philosophy - 2014 accreditation · pdf filephilosophy section i: ... • rel 320- religion...

PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGIOUS STUDIES

Philosophy

SECTION I: Program objectives and outcomes

Philosophy Educational Objectives: The objectives of programs in philosophy are to:

1. develop in majors the ability to read, understand, critique, and generate philosophical

arguments;

2. provide majors with a familiarity with history of philosophy, value theory, and

epistemology/metaphysics;

3. enable majors to bring philosophy and philosophical reasoning to bear on real-world

problems.

Philosophy Program Outcomes: Upon graduation, philosophy majors will demonstrate:

1. the ability to read, understand, critique, and generate philosophical arguments

(assessed in 2011-2012);

2. familiarity with history of philosophy, value theory, and epistemology/metaphysics

(assessed in 2011-2012); and

3. the ability to bring philosophy and philosophical reasoning to bear on real-world

problems (assessed in 2012-2013).

SECTION II: Outcomes measured in 2011/2012

Program Outcome: • Outcome 1. Students will demonstrate the ability to read, understand, critique,

and generate philosophical arguments.

Related Courses • PHI 494- Research and Writing in Ethics

• PHI 495- Research and Writing in History of Philosophy

• PHI 496- Research and Writing in Contemporary Philosophy

• PHI 497- Research and Writing in Logic, Representation and Reasoning

• PHI 498 – Special Topics in Philosophy

Method for

Assessment • 18 papers of students in the courses indicated in boldface above (Document

analysis)

Population (Number)

and sample

information :

• Population = 24 papers

• Sample = 16 (67%) of 24 papers

Implementation of

method: • Majors should be able to demonstrate that: a. they can present and explain each

premise of a philosophical argument, evaluate the argument's validity and

soundness, explain any problems that are found, and suggest ways to remedy the

problems; and b. they can construct and present an argument in a way that

Implementation of

method (con’t):

allows the audience to analyze and critique the argument.

• We employed the following two-part test to operationalize the above metric:

o (Q1) Can one readily figure out from the paper itself which arguments are

being presented by the author?

o (Q2) Does the author demonstrate the ability that a hypothetical average major should have to evaluate the arguments?

• If the answer to Q1 was negative, then the paper received a score of 0. If the

answer to Q1 was affirmative and the answer to Q2 was negative, then the paper

received a score of 1. If the answer to both questions was affirmative, then the

paper received a score of 2.

• (It was assumed that in no case could Q1 receive a negative answer while Q2

received a positive answer, the idea being that if one can’t figure out which

arguments are being presented, then it is not feasible to assess the evaluation of

the unknown arguments).

• Reliability between assessors is determined by having each assessor score six randomly selected papers graded by any others.

Brief Summary of

Results: • The overall rating was 1.6, indicating that program objectives are being met in a

significant majority of cases.

• Students have difficulty in applying methods of formal logic in structuring

arguments without oversimplifying argument content. There is evidence that

adjusting the complexity of material that students are expected to cover in major

assignments can result in a level of desirable difficulty that yields a better match

with the objective.

Decisions: • In early Fall 2012, all Philosophy faculty will consult to determine how best to

improve the ability of students to discern logical structure of arguments without

oversimplifying argument content. Some assignments adjusted as suggested will

be considered for comparison trials.

Program Outcome: • Outcome 2. Students will demonstrate familiarity with history of philosophy,

value theory, and epistemology/metaphysics (E/M).

Related Courses • PHI 300- History of Ancient Philosophy

• PHI 301- History of Modern Philosophy

• PHI 375- Ethics (value theory)

• PHI 376- History of Ethics (history and value theory)

• PHI 475- Ethical Theory (value theory)

• PHI 330- Metaphysics (E/M)

• PHI 333- Theory of Knowledge (E/M)

• PHI 440- The Scientific Method (E/M)

• PHI 494- Research and Writing in Ethics (value theory)


• PHI 496- Research and Writing in Contemporary Philosophy (E/M)

• PHI 497- Research and Writing in Logic, Representation and Reasoning (E/M)

Method for

Assessment • 35 papers and exam essays of students in the courses indicated in boldface

above (Document analysis)

Population (Number)

and sample

information :

• Population = 35 papers

• Sample = 27 (77%) of 35

Implementation of

method: • Each paper and essay was rated on a three-point scale: 2 – shows high degree of

familiarity with at least one key issue in specified area; 1 – shows moderate

familiarity; 0 – shows little or no familiarity.

