2019-2020 BA in History all Options and History Minor
A printable PDF of this information can be found here.
Annual Program Assessment Report
Academic Year Assessed: 2019-2020
College: CLS
Department: History & Philosophy
Submitted by: History and Philosophy, DH and History Assessment Committee
Program(s) Assessed:
Indicate all majors, minors, certificates and/or options that are included in this
assessment:
|
Majors/Minors/Certificate |
Options |
|
Major, Minor |
History-History/History-SETS/History-Teaching |
Annual Assessment Process (CHECK OFF LIST)
- Data are collected as defined by Assessment Plan
YES - Population or unbiased samples of collected assignments are scored by at least two faculty members using scoring rubrics to ensure inter-rater reliability.
YES. All papers reviewed separately by all three members of assessment committee.
- Areas where the acceptable performance threshold has not been met are
NA - Assessment scores were presented at a program/unit faculty meeting.
Presented at August 26 meeting with full department.
- The faculty reviewed the assessment results, and responded accordingly (Check all appropriate lines)
Gather additional data to verify or refute the result. _____
Identify potential curriculum changes to try to address the problem _____
Change the acceptable performance threshold, reassess _____
Choose a different assignment to assess the outcome _____
Faculty may reconsider thresholds_____
Evaluate the rubric to assure outcomes meet student skill level _____
Use Bloom’s Taxonomy to consider stronger learning outcomes _____
Choose a different assignment to assess the outcome_____
OTHER: Will address options at upcoming meeting.
- Does your report demonstrate changes made because of previous assessment results (closing the loop)? YES
1. Assessment Plan, Schedule and Data Source.
a. Please provide a multi-year assessment schedule that will show when all program
learning outcomes will be assessed, and by what criteria (data). (You may use the
table provided, or you may delete and use a different format).
|
|
’11-12 |
12-13 |
13-14 |
14-15 |
15-16 |
16-17 |
17-18 |
18-19 |
19-20 |
|
History Major Los |
|
1, 6 |
2, 3, 4, 5 |
1, 6 |
2, 3 |
1, 6 |
4, 5 |
2, 3 |
1, 2 |
|
History Minor Los |
|
|
1, 2, 3 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
|
1 |
*Data sources: randomly selected essays from senior capstone courses (major) and randomly selected essays from 100-level courses essays (minor)
b. What are your threshold values for which you demonstrate student achievement? (Example provided in the table should be deleted before submission)
See below
2. What Was Done
a. Was the completed assessment consistent with the plan provided? YES.
If no, please explain why the plan was altered.
b. Please provide a rubric that demonstrates how your data was evaluated.
See rubrics below for major LOs 1 and 2, and minor LO 1.
3. How Data Were Collected
a. How were data collected? (Please include method of collection and sample size).
We selected 10 of 10 submitted essays from capstone course from Fall 2019 and selected 10 (every 14th) papers from 100-level class with approximately 140 submissions in final paper assignment, also from Fall 2020. Given the nature in which the Spring 2020 semester concluded, we elected to not use papers from that semester in this year’s assessment.
b. Explain the assessment process, and who participated in the analysis of the data.
The chair of history assessment committee contacted professors from the classes that were chosen to assist with assessment: 10 papers from the Capstone and 10 papers from the 100-level class. Two learning outcomes were assessed for the Capstone papers, one learning outcome was assessed in the papers from the 100-level class.
All three members of the assessment committee read all twenty papers and scored them individually according to the following four categories: excellent, good, acceptable, and unacceptable. The committee members then convened, and reported to one another the total number of papers they found to fall under each category, with the committee chair keeping score. Since there were 10 papers per class and 3 committee members reading them, there was a total of 30 scores per assessed learning outcome. In cases in which the quality of assessed learning outcomes was found to be “borderline” between two categories, the score was split (0.5 per category) between the two categories, which is why some scores end in .5.
NOTE: Student names must not be included in data collection. Totals of successful completions, manner of assessment (publications, thesis/dissertation, or qualifying exam) may be presented in table format if they apply to learning outcomes.
4. What Was Learned
Based on the analysis of the data, and compared to the threshold values provided,
what was learned from the assessment?
a. Areas of strength
100% of student essays met the threshold (acceptable or above) on both objectives. We are meeting the goals established by the first assessment committee in 2010-11.
