MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Location: file:///C:/9EC36A37/PhilGoalsPolicy07.htm Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Philosophy Learning Goals and Assessment Policy

Learning Goals and Assessment Policy<= /span>

Department of Philosop= hy

Philosophy Program

Geo= rgia State University

February 9, 2006

 

 

 

 

Pages:        Section:        &= nbsp;         Contents:

 

2-3        &= nbsp;    Introduction        &= nbsp;   Mission Statements for Philosophy and Religious Stud= ies

4-7        &= nbsp;    Section 1       =          Learning Goals for Phil 1010 and Phil 2010

8        &= nbsp;       Section 2       =          Assessment Plan for Phil 1010 and Phil 2010

9-13        &= nbsp;  Section 3       =          Learning Goals for the B.A. in Philosophy

14        &= nbsp;     Section 4       =          Assessment Plan for the B.A. in Philosophy

15        &= nbsp;     Section 5       =          Learning Goals for the M.A. in Philosophy

15        &= nbsp;     Section 6       =          Assessment Plan for the M.A. in Philosophy

16        &= nbsp;     Appendix 1       =      Georgia State University General Education Learning Goa= ls

17        &= nbsp;     Appendix 2       =      M.A. Thesis Assessment Form

18        &= nbsp;     Appendix 3       =      Assessment Form for BA Papers

19        &= nbsp;     Appendix 4       =      Assessment Form for 2010 Exams

Introductio= n

        &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp; 

        &= nbsp;   At the request of the Office of the Provost, The Program in Philosophy has developed this policy to clearly set out its student learning goals and assessment procedures.  From 2= 002 to 2005 (academic years) and in conjunction with the Academic Program Review process, the Program reviewed its entire curriculum and revised it from top= to bottom.  We have put in place = many changes: deleting many courses, adding others, modifying the content of oth= ers, renumbering to make the curriculum clearer to students, and adding a comprehensive system of prerequisites.   We reviewed the general educ= ation learning goals as well as discussing the learning goals for general educati= on, philosophy majors and graduate students.&n= bsp; Data was collected in broad and wide-ranging discussions among the faculty.  Instructors reflecte= d on what material and methods worked best to reach the learning goals.  We also had in-depth discussions regarding assessment methods.  This document does not list all the changes but rather is a report of the learni= ng goals of new curriculum and how we plan to assess student progress towards those goals.  A particular cha= llenge in the Philosophy Program is insuring quality instruction in our core cours= es many of which are taught by a constantly changing group of visiting instruc= tors and graduate students.  Theref= ore the Program developed The Handbook for Teachers of Phil 1010, Critical Thin= king and Phil 2010, Great Questions of Philosophy.  A copy of the Handbook is included= as an appendix to this document.

 

The Mission= of the Philosophy Program

 

        &= nbsp;   Philosophy has traditionally had a central role in the liberal arts.  The writings of Aristotle, Descart= es, Hume, and Kant are among the greatest products of the human mind.  They are worth studying for their inherent value as well as for their impact on subsequent intellectual histo= ry.  Much philosophical work is concern= ed with abstract and fundamental questions:&n= bsp; What is real?  Can we k= now anything about the external world?  Are there objective moral truths?&n= bsp; Is there a God?  Althou= gh some of these issues are unlikely to have practical consequences, they are = no less important.  In fact, it is difficult to conceive of an educated person who has not systematically grap= pled with these questions. 

        &= nbsp;   At the same time, philosophy is deeply involved with practical issues, such as= the nature of the good life and what constitutes a just society.  In the last two decades there has = been an explosion of activity in applied philosophy with the result that philosophers now work in numerous cross-disciplinary fields such as business ethics, medical ethics, philosophy of law,=   philosophy of science, philosophy of language and philosophy of mind=

        &= nbsp;   Despite its wide range of applications, philosophy as currently practiced in this country has one overarching theme: it is fundamentally concerned with good reasoning.  Although philosoph= ers by no means have a monopoly on logical argumentation, the systematic study of = what distinguishes good arguments from bad is central to the philosophical enterprise.  Consequently, tho= se who teach philosophy are as much concerned with fostering reasoning skills as w= ith imparting information. 

