The Lore
If course grades exist, they can automatically be used as assessment evidence. After all, grades are already collected, institution-wide, and tied to student performance—so why not use them?
The Law
Course grades may be used as assessment evidence—but only when they are intentional, aligned, and interpretable in relation to stated student learning outcomes. Grades that are simply available are not necessarily meaningful for assessment purposes.
Why This Lore Persists
This misconception persists because grades feel efficient. They are familiar, quantifiable, and already embedded in institutional systems. In an era of limited time and increasing reporting demands, it’s tempting to rely on what is already in hand rather than design something more purposeful.
But availability is not the same as evidence—and convenience is not the same as quality.
What the Standard Actually Requires
SACSCOC does not prescribe what evidence must be used, but it is very clear about how evidence must function.
For assessment evidence to be meaningful, it must:
• Align directly to the stated learning outcome being assessed
• Isolate student learning, not behavior, effort, or participation alone
• Be disaggregated or interpretable, allowing faculty to understand what students did or did not learn
• Support improvement, meaning the results can inform decisions about curriculum, pedagogy, or support services
A final course grade often represents a composite of many elements—exams, homework, attendance, participation, extra credit, and sometimes even penalties for late work. When bundled together, the grade obscures which specific learning outcomes were achieved and which were not.
When Grades Can Be Meaningful Evidence
Grades can serve as legitimate assessment evidence when:
• A specific component of the grade is clearly tied to a learning outcome
• Faculty can explain what the grade represents in terms of demonstrated knowledge or skills
• The grading process is consistent and intentional
• Results are analyzed beyond pass/fail to reveal patterns of learning
When Grades Are Merely “Available”
Grades fall short as assessment evidence when:
• They reflect effort, attendance, or compliance more than learning
• They cannot be disaggregated by outcome
• Faculty cannot clearly articulate how a grade demonstrates mastery
• They are used because “that’s what we already collect”
The Pruitt Perspective
Assessment is not about proving that learning happened—it’s about understanding how well it happened and where we can do better. When we confuse convenience with meaning, we miss the opportunity to improve student learning in real and substantive ways.
Grades are powerful tools when used with intention. But without clarity and alignment, they tell us very little about what students actually know and can do.
Bottom Line
Grades can be used.
But meaningful assessment requires purposeful design, not just existing data.