What is it? Academic rigor is the interaction between critical thinking, active learning, and meaningful content (Graham & Essex, 2001; Draeger et al., 2013). It is the degree of transformation students will experience as they progress through new concepts; practicing and demonstrating critical thinking while applying learning in a different context. From a student perspective, a rigorous course is about workload, grading difficulty (rubric criteria), engagement expectations, the design of the course, and the support offered by the instructor. There truly is a fine line between challenging students and frustrating students, the goal is to push students to grow while not overwhelming them in the process. Moreover, this makes the design and delivery of online courses particularly important because course clarity and organization are prerequisites for an appropriately rigorous online course (Duncan et al., 2013).
To clear up a common misconception, academic rigor is not about busy work, difficulty, or quantity of work.
Academic Rigor is:
- Appropriately challenging students according to the course level; complex and advanced cognitive work
- Incorporating assessments that accurately measure depth of knowledge and the synthesis of complex ideas & thinking
- Content, activities, and assessments that challenge and motivate
- High levels of student engagement (student-to-student, student-to-faculty, student-to-content) and learning
- Applying learned information to new contexts, demonstrating the ability to transfer and apply new information/concepts
- Designing a course that makes students active participants, identifying where students are passive listeners and adding quality course elements to change that
- Challenging students to think, grow, and perform (demonstrate achievement)
Do you have time for a deep dive? Quality Matters offers a three-part series on Academic Rigor: part one, part two, part three.
Why is it important? When a school holds accreditation, it demonstrates that an institution merits the tuition costs. Accreditation agencies set the criteria for accreditation, working with institutions vetting its academic programs for quality, rigorousness, and adherence to educational standards. Learn more by reviewing: How Accreditation Works and Why It Matters from the Center for Online Education. Students must be enrolled in an accredited institution to receive and use federal aid. Miami University works with various accreditation entities (HLC, DOE, ODHE, program level entities) and must meet the specific criteria and expectations of each.
Do you have time for a deep dive? Accreditation in the United States -U.S. Department of Education.
Where do I start? An efficient way to start a rigor analysis is to reflect on the course level. This step involves developing appropriately specific and measurable learning outcomes for the course. A 100-200 level undergraduate course will have outcomes that involve lower-order cognitive thinking such as recall, define, describe, restate, or solve. A 400-graduate level course will have outcomes that involve higher-order cognitive thinking such as investigate, evaluate, analyze, compose, or formulate. This doesn’t mean that you won’t use lower-level action verbs in an advanced course, you may still have instances where you need to scaffold assignments and get your students to the higher levels. Equally, you may use higher-level thinking skills in a lower level course, depending on the course content and goals. Bloom’s taxonomy verbs are a go-to resource to formulate the appropriate action verb for your course level. Visit our resource on crafting learning outcomes.
The Higher Learning Commission demands that graduate course work:
- Be current
- Require “levels of student performance” that are “appropriate” for the credential
- Have learning outcomes that clearly differ from undergraduate-level ones
- Maintain equivalent rigor across modalities
Review the Standards for Academic Rigor in Online Graduate Courses to review examples of policies and practice.
The next step is to take those learning outcomes and design assessment methods that are rigorous enough for the course. Rigorous assessment is often also authentic assessment, below we share examples of activities and assignments that provide adequate rigor for the course level and are aligned with the stated outcomes.
Evaluation of rigorous activities and assessments involves using the right tools (rubrics) and approaches to provide quality feedback and opportunities for growth (scaffolding). It is important to remember that rigor is more than expecting students to complete challenging work, the appropriate scaffolding must be in place to ensure that students feel confident that they can rise to the rigorous levels of your course. Presenting multiple opportunities to learn will result in multiple opportunities for critical thinking, problem-solving, and collaborating with peers. “Create an environment in which each student is expected to learn at high levels, each student is supported so he or she can learn at high levels, and each student demonstrates learning at high levels” (Blackburn, 2008).