        &= nbsp;   Both ethics and critical reasoning are stressed in GSU’s strategic plan, w= hich states: “In the twenty-first century, Georgia State University's curric= ular and co-curricular activities must prepare students who are critical thinker= s, creative problem solvers, and responsible citizens who make ethical choices.”  Likewise, the strategic plan of the College of= Arts and Sciences states: “Central goals = in Humanities include enhancing the communication and critical thinking abilit= ies of all Georgia State students . . . .” 

        &= nbsp;   The Philosophy Department serves the citizens of Georgia in several complement= ary ways.  In addition to its high= ly ranked M.A. program, it plays a significant role in undergraduate education.  In Critical Thinking (Phil 1010 in Area B) students honing reasoning skills th= at are applicable to any endeavor.&nbs= p; Furthermore, because it is a writing intensive course, each section = of Phil 1010 focuses developing the essential skill of writing lucid argumenta= tive essays.  In Great Questions of Philosophy (Phil 2010 in Area C) offers students the opportunity to confront big questions and to learn what history’s most original thinkers have said about issues fundamental to existence as a human being. 


 

Section 1&n= bsp;        Learning Goals for Phil 1010 and Phil 2010

A. Phil 1010

A.1. As indicated in the chart below, Phil 1010 aims to contribute significantly= to GSU’s Learning Goals for General Education.  Thus, the learning goals indicated= in the chart below are learning goals for Phil 1010.  There are some additional learning= goals which the department has adopted as a further clarification, specification = and application of GSU’s Learning Goals for General Education to this particular course. 

 

A.2. Phil 1010 is a skills course.  There is little emphasis on content knowledge (although the line between skills a= nd content knowledge can be hard to draw.)

 

Students successfully completing Phil 1010 should be able to:

(i) distinguish arguments f= rom non-arguments,

(ii) identify the premises and conclusion,

(iii) understand the relation between main and subordi= nate arguments,

(iv) critically evaluate the arguments of others, and=

(v) construct their own argumentative essays.*

 

B. Phil 2010

B.1. As indicated in the chart below, Phil 2010 aims to contribute significantly= to GSU’s Learning Goals for General Education.  Thus, the learning goals indicated= in the chart below are learning goals for Phil 2010.  There are some additional learning= goals which the department has adopted as a further clarification, specification = and application of GSU’s Learning Goals for General Education to this particular course.  Moreover, = Phil 2010 also contributes to the attainment of the learning goals for the B.A. = in philosophy.  See Section 3 below. 

 

B.2.  Phil 2= 010 addresses problems and proposed solutions through lecture, analysis of arguments, and selected readings of philosophers of historical import, but = is neither a history of philosophy co= urse nor one that focuses exclusively o= n just a few philosophers or just a few topics.&n= bsp; It establishes a basic vocabulary of issues, positions, and terms foundational for the course and for further work in philosophy.  Finally, it stimulates an interest= in the value of philosophy as an integral part of the liberal arts curriculum = and as relevant for personal meaning and decision-making.

 

Students successfully completing Phil 2010 should

(i) have a basic understand= ing of central problems in metaphysics (What is real?)

(ii) have a basic understanding of central problems i= n epistemology (What do we know?)

(iii) have a basic understanding of central problems in ethics (What should we do?)

(iv) have a basic understanding of how to apply ethic= al theory to practical ethical problems.

(v) have a basic familiarity with some classical and= some contemporary authors.

(vi) have a basic ability to think and write philosophically.*

 

*For further details, see the Handbook for Teachers of Phil 1010, Critical Think= ing and Phil 2010, Great Questions of Philosophy.


Alignment of Phil 1010 (Critical Thinking) and Philosophy 2010 (Great Questions of Philosophy) with GSU Learning Goals for General Education

 

(“M” and “P” defined at end of chart.)

Learning Goal

1010

2010

Goal I. Communication-- Students use writing effectively for different audiences = and purposes.