• Reliability between assessors is determined by having each assessor score three randomly selected papers graded by any others.

Brief Summary of

Results: • The overall rating was 1.7, indicating that program objectives are being met in a

significant majority of cases.

• Some students exhibited less facility with the conceptual distinctions on which

the relevant sorts of familiarity depend.

• There is evidence that adjusting the complexity of material that students are

expected to cover in major assignments can result in a level of desirable

difficulty that yields a better match with the objective.

Decisions: • In early Fall 2012, all Philosophy faculty will consult to determine how best to

facility with the conceptual distinctions on which the relevant sorts of familiarity

depend. Some assignments adjusted as suggested will be considered for

comparison trials.

SECTION III: Outcomes to be measured in 2012/2013

Program Outcome 1: • Outcome 1. Students will demonstrate the ability to read, understand, critique, and generate philosophical arguments.

Relevant Courses: • PHI 494- Research and Writing in Ethics


• PHI 496- Research and Writing in Contemporary Philosophy

• PHI 497- Research and Writing in Logic, Representation and Reasoning

• PHI 498 – Special Topics in Philosophy

Method for Assessment:

• NN Student writing samples (Document analysis)

Timeline: • Data collection: Fall and spring semester 2012-2013.

• Data analysis: by April 30, 2013.

• Preliminary report to Philosophy faculty: April 30, 2013.

• Final report including course and curriculum recommendation: May 5, 2013.

• Description of implementation plans: May 10, 2013

Person Responsible: • Preliminary report: Associate Head with Philosophy faculty

• Final report with implementation plans: Associate Head

Program Outcome: • Outcome 2. Students will demonstrate the ability to bring philosophy and

philosophical reasoning to bear on real-world problems

Relevant Courses: • LOG 435- Advanced Logic & Metamathematics

• LOG 437- Model Theoretic Semantics

• LOG 498- Special Topics in Logic

• PHI 221- Contemporary Moral Issues

• PHI 250- Thinking Logically

Relevant Courses

(con’t): • PHI 312- Philosophy of Law

• PHI 313- Ethical Problems in the Law

• PHI 325- Bio-Medical Ethics

• PHI 331- Philosophy of Language

• PHI 332- Philosophy of Psychology

• PHI 420- Global Justice

• PHHI 422- Philosophical Issues in Environmental Ethics

• PHI 425- Introduction to Cognitive Science

• PHI 445- Philosophy of Biology

• PHI 447- Philosophy, Evolution and Human Nature

• PHI 498- Special Topics in Philosophy

Method for

Assessment: • NN Student writing samples, exams, problem sets (Document analysis) with

focus on whether students are able to distinguish and connect philosophical and

empirical questions.

• Longitudinal (time-series) analysis using ADA data and document analyses



• Preliminary report to Philosophy faculty: April 30, 2013.



Person Responsible: • Preliminary report: Associate Head with Philosophy faculty

• Final report with implementation plans: Associate Head

Religious Studies

SECTION I: Program objectives and outcomes

Religious Studies Educational Objectives: The objectives of the program in religious studies are to:

1. encourage in its majors an awareness of and appreciation for the diversity of religious

perspectives

2. provide its majors the guidance and skills to enable them to think and write critically

about religion

3. develop in its majors an ability to apply critical, historical, and textual methods in the

academic study of religion

Religious Studies Program Outcomes: Upon graduation, Religious Studies majors will demonstrate:

1. an awareness of and appreciation for the diversity of religious perspectives (assessed

in 2011-2012);

2. an ability to think and write critically about religion (assessed in 2011-2012); and

3. an ability to apply various analytical methods as part of the academic study of

religion (assessed in 2012-2013).

SECTION II: Outcomes measured in 2011/2012

Program Outcome: • Outcome 1. Students will demonstrate an awareness of and appreciation for the

diversity of religious perspectives.

