External stakeholders have demanded evidence that college students learn what their institutions and programs say they will learn (Ewell, 2009; Hutchings 2010; Kuh, 2001). As the architects of curriculum and the defenders of academic freedom, faculty are responsible for any initiatives that may affect those pedagogical goals (Kuh, et al., 2015). The mandate for verified learning in higher education has taken the form of program learning outcomes (PLO) assessment, or the measurement of student learning against predetermined programmatic goals (Banta, 2009). One strategy for motivating faculty to participate in assessment has been citing it as invaluable to the improvement of teaching and learning (Ewell, 2008). However, faculty at large public research universities are often hired and rewarded for their research as opposed to their teaching (Binder, Chermak, Krause, & Thacher, 2012). Utilizing a mixed methods inquiry this study investigated faculty across disciplines and programs at a major research university in California. Applying deductive reasoning to a modified expectancy value cost theoretical framework (Barron & Hulleman, 2015), this study reveals that faculty motivation to participate in PLO assessment is generally low. However, armed with that understanding assessment professionals can begin to be better prepared to support and foster externally required PLO assessment programs. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]