M

 

P

 

Measurable Outcomes:

 

 

1. Students develop their ideas in written formats.

M

P

Assessment Elements:

 

 

a. Statements of purpose

M

P

b. Integration of ideas into a larger body of knowledge

M

P

c. Clarity of organization

M

P

d. Quality of argument

M

P

2. Students use appropriate writing conventions and formats.

M

P

Assessment Elements:

 

 

a. Selection of mode appropriate for audience

M

P

b. Proper use of documentation

M

P

c. Coherence

M

P

d. Style, syntax, punctuation

M

P

e. Diction, pronunciation

 

 

3. Students use writing as a tool for learning.

M

P

Assessment Elements:

 

 

a. Writing that leads to and reflects subject mastery

M

P

b. Writing that reflects on the learning process

 

 

c. Writing that is formal and/or informal

M

P

4. Students communicate orally in group settings.

 

 

Assessment Elements:

 

 

a. Classroom presentations and discussions

P

P

b. Internet-based chat rooms and bulletin boards

 

 

c. Group work

 

 

d. Listening skills

M

M

e. Presentation skills

 

 

5. Students demonstrate ability to incorporate written feedback into revised work.

M

P

Assessment Elements:

 

 

a. Sequential drafts

P

P

b. Sequence of related, but brief, written assignment

M

P

c. Reflection on the writing process

M

P

d. Revision of work based on feedback

M

P

Continued on the next page

 

Goal II. Analysis of Information Students collect, analyze= , and interpret data effectively in a variety of settings.

M

 

Measurable Outcomes:

 

 

1.Students collect and weigh evidence.

M

 

Assessment Elements:

 

 

a. Consideration of authority

M

 

b. Differentiation between primary and secondary and popular and scholarly <= /p>

M

 

c. Proper attribution and citation

M

 

d. Use of appropriate information technology sources

P

 

2. Students distinguish the relationships among evidence, hypothesis and the= ory

 

 

Assessment Elements:

 

 

a. Use of observation and experimentation

 

 

b. Testing and application of hypotheses and theories

 

 

3. Students draw inferences from written, quantitative, qualitative, data.

 M

M

Assessment Elements:

 

 

a. Arrangement of data

 

 

b. Explication of inference

M

M

c. Consideration of alternative interpretations

M

M

Goal III. Critical Thinking-- Students identify important questions and formul= ate hypotheses and arguments to answer them effectively.

M

M

Measurable Outcomes:

 

 

1. Students identify, select, and analyze questions.

M

M

Assessment Elements:

 

 

a. Context for question

M

M

b. Breaking question into parts

M

M

c. Options for answering the question

M

M

2. Students use basic qualitative, or logical met= hods to formulate answers.

M

M

Assessment Elements:

 

 

a. Appropriate method selected

M

M

b. Application of method

M

M

c. Appropriate interpretation of the results

M

M

d. Utility of proposed answer

 

 

e. Consideration of alternatives

M

M

3.Students use their proposed answer to generate &am= p; explore new questions.

 

 

Assessment Elements:

 

 

a. Examination of proposed answers

M

M

b. Explication of new questions

M

M

Continued on the next page

 

Goal IV. Students analyze important contemporary questions effectively

M

M

1. Students analyze contemporary issues within the context of diverse disciplinary perspectives.

M

 

Assessment Elements:

 

 

a. Explication of question

M

 

b. Context for question

M

 

c. Awareness of aesthetic dimensions

 

 

2. Students analyze contemporary multicultural, global, and international questions.

P

 

Assessment Elements:

 

 

a Explication of question

P

 

b. Context for question

P

 

 

 

"M" indicates that the course makes a major contribution to the attainment of t= his goal/outcome.  In the case of = an "M," the indicated assessment elements are explicitly required to= be considered in considerable depth.  "P" indicates that the courses makes a partial contribution to the attainment of this goal/outcome.  In the case of a "P," the indicated assessment elements are not required to be considered in consider= able depth but they may be optional features of the course or required to be considered in less-than-considerable depth.

