05 / Assurance of learning
Prove what was learned — not just what was marked.
Most programs can show a distribution of grades. Far fewer can show why a grade means what it claims. Assurance of learning is the established term; the Learning Evidence Chain is how CoAcademic intends to make it inspectable — outcome, requirement, AI-use rule, process evidence, artifact, explanation, rubric judgment, faculty decision, record.
01The problem
Grades are a summary, not evidence
Assurance of learning fails at the point where an outcome claim cannot be traced to anything a reviewer can inspect. That gap is usually a records problem rather than a teaching problem.
Rubrics drift
The rubric in the handbook is often not the rubric that was marked against.
Band meaning is tacit
Two markers can apply the same descriptor to visibly different work without either being wrong.
Moderation is undocumented
The conversation happens; the record of what changed and why usually does not.
Evidence is unlinked
An outcome report can rarely point at the passage, the process artifact, or the student explanation that justified a specific judgment.
02The record
The Assurance Record, link by link
Founding pilot scope
Founding Pilot Scope: the chain preserved end to end for one assignment, produced as a by-product of normal marking rather than a separate reporting exercise.
- Intended outcome
- The learning outcome this assignment was meant to evidence, stated before the work began.
- Requirement and AI-use rule
- What the task asked for, and whether AI use was restricted, limited, disclosed, or required.
- Required process evidence
- The planning, drafting, or annotation artifacts the assignment asked students to keep.
- Artifact and explanation
- The submitted work together with the student's account of specific choices in it.
- Rubric version and calibration
- Which criteria, weights, and band descriptors applied, and which anchor work set band meaning.
- Moderation
- Which scripts were second-read, where markers differed, and how the difference was resolved.
- Faculty decisions
- Every proposal a faculty member approved, revised, or rejected, recorded per criterion.
- Release
- Who released results, and when.
03Program level
Roll-up across courses and terms
Planned product
Program-level attainment views are planned product. They are not built, and nothing on this site should be read as a working analytics capability.
- 01
Outcome mapping
Criteria mapped to program learning outcomes so a course record contributes to a program claim.
- 02
Attainment views
Distribution of outcome attainment across cohorts, with the underlying evidence still reachable.
- 03
Consistency signals
Where marker agreement is weak, the program sees it before an external reviewer does.
- 04
Review-ready export
A package a program committee can read without asking faculty to rebuild it by hand.
The Founding Assessment Assurance Pilot
One course team, one assignment, one confirmed rubric — audited, calibrated, reviewed against evidence, and decided by faculty. Enrolment is not open; the page explains the intended scope and what a pilot would require from both sides.