|
Preface
The purpose of this template is to help departments know where
to begin in assessment as well as help departments advance in
assessment with guidance from the American Sociological
Association. This document is a companion piece to the ASA Task
Force Assessment Manual. Thus, is it a product of the work
accomplished by the ASA Task Force on Assessment and an
intentional effort to support the work of the ASA Task Force on the
sociology Major, which revised the Liberal Learning and the Sociology
Major (McKinney et al. 2004) booklet.
Much is known about assessment and we hope this template is
useful in providing organization, direction, and suggestions for actual
practice. There is, however, no template that can simply “be
adopted”; departments must make decisions appropriate to their
distinctive situations as they consider the 12 outcomes. It is just not
possible to send out "The ASA Assessment Instrument”, for unlike
engineering or nursing, for example, such complete standardization
of knowledge is not appropriate.3 As explained in the Assessment
Manual, a department must make any program its own or assessment
will almost certainly fail. At the same time, there is enough shared
understanding of the essential components of our discipline to allow
us to both define what matters and respect variations on the themes.
Thus, this template suggests an ideal type that can help guide
departments as they identify the strengths of their programs,
consider gaps, prioritize efforts, and where appropriate, work toward
changes.
Lastly, understand that this is a program level model. The
required decision-making and the nature of programmatic success in
teaching and learning mean that this guide should be used
collaboratively. In each section, examples and suggestions are
provided--not mandates for a single way of effective practice. What
ultimately matters most is how departments make use of what they
learn to benefit the students, the faculty and the program.
| Learning Goal 1:
|
Students can demonstrate understanding of the
discipline of sociology and its role in contributing to our
understanding of social reality.
- Describe how sociology is similar or different
from other social sciences and give examples of
these differences.
- Articulate the contribution of sociology to a
liberal arts understanding of social reality.
- Apply principles, concepts and the sociological
imagination to at least one area of social
reality.
|
| Departmental
Decisions
|
Does this goal fit with the current major?
Which principles and concepts should students be able to
identify?
With which social sciences should students be able to
compare and contrast?
How are the liberal arts defined at your institution? Upon
what can the department agree as sociology's
contribution?
What are the sociological principles and key concepts
upon which can you agree?
In what ways will you expect students to articulate the
sociological imagination?
|
| Location in the
Program
|
Identify courses in which these abilities are taught and
practiced: intro, methods, statistics, lower division
electives, upper division electives, theory, seminar
List particular assignments; be as specific as possible
|
| Evidence of
Student Learning
|
Well-crafted, standard examination questions (short
answer and/or multiple-choice) can identify students’
comprehension of basic concepts. Essay questions for
more complex tasks: "Compare and contrast sociology
with psychology and economics."
Provide a short newspaper clipping of an event and ask
students to compare and contrast how different
disciplines would make sense of (analyze) the example;
might also allow connection of sociology to the liberal
arts. Authentic examples often help students practice
application of their sociological understanding; Offer
multiple opportunities both within a particular course
and across the curriculum. What is already in place?
Discuss the shared understandings across multiple
sections and courses. Rotate the focus: what is assessed
this year and what next year? Sample student work.
|
| Criteria for
Evaluation
|
What standards of evaluation will be applied?
What levels of quality are necessary to distinguish for
purposes of departmental programming? Is pass/no pass
ever appropriate?
Compare findings on student comprehension of intro
and address strengthening areas of weaker performance.
For intro essays, faculty share examples of two excellent,
two good, and two satisfactory essays; discuss patterns of
strength and gaps; share ideas for addressing gaps.
In other (typically required) courses, identify continued
application of concepts.
|
| Closing the Loop |
Examine the capacity of students to demonstrate these
abilities at various points in the curriculum. Give the
intro instrument again in senior year and compare
results; compare an essay question or short paper
assignment to sample of intro levels essay. Prioritize!
What matters most?
|
| Learning Goal 2: |
Students can demonstrate the role of theory in sociology.
- Define theory and describe its role in building sociological knowledge.
- Compare and contrast basic theoretical knowledge.
- Demonstrate the historical/cultural context in which theories were developed.
- Apply basic theories or theoretical approaches in at least one area of social reality.
|
| Departmental Decisions
|
What definition/s of theory will be adopted?
Which theories should majors to be able to compare and
contrast?
What depth of historical/cultural context is appropriate
in the program?
