philosophy b.a./b.s

Philosophy B.A./B.S.

Assessment Plan – 1

College of Liberal Arts & Sciences

Department of Philosophy

Philosophy

B.A. and B.S.

August 16, 2014

David J. Buller, Chair



1. Student Learning Outcomes

Passages in boldface are designed to be the public face of the assessment plan, to be used on the

Office of Assessment Services clearinghouse web page

(http://www.niu.edu/assessment/clearinghouse/outcomes/index.shtml).

I. Graduates will be able to write a thesis-governed essay that is organized, clear, informed,

and convincing, as evidenced by completing (at least) a 3500-word writing assignment in

PHIL 495, Senior Capstone, that:

1. Presents ideas and analysis in a well-structured format

a. Begins with a succinct introduction that clearly states the essay’s thesis

b. Remains focused on achieving the essay’s major aims

c. Organizes paragraphs and sections in a way that facilitates the presentation of ideas

d. Correctly formats quotations and bibliography by standard style rules

2. Maintains clarity throughout

a. Avoids errors in grammar, punctuation, usage and spelling

b. Contains clear and precise word choice and sentence structure

c. Distinguishes clearly between arguments, objections, and responses

d. Distinguishes clearly between exposition of others’ ideas and the student’s own

analysis

e. Draws relevant distinctions and explains them clearly

3. Demonstrates comprehension of relevant literature

a. Displays familiarity with an appropriate range of philosophical literature relevant to

the topic

b. Effectively explains relevant philosophical concepts and issues

c. Provides an accurate and charitable exposition of the pertinent philosophical texts or

views

4. Supports and defends the essay’s thesis

a. Presents strong, well-developed arguments in support of the essay’s central claims

b. Anticipates potential objections and expresses them in their strongest form

c. Responds effectively to the anticipated objections

d. Displays independence or creativity in developing arguments

II. Graduates will be able to effectively apply concepts and principles of deductive logic in

reasoning, as evidenced by completing assignments in PHIL 205, Symbolic Logic, in which

they:

1. Identify arguments and represent their premises and conclusions in standard form

2. Demonstrate knowledge of the concepts of validity, soundness, consistency, logical

equivalence, logical truth, and logical contingency

3. Symbolize the logical form of English sentences expressing:

a. Truth-functional compounds

b. Classical categorical forms

c. Polyadic quantification (with binary relations and without identity)



4. Construct truth tables to analyze statements and arguments

5. Construct derivations to prove the validity of arguments in:

a. Propositional logic

b. Predicate logic without identity

6. Construct counterexamples to prove the invalidity of arguments in:

a. Propositional logic

b. Predicate logic without identity

III. Graduates will be able to demonstrate knowledge of the significant contributions that

philosophers have made to our understanding of:

1. The ethical dimensions of human life and society, by completing assignments in which

they demonstrate knowledge of:

a. Plato’s theory of justice

b. Theories in the virtue ethics tradition

c. Deontological ethical theories

d. Consequentialist theories of ethics and justice

e. Social contract theories of justice

f. Theories of justice in the libertarian tradition

g. Feminist criticisms of traditional theories of ethics and justice

2. The nature and limits of human knowledge and rationality, by completing

assignments in which they demonstrate knowledge of:

a. Early modern theories of the sources and limits of human knowledge

b. Early modern theories of the rationality of belief in God

c. The justified true belief theory of knowledge and counterexamples to it

d. Alternatives to the justified true belief theory of knowledge

e. Theories of epistemic justification

f. Arguments for skepticism and responses to them

3. The nature of the world disclosed in scientific inquiry and in human experience, by

completing assignments in which they demonstrate knowledge of:

a. The Platonic theory of Forms

b. Early modern theories of the basic structure of the natural world

c. Early modern theories of mind

d. Theories of substance

e. Theories of free will

f. Theories of personal identity

g. Theories of modality



2. Program-by-Baccalaureate Learning Outcomes Matrix

Program Student

Learning

Outcome

Baccalaureate Learning Outcomes

A.

Global inter-

connections

and inter-

dependencies

B.

Intercultural

competencies

C.

Analyze

human life

and natural

world inter-

connections

D.