 

Section 2&n= bsp;        Assessment Plan for Phil 1010 and Phil 2010

 

Phil 1010

 

Every fall, five sections of Phil 1010 taught by different instructors will be selected at random.  Four final papers will be selected at random from each of these five sections.  (It will be the papers of the firs= t four students on the roll who turn in papers.)&= nbsp; A committee of three continuing faculty (tenured, tenure-track or lecturers) will assign each paper a letter grade (A+, A, A-, B+, B, etc.) on each of the follow three criteria:

1. Writing ability

2.  Philosophical skills, more particu= larly, the analysis of information and arguments by

        &= nbsp;   (I) distinguishing arguments from non-arguments,

        &= nbsp;   (ii) identifying the premises and conclusion,

        &= nbsp;   (iii) understanding the relation between main and subordinate arguments,

        &= nbsp;   (iv) critically evaluating the arguments of others, a= nd

        &= nbsp;   (v) constructing their own argumentative essays.

3. Application of this ability and these skills to contemporary problems.

 

Every Spring, the faculty of the philosophy program wi= ll meet to discuss how well the students in Phil 1010 are meeting the learning outcomes, using the materials collected the previous Fall.

        &= nbsp;  

Phil 2010

 

Every Fall, five sections of Phil 2010 will be selecte= d at random.  Four final exams will= be selected at random from each of these five sections. (It will be the exams = of the first four students on the roll who turn in exams.)  The instructor of the course will = assign each exam a letter grade (A+, A, A-, B+, B, etc.) on each of the follow thr= ee criteria:

1.  Mastery of content knowledge, more particularly

        &= nbsp;   (I) have a basic understanding of central problems in metaphysics.

        &= nbsp;   (ii) have a basic understanding of central problems in epistemology.

        &= nbsp;   (iii) have a basic understanding of central problems in ethics.

        &= nbsp;   (iv) have a basic understanding of how to apply ethic= al theory to practical ethical problems.

        &= nbsp;   (v) have a basic familiarity with some classical and= some contemporary authors.

2.  Philosophical skills, i.e, a basic ability to think and write philosophical= ly.

3. Application of this knowledge and these skills to contemporary problems.

 

 

Every Spring, the faculty of the philosophy program wi= ll meet to discuss how well the students in Phil 2010 are meeting the learning outcomes, using the materials collected the previous Fall.

 

Section 3&n= bsp;        Learning Goals for the B.A. in Philosophy

 

A.  Content Knowledge

1. General knowledge of a variety of philosophical systems and movements from = the different periods in the history of Western philosophy (ancient/medieval and modern) and detailed knowledge of at least one system or movement in each of these two periods.

2. General knowledge of the thought of various major philosophers from the different periods in the history of Western philosophy and detailed knowled= ge of at least one philosopher from each of the two periods.

3. Familiarity with representative philosophers and movements in contemporary philosophy and in-depth understanding of at least one philosopher in at lea= st two of the movements.

4. Knowledge of the fundamental concepts, principles, and issues found in at l= east three of the following concentrations: ethics, aesthetics, metaphysics, epistemology, and logic. (These concentrations are to be defined broadly so= as to exhaust all fields of philosophy.)

5. Knowledge of the distinctive contributions made by philosophy to intellectu= al inquiry.

6. Knowledge of the relevance of philosophy to contemporary American culture a= nd life.

 

B.  Philosophical Skills

1. Ability to read critically and with comprehension.

2. Ability to think critically and to write clearly and persuasively.

3. Ability to apply principles and techniques of logic to philosophical discussions.

4. Ability to conduct philosophical research effectively.

 

        &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;         Matrix for the Student Learning Goals for the B.A. in Philosophy

 

Student Learning Goals

 

A1

A2

A3

A4

A5

A6

B1

B2

B3

B4

Course

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1010, Critical Th

 

 

 

 

 

 

M

M

M

 

2010, Great Qs

P

P

P

P

M

M

M

M

M

 

2050, Phil Th

 

 

P

M

P

 

M

M

M

M

3000, Moral Qs

P

P

P

P

P

P

M

M

M

 

3010, History I

M

M

 

 

P

 

M

M

M

 

3020, History II

M

M

 

 

P

 

M

M

M

 