Which theories/approaches should students be able to
apply and why?
|
| Operationalization of Learning Goals
|
Sociological theory: The systematic explanation of social
phenomena; abstract explanations that predict events in
the world; theory is probabilistic.
Approaches: Functionalism, Conflict Theory and Symbolic
Interactionism (Post-modern/Critical/Feminist/Marxist)
Historical/cultural context: Major features of late 19th and early 20th century Western Europe and the United
States; the Enlightenment—France, England and Germany
|
| Location in the program
|
To what extent is theory introduced in introductory
sociology?
What is type and depth of theory coverage in all of
your courses?
Which theories are covered in your theory course and
why?
Is theory included in research methods and/or senior
seminar?
|
| Evidence of Student Learning
|
Intro: essay question or short written assignment in
which students to compare and contrast functionalism,
conflict theory and symbolic interaction regarding a
current issue.
Exam questions or papers asking for the identification
of main features of theories identified in any of the
other courses in your program.
Theory: Major papers or essay exams regarding the
historical/cultural context of Marx, Durkheim, and
Weber
|
| Criteria for Evaluation |
Depth of theoretical analysis required: pass/no pass?
Features included for excellence: depth, specificity,
accuracy, substance
Ability to identify limitations and or weaknesses of
theories
|
| Closing the Loop
|
Save samples of student work.
Which theories are best understood and why?
Where, if appropriate, can theory be strengthened?
|
| Learning Goal 3:
|
Students can demonstrate understanding of the role of
evidence and qualitative and quantitative methods.
- Identify basic methodological approaches and describe the general role of methods in building sociological knowledge.
- Compare and contrast the basic methodological approaches for gathering data.
- Design a research study in an area of choice and explain why various decisions were made.
- Critically assess a published research report and explain how the study could have been improved.
|
| Departmental Decisions
|
Which methodological approaches should students be
able to understand and use?
How should students understand the conceptualization
of quantitative and qualitative—as types of methods or
styles of analysis?
Should students design a research project? If so, of
what type?
What type of published research articles will be
included for critical assessment?
|
| Operationalization of Learning Goals
|
Role of empirical evidence in the scientific method;
induction/deduction
Role of evidence in the interpretive method
Methodologies: survey (questionnaire, interview),
experiment, observation, document/content analysis,
secondary analysis.
Design a primary research study in research methods
course or in senior seminar.
Select articles from international, national and
regional peer reviewed sociology journals, and related
fields.
|
| Location in the program
|
Typical in research methods course; senior seminars
that are research based, and upper division electives.
Is it addressed in any other courses?
|
| Evidence of Student Learning
|
Major primary empirical research papers in required
courses; samples should be saved.
Examination questions that compare and contrast
methods (intro, research methods course, or senior
seminar are typical sources) and apply appropriate
design to an example.
Required paper on journal article critique; some
excellent sources can be found in Pryczak publishing
documents.
|
| Criteria for Evaluation
|
Standards for evaluation can be taken from peer
review or journal instructions. What is the level of
quality expected and why? See resources in Assessment
Manual.
|
| Closing the Loop
|
Assess quality and range of papers, assignments and
exam performance through sampling of senior papers.
If program is small, no need to sample.
Determine what changes might be needed in the
seminar and/or in courses that are preparatory.
|
| Learning Goal 4:
|
Students can:
- use technical skills in retrieving information from the Internet.
- use computers appropriately for data analysis.
- write in appropriate social science style for accurately conveying data findings.
- identify and apply the principles of ethical sociological practice.
|
| Departmental Decisions
|
How is information literacy defined at your institution?
What type of computer data analysis must students
do? Define level of student expertise in presenting
findings.
Will department adopt the ASA Code of Ethics?
Can department adopt the ASA Integrated Data Analysis (IDA) program within the major?
|
| Operationalizing of Learning Goals
|
The American Library Association defines information
literacy as a set of abilities requiring individuals to
"recognize when information is needed and have the
ability to locate, evaluate, and use effectively the
needed information." ALA also states that "information
literacy is a survival skill in the Information Age."