Types of scaffolding for all course modalities:
- Teacher and peer scaffolding: Support is provided with the initial introduction of new concepts, tasks, or thinking strategies and then gradually removed over time: peers read and discuss together, instructor substantively interacts with students, peers and instructor challenge each other’s ideas/solutions, peers collaboratively solve problems.
- Content scaffolding: Less complex versions of the content/concepts are introduced before more challenging (deeper or broader) ones are tackled, such as using paired texts, articles, web resources, and other multimedia to first build background knowledge before a more complex text or resource is introduced.
- Task scaffolding: Multi-step complex task processes are broken into smaller steps (microlearnings); basic skills in isolation, applying skills in routine tasks, problem solving with less complex content. More complex and challenging, performance-based tasks are then introduced.
- Materials scaffolding: Use of non-print (audio, video, kenisthetic, gamification interactions), graphic organizers, learning journals, study guides, branching scenarios, and embedded visual cues (color coding parts of an essay, chunking texts for annotation) support students in managing their learning, uncovering predictable patterns, and applying problem-solving strategies in different contexts.
Adapted from: To scaffold or not to scaffold? The first big misconception about rigor.
Rigor-Activity & Assignment Examples
This file contains examples of activities and assignments that provide adequate rigor for the course level and are aligned with the stated outcomes.
Developing Discussions with Rigor
Discussion boards can be a powerful formative or summative assessment in online courses. Proper development of discussion prompts can provide a highly effective and engaging teaching tool; a tool to guide and evaluate student learning. Instead of another assignment, formulate an engaging discussion prompt(s) for students to demonstrate a thorough understanding of readings, concepts, or terminology. Require responses that incorporate the use of unit/module content and terminology, relevant outside resources, relevant life experiences, or other prior learning that will support their opinions and feedback. Clearly articulate expectations on how students are to contribute to the discussion. A discussion rubric can provide details on how responses should substantially contribute to the conversation while demonstrating mastery of the aligned learning outcome. Perhaps the discussion requires an opposition statement with supporting research and resources. We found a couple excellent resources for developing discussions: Carnegie Mellon University-Discussions and Johns Hopkins-Discussions in Online Courses: Best Practices and Expectations.
Discussion example: Graduate level Finance course with no rubric provided.
Locate an article relevant to our module. Respond to the following prompts.
- Why is the Federal Reserve changing interest rates?
- How do bond prices respond to changes in yields?
- What impact will proposed interest rate changes have on bond prices?
- Respond to at least two of your classmates’ posts.
Rewrite of the discussion prompt that is more engaging, applicable, and rigorous.
In this module we covered stock and bond valuations. Please refer back to the textbook readings and videos for your initial post. After you have posted your response to the prompt below, respond to two of your classmates’ posts in a substantive way. Substantive responses include but are not limited to:
- Contributing to the ongoing conversation / discussion showing mastery of the subject, topic, or stated outcome
- Asking a question(s); contributing to the argument in a substantive way by providing additional resources, research, personal experience, or prior learning
- Making an opposition statement with supporting research, resources, life experience, or prior learning
Please complete the following for this discussion:
Review this article on the Federal Reserve Monetary Policy (linked article). In your initial post, outline the following:
- Why the Federal Reserve changes interest rates
- How bond prices respond to changes in yields
- Explore the markets and financial reporting sources to find real-world examples of how the Federal Reserve impacted stocks and bonds in the past 20 years. Post your conclusions on the impact. Include in your response citations to your resources (two citations minimum) to support your conclusions.
After your initial post, review the posts of two of your peers. Evaluate the conclusions your peers reached and substantively respond to their posts. Provide your peer actionable feedback by asking a clarifying question and/or providing additional resources for review.
Finally, review the peer reviews for your initial post. Comment to your peers on their review of your posts. Include how their review added to your conclusions (positive or negative). Ask clarifying questions or add additional resources to support your work. Describe how you will utilize this feedback in the future. Describe how your peer review impacted your mastery of the content.
