Benchmarking is a process that can take place at both the inter-institutional and intra-institutional level. This paper focuses on benchmarking intra-institutional student learning outcomes using case examples. The findings of the study illustrate the point that when the outcomes statements associated with the mission of the institution are criterion-oriented and not comparative, then benchmarking can take place with respect to institutional standards or competencies. Another form of intra-institutional benchmarking, known as normative assessment, can occur when students from different majors are compared with respect to common core skill areas. Both types of the intra-institutional "contexts" for benchmarking, criterion-oriented or normative, depend on the mission-related institutional standards of performance. Issues identified relate to the potential for inappropriate or invalid inferences being made from outcomes assessment results using rubrics and baselines due to a lack of validity, primarily as a result of what might still be proper statistical applications. Benchmarking is important to educational decision-making processes. Yet, more thought is needed on how human judgment surrounding the benchmarking process influences the validity of curricular decisions and relationships to student learning outcomes. Offered is an in-depth understanding of benchmarking types and how to further their uses with student learning outcomes.