Provost David L. Potter of George Mason University chaired a joint task force and presented a report entitled ``Powerful Partnerships : A Shared Responsibility for Learnin'' in June 1998. The main goal is to make a difference in the quality of student learning. Further, it is important to assess this difference and document it. Clifford O. Young, Sr., & Laura Howzell Young of California State University, San Bernardino argue that a new paradigm for assessment, a learning paradigm, must be constructed to measure the success of new kinds of educational practices. Using two survey instruments, the Instruction Model Learning Model Questionnaire (IMLMQ) and the Student Evaluation of Teaching Effectiveness (SETE), they compared students' responses to the course when taught with traditional methods and with interactive methods. The results suggest that neither instrument effectively measures the kinds of learning promoted under the new paradigm. Linn, Baker, & Dunbar recommend that these newer assessment practices should be more authentic, that is, to involve students in the actual or simulated performance of a task or the documentation of the desired competency in a portfolio. Cerbin says that one of the most unfortunate consequences of a summative emphasis is that it inhibits open and productive discussions about teaching; in essence, it marginalizes the types of activity that could lead to better teaching (Cerbin, 1992). William Cerbin, who is the Director of the Center for Effective Teaching and learning, University Assessment Coordinator, and Professor of Psychology at the University of Wisconsin-LaCrosse is a recognized expert in the areas of cognition, language, and development. Edgerton, Hutchings, & Quinlan indicate that Teaching Portfolios may contain evidence of students' learning, but such information is optional, and when included, it may be only one of many pieces of material. Seldin, also supports this and stresses that the interplay between the instructor and the learner should be carefully observed and monitored. Forrest says that Student Portfolios, which document learning in more detail, seldom reveal how teaching contributes to students' progress. Cerbin further indicates that a course portfolio is essentially, a like a manuscript of scholarly work in progress. In this example, it is a work that explains what, how, and why students learn or do not learn in a course. In this paper, the author reports on a dozen techniques that could perhaps be used to document assessment of student learning. References : Cerbin, W. (1993). Fostering a culture of teaching as scholarship. The Teaching Professor, 7(3), 1-2. Edgerton, R., Hutchings, P., & Quinlan, P. (1991). The teaching portfolio: Capturing the scholarship in teaching. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education. Forrest, A. (1990). Time will tell: Portfolio-assisted assessment of general education. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education. Linn, R., Baker, E., & Dunbar, S. (1991). Complex, Performance-based Assessment: Expectations and Validation Criteria. Educational Researcher, 20 (8), 15-21. Narayanan, M. (2003). Assessment in Higher Education: Partnerships in Learning. Paper presented at the 23rd Annual Lilly Conference on College Teaching, Miami University, Oxford, OH. Seldin, P. (1991). The teaching portfolio. Bolton, MA: Anker. Young, C. O., Sr., & Young, L. H. (1999). Assessing Learning in Interactive Courses. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 10 (1), 63-76.