3030, History III

M

M

 

 

P

 

M

M

M

 

3050, Analytic

 

 

M

M

P

 

M

M

M

 

3060, Existential

M

M

 

 

P

 

M

M

M

 

3080, His Af-Amer

M

M

 

 

P

P

M

M

M

 

3200, Conscious

 

 

 

 

P

M

M

M

M

 

3230, Religion

M

M

 

 

P

P

M

M

M

 

3700, Clas Political

M

M

 

 

P

 

M

M

M

 

3710, Mod Political

M

M

 

 

P

 

M

M

M

 

3720, Moral Prob

 

 

 

P

P

M

M

M

M

 

3730, Business

 

 

 

P

P

M

M

M

M

 

Continued on the next page.  (“M” and “P̶= 1; defined at end of chart.)

 

 

A1

A2

A3

A4

A5

A6

B1

B2

B3

B4

4010, Plato

M

M

 

 

P

 

M

M

M

M

4020, Aristotle

M

M

 

 

P

 

M

M

M

M

4030, Ancient

M

M

 

 

P

 

M

M

M

M

4040, Augus/Aq

M

M

 

 

P

 

M

M

M

M

4050, Modern

M

M

 

 

P

 

M

M

M

M

4060, Kant

M

M

 

 

P

 

M

M

M

M

4070, Marxism

M

M

 

 

P

 

M

M

M

M

4080, Witt

M

M

 

 

P

 

M

M

M

M

4090, Continental

M

M

 

 

P

 

M

M

M

M

4100, Epistem

 

 

M

M

P

 

M

M

M

M

4130, Science

 

 

M

M

P

 

M

M

M

M

4300, Metaphysics

 

 

M

M

P

 

M

M

M

M

4330, Mind

 

 

M

M

P

 

M

M

M

M

4520, Logic

 

 

 

M

P

 

M

M

M

M

4530, Language

 

 

M

M

P

 

M

M

M

M

4610, Hinduism

 

 

 

 

 

 

M

M

M

M

4615, Buddhism

 

 

 

 

 

 

M

M

M

M

4620, Confusian

 

 

 

 

 

 

M

M

M

M

4625, Zen

 

 

 

 

 

 

M

M

M

M

4630, Mysticism

 

 

 

 

 

 

M

M

M

M

4650, Rel & Ethics

 

 

M

M

P

M

M

M

M

M

4670, Church/State

 

 

M

M

P

M

M

M

M

M

4700, Ethics

 

 

M

M

P

M

M

M

M

M

4710, Biomedical

 

 

M

M

P

M

M

M

M

M

4800, Soc/Pol

 

 

M

M

P

M

M

M

M

M

4820, Law

 

 

M

M

P

M

M

M

M

M

4830, Art

 

 

M

M

P

 

M

M

M

M

4850, Af-Amer

 

 

M

M

P

M

M

M

M

M

4860, Women

 

 

M

M

P

M

M

M

M

M

4900, Issues

 

 

 

 

 

 

M

M

M

M

4950, Research

 

 

 

 

 

 

M

M

M

M

 

 

"M" indicates that the course makes a major contribution to the attainment of t= his goal/outcome.  In the case of = an "M," the indicated assessment elements are explicitly required to= be considered in considerable depth.  "P" indicates that the courses makes a partial contribution to the attainment of this goal/outcome.  In the case of a "P," the indicated assessment elements are not required to be considered in consider= able depth but they may be optional features of the course or required to be considered in less-than-considerable depth.

Measurable Outcomes

 

A.  Content Knowledge

 

1. Knowledge of systems and movements such as the following:

a. Ancient and Medieval Philosophy:  Pre-Socratic monism and pluralism, Pythagoreani= sm, Pyrrhonean Scepticism, Stoicism, Epicurean Hedonism, Atomism, Determinism, Platonism, Aristotelianism, Humanism, Neopl= atonism, Voluntarism, Realism, Relativism, Scholasticism, and Naturalism.

b. Modern Philosophy:  Rationalis= m, Empiricism, Parallelism, Reformation, Renaissance, Phe= nomenalism, Scepticism, Subjective Idealism, Scepticism, Pantheism, Materialism, Dualism, and Social Contract Theory.