Minor:
Learning Outcome 1: “Our graduates will be able to recognize that historical events are subject to multiple interpretations.”
Excellent 10% (3 out of 30 scores)
Good 23% (7/30)
Acceptable 67% (20/30)
Unacceptable 0% (0/30)
Total “Acceptable” and better: 100%. This result surpasses the goal of 75%.
Major:
Learning Outcome 1: “Our graduates will be able to present a clear thesis statement.”
Excellent 0% (0 out of 30 scores)
Good 23% (7/30)
Acceptable 52% (15.5/30)
Unacceptable 12% (3.5/30)
Total “Acceptable” and better: 88%. This result surpasses the goal of 75%.
Learning Outcome 2: “Our graduates will be able to distinguish between primary and secondary sources”
Excellent: 13.3% (4 out of 30 scores)
Good: 20% (6/30)
Acceptable: 63.3% (19/30)
Unacceptable: 3.3% (1/30)
Total “Acceptable” and better: 96.6%. This result surpasses the goal of 75%.
5. How We Responded
a. Describe how “What Was Learned” was communicated to the department, or program faculty. Was there a forum for faculty to provide feedback and recommendations?
The assessment committee presented its findings at a full meeting of the department on August 26, 2020. Faculty were given a copy of this report, and we discussed the committee’s findings for approximately 20 minutes. The committee’s findings have been incorporated into ongoing department discussions pertaining to teaching and the future directions of the history major.
b. Based on the faculty responses, will there any curricular or assessment changes (such as plans for measurable improvements, or realignment of learning outcomes)?
Not at present. While our assessment indicates that we are currently quite strong with regard to the writing LOs that were investigated, we plan to continue regular discussions within our department regarding curriculum and assessment techniques.
If yes, when will these changes be implemented?
As indicated above, these are ongoing discussions.
Please include which outcome is targeted, and how changes will be measured for improvement.
If other criteria is used to recommend program changes (such as exit surveys, or employer
satisfaction surveys) please explain how the responses are driving department, or
program decisions.
c. When will the changes be next assessed?
See above.
6. Closing the Loop
a) Based on assessment from previous years, can you demonstrate program level changes
that have led to outcome improvements? As our assessment plan stands, we are consistently
meeting our threshold. Our review process this year will help us to identify with
more specificity where and how we can improve our program.
Submit report to [email protected]
** Threshold value: At least 75% of students will be rated “Acceptable” or higher on every category of the scoring rubrics for both major and minor.
LEARNING OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT RUBRICS
MAJOR LEARNING OUTCOMES (History/SETS)
- be able to present a clear thesis statement
- be able to distinguish between primary and secondary sources
- be able to marshal evidence from both primary and secondary sources to support an argument
- be able to communicate effectively
- be able to recognize that historical events are subject to multiple interpretations
- be able to cite sources according to the conventions of the discipline.
MAJORLEARNING OUTCOME 1 - Our graduates will be able to present a clear thesis statement.