Critical,

creative, and

independent

thought

E.

Communicate

clearly and

effectively

F.

Collaborate

with others

G.

Quantitative

and

qualitative

reasoning

H.

Apply

knowledge

/ skills

creatively

I. Write a thesis-

governed essay

that is organized,

clear, informed,

and convincing

S S M M

II. Effectively apply

concepts and

principles of

deductive logic in

reasoning

M S

III.1. Demonstrate

knowledge of

contributions to

understanding

the ethical

dimensions of

human life and

society

M M



Program Student

Learning

Outcome

Baccalaureate Learning Outcomes

A.

Global inter-

connections

and inter-

dependencies

B.

Intercultural

competencies

C.

Analyze

human life

and natural

world inter-

connections

D.

Critical,

creative, and

independent

thought

E.

Communicate

clearly and

effectively

F.

Collaborate

with others

G.

Quantitative

and

qualitative

reasoning

H.

Apply

knowledge

/ skills

creatively

III.2. Demonstrate

knowledge of

contributions to

understanding

the nature and

limits of human

knowledge and

rationality

M M

III.3. Demonstrate

knowledge of

contributions to

understanding

the nature of the

world disclosed

in scientific

inquiry and in

human

experience

M M

Overall M S S S M



3. Curriculum Map

Course

Student Learning Outcome

I. Write a thesis-

governed essay that

is organized, clear,

informed, and

convincing


concepts and

principles of

deductive logic in

reasoning

III. Demonstrate knowledge of contributions to understanding:

1. The ethical

dimensions of

human life and

society

2. The nature and

limits of human

knowledge and

rationality

3. The nature of the

world disclosed in

scientific inquiry and

in human experience

PHIL 205 P

PHIL 301 B, D

PHIL 321 P P P

PHIL 322 P P

PHIL 311 D P

PHIL 312 D P

PHIL 331 D P

PHIL 351 D P

PHIL 495 P

Note. Course supports the outcome at the B=beginning, D=developing, or P=proficient level.



4. Assessment Methods

Assessment Method

Student Learning Outcome

I. Write a thesis-

governed essay

that is organized,

clear, informed,

and convincing


concepts and

principles of

deductive logic in

reasoning

III. Demonstrate knowledge of contributions to understanding:

1. The ethical

dimensions of

human life and

society

2. The nature and

limits of human

knowledge and

rationality

3. The nature of the

world disclosed in

scientific inquiry and

in human experience

Symbolic logic problems

in PHIL 205 S, D

Written exams and

assignments in PHIL 321 S, D S, D S, D

Written exams and

assignments in PHIL 322 S, D S, D

Written exams and

assignments in PHIL 311 S, D

Written exams and


Written exams and


Written exams and


Culminating capstone

activity in PHIL 495 S, D

Alumni survey S, I S, I S, I S, I S, I

Note. F=formative assessment, S=summative assessment, D=direct assessment, and I=indirect assessment



Explanation of Assessment Methods

For each of the assessment methods listed in the tables below, on each performance outcome listed in the column entitled

“Description,” student performance is assigned one of the following three scores:

0 = Does not meet expectation in any significant respect

1 = Partially meets expectation, but does not satisfy expectation for baccalaureate-level performance

2 = Meets expectation for baccalaureate-level performance

As this scoring system implies, the student-level target for each performance outcome is a score of “2.”

Also, for each assessment method listed in the tables below, the program-level target is an average score, among program graduates

collectively, of 1.75 on each performance outcome. An average score of 1.75 on each outcome mathematically guarantees that at

least 75% of program graduates have met expectation for baccalaureate-level performance (received a “2” for their performance). In

fact, assuming that all graduates receive only a “1” or a “2,” an average of 1.mn indicates that mn% of graduates received a score of

“2.” Of course, not all graduates receive scores of “1” or “2”; some receive scores of “0” on a performance outcome. Accordingly, the

percentage of graduates who meet the department’s expectation on each performance outcome is virtually always greater than mn%

when the average is 1.mn. Thus, while the program-level target ensures that at least 75% of all graduates achieve the student-level

target, which is what the department would like to see, tracking the average score of program graduates collectively is simpler,

hence more efficient, than counting the number of graduates who achieve the student-level target.