 

2. Knowledge of philosophers such as the following:

a. Ancient and Medieval Philosophy: Heraclitus, Parmenides, Pythargoras, Democritus, Epicurus, Plato, Artistotle, Epicte= tus, and Sextus Empiricus, Plotinus, St. Augustine, John Scotus Erigena, Abelard, St. Thomas Aquinas, Roger Bacon, Duns Scotus<= /span>, William of Occam.

b. Modern Philosophy: Hobbes, Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, Locke, Berkeley, Hu= me, Kant, Reid, Butler= , Francis Bacon, and Rousseau.

 

3. Knowledge of representative philosophers and movements such as the followin= g:

a. Philosophers:  Hegel, Schopenh= auer, Nietzsche, Marx, Bentham, Mill, Comte, Bradley, Peirce, James, Dewey, Frege, Russell, Wittgenstein, Ca= rnap, Ayer, Quine, Davidson, Dum= mett, Putnam, Kripke, Rawls, Husserl, Gauthier, Nussb= aum, Lewis, Hart, Austin, Heidegger, Moore, Sartre, Merleau= -Ponty, Foucault, Habermas, Derrida.

b. Movements:  Absolute Idealism, Utilitarianism, Positivism, Dialectical Materialism, Pragmatism, Logical Atomism, Logical Positivism, Ordinary Language Philosophy, Conceptual Analy= sis, Scientific Realism, Phenomenology, Existentialism, Structuralism, Post-Structuralism, Deconstruction.

 

4. Knowledge of fundamental concepts, principles, and issues such as the following:

a. Ethics:  Problem of freedom and moral responsibility, problem of egoism, relativism, the is-ought controver= sy, hedonism, act and rule utilitarianism, deontology versus consequentialism, contractarianism, issues in feminist ethics, co= ncepts of justice, concepts of rights, intrinsic and extrinsic value, cognitivism versus noncognitivis= m, definitions of morality, and justifications of morality, the nature of just= ice, political obligation, conceptions of the state, liberty and its limits, the nature of rights, Marxist and feminist political theory, contract theory, relationship between law and morality, punishment, racism and sexism, censorship, civil disobedience, the nature of democracy.

b. Aesthetics:  The creative imagination, metaphoric and metanymic signs, kinaesthetic and bodily movement, existential self-actualization, primary devices of poetic language (sound, word order, rhythm, and images), relation of imaginative experience to emotional and cognitive experience, main aesthetic theories, comparison of various kinds = of art works from different historical periods, the aesthetics of modernism.

c. Metaphysics:  The problem of universals, causality, free-will, substance/accident, nature of time and sp= ace, nature of mind, dualism, monism, pluralism, materialism, idealism, process philosophy, phenomenenalism, arguments for and against the existence of God, the problem of evil, conceptions of the natur= e of God(s), faith and reason, the nature of religious experience, sense and reference, analyticity, a priority and necessity, speaker-meaning, speech a= cts, semantics and pragmatics, conversational implicature, definite description, proper names, and natural-kind terms, the nature of t= ime, critiques and defenses of metaphysics.

d. Epistemology:  Rationalism and empiricism (classical and contemporary), classical definition of knowledge = and Gettier-type counter-examples, theories of epistemic justification, theories of truth, certainty, theories of perception, proble= m of induction, naturalized epistemology, the deductive-nom= ological model of explanation, Kuhn and scientific revolutions, demarcation between science and pseudo-science, verifiability and falsifia= bility, holism, redutionism, distinction between natural sciences and human sciences.

e. Logic:  Truth values, truth ta= bles, formal languages, propositional logic, prepositional logic, modal logic, meta-logic, completeness, consistency.

 

5. Knowledge of the distinctive contributions made by philosophy to intellectu= al inquiry

a. Ability to define at least two contrasting conceptions of philosophy and to distinguish philosophy, according to each conception, from natural science, social science, literature and the fine arts, and religious studies.

b. Appreciation of the role of philosophy in providing methodological and substantive models for scientific disciplines, social and political movemen= ts, and artistic movements.

