Assessment Evidence Checklist

Purpose and scope

This checklist helps theological institutions and quality-assurance stakeholders identify, organise and present assessment evidence used to demonstrate that learning outcomes are achieved and that assessment systems are reliable, valid and auditable. It is suitable for programme review, external moderation, internal audit and accreditation self-evaluation.

Core evidence categories

Collect evidence across these core categories so reviewers can verify judgements about student achievement and assessment quality:

1. Curriculum mapping: learning outcomes matched to assessment tasks and programme documentation (syllabus, module specifications, programme map).
2. Assessment artefacts: samples of marked student work, exam scripts, portfolios, project reports, recorded presentations and practical assessments.
3. Assessment briefs and rubrics: task instructions, marking criteria and scoring rubrics showing standards and grade descriptors.
4. Moderation and marking records: internal moderation notes, second-marker reports, standardisation meeting minutes and grade-change logs.
5. Assessment policies and procedures: academic regulations, assessment policy, academic integrity policy and reasonable adjustment records.
6. Assessment data and analytics: grade distributions, progression statistics, assessment reliability checks and sampling plans.
7. Feedback and improvement: feedback samples, action plans from assessment review, student evaluation summaries and closing-the-loop evidence.

Practical checklist (quick view)

1. List assessment components by module with mapped learning outcomes.
2. Select representative samples of student work across grade bands and assessment types.
3. Include marking guides and completed rubrics for each sampled item.
4. Provide evidence of internal moderation and external examiner reports where available.
5. Attach assessment policies, academic regulations and reasonable adjustment records.
6. Supply anonymised data tables showing grade distributions and sampling rationale.
7. Document actions taken after assessment reviews and evidence of follow-up.
8. Organise files clearly (by programme → module → assessment → artefact) and provide an index.

Quality considerations and common weaknesses

When preparing evidence, ensure authenticity, alignment and sufficiency. Common weaknesses include: poorly mapped outcomes, insufficient moderation records, selective sampling that omits low-performing work, missing marking guidance or inconsistent application of rubrics. Annotate each artefact to explain how it evidences the stated learning outcome(s).

Preparing for external review

Provide reviewers with an evidence index, clear file naming, a sampling rationale and contact details for the academic lead. Make electronically stored evidence accessible in one secure location and ensure all personal data is handled in line with privacy obligations. Where external examiners or external quality assurance bodies require specific documents, follow their published evidence lists.

Minimum documentation checklist (print or digital pack)

• Programme specification and curriculum map.
• Assessment briefs, rubrics and marking schemes.
• Sampled student work (annotated).
• Internal moderation records and standardisation meeting minutes.
• External examiner or moderation reports (if available).
• Assessment policy, academic regulations and academic integrity records.
• Grade distributions, sampling plan and action plans from assessment review.

ITAA’s role and legal context

Important governance notes: The International Theological Accreditation Association (ITAA) is an independent theological accreditation agency and is not a governmental accreditation authority. Institutions remain solely responsible for compliance with all applicable national, state or provincial, regional and local laws. ITAA accreditation never overrides local law and ITAA does not grant statutory degree-awarding powers.

Use this checklist to strengthen institutional evidence practices for ITAA review or other external quality-assurance activities. The checklist does not replace legal or regulatory requirements in any jurisdiction.