Assessment

Method

Explanation

Description

Student-Level

Target a

Program-Level

Target b

When Data Will

be Collected

Person

Responsible

Symbolic logic

problems in

PHIL 205

Students complete assignments in

which they:

1. Identify arguments and represent

their premises and conclusions in

standard form

2. Demonstrate knowledge of the

concepts of validity, soundness,

consistency, logical equivalence,

logical truth, and logical

contingency

3. Symbolize the logical form of

English sentences expressing (a)

truth-functional compounds, (b)

classical categorical forms, and (c)

polyadic quantification (with binary

relations and without identity)

4. Construct truth tables to analyze

statements and arguments

5. Construct derivations to prove the

validity of arguments in (a)

propositional logic and (b)

predicate logic without identity

6. Construct counterexamples to

prove the invalidity of arguments in

(a) propositional logic and (b)

predicate logic without identity

A score of 2

(= “meets

expectation”) on

each of the six

performance

criteria on the

attached rubric

(Appendix A).

An average score,

among program

graduates

collectively, of 1.75

on each of the six

performance criteria

on the rubric.

Every semester Instructor of

PHIL 205



Assessment

Method

Explanation

Description

Student-Level

Target a

Program-Level

Target b

When Data Will

be Collected

Person

Responsible

Written exams

and assignments

in PHIL 321

Students complete writing

assignments in which they

demonstrate knowledge of:

1. Plato’s theory of justice [III.1.a*]

2. The Platonic theory of Forms

[III.3.a]

3. Aristotle’s theory of substance

[III.3.d]

4. Aristotle’s virtue ethics [III.1.b]

5. The arguments for ancient

skepticism [III.2.f]

* Numbers in brackets indicate the

program learning outcome (see

section 1) served by the course

learning outcome.

A score of 2

(= “meets

expectation”) on

each of the five

performance

criteria on the

attached rubric

(Appendix B).

An average score,

among program

graduates


on each of the five


on the rubric.

Every fall

semester

Instructor of

PHIL 321



Assessment

Method

Explanation

Description

Student-Level

Target a

Program-Level

Target b

When Data Will

be Collected

Person

Responsible

Written exams

and assignments

in PHIL 322




1. Early modern theories of the

sources and limits of human

knowledge [III.2.a]


rationality of belief in God

[III.2.b]


basic structure of the natural

world [III.3.c]

4. Early modern theories of mind

[III.3.d]

5. Early modern theories of free

will [III.3.f]

A score of 2

(= “meets

expectation”) on

each of the five

performance

criteria on the

attached rubric

(Appendix C).

An average score,

among program

graduates


on each of the five


on the rubric.

Every spring

semester

Instructor of

PHIL 322



Assessment

Method

Explanation

Description

Student-Level

Target a

Program-Level

Target b

When Data Will

be Collected

Person

Responsible

Written exams

and assignments

in PHIL 311




1. The justified true belief theory of

knowledge and

counterexamples to it [III.2.c]

2. Alternatives to the justified true

belief theory of knowledge

[III.2.d]

3. Theories of epistemic

justification [III.2.e]

4. Arguments for skepticism and

responses to them [III.2.f]

A score of 2

(= “meets

expectation”) on

each of the four

performance

criteria on the

attached rubric

(Appendix D).

An average score,

among program

graduates


on each of the four


on the rubric.

Every time

PHIL 311 is

offered

(typically every

fall semester)

Instructor of

PHIL 311

Written exams

and assignments

in PHIL 312




1. Theories of substance [III.3.d]

2. Theories of free will [III.3.e]

3. Theories of personal identity

[III.3.f]

4. Theories of modality [III.3.g]

A score of 2

(= “meets

expectation”) on

each of the four

performance

criteria on the

attached rubric

(Appendix E).

An average score,

among program

graduates


on each of the four


on the rubric.

