with assessments. Are the outcomes clear and measurable? Do they describe achievement at the right level? Do they reflect the field of education and the qualities we expect of a Sydney graduate? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Course teams can then identify where each outcome is developed and where it is most appropriately assessed and assured. In some degrees, an existing assessment may already provide the evidence we need and simply needs to be identified as a formal progression point. In others, an assessment may need to be modified or a new form of secure assessment introduced.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This work can also reveal broader curriculum issues. An outcome might be assessed several times in some pathways but missed in another. Several assessments might test the same capability while another important outcome receives little attention. A capstone may integrate the course effectively, or it may sit too far from some of the learning it is expected to assure. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Infographic
CLOs can be assured through degree core, component core, capstone units, and\/or selective units of study, ensuring that they are all mapped to secure assessments and assured across all pathways available to students within the degree.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Taking a program-level view<\/a> helps us see these patterns. Beyond providing assurance, it can help improve the coherence of the degree, ensure clarity for teaching teams, and support student motivation.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Working through the process together <\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Course teams know their disciplines, their students and their curricula best. Our assurance strategy draws on that expertise while providing a consistent approach across the University. Developing, reviewing, and having an assurance strategy approved follows the below process: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. Faculty and school teams review their course and mid-level learning outcomes, map the relevant secure assessments marking hurdles as appropriate. <\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. The Division of Teaching and Learning works with those teams to test whether the mapping produces a coherent assurance strategy, that it captures all student journeys, and that the proposed progression points are proportionate and educationally appropriate. DTL endorses the proposal.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  3. The strategy proceeds through local governance.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  4. The strategy proceeds to the Undergraduate or Graduate Studies Committee for review and approval.\u00a0<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    The governance process at faculty\/school and Academic Board level, despite the description above, is more than an approval exercise. At its best, it is a structured form of peer review, giving us an opportunity to ask whether a design is coherent, whether the evidence is sufficiently strong and whether students will experience a sensible progression across the degree. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    We encourage course teams to contact the Division of Teaching and Learning<\/a> early for consultation and discussion, rather than waiting until a proposal is ready for formal approval.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    What this work will achieve <\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    Done well, assurance of learning should give us much more than regulatory compliance. It should lead to clearer course learning outcomes and stronger connections between those outcomes, the curriculum and assessment. It should help us improve the coherence of our courses and identify gaps, remove unnecessary repetition and workload, and identify places where students need more opportunity to practice before being summatively assessed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    It should also make our use of secure assessment more purposeful. Rather than trying to secure every task, we must concentrate assurance where it provides the strongest evidence of achievement. We can then use open assessment elsewhere to support rich, authentic learning with contemporary tools. Most importantly, this work should allow us to stand behind our qualifications with confidence. A Sydney degree should tell students, employers, professional bodies and the wider community something meaningful about what our graduates know and can do. It should be something our students, their families, and us as their teachers are proud of. This work gives us the evidence to stand behind that promise. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Find out more about the process for detailing and progressing your assurance of learning strategy on the staff intranet in the DVC (E&S) assurance of learning process guide<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    When we award a degree, we are making a significant claim. We are stating that graduates of that degree have developed the knowledge and…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2137,"featured_media":27902,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_tec_requires_first_save":true,"_price":"","_stock":"","_tribe_ticket_header":"","_tribe_default_ticket_provider":"","_tribe_ticket_capacity":"0","_ticket_start_date":"","_ticket_end_date":"","_tribe_ticket_show_description":"","_tribe_ticket_show_not_going":false,"_tribe_ticket_use_global_stock":"","_tribe_ticket_global_stock_level":"","_global_stock_mode":"","_global_stock_cap":"","_tribe_rsvp_for_event":"","_tribe_ticket_going_count":"","_tribe_ticket_not_going_count":"","_tribe_tickets_list":"[]","_tribe_ticket_has_attendee_info_fields":false,"_EventAllDay":false,"_EventTimezone":"Australia\/Sydney","_EventStartDate":"","_EventEndDate":"","_EventStartDateUTC":"","_EventEndDateUTC":"","_EventShowMap":false,"_EventShowMapLink":false,"_EventURL":"","_EventCost":"","_EventCostDescription":"","_EventCurrencySymbol":"","_EventCurrencyCode":"","_EventCurrencyPosition":"","_EventDateTimeSeparator":"","_EventTimeRangeSeparator":"","_EventOrganizerID":[],"_EventVenueID":[],"_OrganizerEmail":"","_OrganizerPhone":"","_OrganizerWebsite":"","_VenueAddress":"","_VenueCity":"","_VenueCountry":"","_VenueProvince":"","_VenueState":"","_VenueZip":"","_VenuePhone":"","_VenueURL":"","_VenueStateProvince":"","_VenueLat":"","_VenueLng":"","_VenueShowMap":false,"_VenueShowMapLink":false,"_tribe_blocks_recurrence_rules":"","_tribe_blocks_recurrence_description":"","_tribe_blocks_recurrence_exclusions":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[4375,4373,56],"tags":[5643,238,4389],"coauthors":[571,5641,462],"class_list":["post-27893","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-ai-in-education","category-dvc-education-and-students","category-news-events","tag-assurance-of-learning","tag-learning-outcomes","tag-sydney-assessment-framework","post-item","post-even"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/educational-innovation.sydney.edu.au\/teaching@sydney\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27893","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/educational-innovation.sydney.edu.au\/teaching@sydney\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/educational-innovation.sydney.edu.au\/teaching@sydney\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/educational-innovation.sydney.edu.au\/teaching@sydney\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2137"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/educational-innovation.sydney.edu.au\/teaching@sydney\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=27893"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/educational-innovation.sydney.edu.au\/teaching@sydney\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27893\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":27947,"href":"https:\/\/educational-innovation.sydney.edu.au\/teaching@sydney\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27893\/revisions\/27947"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/educational-innovation.sydney.edu.au\/teaching@sydney\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/27902"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/educational-innovation.sydney.edu.au\/teaching@sydney\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=27893"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/educational-innovation.sydney.edu.au\/teaching@sydney\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=27893"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/educational-innovation.sydney.edu.au\/teaching@sydney\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=27893"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/educational-innovation.sydney.edu.au\/teaching@sydney\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=27893"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}