 

6. Knowledge of the relevance of philosophy to contemporary American culture a= nd life

a. Understanding and appreciation of the contributions of philosophers in areas such as medical ethics, business ethics, communication ethics, governmental ethics, animal ethics, and environmental ethics.

b. Ability to interpret the history of philosophy in terms of the contribution= s it has made to contemporary domains of society and culture such as science, ar= t, literature, religion, and government.

c. Appreciation of the Socratic dictum that the unexamined life is not worth living.

B.  Philosophical Skills

1. Ability to read critically and with comprehension.

a. Ability to outline, with clarity and succinctness, any essay or book one wi= shes to evaluate critically.

b. Ability to identify premises and conclusions in arguments.

c. Ability to identify fallacies in reasoning.

d. Ability to detect vague and ambiguous terms,

 

2. Ability to think critically and to write clearly and persuasively.

a. Ability to identify premises and conclusions in arguments.

b. Ability to identify fallacies in reasoning.

c. Ability to avoid fallacies in one's own reasoning and writing.

d. Ability to avoid vagueness and ambiguity in one's own reasoning and writing= .

d. Ability to write in a grammatically correct fashion.

 

3. Ability to apply principles and techniques of logic to philosophical discussions.

a. Same abilities as listed in 2. as these abilities apply to philosophical reasoning and writing.

 

4. Ability to conduct philosophical research effectively.

a. Ability to use the library and other information resources effectively.

b. Ability to distingish useful from non-useful information.

c. Ability to synthesize data from various sources.

d. Ability to use primary and secondary sources effectively to interpret texts= and argue for one's views.

 

Section 4&n= bsp;        Assessment Plan for the B.A. in Philosophy

 

Assessment Method: Mixed final paper, communication and technology evaluation

        &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;           &nbs= p; 

Data Collection:

Every Fall, all philosophy majors who are seniors in 4000-level courses will be asked to submit their papers at the end of the semester.  Each instructor must include on her/his syllabus the requirement that seniors send their paper electronically to the professor.  (Professors are responsible to note which students are seniors based on GOSOLAR or by consultation with Ellen L= ogan or the Assessment Coordinator.)  The instructor of each of these classes will report a letter grade (A+, A, A-, = B+, B, etc.) for each student indicating: (1)  how well she “communicate[s] ... using appropriate oral or signed conventions and formats” and (2) how well she “participate[s] effectively in collaborative activities” (the latter would include how well she takes part in discussions with classmates and the instructor).  The professor will then e-mail the papers with an assessment form to the Assessment Coordinator. 

 

Review:

Every Spring, the department will calculate the percen= tage of philosophy majors who are seniors who successfully e-mailed in their materials, using the numbers from the previous Fall.  This will indicate the percentage = of philosophy major graduates who “effectively use computers and other technology appropriate to the discipline” of philosophy.  The department will calculate the average oral communication score (1).  This will indicate how well philosophy major gra= duates  “communicate ... using appropriate oral or signed conventions and formats.”   The department will calculat= e the average collaboration score (2).  This will indicate how well philosophy major graduates “participate[s] effectively in collaborative activities.”  A committe= e of three continuing faculty (tenured, tenure-track or lecturers) will assign e= ach paper a letter grade (A+, A, A-, B+, B, etc.)  on each= of the follow two criteria:  (3) mast= ery of content knowledge, and (4) philosophical skills. These are the two broad ar= eas identified in the learning outcomes in Section 3 above. When the grading is complete, the department will calculate the average grade on each criterion.  Then the faculty of Philosophy will meet to discuss how well the B.A. students are meeting the learning outcomes.    &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;           &nbs= p; 


 

Section 5&n= bsp;        Learning Goals for the M.A. in Philosophy

 

The learning goals for the M.A. in philosophy are the same the learning goals f= or the B.A. in philosophy with one crucial difference–the goal of the M.= A. program is for graduates to have a greater mastery of the content knowledge and a higher level of philosophical skills that graduates = of the B.A. program. 