Every time

PHIL 312 is

offered

(typically every

spring

semester)

Instructor of

PHIL 312



Assessment

Method

Explanation

Description

Student-Level

Target a

Program-Level

Target b

When Data Will

be Collected

Person

Responsible

Written exams

and assignments

in PHIL 331




1. Theories in the virtue ethics

tradition [III.1.b]

2. Deontological ethical theories

[III.1.c]

3. Consequentialist ethical theories

[III.1.d]

4. Feminist criticisms of traditional

approaches to ethics [III.1.g]

A score of 2

(= “meets

expectation”) on

each of the four

performance

criteria on the

attached rubric

(Appendix F).

An average score,

among program

graduates


on each of the four


on the rubric.

Every time

PHIL 331 is

offered

(typically every

year)

Instructor of

PHIL 331

Written exams

and assignments

in PHIL 351




1. Social contract theories of justice

[III.1.e]

2. Consequentialist theories of

justice [III.1.d]

3. Theories of justice in the

libertarian tradition [III.1.f]

4. Feminist criticisms of traditional

theories of justice [III.1.g]

A score of 2

(= “meets

expectation”) on

each of the four

performance

criteria on the

attached rubric

(Appendix G).

An average score,

among program

graduates


on each of the four


on the rubric.

Every time

PHIL 351 is

offered

(typically every

other year)

Instructor of

PHIL 351



Assessment

Method

Explanation

Description

Student-Level

Target a

Program-Level

Target b

When Data Will

be Collected

Person

Responsible

Culminating

capstone activity

in PHIL 495

Graduates will write a thesis-

governed essay (of at least 3500

words) that:

1. Presents ideas and analysis in a

well-structured format

2. Maintains clarity throughout

3. Demonstrates comprehension

of relevant literature

4. Supports and defends the

essay’s thesis

A score of 8, 9,

or 10 (all of

which = “meets

expectation,”

hence converted

to 2) on each of

the four

performance

criteria on the

attached rubric

(Appendix H).

An average score,

among program

graduates


on each of the four


on the rubric (where

scores of 8/9/10 = 2,

scores of 5/6/7 = 1,

and scores of 1/2/3/4

= 0 on the

department’s

standard assessment

scale).

Every semester Instructor of

PHIL 495

Note. a Student-level target is the score or performance an individual student must demonstrate to say the student met the student

learning outcome. b Program-level target is expressed as the average of all program graduates.

Course:

Semester:

Faculty Name:

Rubric Scores


1 = Partially meets expectation, but does not satisfy expectation for baccalaureate performance


PHIL 205, Symbolic Logic

Student Name 1. Identif

ies a

rgum

ents a

nd repre

sents

their

prem

ises a

nd conclu

sions i

n stan

dard fo

rm

2. Dem

onstra

tes k

nowle

dge o

f the co

ncepts

of

valid

ity, s

oundness, c

onsiste

ncy, lo

gical

equivale

nce, lo

gical

truth

, and lo

gical

contin

gency

3. Sym

bolizes t

he logic

al fo

rm o

f Engli

sh se

ntence

s

expre

ssin

g:

a. Tru

th-fu

nctio

nal co

mpounds

b. Cla

ssica

l cat

egoric

al fo

rms

c. Polya

dic quantif

icatio

n (with

out identit

y)

4. Const

ruct

s tru

th ta

bles t

o anal

yze st

atem

ents

and ar

gum

ents

5. Const

ruct

s deriv

atio

ns to p

rove

valid

ity in

:

a. P

roposit

ional

logic

b. Pre

dicate

logic

with

out identit

y

6. Const

ruct

s counte

rexa

mple

s to p

rove

inva

lidity

in:

a. P

roposit

ional

logic

b. Pre

dicate

logic

with

out identit

y

Overa

ll Cours

e Gra

de

Appendix A

Assessment Plan - 15

Course:

Semester:

Faculty Name:

Student work demonstrates knowledge of:

PHIL 321, Ancient Philosophy Rubric Scores




Student Name 1. Plat

o's th

eory o

f just

ice

2. The P

latonic

theory

of F

orms

3. Aris

totle

's th

eory o

f subst

ance

4. Aris

totle

's vir

tue e

thics

5. The ar

gum

ents fo

r ancie

nt

skeptic

ism

Overa

ll Cours

e Gra

de

Appendix B


Course:

