Performance Results Scale
The Performance Results Scale defines how learning outcomes are evaluated and reported across the institution. This shared scale ensures consistent interpretation of results while still allowing flexibility at the course and assignment level to support meaningful, faculty-aligned assessment.
Define the Institutional Performance Results Scale
Institutions may configure 2–5 scale units
Scale titles are customizable at the institutional level
Scale units may be configured to support Pass/Fail use cases
A single Performance Results Scale is used across the institution
Note: This applies to scale structure and labels only; thresholds are configurable at lower levels
Configure Scale Governance
The Performance Results Scale is set by Annual Term
Once assessment data is entered, the scale for that annual term is locked to protect reporting integrity
Scale item titles can be updated at any time without impacting historical data
Set and Adjust Performance Thresholds
Default performance thresholds can be defined for each scale unit
Thresholds are adjustable at the assignment level, allowing robust and flexible outcome measurement
This supports varied assessment strategies while maintaining institutional consistency
Align Language with Faculty Culture
Use clear, faculty-friendly language (e.g., Exceeds / Meets / Approaching / Not Met)
Promote consistent scale usage across programs to support reliable, aggregated reporting
Things to Consider
A shared Performance Results Scale allows outcome data to be aggregated and compared across courses, programs, and academic terms—supporting trend analysis and longitudinal reporting.
The Performance Results Scale is visible across the institution:
At the course level, for each outcome measured
At the student level, showing individual mastery of outcomes
At the program, subject, and institutional levels, aggregating results across terms
By combining a single institutional scale with adjustable thresholds at the assignment level, institutions can ensure data consistency while still respecting disciplinary differences and instructional design needs.
Engage faculty, assessment leaders, and academic governance early when defining scale language and defaults. Aligning on shared terminology upfront builds trust in the data, improves adoption, and strengthens the value of outcomes reporting across the institution.