ࡱ> ?A> "bjbjT~T~ 4,6644wwwww.}$,wOOOww111Oww}1O}111`r\xzae1i01~{~1~w18Z@1(4\OOOO~4 =: Academic Year 2009/10 Assessment Report Department of Anthropology Fairmount College of Liberal Arts and Sciences Eunice, Myers, Associate Dean College of Liberal Arts 鶹ý September 2010 Please accept the following narrative as supplement to the assessment matrix (see also attachment to this email). Peer H. Moore-Jansen, Chair Objective A: During the fall 2009 and spring and summer of 2010, the department conducted an annual evaluation of the full faculty in accordance with the university guidelines using the faculty activity report. The reports were submitted to the college and document the continued intensive teaching and research activity in the department. A subsequent request to search for a replacement for one faculty position was submitted in summer and again in August of 2010. No responses to these requests have been received so far. The current tenure-track faculty of 6.5 FTE was actually limited to 4.5FTE for both the fall and spring semesters of 2009. This added an additional burden to teaching loads and to advising and student engagement efforts. It appears that signs of the stretched faculty resources are beginning to show on program performance, even if the department is able to enhance credit hour production, and maintain or even increase number of graduates through sound advising and instruction. The medical absences and phase-retirement facing the department during the past four years must be remedied by a faculty hire to maintain the programs ability to address objective A. Objective B and E: During the school year 2009-2010, student senior exit survey/interview continues to report an overall satisfaction with the program. Five students matriculated in graduate programs in anthropology and at least two are considering matriculating in an MA program. Two students have left Wichita to seek employment elsewhere. One student has been employed in archaeological work in Central America. The number of former graduates in professional and academic positions in and outside Kansas is growing. Several students are working on their PhD degree or hold academic positions in Arkansas, New York State, Illinois, Arizona, Florida, Texas, Indiana, Louisiana, and Oklahoma. Many more hold professional jobs in anthropology in these and several additional states. Objectives C and D: In the fall 2008 the department administered assessment tools to measure the educational outcomes related to of the program objectives C (Command and critical thinking re: basic concept, theories and subject matter) and D (appreciation of a variety of human social systems), particularly in general and socio-cultural anthropology. An instrument measuring the educational outcome of the required capstone class in anthropology (ANTH 647 Theories of Culture) was prepared, administered, and rated by the undergraduate coordinator and the class instructor as a committee of two. The direct knowledge-based multi-component designed to demonstrate subject mastery and critical thinking was administered to all majors in the class. Committee ratings were averaged for each student and totaled for the class (majors only). The instrument comprised two essay questions designed to assess the students general knowledge of anthropology. Students were asked to address each essay in a written format and 19 of the 29 majors enrolled in the class completed the instrument. The essay questions were rated by each of the two faculty as a letter grade on a 100% scale (A: 90+%; B: 80+%; C: 70+%; D: 60+%; F >60%). The averaged ratings from the two essays demonstrate that scores for each question identify 76.7% of students as meeting the minimum expectations on both essays. Although rating of essay questions is notoriously subjective in nature, it is observed that ratings derived independently by each faculty member differ by 4.6%. This observation supports the validity of results and the use of this particular instrument. Further, the reported educational outcomes strongly suggest that objectives C and D are being met. No changes are recommended to the instrument and its application here. It is recommended that the present assessment of Anth 647 be repeated in fall 2008. Objectives A, C and D: Objectives A., C. and D. are also assessed by examination of transcript records for the capstone course. Twenty-one of 25 students (ca. 84%), of all students enrolled in the capstone course, scored 2.0 or better. The