Semester:

Faculty Name:


PHIL 322, Modern Philosophy Rubric Scores




Student Name 1. Theorie

s of t

he sourc

es and

limits

of h

uman

know

ledge

2. Theorie

s of t

he ratio

nality

of

belief i

n God

3. Theorie

s of t

he bas

ic st

ruct

ure

of the n

atura

l world

4. Theorie

s of m

ind

5. Theorie

s of f

ree w

ill

Overa

ll Cours

e Gra

de

Appendix C


Course:

Semester:

Faculty Name:


Rubric ScoresPHIL 311, Knowledge & Justification




Student Name 1. The ju

stifi

ed true b

elief t

heory o

f

know

ledge

& co

untere

xam

ples t

o it

2. Alte

rnat

ives t

o the ju

stifi

ed true

belief t

heory o

f know

ledge

3. Theorie

s of e

pistem

ic ju

stifi

catio

n

4. Arg

uments

for s

keptic

ism an

d

resp

onses t

o them

Overa

ll Cours

e Gra

de

Appendix D


Course:

Semester:

Faculty Name:


Rubric ScoresPHIL 312, Introduction to Metaphysics





s of s

ubstan

ce

2. Theorie

s of f

ree w

ill

3. Theorie

s of p

ersonal

identit

y

4. Theorie

s of m

odality

Overa

ll Cours

e Gra

de

Appendix E


Course:

Semester:

Faculty Name:


Rubric ScoresPHIL 331, Ethics





s in th

e virtu

e eth

ics

traditi

on

2. Deonto

logic

al e

thica

l theorie

s

3. Conse

quentialis

t eth

ical t

heories

4. Fem

inist

criti

cism

s of t

raditi

onal

appro

aches t

o eth

ics

Overa

ll Cours

e Gra

de

Appendix F


Course:

Semester:

Faculty Name:


Rubric ScoresPHIL 351, Social & Political Philosophy




Student Name 1. Socia

l contra

ct th

eories o

f

just

ice

2. Conse

quentialis

t theorie

s of

just

ice

3. Theorie

s of j

ustice

in th

e

liberta

rian tr

aditi

on

4. Fem

inist

criti

cism

s of t

raditi

onal

theorie

s of j

ustice

Overa

ll Cours

e Gra

de

Appendix G


PHIL 495 Rubric Student: Semester: Grade:

ORGANIZATION 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

• Begins with a succinct introduction that clearly states the essay’s thesis

• Remains focused on achieving the essay’s major aims • Has paragraphs and sections organized in a way that

facilitates the presentation of ideas • Correctly formats quotations and bibliography by

standard style rules

Meets all criteria to a satisfactory degree; focused and organized

Meets some criteria; uneven; some

lapses in focus and organization

Meets few criteria; often unfocused or disorganized

CLARITY 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

• Avoids errors in grammar, punctuation, usage and spelling

• Contains clear and precise word choice and sentence structure

• Distinguishes clearly between arguments, objections, and responses

• Distinguishes clearly between exposition of others’ ideas and the student’s own analysis

• Draws relevant distinctions and explains them clearly

Meets all criteria to a satisfactory

degree; clear

Meets some criteria; uneven; some

lapses in clarity

Meets few criteria; often unclear

KNOWLEDGE OF LITERATURE 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

• Displays familiarity with an appropriate range of philosophical literature relevant to the topic

• Effectively explains relevant philosophical concepts and issues

• Provides an accurate and charitable exposition of the pertinent philosophical texts or views


degree; knowledgeable

and accurate

Meets some criteria; uneven; some inaccuracies in

exposition or some ideas misunderstood

Meets few criteria; many inaccuracies in exposition and relevant philosophical issues poorly understood

ARGUMENTATION 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

• Presents strong, well-developed arguments in support of the essay’s central claims

• Anticipates potential objections and expresses them in their strongest form

• Responds effectively to the anticipated objections • Displays independence or creativity in developing

arguments


degree; well argued

Meets some criteria; uneven; arguments weak or objections

not considered

Meets few criteria; poorly argued and potential

objections not considered

Appendix H


philosophy b.a./b.s

Documents