This study examines how global learning outcomes are assessed within agricultural and extension education research published from 2020 to 2025. The focus is on the prevalence and application of three validated global learning assessments: the Global Perspectives Inventory, Global Citizenship Inventory, and Intercultural Development Inventory. A comparative document analysis was conducted using peer-reviewed articles published in the Journal of Agricultural Education, the NACTA Journal, and the Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education to explore how global learning constructs are defined, operationalized, and measured in post-pandemic scholarship. Thirteen articles met the inclusion criteria for analysis. Findings indicate that the use of standardized global learning assessments has been limited across journals. Two studies employed one of the established instruments, while most relied on researcher-developed surveys and oral, written and visual qualitative methods such as journaling and photography. Qualitative and perception-based approaches were most aligned with knowledge and value dimensions of the Global Competence Framework by Morais & Ogden (2010), whereas fewer studies assessed skills development or action-oriented outcomes. Assessment practices varied based on the unit of analysis and purpose of the study, with individual-focused research more frequently using qualitative methods and program-level studies more likely to incorporate structured quantitative or mixed-method approaches.  The findings reveal inconsistencies and misalignment between assessment practices and comprehensive global competence frameworks and assessments within agricultural and extension education research. Results suggest that no single assessment approach adequately captures the complexity of global learning development. Instead, a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods is needed to document both experiential learning outcomes and developmental change. This study provides insight into current assessment practices and highlights the need for greater intentionality in aligning global learning constructs, research objectives, and assessment tools in agricultural and extension education.