Discussion Rubric
Criteria
Superior/Exemplary (___ points)
Proficient/Satisfactory (___ points)
Needs Improvement(___ points)
Unsatisfactory/Needs Significant Improvement(___ points)
Critical Thinking | Contribution to the Discussion
Initial response demonstrates an advanced understanding or application of the readings, concepts, and terminology. Post fully extends and elevates the discussion by providing critical insight, asking a question, and/or contributing to an argument.
Initial response demonstrates a basic understanding/application of or partial understanding/application of the readings, concepts, and terminology. Post partially extends and elevates the discussion by providing critical insight, asking a question, and/or contributing to an argument.
Initial response does not demonstrate an acceptable understanding/application of the readings, concepts, and terminology. Post is weak and doesn’t adequately extend or elevate the discussion by providing critical insight, asking a question, and/or contributing to an argument.
Student did not complete assignment or initial response is severely lacking in the application of content or in demonstrating understanding of material. Post does not extend or elevate the discussion, no demonstration of critical insight, asking a question, and/or contributing to an argument.
Use of Resources to Support Opinion
Contributes to the discussion or argument in a substantive way by providing additional resources, research, personal experience, or prior learning. Made an opposition or reinforcing statement supported with research, resources, life experiences or prior learning. Minimum of two citations are provided.
Contributes to the discussion or argument by providing additional resources, research, personal experience, or prior learning. Made an opposition or reinforcing statement with supporting research, resources, life experiences or prior learning. Provides one citation.
Contributes to the discussion or argument with additional resources, research, personal experience, or prior learning but does not provide any citations.
Does not provide any additional resources, research, personal experience, or prior learning at all in the post. Citations are not provided.
Comments & Feedback
Discussion comments/feedback are thoughtful, relevant to the discussion, and demonstrate a thorough analysis of the peer(s) post. Responses are substantive and provide actionable feedback by asking a clarifying question and/or providing additional support or applicable resources.
Discussion comments/feedback partially demonstrate thought, or are partially relevant to the discussion, or only partially demonstrate a thorough analysis of the peer(s) post. Responses are mostly substantive and provide some actionable feedback either with clarifying question and/or providing additional support or applicable resources.
Discussion comments/feedback are not thoughtful, not relevant to the discussion, do not demonstrate a thorough analysis of the peer(s) post. Responses are not substantive nor do they provide actionable feedback by asking a clarifying question and/or providing additional support or applicable resources.
Discussion comments/feedback are not provided.
Quality of Work: grammar and proofreading
Submitted substantive initial response and peer response by due date. Appropriately cited all resources. Proofread and submitted with no errors in grammar, spelling, and format. Submitted responses showing respect to peers.
Submitted substantive initial response on due date but peer response was late. All posts are submitted on time, but did not appropriately cite all resources. All posts are submitted on time, but summitted with errors in grammar, spelling, and format. All posts are submitted on time with no errors in grammar, spelling, or format, however responses are not respectful to peers.
Submitted substantive initial response on due date but peer response was late. All posts are submitted on time, but did not cited any resources. All posts are submitted on time, but summitted with extensive errors in grammar, spelling, and format. All posts are submitted on time with no or some errors in grammar, spelling, or format, however responses are not respectful to peers.
Did not submit comments on peer(s) posts.
