Department of Political Science and Public Administration
Assessment Plan
February 2004
Student Outcomes
Educational Objectives
· Student learning outcomes will be assessed primarily through evaluation of a portfolio. The portfolio will comprise papers representing work completed in courses taken at different stages of the degree program and from courses in two or more of the subfields listed above. All political science majors will be asked to select papers that meet the following criteria:
o A) One paper from the first gateway course (PSC 2610, PSC 2620, PSC 2660, PSC 2700, PSC 2800, PSC 3420) taken by the student (all majors must complete a gateway course in three of the four subfields of comparative politics, international relations, political theory, or public administration).
o B) One paper completed in a 4000-level course taken during the student’s senior year.
o C) One additional paper selected by the student as representative of his or her “best work” from a course in a subfield not represented in A and B above.
· The department assessment liaisons, in consultation with the undergraduate committee, will develop guidelines for students to use in compiling their portfolios. One member of the undergraduate curriculum committee, using the rubric in appendix B, will evaluate each paper; each of the three papers in the student’s portfolio will be evaluated by a different faculty member. Committee members will, where possible, review papers in their areas of expertise, but should not review papers prepared in a class they taught. Each evaluator will assign a score of 1 (low) to 4 (high) in each of the five areas of assessment (reasoning, style, organization, research, and content) and an overall score (the sum of the five scores). Rating sheets will be kept on file with the papers. Comparison of the scores for the “gateway” paper and other papers will be used in assessing student learning outcomes. Portfolios for all majors will be kept on file in the departmental office.
· When students declare a major, College of Arts and Sciences advisors will have them complete a “statement of expectations” describing what they expect to learn in that major. A copy of the statement will be provided to the student’s departmental undergraduate advisor. The departmental advisor will have the student update this annually. Statements will be compiled in the student’s portfolio, and will be compared with responses to the exit interview.
· All graduating seniors will complete a brief, standardized “exit interview”. (Proposed interview questions are provided in Appendix C) Departmental undergraduate advisors will work with the college office to compile a list of majors intending to graduate each semester. Advisors will contact each graduating senior to arrange an appointment for a personal interview during the last month of the semester. In preparation for the interview, students will be asked to reflect on their educational experience and future plans. A copy of the interview questions will be provided to students in advance. Exit interview responses will be kept on file in each major’s portfolio.
· Each semester, the assessment liaisons and the undergraduate committee will prepare a brief analysis of transcripts of students graduating that semesters (names will be obtained from college advisors), showing patterns of course selection and grades. They will summarize their findings in a report to the department identifying numbers of students specializing in each subfield and their average GPA’s.
Timeline for Assessment
Spring 2004 When the departmental assessment plan has been approved, the assessment liaisons and undergraduate committee will develop guidelines for students and faculty on portfolio preparation. The guidelines will be disseminated to all majors and faculty by e-mail, and distributed in classes. Undergraduate advisors will provide students with hard copies of the guidelines at advising appointments and when meeting with new majors. Majors enrolled in their first gateway course will be informed of the option of submitting a paper from that course for their portfolios. We hope that all majors will have received the portfolio guidelines, and started to develop portfolios by the end of this semester.
Fall 2004 Undergraduate advisors and instructors of FYI classes provide portfolio guidelines to new majors. (ongoing from this time forward)
First and second year majors enrolled in gateway courses select a paper from that course for their portfolios.
Assessment liaisons and undergraduate committee develop exit interview, to be used with all majors graduating in Spring 2005 and thereafter.
Spring 2005 In first month of semester, undergraduate committee members evaluate gateway course papers and place rating sheets in portfolios.
All majors compile papers from gateway and advanced classes for inclusion in portfolios.
(March) Undergraduate committee and assessment liaisons prepare transcript analysis of majors graduating in May 2005.
(April) Undergraduate advisors complete exit surveys with majors graduating in spring 2005.
This process will continue over the next several years. We expect that the first majors to have completed portfolios will be those graduating in Spring 2006.
Student portfolios: At the beginning of each academic year, the undergraduate committee will prepare a report to the department faculty and chair, summarizing their evaluation of portfolios of all majors graduating in the preceding academic year. The report will include data on the average and range of scores for each of the three papers in the portfolio, the average and ranges of improvement from the first paper to the third, and average scores in each of the five areas of evaluation, and will comment on particularly strong or weak papers. If the report identifies areas of particular concern, the committee will recommend appropriate action to the department faculty. Information in the report, along with information gathered through exit interviews and transcript analysis, will be considered by the department chair, undergraduate committee, and individual faculty members in making decisions about revisions in courses or curriculum requirements. Another potential use of the portfolio information would be to initiate discussions of pedagogy: for example, if the portfolio review indicates that some students have not mastered some of the central concepts in a particular subfield, faculty teaching in that area might consider adopting different instructional methods.
Exit interviews: At the beginning of each academic year, undergraduate advisors and assessment liaisons will prepare a report to the department faculty and chair, summarizing the information collected from exit interviews during the preceding academic year. Of particular value will be the graduates’ views on courses in need of improvement, and suggestions for changes or additions to the curriculum. This information will inform committee and departmental discussions of changes in specific courses or major requirements; for example, developing a course on media and elections if a large number of graduates indicated the need for such a course. Comments on scheduling, for example, the need for a particular course to be offered in the evening, or through distance learning, will be considered by the scheduling committee in preparing schedules for future years. Information on the types of graduate programs to which our majors are admitted is also indicative of the strength of their preparation (as well as their interests, and financial and geographical constraints) and of their professional interests; this information should be considered along with graduates’ curriculum recommendations, because those going to law school or graduate school would need different preparation than those going to work for a state or local government agency.