"Information literacy forms the basis for lifelong
learning. It is common to all disciplines, to all learning
environments, and to all levels of education. It
enables learners to master content and extend their
investigations, become more self-directed, and
assume greater control over their own learning."
lib1.bmcc.cuny.edu/lib/help/glossary.html The ability
to locate, evaluate and use information effectively.
www.wpi.edu/Academics/Library/Help/glossary.html
Students use SPSS for Windows for data entry,
analysis, and presentation. Levels of expertise include:
frequencies, cross-tabs, regression and correlation,
non-parametric tests. The ASA Code of Ethics is on the
ASA website:
http://www.asanet.org/members/ecoderev.html
Connect with campus or federal IRB guidelines; include
campus processes and practices.
|
| Location in the Program
|
Research methods, senior seminars, or upper division
courses requiring major research papers. IDA modules
(see ASA website) can be included in all courses.
Ethics should be covered in methods; is it addressed in
intro? Other courses with human subjects research?
|
| Examples of Methods for Collecting Student Learning Data
|
Require ethics section in any paper with a
methodology section.
Ask examination essay questions that pose an ethical
problem and require analysis. Provide a case study
where students analyze and make a decision using the
ASA Code and campus IRB practices as a guide. Ask
students to reflect on information literacy in their
literature reviews. How complete were the databases?
Collect samples of data analysis done with SPSS
and samples of IDA modules. Test questions
completing data tables.
|
| Criteria for Evaluation
|
Identify the minimum skills for SPSS and quantitative
literacy.
Clarify level of skill sociology honors majors must
demonstrate. List databases that must be used.
|
| Closing the Loop |
Identify how much research actually happens in your
program; is it sufficient for the overall mission?
|
| Learning Goal 5:
|
Students can demonstrate knowledge and
comprehension of: culture, social change,
socialization, stratification, social structure,
institutions, and differentiation by race/ethnicity,
gender, age, and class.
Students can define and explain the relevance of each
concept.
|
| Departmental Decisions
|
Is this list of concepts adequate? Upon what can the
department agree? What should be added?
|
| Operationalization of Learning Goals
|
Examine intro materials. What shared definitions can
be adopted?
If a common intro text is used, begin with those
definitions. If not, consider definitions that can be
agreed upon. If faculty cannot generally agree on what
social class is, we certainly can’t expect students to
clearly know and apply the term.
Relevance refers to pertinence and the ability to apply
that which can be brought to bear on a particular
problem or question.
|
| Location in the Program
|
Introductory Sociology is typical.
List the courses where concepts are clearly and
intentionally revisited; e.g. race and gender course, a
stratification course, family, demography, aging,
urban, etc.
|
| Evidence of Student Learning
|
Standard intro exams. (See other earlier outcomes.)
Essay exam questions in social institution based
courses (e.g. family, religion, political, education,
etc.)
Papers that require application of the concepts.
Sample and review.
|
| Criteria for Evaluation
|
Will the definition and application/analysis skills be
different for seniors than for lower division students? If
so, what level is expected and how will you know it
when students have achieved this?
|
| Closing the Loop |
Which concepts do students understood and apply
most effectively?
Are courses adequately reinforcing the use of the
concepts?
What changes should be made?
|
| Learning Goal 6:
|
Students can articulate an understanding of how
culture and social structure operate.
- Describe the inter-linkage of institutions and their effects on individuals.
- Explain how social change factors affect social structures and individuals.
- Describe how culture and social structure vary across time and place and with what effect.
- Identify examples of specific social policy implications using reasoning about social structural effects.
|
| Departmental Decisions
|
What are the main ways students should understand
the inter-linkage of institutions and the effects on
individuals?
How is social change conceptualized?
Where are the multi-cultural and global dimensions to
be included?
Identify specify aspects of culture and social structure
and their effect.
How are policy implications examined across the
program? What type of reasoning should students use?
|
| Operationalization of Learning Goals
|
Institutions: “A process or an association that is highly
organized, systematized and stable” (Modern
Dictionary of Sociology: 165) “The organized, usual or
standard ways by which a society meets its basic
needs” (James Henslin, 1999)
Social change: Alteration of societies and/or cultures
over time.
|
| Location in the Program
|
Typically introduced in the basic intro course.
Are there topical area courses in your program that
meet these goals? e.g. family, sociology of religion,
and social change course, social movements.
Is policy systematically or idiosyncratically addressed?
|
| Evidence of Student Learning
|
Term papers of appropriate design in “institution”
based courses or social change course.
Service learning projects that require analysis of
institutions, their effects on individuals and aspects of
social change.
Essay exams that require students to demonstrate
comprehension and analysis of policy article from
newspaper or case study.
|
| Criteria for Evaluation
|
At what level must all students perform? Pass/no pass
rates? Percentage at what level of quality and
rationale for that level? Content rubrics can be
developed or borrowed.
|
| Closing the Loop |
Are our courses meeting these goals? Why or why not?