| Criteria | Superior/Exemplary (___ points) | Proficient/Satisfactory (___ points) | Needs Improvement(___ points) | Unsatisfactory/Needs Significant Improvement(___ points) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Critical Thinking | Contribution to the Discussion | Initial response demonstrates an advanced understanding or application of the readings, concepts, and terminology. Post fully extends and elevates the discussion by providing critical insight, asking a question, and/or contributing to an argument. | Initial response demonstrates a basic understanding/application of or partial understanding/application of the readings, concepts, and terminology. Post partially extends and elevates the discussion by providing critical insight, asking a question, and/or contributing to an argument. | Initial response does not demonstrate an acceptable understanding/application of the readings, concepts, and terminology. Post is weak and doesn’t adequately extend or elevate the discussion by providing critical insight, asking a question, and/or contributing to an argument. | Student did not complete assignment or initial response is severely lacking in the application of content or in demonstrating understanding of material. Post does not extend or elevate the discussion, no demonstration of critical insight, asking a question, and/or contributing to an argument. |
| Use of Resources to Support Opinion | Contributes to the discussion or argument in a substantive way by providing additional resources, research, personal experience, or prior learning. Made an opposition or reinforcing statement supported with research, resources, life experiences or prior learning. Minimum of two citations are provided. | Contributes to the discussion or argument by providing additional resources, research, personal experience, or prior learning. Made an opposition or reinforcing statement with supporting research, resources, life experiences or prior learning. Provides one citation. | Contributes to the discussion or argument with additional resources, research, personal experience, or prior learning but does not provide any citations. | Does not provide any additional resources, research, personal experience, or prior learning at all in the post. Citations are not provided. |
| Comments & Feedback | Discussion comments/feedback are thoughtful, relevant to the discussion, and demonstrate a thorough analysis of the peer(s) post. Responses are substantive and provide actionable feedback by asking a clarifying question and/or providing additional support or applicable resources. | Discussion comments/feedback partially demonstrate thought, or are partially relevant to the discussion, or only partially demonstrate a thorough analysis of the peer(s) post. Responses are mostly substantive and provide some actionable feedback either with clarifying question and/or providing additional support or applicable resources. | Discussion comments/feedback are not thoughtful, not relevant to the discussion, do not demonstrate a thorough analysis of the peer(s) post. Responses are not substantive nor do they provide actionable feedback by asking a clarifying question and/or providing additional support or applicable resources. | Discussion comments/feedback are not provided. |
| Quality of Work: grammar and proofreading | Submitted substantive initial response and peer response by due date. Appropriately cited all resources. Proofread and submitted with no errors in grammar, spelling, and format. Submitted responses showing respect to peers. | Submitted substantive initial response on due date but peer response was late. All posts are submitted on time, but did not appropriately cite all resources. All posts are submitted on time, but summitted with errors in grammar, spelling, and format. All posts are submitted on time with no errors in grammar, spelling, or format, however responses are not respectful to peers. | Submitted substantive initial response on due date but peer response was late. All posts are submitted on time, but did not cited any resources. All posts are submitted on time, but summitted with extensive errors in grammar, spelling, and format. All posts are submitted on time with no or some errors in grammar, spelling, or format, however responses are not respectful to peers. | Did not submit comments on peer(s) posts. |
Rubrics | Feedback
A rubric consists of the following three components: criteria, levels of performance, and descriptors. Learn more about the power of rubrics by visiting Developing and Using Rubrics.
Example Rubrics
Group Participation (analytic rubric)
Participation (holistic rubric)
Design Project (analytic rubric)
Critical Thinking (analytic rubric)
Media and Design Elements (analytic rubric; portfolio)
Setting up a Rubric in Canvas
These Canvas Guides will help you set up a rubric:
Share the following Canvas Guide with your students:
Feedback
Providing substantive and timely feedback to students is essential. Well-designed courses include scaffolding activities that prepare students for summative assessments that meet the rigor expected for the course level. Giving feedback on activities and assessments helps to ensure that the course as a whole supports students in achieving the learning outcomes. In an online environment, the importance of quality feedback is heightened by the fact that the students do not have the same in-person interaction with you. Review our suggested tools and strategies for providing substantive feedback.
Academic Rigor Decision-Making Tool
Make a selection to find course-level recommendations for learning outcomes, instructional strategies, learning resources, questioning prompts, and assessments.
Sources:
Graham, C. and Essex, C. (2001). Defining and Ensuring Academic Rigor in Online and On-Campus
Courses: Instructor Perspectives
Draeger, J., Hill, P. P., Hunter, L. R., & Mahler, R. (2013). The Anatomy of Academic Rigor: The Story of
One Institutional Journey
Duncan, H. E., Range, B., & Hvidston, D. (2013). Exploring Student Perceptions of Rigor Online: Toward a Definition of Rigorous Learning
Blackburn, B. (2008). Rigor Is Not a Four-Letter Word (first edition). New York: Routledge.
Teach Online | Miami University
© 2024 Miami University Online, Oxford, OH.