|
|
Unacceptable There is no recognizable thesis or it is unintelligible due to grammatical errors. Unacceptable |
Acceptable There is a thesis statement that takes a position on an arguable point, but it may not be fully developed. It is largely free of grammatical errors. Acceptable |
Good There is a thesis statement that takes a clear position on an arguable point. It is written in grammatically correct language. It demonstrates an effort to interpret a historical phenomenon. Good |
Excellent There is a thesis statement that is original and/or creative in its presentation of an argument about a historical phenomenon. It is forcefully or persuasively presented in well-written language. It previews the argumentative line of the essay and the evidence that will be used. Excellent |
MAJORLEARNING OUTCOME 2 - Our graduates will be able to distinguish between primary and secondary sources
|
|
Unacceptable the paper used only secondary sources with no sense that original research requires primary materials Unacceptable |
Acceptable the paper demonstrated the use of primary and secondary sources but without notable distinction Acceptable |
Good there is an embedded understanding of the difference between types of sources Good |
Excellent there is an explicit discussion of the nature of sources used in the paper Excellent |
MAJORLEARNING OUTCOME 3 - Our graduates will be able to marshal evidence from both primary and secondary sources to support an argument
|
|
Unacceptable makes a claim but doesn’t have convincing evidence Unacceptable |
Acceptable makes a connection between a claim and a source, but uses limited sources, is overly dependent on a single source without explanation Acceptable |
Good makes a connection between a claim and source materials, but does not contextualize the source Good |
Excellent makes a clear connection between a claim and source material and uses more than one kind of material to support that claim, sometimes with a comment on the nature of the evidence Excellent |
MAJORLEARNING OUTCOME 4 – Our graduates will be able to communicate effectively
|
|
Unacceptable has no argument; is poorly organized; is riddled with grammatical errors Unacceptable |
Acceptable organizes essay with introduction, explanatory body and conclusion; paragraph are not always clear; and argument wanders about Acceptable |
Good organizes essay with introduction, explanatory body and conclusion; has paragraphs with clear topic sentences, is grammatically correct and virtually error free Good |
Excellent organizes essay with introduction, explanatory body and conclusion; has paragraphs with clear topic sentences, is grammatically correct and virtually error free, and shows evidence of a “voice” of their own and some stylistic flair Excellent |
MAJORLEARNING OUTCOME 5 – Our graduates will be able to recognize that historical events are subject to multiple interpretations
|
|
Unacceptable does not show any understanding that the past may be subject to interpretation Unacceptable |
Acceptable acknowledges that the event under study is subject to multiple interpretations but adheres to only one interpretation without serious consideration of other points of view Acceptable |
Good acknowledges that the event under study is subject to multiple interpretations and attempts to use evidence from sources to demonstrate those interpretations Good |
Excellent recognizes that the event/theory/phenomenon under study is subject to multiple interpretations and suggest the lines of competing interpretations, referring to a variety of texts or contradictory sources Excellent |
MAJOR LEARNING OUTCOME 6 - Our graduates will be able to cite sources according to the conventions of the discipline.
|
|
Unacceptable Incomplete bibliographic information that does not permit traceability; so many errors in style and punctuation as to make information unusable. Unacceptable |
Acceptable Citations have full bibliographic information that permits traceability; there may be inconsistency in style and errors of punctuation. Acceptable |
Good Citations are consistent, with full bibliographic information that permits traceability; there may be errors of punctuation. Good |
Excellent Citations meet journal standards of accuracy, consistency and punctuation. Excellent |
MINOR LEARNING OUTCOMES (History/ History Teaching)
- have acquired an introductory knowledge of Western Civilization, U.S. History, and one area of World History
- be able to marshal historical evidence from assigned texts, which may include primary and secondary sources, to support an argument
- be able to communicate historical ideas effectively
MINOR LEARNING OUTCOME 1 – Our minors will have acquired an introductory knowledge of Western Civilization, U.S. History, and one area of World History
|
|
Unacceptable Demonstrates no or very limited knowledge and understanding of the subject matter (Western Civilization, U.S. History, or World History, per selected class) Unacceptable |
Acceptable Demonstrates a basic, rudimentary knowledge and understanding of the subject matter (Western Civilization, U.S. History, or World History, per selected class) Acceptable |
Good Demonstrates more than a basic knowledge and understanding of the subject matter (Western Civilization, U.S. History, or World History, per selected class) Good |
Excellent Demonstrates a comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the subject matter (Western Civilization, U.S. History, or World History, per selected class) Excellent |
MINOR LEARNING OUTCOME 2 – Our minors willbe able to marshal historical evidence from assigned texts, which may include primary and secondary sources, to support an argument
|
|
Unacceptable makes a claim but doesn’t have convincing evidence Unacceptable |
Acceptable makes a connection between a claim and a source, but uses limited sources, is overly dependent on a single source without explanation Acceptable |
Good makes a connection between a claim and source materials, but does not contextualize the source Good |
Excellent makes a clear connection between a claim and source material and uses more than one kind of material to support that claim, sometimes with a comment on the nature of the evidence Excellent |
MINOR LEARNING OUTCOME 3 - Our minors will be able to communicate historical ideas effectively
|
|
Unacceptable Demonstrates no or very limited ability to communicate historical ideas Unacceptable |
Acceptable Demonstrates a basic, rudimentary ability to communicate historical ideas Acceptable |
Good Demonstrates more than a basic ability to communicate historical ideas Good |
Excellent Clearly and effectively communicates historical ideas Excellent |