Related Courses • REL 200- Introduction to the Study of Religion

• REL 230- South Asian Religious Traditions

• REL 298- Special Topics in Religious Studies

• REL 300- Religious Traditions of the World

• REL 320- Religion in American History

• REL 323- Religious Cults, Sects, and Minority Faiths in America

• REL 327- Issues in Contemporary Religion

• REL 331- The Hindu Tradition

• REL 332- The Buddhist Traditions

• REL 333- Chinese Religions

• REL 340- Islam

• REL 350- Introduction to Judaism

• REL 407- Islamic History to 1798

• REL 408- Islam in the Modern World

• REL 413 – The Life and Letters of the Apostle Paul

• REL 423- Religion and Politics in America

• REL 472- Women and Religion

• REL 473- Religion, Gender, and Reproductive Technologies

• REL 482- Religion and Conflict

• REL 489- Interpretations of Religion

• REL 491- Advanced Readings in Theological and Religious Literature

• REL 496- Seminar in Religious Studies


Method for

Assessment • 44 papers from related courses (Document analysis)

Population (Number)

and sample

information :

• Population = 44 papers from 28 majors

• Sample = 100% of 44

Implementation of

method: • To assess this objective, 44 papers (over 600 pages) from a subset of the relevant

courses (boldfaced above) were read and rated. In the analysis of these sample

writings, the following factors were taken into consideration:

1. Does the student clearly understand the complexity and details of different

beliefs and practices, particular to distinct religious traditions or

orientations?

2. Is the student able to articulate and describe diverse religious perspectives

clearly?

3. Does the student demonstrate an awareness of the range of opinions and

approaches that different religious traditions bring to bear on specific issues

or questions?

• If the answer to these three questions was “no,” the paper was assigned a

numeric value of 0. If the answer to one or two questions was “yes,” the paper

was assigned a numeric value of 1. If the answer to all three questions was

“yes,” the paper was assigned a numeric value of 2. Using this scheme, our

assessment is that a score of 0 means that the objective was not met; a score of 1

means that the objective was partly or adequately met; and a score of 2 means

that the objective was successfully met.

Brief Summary of

Results: • The overall rating was 1.64, indicating that program objectives are being met in

a significant majority of cases. Seniors are doing somewhat better than juniors,

as would be expected.

• Students have difficulty in appreciating the depth of differences among religious

perspectives. There is evidence that adjusting the quantity and complexity of

material that major assignments must address can result in a level of desirable


Decisions: • In early Fall 2012, Religious Studies faculty will determine how best to improve

students appreciation of depth of differences among religious perspectives.

Some assignments adjusted as suggested will be considered for comparison

trials.

Program Outcome: • Outcome 3. Students will demonstrate an ability to think and write critically

about religion.

Related Courses • REL 314- Introduction to Intertestamental Literature

• REL 317- Christianity




• REL 331- The Hindu Tradition



• REL 340- Islam




• REL 413 – The Life and Letters of the Apostle Paul









Method for

Assessment • 42 papers from related courses (Document analysis)

Population (Number)

and sample

information :

• Population = 42 papers from 27 majors

• Sample = 100% of 42 papers {limited to the subset of courses listed above

offered during the academic year, with <10% drawn from Fall 2011.}

Implementation of

method: • To assess this objective, 42 papers (over 550 pages) from a subset of the relevant

courses (boldfaced above) were read and rated. In the analysis of these sample

writings, the following factors were taken into consideration:

1. Does the student make an effort to limit the influence of his/her personal

views when discussing religious ideas and practices?

2. Is the student able to take an “outsider’s” view of the ideas and practices?

3. Does the student present ideas and describe practices with clarity?

• If the answer to these three questions was “no,” the paper was assigned a

numeric value of 0. If the answer to one or two questions was “yes,” the paper

Implementation of

method (con’t):

was assigned a numeric value of 1. If the answer to all three questions was “yes,” the paper was assigned a numeric value of 2. Using this scheme, our

assessment is that a score of 0 means that the objective was not met; a score of 1

means that the objective was partly or adequately met; and a score of 2 means

that the objective was successfully met.

Brief Summary of

Results: • The overall rating was 1.60, indicating that program objectives are being met in

a large majority of cases. Seniors are doing somewhat better than juniors, as

would be expected.

• Students do not always maintain desirable critical distance from ideas or practices

described. There is evidence that adjusting the quantity and complexity of

material that major assignments must address can result in a level of desirable


Decisions: • In early Fall 2012, Religious Studies faculty will consult to determine how best

to help students’ to be less subjective reporters on religious traditions less

familiar to them. Some assignments adjusted as suggested will be considered for

comparison trials.