results suggest that students receive mentorship, instruction, and that they demonstrate acceptable mastery of anthropological method and theory. Two anthropological essays assessed by two faculty, including the course instructor and a second faculty member did show a decline in overall student scores. The scores are reflective of their mastery of anthropological theory. The averaged scoring produced a mean score of 76% on the two anthropological essays. However, only 63 percent met the objective of a score of 70% or better. The observed decline in the average score is likely a long term result of the reductions in faculty resources, which , in turn, disallow program enhancements such as returning to a more varied or comprehensive curriculum that help prepare students for success. Because instructor time savings or re-allocations realized through creative and most strategic curriculum changes have been entirely absorbed by reductions in tenure-track faculty reductions, the program has not gained any additional flexibility in instructor resources. One positive result of the curriculum changes have been a noticeable increase in enrolments. Thus, changes include a request for an additional faculty position with a focus on teaching. Objective D: Program effectiveness relative to Objective D was also assessed using student evaluations and assessments of one of two introductory, general education anthropology courses Anth 100, a non-major course teaching an anthropological perspective. Student assessments point to strengths, including providing an anthropological perspective to student education and life experiences but also address weaknesses including fostering collaboration and critical thinking. The outcome of a faculty assessment of the course, using the student measuring instrument, called for: teaching the class with the student concern in mind collect follow-up data and compare these with the Anth 102 Cultural Anthropology course. Subsequently, the role of the Anth 100 will be decided upon and the faculty will decide to either maintain the course with a better define mission within the curriculum, OR, the course will be deleted from same to limit redundancy or instructional efforts that do not sufficiently address the mission of the department curriculum. rsu  ) M n o p ~  ~ 5 6 GHKLO37@Zenop)12Upz()* hyh[6sh[6sh}9h:hhzhkh R1hm hBhjhbhL?c hyhjL(CrstuvQ R n o p } ,)*+./gdFgd[6sgdj$a$gdj*,-/ST|}.089:Z^1;>?#=>EFGhwx%: '[\tuv """""Ǽ hZrhj hhh:hB hyh&h&hTh[6shAh?hhjhF h %h % hyhjG/Czuv"""gdjgdF 21h:p/ =!"#$% ^ 2 0@P`p2( 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p8XV~_HmH nH sH tH @`@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH DA D Default Paragraph FontRiR  Table Normal4 l4a (k (No List l$l & ,Envelope Address!@ &+D/^@ ;OJQJ^JHH Ta Balloon TextCJOJQJ^JaJPK![Content_Types].xmlj0Eжr(΢Iw},-j4 wP-t#bΙ{UTU^hd}㨫)*1P' ^W0)T9<l#$yi};~@(Hu* Dנz/0ǰ $ X3aZ,D0j~3߶b~i>3\`?/[G\!-Rk.sԻ..a濭?PK!֧6 _rels/.relsj0 }Q%v/C/}(h"O = C?hv=Ʌ%[xp{۵_Pѣ<1H0ORBdJE4b$q_6LR7`0̞O,En7Lib/SeеPK!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xml M @}w7c(EbˮCAǠҟ7՛K Y, e.|,H,lxɴIsQ}#Ր ֵ+!,^$j=GW)E+& 8PK!Ptheme/theme/theme1.xmlYOo6w toc'vuر-MniP@I}úama[إ4:lЯGRX^6؊>$ !)O^rC$y@/yH*񄴽)޵߻UDb`}"qۋJחX^)I`nEp)liV[]1M<OP6r=zgbIguSebORD۫qu gZo~ٺlAplxpT0+[}`jzAV2Fi@qv֬5\|ʜ̭NleXdsjcs7f W+Ն7`g ȘJj|h(KD- dXiJ؇(x$( :;˹! I_TS 1?E??ZBΪmU/?~xY'y5g&΋/ɋ>GMGeD3Vq%'#q$8K)fw9:ĵ x}rxwr:\TZaG*y8IjbRc|XŻǿI u3KGnD1NIBs RuK>V.EL+M2#'fi ~V vl{u8zH *:(W☕ ~JTe\O*tHGHY}KNP*ݾ˦TѼ9/#A7qZ$*c?qUnwN%Oi4 =3ڗP 1Pm \\9Mؓ2aD];Yt\[x]}Wr|]g- eW )6-rCSj id DЇAΜIqbJ#x꺃 6k#ASh&ʌt(Q%p%m&]caSl=X\P1Mh9MVdDAaVB[݈fJíP|8 քAV^f Hn- "d>znNJ ة>b&2vKyϼD:,AGm\nziÙ.uχYC6OMf3or$5NHT[XF64T,ќM0E)`#5XY`פ;%1U٥m;R>QD DcpU'&LE/pm%]8firS4d 7y\`JnίI R3U~7+׸#m qBiDi*L69mY&iHE=(K&N!V.KeLDĕ{D vEꦚdeNƟe(MN9ߜR6&3(a/DUz<{ˊYȳV)9Z[4^n5!J?Q3eBoCM m<.vpIYfZY_p[=al-Y}Nc͙ŋ4vfavl'SA8|*u{-ߟ0%M07%<ҍPK! ѐ'theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsM 0wooӺ&݈Э5 6?$Q ,.aic21h:qm@RN;d`o7gK(M&$R(.1r'JЊT8V"AȻHu}|$b{P8g/]QAsم(#L[PK-![Content_Types].xmlPK-!֧6 +_rels/.relsPK-!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK-!Ptheme/theme/theme1.xmlPK-! ѐ' theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK]  ,*"/"8@0(  B S  ?C4w>D>E>Ft>G4>Ht>CCMLTT9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplace=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceName=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceType rtop)1* * bbnnHGj`}skCy$(I!UT$ %A';p)& ,!F1 R1!8?3?BrC9"H(LUIzUP]aA]Ta3bL?ck8kkln[6sEt!zu