 

 

Section 6&n= bsp;        Assessment Plan for the M.A. in Philosophy

 

Assessment Method:  Thesis

 

Data Collection:

Each masters thesis will be read by at least three fa= culty members.  Before reading a the= sis, the faculty members will review the learning goals for the M.A. in Philosophy.  Each member of the committee will assign each thesis a letter grade (A+, A, A-, B+, B, etc.) on each of two criteria:  mastery= of content knowledge, philosophical skills.&n= bsp; The Assessment Coordinator will collect all of this data on a contin= uing basis.

 

Review: 

Each Spring, the graduate faculty will meet to review= the survey responses and their grades and discuss whether the M.A. students are meeting the learning outcomes.  They will do so by considering the Assessment Forms for all MA theses from the previous Fall, Summer, and Spring.

Phase in: For 2006 we would only use data from the summer and fall of 2005.


Appendix 1<= /u> &= nbsp;   Georgia State University General Education Learning Goals

 

Goal I. Communication

1. Students communicate effectively using appropriate writing conventions and formats.

2. Students communicate effectively using appropriate oral or signed conventio= ns and formats.

 

Goal II. Collaboration

1. Students participate effectively in collaborative activities.

 

Goal III. Critical Thinking

1. Students formulate appropriate questions for research.

2. Students effectively collect appropriate evidence.

3. Students appropriately evaluate claims, arguments, evidence and hypotheses.=

4. Students use the results of analysis to appropriately construct new argumen= ts and formulate new questions.

 

Goal IV. Contemporary Issues
1. Students effectively analyze contemporary issues within the conte= xt of diverse disciplinary perspectives.
2. Students effectively analyze contemporary multicultural, global, and int= ernational questions.

 

Goal V. Quantitative Skills
1. Students effectively perform arithmetic operations, as well as re= ason and draw appropriate conclusions from numerical information.
2. Students effectively translate problem situations into symbolic represen= tations and use those representations to solve problems.

Goal VI. Technology
1. Students effectively use computers and other technology appropria= te to the discipline.

 

Appendix 2= &= nbsp;   M.A. Thesis Assessment Form

 

M.A. Thesis Assessment=

 

Each member of the thesis committee should assign the thesis a letter grade (A+,= A, A-, B+, B, etc.) on each of two criteria:&= nbsp; mastery of content knowledge and philosophical skills. These grades = are used for the purposes of program assessment only, and will have no further impact on the student in question.

 

Name of student:     &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp; 

 

Title of Thesis:     &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;            =       

 

Committee member #1:

Mastery of content knowledge    &nbs= p;        

&nbs= p;

Philosoph= ical skills       =             

<= span style=3D'text-decoration:none'> 

Committee member #2:

Mastery of content knowledge    &nbs= p;        

&nbs= p;

Philosoph= ical skills       =             

&nbs= p;

Committee member #3:

Mastery of content knowledge    &nbs= p;        

&nbs= p;

Philosoph= ical skills       =             

&nbs= p;

Committee member #4 (if applicable):

Mastery of content knowledge    &nbs= p;        

&nbs= p;

Philosoph= ical skills       =             

&nbs= p;

Committee member #5 (if applicable):

Mastery of content knowledge    &nbs= p;        

&nbs= p;

Philosoph= ical skills

 

Please send this form, along with the student’s final paper, to the Assessme= nt Coordinator, Andrew J. Cohen (cohenaj@gsu.edu).

 

Appendix 3= &= nbsp;   Assessment form for B.A. Papers

 

4000 Instructor Assess= ment of Senior Majors’ Final Paper Form

 

Name of instructor:    &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;             <= /span>

 

Name of student:     = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;  

 

In= dicate here the letter grades (A+, A, A-, B+, B, etc.) you would assign this stude= nt indicating how well she (1) “communicate[s] effectively using appropr= iate oral or signed conventions and formats” and (2) “participate[s] effectively in collaborative activities.”  Neither of these need be the grade you actually assign the student in your class. 

 

(1) Communication Grade:   &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;  

 

(2) Collaboration Grade:   &n= bsp