Transcript analysis: As noted previously, transcript analysis will be used to identify patterns in course selection, including the sequences in which courses are taken, and grade point averages of majors in different areas of specialization. Annual reports of this information, over time, will enable us to clearly identify areas of growing and waning interest, and, when used with the exit interviews, provide justification for development of new courses or curriculum revision; advisors should also find this information helpful in encouraging students to complete gateway courses early in their academic programs.
Assessment data from exit interviews and student portfolios, over time, will inform departmental strategic planning efforts and resource allocation decisions in several ways. First, it will provide us with specific evidence on strengths and weaknesses in our curriculum and the accomplishment of our educational objectives. As we identify areas of concern, we will then be able to develop sound strategies for remedying them. Second, as noted in the preceding section, assessment data will be useful in developing proposals for new courses. To the extent that new courses fall within the areas of expertise of existing faculty members, we will need to adjust their teaching assignments, by replacing less relevant courses with new ones. Alternatively, we may need to hire additional faculty to strengthen the department’s ability to regularly offer our students a range of courses in all subfields of the discipline. Over time, as current faculty members retire, information on the areas of the discipline that should receive more coverage will be valuable in preparing job descriptions and hiring justifications for new positions.
Assessment Liaisons:
Lynn Bachelor, Associate Professor and Chair; Professors David Davis and James W. Lindeen
Undergraduate Committee: Professor James W. Lindeen, Associate Professors Mark Denham, Renee Heberle, and David Wilson; Assistant Professor Samuel Nelson.
Federalism, separation of powers, republicanism, Bill of Rights, apportionment and districting, representation, presidential character, divided government, judicial review, pluralism, ideology, democracy, political socialization, political participation, political party systems, primary and general elections, group theory of politics, types of policy, incrementalism, satisficing, policy cycle, public goods, civil liberties, civil rights, affirmative action, monetary policy, fiscal policy, regulation, globalization, levels of measurement, descriptive and inferential statistics.
Idealism, realism, globalization, nationalism, liberalism, nation, state, political economy, less developed countries, nongovernmental organizations, transnationalism, sovereignty, national interest, bipolar system, non-state actors, international organizations, multipolar system, power, international law, deterrence, causes of war, characteristics of the international economic system, sustainable development
Political cultures (authoritarian, civic, participant, deferential, absolutist, pragmatic, individualist, collectivist, statist and anti-statist), party systems (one-party, two-party, multi-party, competitive, non-competitive); types of parties (ideological, pragmatic, mass, cadre, disciplined, non-disciplined), parliamentary system of government, presidential system of government, unitary governments, federal government, proportional and pluralist electoral systems, democratic and authoritarian systems of government, majoritarian and consociational democracy.
Power, obligation, justice, public good, rule of law
Democracy, liberalism, republicanism, communism, capitalism, Marxism
State of nature, consent of the governed, social contract, private property, legitimacy, individuality, collective identity.
Bureaucracy, judicial review, privatization, organizational development, legislative oversight, parliamentary system, checks and balances, popular sovereignty, limited government, representation, pluralism, accountability, electoral college, interest groups, constituency, issue networks, intergovernmental relations, devolution, hierarchy, patronage, merit system, incrementalism, policy agenda, implementation, reverse discrimination, affirmative action, deficit, types of policies, policy analysis, program evaluation, deregulation, procedural due process, equal protection.
Appendix B
Rubric for Evaluation of Undergraduate Student Papers
Department of Political Science and
Public Administration
Student papers will be evaluated in five areas: reasoning, style, organization, research, and content, using a four point scale, as outlined below, for a maximum total score of 20 and minimum of 5. Two members of the undergraduate committee will evaluate each paper.
|
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
REASONING |
Undeveloped ideas Shows little understanding of topic No clear point of view
|
Develops a variety of simple ideas Shows some understanding of topic Point of view somewhat clear |
Presents ideas of some complexity Shows understanding of topic Point of view clearly expressed |
Develops ideas fully to create greater understanding Shows thorough understanding of the topic Point of view clearly and convincingly expressed |
|
STYLE |
Minimal use of political science terms & concepts One type of sentence
|
Contains some appropriate political science terms & concepts Contains a variety of sentences |
Makes good use of political science terms & concepts Contains a wide variety of sentences |
Effectively uses and explains political science terms & concepts Contains a wide variety of sentences effectively used |
|
ORGANIZATION |
Several major errors and major omission No clear structure or organization No thesis stated |
Several errors and omissions Some evidence of structure Thesis present but not clearly expressed |
A few minor errors and omissions Logical and effective structure Clearly expressed thesis
|
Practically no errors or omissions Structure supports the thesis and enhances the argument Thesis is clearly expressed and resolved |
|
RESEARCH |
Rudimentary research undertaken No bibliography or sourcing |
Evidence of research, use of sources appropriate to subfield Bibliography present
|
Several sources from a variety of media appropriate to subfield Bibliography and proper sourcing present |
Extensive, appropriate and varied resources used Detailed bibliography correctly presented and professional use of citations |
|
CONTENT |
General discussion of topic unrelated to subjects covered in course |
Mostly general information on topic somewhat related to subjects of course, few details |
Includes general and specific information on topics related to course |
Preponderance of general and specific information on topics and concepts central to the course |
See Appendix A, above, for lists of central concepts in political science subfields.
Appendix C
Proposed Exit Interview Questions