How focused on social change, institution and policy is
the program?
Are there elective courses that should be required?
Might tracks or concentrations meet these outcomes
differentially?
|
| Learning Goal 7:
|
Students can articulate the reciprocal relationship
between individuals and society.
- Explain how the self develops sociologically.
- Explain how society and structural factors influence individual behavior and development of the self.
- Explain how social interaction and the self influences society and social structure.
- Compare and contrast the sociological approach to the self with psychology and economic approaches.
|
| Departmental Decisions
|
Where is there agreement on these goals?
Does it work to use psychology and economics?
What definitions of the self do those disciplines offer?
What explanations are students expected to
demonstrate?
|
| Operationalization of Learning Goals
|
Self: “The unique human capacity of being able to see
our selves ‘from the outside‘; the picture we gain of
how others see us.” (Henslin: 1999) “An individual’s
awareness of, and attitudes toward, his own psychic
and biologic person.“ (Modern Dictionary of Sociology)
Social interaction: “two or more actors mutually
influencing one another” (Modern Dictionary of Sociology)
|
| Location in the Program
|
To what extent is this topic covered in intro courses? Is
it done so universally?
Is there a separate social-psychology course? Does it
build upon intro or is there no pre-requisite?
|
| Evidence of Student Learning
|
Papers in social psychology class.
Examinations and written assignments on these topics.
Primary research done in social psychology course.
|
| Criteria for Evaluation
|
At what level must all students perform? Pass/no pass
rates? Percentage at what level of quality?
What standards are embedded in existing courses? How
do these translate across the program?
|
| Closing the Loop |
Is there sufficient evidence of student understanding
of the reciprocal relationship between the individual
and society? If not, what changes might be made?
|
| Learning Goal 8:
|
Students can articulate the macro/micro distinction.
- Compare and contrast theories at one level with theories at another.
- Summarize research documenting connections between the macro and micro.
- Develop a list of research issues that should be pursued to understand more fully the relationship between the two levels.
|
| Departmental Decisions
|
Are macro and micro theories included in the
curriculum?
How much research students be asked to do? Where?
Why?
How does a list of research issues fit into the program?
In what areas? Should student’s skills be about equal
between micro and macro?
|
| Operationalization of Learning Goals
|
Macro theories: study of total social systems,
particularly societies, such a functionalism and conflict theory
Micro theories: study of segments or groups within social systems.
Examples of research that summarizes these
connections. Identify both theoretical and empirical
dimensions.
|
| Location in the Program
|
Typically, functionalism, conflict theory and symbolic
interaction are introduced in the first course. Are
other theories presented in other areas of the
curriculum?
Social theory course may or may not require link to
current research issues.
Stratification courses or advance social problems
courses may address this dimension.
|
| Evidence of Student Learning
|
Exam essays or papers can document comparison and
contrast of theories and of research.
A specific example or case study can be offered and
analyzed with both levels.
|
| Criteria for Evaluation
|
What is the depth of articulation between the two that
is expected by majors?
|
| Closing the Loop |
Is the department satisfied with how macro and micro
levels of explanation are balanced? Should strength be
added in one area more so than the other? Are theory
and research both adequately addressed? If not, what
can change?
|
| Learning Goal 9:
|
Students can articulate at least two specialty areas
within sociology in depth.
- Summarize basic questions and issues in each area.
- Compare and contrast basic theoretical orientations and middle range theories in each area.
- Summarize current research in each area.
- Develop specific policy implications of research and theory in each area.
|
| Departmental Decisions
|
Is the program broad enough so students can have
depth in two areas?
Do requirements versus electives facilitate this goal or
create a barrier?
What level of depth should students accomplish?
|
| Operationalization of Learning Goals
|
Specialty areas: race/gender, family, religion,
crime/deviance, urban, demography, social
movements/change, organizations Methods:
qualitative or quantitative skills or theory?
|
| Location in the Program
|
At what levels of the curriculum are specialty areas
offered? At all four levels?
Which required courses allow in depth research
projects?
|
| Evidence of Student Learning
|
Types of research papers assigned; perhaps gathered
in a student portfolio (see Manual).
|
| Criteria for Evaluation
|
Degree of depth and criteria will be dependent on
decisions made. See Manual for examples.
|
| Closing the Loop |
Are faculty satisfied with specialty areas available in
the program?
