Substance
What was found and understood, for example the academic quality of the student’s research and reasoning.

Assessment has two categories: Substance, which informs the academic transcript; and Craft, which contributes to the Portfolio. Both inform the competency profile. Assessments include essays, written examinations, podcasts, documentary photo and film, public speaking, and so on across a range of media.
Each piece of work is assessed for Substance and Craft in separate marking events.
What was found and understood, for example the academic quality of the student’s research and reasoning.
Example from Term 1, Nootka
Research question, method, evidence quality, analysis, limitations and argument. The primary competencies are Rigor and Judgement.
Group fieldwork may produce a shared dataset. Each student submits an identifiable contribution, such as a discussion, interpretation or oral defense.
Each piece of work receives separate Substance and Craft assessments in separate marking events. Substance contributes to the transcript; Craft contributes to the Portfolio and competency profile. The initial diagnostic is ungraded and retained as a baseline; Block 1 synthesis is formative practice.
Research reports, policy briefs, examinations, synthesis papers and oral explanation. Term assessments include earlier material; the final defense covers the program as a whole.
Substance records what the student found and understood. It is scored on Rigor and Judgement, and it is the academic score that feeds the transcript and the credential.
How effectively a submission communicates to an audience.
Six summative assessments cover fieldwork, assigned reading and material from earlier terms.
Term 1 · Canada
Canadian fieldwork brought into an argument about ecology and knowledge.
Term 2 · Nepal & India
Water, energy and development examined through a Canadian–Himalayan comparison.
Term 3 · Japan
Japanese concepts applied to a design case and earlier field research.
Term 4 · Namibia, Botswana & Tanzania
Who makes conservation decisions, and who receives the benefits or bears the costs.
Term 5 · Chile & Argentina
An independently developed claim tested against the accumulated research record.
Term 6 · Alaska, USA
The student accounts for their work and its development over two years.
One substantial storytelling submission per block, with reflection, consent records and attribution.
Written, visual, audio, interactive and live storytelling across two years.
Four levels per competency, with examples of evidence and assessment methods.
Reliable evidence and defensible research methods.
Reasoned decisions when information is incomplete or consequences are significant.
Sustained attention to people, place and the student’s own responses.
Conduct, collaboration and demonstrable effects of the student’s contribution.
Sustained effort, effective conduct and recovery through difficulty.
Original initiative, principled risk-taking and follow-through.
How marks and competency levels are checked for consistency.
Emerging. Basic recounting or simple documentation with limited synthesis.
Developing. Clear story with some integration of experience and findings; positionality emerging.
Proficient. Compelling narrative that weaves embodied experience, rigorous evidence, multiple knowledges, and personal transformation into coherent whole.
Mastery. Transformative synthesis that advances collective understanding; models epistemic justice and multi-epistemic integration across the full program arc.
Emerging. Minimal or absent positionality; limited consent awareness.
Developing. Basic positionality statement; some consent evidence; emerging reciprocity intent.
Proficient. Clear, honest positionality; documented consent processes; explicit reciprocity plan (gifting, co-creation, or community benefit).
Mastery. Sophisticated ethical practice that centers community voices, honors OCAP®-like protocols, repairs power imbalances, and produces lasting reciprocal value.
Emerging. Disjointed or purely functional recounting; little audience consideration.
Developing. Functional structure and voice; some engagement for intended audience.
Proficient. Compelling structure, voice, pacing, and resonance appropriate to modality and audience; emotional/intellectual impact.
Mastery. Masterful craft that moves audiences to new understanding or action; adapts fluidly across cultural and power contexts; models best practice in chosen medium.
Emerging. Intended for self or immediate peers only; no evidence of effect.
Developing. Some reach beyond self; limited feedback or use.
Proficient. Clear evidence of reach/effect (views, partner feedback, community use, calls to action); student initiative in distribution.
Mastery. Catalytic, regenerative impact that continues beyond direct involvement; shifts systems, narratives, or relationships; documented long-term influence or partner adoption.
Emerging. Basic or inconsistent technical execution; choices feel arbitrary.
Developing. Adequate craft for chosen form; some intentional decisions.
Proficient. Strong technical/aesthetic quality; intentional creative choices that serve the story and audience.
Mastery. Exceptional craft excellence; innovative or culturally resonant choices that amplify meaning and model professional standards.
Emerging. Superficial reflection; weak links to competencies or growth.
Developing. Basic reflection on process and learning; some competency connections.
Proficient. Honest, insightful process statement on choices, challenges overcome, and links to six competencies + emerging theory of change.
Mastery. Profound metacognition that articulates worldview shifts, lifelong practices, and specific acts of reciprocity or courageous action the student now commits to.