For the past two cycles, GCC assessed learning primarily through academic departments. Under the guidance of their Department Assessment Coordinators (DACs), faculty conducted course assessment and compiled department reports called Academic Assessment Plans. Career and Technical Education areas with external accreditors conducted more traditional, accreditor-aligned program assessment; however, the majority of departments focused on course-level assessment with department-level rollups for public reporting.

Faculty submitted course assessments through an assessment report form; selected content from those submissions was compiled into each department’s Academic Assessment Plan for public reporting.

Academic Assessment Plans from Cycle 2 (AY21-22 through AY23-24) are available below. The expectation was that all courses would complete the Plan–Do–Study–Act process at least once. 

Assessment report highlights

All departmental course assessment reports from GCC in the most recent multiyear cycle were compiled into one dataset, with each row representing a single course report. We summarized the dataset using simple counts and percentages to show faculty participation, collaboration on common course assessments, alignment to institutional learning outcomes, and evidence of action. 

• Faculty participation. 1,186 total participation instances recorded across faculty categories (Residential = 688, Adjunct = 428, Dual Enrollment = 53).

• Breadth and consistency of engagement. 470 submissions across 424 courses and 18 departments (no courses are currently offered in the Library Department).

• Collaborative practice. 83.9% of reports from courses taught by more than one faculty report using common course assessment

• Alignment to Institutional Outcomes. Documented Canvas ILO rubric use in 32% of submissions and strong coverage of Critical Thinking and Communication.

• Action and improvement. 85.7% document an intervention, with the most common being pedagogical improvements, and 71.9% report next steps.

• Thematic takeaway from ACT narratives. The most common action was assignment redesign and scaffolding (116 reports). Representative quote: “Faculty coordinated to develop a consistent rubric to be used over all sections of the course for congruency.”

Updated 08/2025

GCC paused the course assessment cycle that would have started in AY24–25 to design an integrated program assessment model. Beginning in Fall 2025, we are implementing that model. This transition was prioritized following feedback from our accreditor, the Higher Learning Commission.

Curriculum mapping
MCCCD publishes official program descriptions, including each program’s learning outcomes and the supporting courses. Building on that foundation, GCC created visual program maps for this initiative. The new, detailed mapping work asks faculty to align course competencies to each Program Learning Outcome and to identify, starting with required courses, whether a course introduces, reinforces, or meets the outcome.

Current status and expectations

• GCC created more than 100 program maps during Spring 2025; faculty are completing alignment of course competencies to program outcomes and planning integrated course and program assessment projects.

• GCC launched a new three-year cycle of assessment in Fall 2025. All courses will be assessed at least once during the cycle.

• Each program is expected to assess at least three Program Learning Outcomes during the cycle.

• Courses not mapped to a program outcome will continue to participate in course assessment.

Assessment Report updates

• Reporting occurs through the Assessment Report form, which will feed results into each program’s spreadsheet for program-level analysis.

• Redesigned to connect course assessment with program assessment, institutional outcomes, and general education in one place. 

• Built to teach as it collects, with concise prompts, examples, and short explanations that guide faculty toward meaningful, improvement focused work.

• Organized around PAIR (Prepare, Assess, Intervene, Reassess), replacing Plan–Do–Study–Act for a clearer process.

• Results feed directly into each program’s spreadsheet for program level analysis. 

Early gains from curriculum mapping

Although the integrated process is just beginning, the mapping work has already produced practical benefits. As faculty identify which course competencies support each Program Learning Outcome and whether courses introduce, reinforce, or meet an outcome, several programs have flagged issues in MCCCD program listings and are preparing feedback for their Instructional Councils. 

• 8122 AA Emphasis in Psychology. Three PLOs (3, 4, 7) were not mapped to PSY230WL and/or PSY290AB despite course competencies directly aligned with those PLOs. 

Updated 08/2025