According to Texas A&M:
The core curriculum focuses on the development of six skills that have been shown to be effective in preparing students for the job market and their role in a diverse world and democratic society.
- Critical Thinking Skills – to include creative thinking, innovation, inquiry, and analysis, evaluation and synthesis of information.
- Communication Skills – to include effective development, interpretation and expression of ideas through written, oral and visual communication.
- Empirical and Quantitative Skills – to include the manipulation and analysis of numerical data or observable facts resulting in informed conclusions.
- Teamwork – to include the ability to consider different points of view and to work effectively with others to support a shared purpose or goal.
- Personal Responsibility – to include the ability to connect choices, actions and consequences to ethical decision-making.
- Social Responsibility – to include intercultural competence, knowledge of civic responsibility, and the ability to engage effectively in regional, national, and global communities.
I used to work for a company that maintained ISO certification. One of the requirements of maintaining the level of certification that we had achieved was to "measure" the effectiveness of training, that is, to quantify the amount of "learning" that had occurred in the training session.
To that end, a test was administered to every student before any "learning" had been delivered and the same test was delivered to every student after the training. The difference in the scores (assuming the post-test scored higher than the pre-test) quantified the learning that was delivered.
Given the amount of time, talent and treasure squandered on college edumacations it seems that quantifying the "learning" that was delivered should be a high priority.
Two possibilities would be to re-administer the ACT/SATs and/or the placement tests used to determine the need for remedial math, writing or science education.
To ensure the purity of the measurement, the scores of the students who did not graduate would have to be purged from the "before" scores. Ideally, the re-test would occur (or be re-administered) in the fourth year of college to also test retention and the product before being delivered to the customer.
One wonders if the growth in abilities is sufficient to justify the costs?
If it did, then I would expect the Universities would already be measuring it and using the results to attract students and encourage employers to visit their campuses. "Super-size your education! Enroll at Making Stuff Up university!!!"
I wonder how abysmally the Universities would fail. Statistically, one would expect some percentage of the students to regress in their abilities. That percentage might be surprisingly high for students of some colleges/majors.