SECTION III: Outcomes to be measured in 2012/2013

Program Outcome: • Outcome 1. Students will demonstrate an awareness of and appreciation for the

diversity of religious perspectives.

Relevant Courses: • (as in SECTION II.a, above)

Method for Assessment:

• Student writing samples (Document analysis) {for a subset of listed courses}



• Preliminary report to Religious Studies faculty: April 30, 2013.



Person Responsible: • Preliminary report: Associate Head with Director of Religious Studies and

Religious Studies faculty

• Final report with implementation plans: Associate Head with Director of

Religious Studies

Program Outcome: • Outcome 3. Students will demonstrate an ability to apply various analytical

methods as part of the academic study of religion

Relevant Courses: • REL 298- Special Topics in Religious Studies

• REL 309- Religion and Society

• REL 311- Introduction to the Old Testament

• REL 312- Introduction to the New Testament

• REL 314- Introduction to Intertestamental Literature

• REL 317- Christianity




Relevant Courses

(con’t): • REL 331- The Hindu Tradition



• REL 340- Islam


• REL 383- Religion, Globalism, and Justice

• REL 402- Early Christianity to the Time of Eusebius



• REL 412- Advanced Readings in the Christian Gospels

• REL 413- The Life and Letters of the Apostle Paul


• REL 471- Darwinism and Christianity








Method for

Assessment: • Student writing samples (Document analysis) {for a subset of listed courses}



• Preliminary report to Religious Studies faculty: April 30, 2013.



Person Responsible: • Preliminary report: Associate Head with Director of Religious Studies and

Religious Studies faculty

• Final report with implementation plans: Associate Head with Director of

Religious Studies

TO: Associate Dean Victoria Gallagher DATE: October 24, 2012

FROM: David Austin, Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies

SUBJECT: Follow-up to Request for SACS-related Assessment Funds for 2012-2013

In my memo of October 1, 2012, “Request for SACS-related Assessment Funds for 2012-2013,” I said that the results of 2011-2012 Philosophy assessment were unclear in at least one significant respect: it is more difficult to tell from the data to what extent instructor approach, course content and initial level of student ability are each factors in any possible variation in sample quality - and are still under consideration by the Philosophy faculty. It is expected that some decisions will be made within the next two weeks or so. One possible decision is to expand assessment efforts to include additional data across time as this could aid in determining the relative strength of the aforementioned factors.

It had been proposed that:

In early Fall 2012, all Philosophy faculty will consult to determine how best to improve the ability of students to discern logical structure of arguments without oversimplifying argument content. Some assignments adjusted so as to provide more nearly optimal levels of desirable difficulty will be considered for comparison trials.

In early Fall 2012, all Philosophy faculty will consult to determine how best to improve students’ grasp of the conceptual distinctions on which familiarity with history of philosophy, value theory, and epistemology/metaphysics depend. Some assignments adjusted so as to provide more nearly optimal levels of desirable difficulty will be considered for comparison trials.

After consulting earlier this month, the Philosophy faculty decided that

While the two proposals [above] were reasonable, they now seem premature because it was not feasible to determine whether the samples represented an improvement in student writing. (Without knowing where the students begin, it’s difficult to know how much they are being helped.)

Once the 2012-2013 assessment is at least partially complete, there will be a more wider basis for determining whether the quality of individual majors’ writing samples has improved with more course work, and with resources augmented by CHASS, it will be feasible to conduct the relevant comparative assessment of some earlier and later samples for individual students.

In addition, it is worth checking for any patterns of improvement in individual major’s performance over time, so the Associate Head has obtained relevant transcript-based time series data from Registration and Records for all majors during 2004-2012 and will analyze this data with an eye to discerning patterns of improvement in individual majors. Depending on what is discovered, it might then be appropriate for Philosophy faculty to consult during late Spring 2013 to re-consider the initially proposed assignment re-design for comparison trials.

Thank you for this opportunity to update the Philosophy Assessment Plan.

Cc: Professor Michael J. Pendlebury, Head, Philosophy and Religious Studies

Professor Samuel Pond, Special Coordinator for CHASS SACS-Related Assessment

Dr. Carrie Zelna, Director, Office of Assessment, DASA

philosophy - 2014 accreditation · pdf filephilosophy section i: ... • rel 320- religion...

Documents