Are students roughly equally good in both?
Should opportunities for depth in specialty areas be
changed?
Can the size of the program support two areas?
|
| Learning Goal 10:
|
Students can articulate the internal diversity of the
United States and its place in the international context.
- Describe variations by race, class, gender and age.
- Make appropriate generalizations across groups.
|
| Departmental Decisions
|
Are these dimensions of diversity sufficient? How do
they fit with institutional mission and general education?
Should any areas be added? i.e. disabilities, sexuality,
religion, ethnicity?
What are appropriate generalizations?
Where should students resist stereotypes and where
are they encouraged?
|
| Operationalization of Learning Goals
|
Race: socially determined on the basis of physical
characteristics
Ethnicity: socially determined on the basis of cultural
characteristics
Class: typically, social stratification based on income,
education, and occupational prestige; determined by
the relationship to the means of production;
Gender: social characteristics associated by society
with being male and female
|
| Location in the Program
|
To what extent are these concepts covered in intro
sociology?
Where are these topics addressed in addition to a race
and class, stratification or gender course?
|
| Evidence of Student Learning
|
Examinations
Analysis in papers and portfolios
Oral exam/exit interviews
MExaminations
Analysis in papers and portfolios
Oral exam/exit interviews
(See Manual and previous outcomes.)
(See Manual and previous outcomes.)
|
| Criteria for Evaluation
|
Must all students take a stance of cultural relativism?
How will views of diversity fit here?
If faculty intentionally teach values, do students
recognize that?
|
| Closing the Loop |
Is the student’s understanding of diversity what is
intended? How internalized is it? Does that
understanding cross over into other courses students
take? How does this support institutional mission and
general education learning goals?
|
| Learning Goal 11:
|
Students can demonstrate critical thinking.
- Demonstrate skills in recall, analysis and
application, and synthesis and evaluation.
- Identify underlying assumptions in theoretical
orientations or arguments.
- Identify underlying assumptions in particular
methodological approaches to an issue.
- Show how patterns of thought and knowledge
are directly influenced by political and
economic social structures.
- Present opposing viewpoints and alternative
hypotheses.
- Engage in teamwork where many different
points of view are presented.
|
| Departmental Decisions
|
Should Bloom’s Taxonomy be adopted?
What other models of critical thinking are used?
Can/are those adopted?
Is critical thinking in every course? Does it change over
the course of the program?
Is critical thinking viewed as “automatic” or
something about which the department needs to be
very intentional? Is critical thinking just expected or
are students explicitly taught how to do it?
What are overall skills expected versus particular
courses?
Is a model of critical thinking offered that students can
recognize and articulate?
|
| Operationalization of Learning Goals
|
Bloom’s taxonomy.
Your campus general education models.
|
| Location in the Program
|
If it is not somewhere, why not?
If it is not everywhere, why not?
|
| Evidence of Student Learning
|
Course embedded assignments.
College wide senior assessments in which sociology
majors can be sorted out.
|
| Criteria for Evaluation
|
All students pass 70% on critical thinking instruments.
|
| Closing the Loop |
How does our critical thinking reinforce that of general
education? Where is the value added by the sociology
program?
|
| Learning Goal 12:
|
Students will develop values.
- Articulate the utility of the sociological
perspective as one of several perspectives on
social reality
- Explain the importance of reducing the
negative effects of social inequality.
|
| Departmental Decisions
|
Is there agreement on these values?
Are they consistent with the mission?
Is the department’s mission consistent with the
institution’s mission and general education goals?
Do others support these values?
|
| Operationalization of Learning Goals
|
Students can do a competent sociological analysis of
any problem presented.
Students can bring their sociological understanding to
bear in other non-sociology courses.
|
| Location in the Program
|
Cuts across the program as a whole; may or may not
be emphasized in particular courses.
|
| Evidence of Student Learning
|
Senior seminar educational autobiographies.
Exit interviews, done individually or in groups
Honors projects.
|
| Criteria for Evaluation
|
Depends on the level of conceptualization of the two
goals; is utility critical?
Where is there agreement on importance of reducing
negative effects of inequality: as a discipline or as a
department?
|
| Closing the Loop |
Such values should lead to thoughtful discussion among
the faculty and with students; it may be an area where
the capacity to ask the appropriate questions is as
significant as the correct answers.
|
|