Executive Summary
I. GOALS
II. ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE
III. INSTRUMENTATION AND DOCUMENTATION
IV ANALYSIS OF DATA
V. ACTIONS TAKEN
VI. PROPOSED NEXT STEPS

Executive Summary

We have a strong and continually developing portfolio assessment process. The first years of this process were limited by the time needed to build extensive portfolios, as well as the difficulty in getting students to place materials in their portfolios. Since we shifted to a system whereby all faculty select and place student material from all core courses and others with large numbers of majors, we have accumulated much more complete data. Based on Assessment Committee recommendations and our own observations, we have been revising and expanding our assessment rubric and reporting form. While this is a clear improvement, it is also going to make longitudinal assessment difficult until we again have several years of data that is reported in a consistent manner.
We have also reached the stage where the assessment process is truly guiding future directions in the department. We are implementing and discussing important curricular changes based on the assessment findings. While the portfolio process is proving very successful, we are also discussing the implementation of other measures to supplement it: capstone courses, alumni surveys, reports from interns' field supervisors, and so forth. One continuing struggle is the demand on faculty time that is required in portfolio assessment. The committee of three meets in the summer after our graduating majors' portfolios are complete, but this must be worked in with many other summer activities and duties.

Student Learning Goals

By the time students complete the major program in sociology we expect them to demonstrate:
1. Ability to apply the sociological imagination to trace the links between individual experiences and social forces and between social forces and history to critically understand oneself.
2. Understanding of substantive issues, which include how culture and social structures operate, the reciprocal relationships between individuals and society, the relationships between macro and micro levels of social reality, the impact of social institutions and social inequality on society.
3. Understanding of sociological research methods both quantitative and qualitative, including how to interpret the findings of such research, awareness of the assumptions built into various research methods and how the choice of a particular method may affect research conclusions, and the advantages and disadvantages of applying a particular research method to a research question.
4. Awareness of the role of sociological theory and ability to discuss, apply, and describe some basic theories or theoretical orientations in at least one area of social reality.
5. Development of a multicultural perspective on the social world, including an awareness of the factors contributing to social and cultural diversity, and an understanding of social structures and processes connected with race, class, gender, sexuality, religion, etc.

Assessment Procedure

In order to measure attainment of these goals, the department has developed a portfolio based assessment program. Samples of each of our major's work are collected from all of the required core courses of the major, as well as all upper-level 300-400 level sociology courses that they take. Each year, the portfolios of our graduates are evaluated by the department's assessment committee using the above criteria.
The materials collected in the portfolios represent objective evidence of student performance. Based on the evidence in the portfolio, the assessment committee ranks each student's achievement with regard to each of the five goals. This information is then compiled in table form and reported to the department. The five goals upon which we evaluate student portfolios are based on what are generally perceived to be the core foci of the discipline. They encompass the theory, methodology, major concepts, and substantive areas of the discipline.
Faculty members each take turns serving on the assessment committee. In addition, each year the assessment committee reports its results to the department as a whole and the faculty deliberates and responds to any recommendations for program revision or development. Portfolios are kept in the departmental office and updated each semester as new materials are submitted and as students meet with their advisors.

Annual Reports
See attached for the past three years.

Instrumentation and Documentation

In the past, we have used a 5-point rating system to evaluate student performance on each of our goals: 5) Excellent, 4) Very Good, 3) Good, 2) Fair, 1) Poor. However, the campus-wide assessment committee asks us to identify to what extent students have exceeded, met, or fallen below our expectations. It has been a bit awkward to translate our rating system into this request. For this reason, we are changing to a 3 point rating system that will use the same categories as those requested by the campus-wide assessment committee. We believe this change will actually simplify our evaluation process and lead to greater internal validity in our results.

Analysis of Data

Assessment is indeed an evolving process. The changes noted above, along with a change in our reporting rubric, makes it very difficult to combine data over the past three years. As such, it is easier to show that we have improved our reporting over the last three years than to show that our students have improved over this time on any given measure. Nonetheless, a consistent pattern emerges of overall strength with several weaknesses in quantitative methodology and in global awareness.

One area of improvement identified by the assessment committee concerned goal number five. While our evaluation showed that almost all of our students met or exceeded our expectations, in actuality, this goal includes 2 different measures. One measure concerns diversity, i.e., class, race, gender, religion, sexuality, etc. Our students did very well in this area. However, they performed much weaker in the area of multicultural (non-U.S., non-Western) perspective. However, because the two measures are collapsed into one goal, this is not reflected in the general report on this goal. It was the recommendation of the assessment committee that this goal be divided in to two separate items and that the department consider how to strengthen its multicultural curriculum.

Actions Taken

We have determined that the current item #5 in our assessment goals actually conflates two items in one, we have decided to separate them into two separate items. In the future item 5 will read:

Development of a multicultural perspective on the social world, including an awareness of the factors contributing to social and cultural diversity.

Item 6 will read:

Acquisition of an understanding of social structures and processes connected with race, class, gender, sexuality, religion, etc.

We are also seeking ways of increasing other measures of our students' performance. We continue to have more students enroll in our S494 Internship Practicum. This is becoming something of a capstone course for those students interested in social and human services and related fields, whether immediately upon graduation or after doing graduate study. At the end of this practicum students evaluate their own overall preparation in the major for the work they did. Their field supervisor also evaluates their performance. We are now including both in our assessment process, although it will take a while for this data to accumulate sufficiently to be analyzed. We are also discussing ways for our senior seminars to function more fully as capstone courses and ways to integrate them into our assessment process.
Each year we have a departmental planning retreat to revisit and revise our strategic plan. All fulltime faculty participate. The assessment report is one crucial piece of data to inform this meeting. Issues of how to improve our students' performance in methods and theory, as well as how to improve their understanding of a global/ comparative perspective were central topics of this year's meeting. We are also currently preparing a self-study this spring, and the findings of this report will form part of that study.

Proposed Next Steps

As new general education requirements are going into effect, we are discussing the scope of our major and minor. One option emerging from this report is the possibility of increasing our major requirements from 30 credits to 36 credits, and of increasing our minor from 15 to 18 credits. The extra 6 credits in the major would allow us to require both contemporary theory and statistics to improve student outcomes in these areas, as well as to require a course with a global comparative focus. The expanded minor would also give our students more depth in the discipline. This change would require us to look carefully at our staffing and ability to offer needed sections.
We will have an external reviewer examining the department and its self-study this coming fall. This external review has been an important part of our overall departmental assessment in the past, and we look forward to new analysis and insights this fall.

Go to top