American Studies Undergraduate Learning Outcomes Assessment Plan

NWCCU Interim Accreditation Review Washington State University College of Liberal Arts

Summary Update Fall 2003

The College of Liberal Arts continues to be the largest college in the university, with the largest number of majors and largest participation in General Education. The College currently has 14 departments (an increase of one, Women’s Studies Program having become a department), five special curricula or interdisciplinary programs (American Studies, Asia Program, Criminal Justice, General Studies, and Theater), and three research units (Anthropology Museum, Thomas S. Foley Institute for Public Administration and Public Service, and the Division of Governmental Studies and Services). The College teaches more students and has more majors than at the time of the 1999 Accreditation review, with fewer faculty and staff.

Curriculum:

The College of Liberal Arts continuously revises degree curricula based on ongoing assessment of student performance, field development, and alumni feedback. The College works with departments to assure that new program proposals include a needs assessment, identify learning outcomes for the program, and propose appropriate assessment methodology. During 1999-2003 CLA has proposed or implemented three new doctoral programs (two Ph.D. and one Aud.D.), five M.A. degree programs or program options, two new B.A. programs (Digital Technology and Culture, Psychology), two new B.A. Distance Degree programs (Criminal Justice and General Humanities), 19 new options and concentrations within existing B.A. degrees, six new Minors, and three undergraduate certificates. A complete list of new programs developed since the Accreditation review of 1999 is appended. In addition, revision and reconfiguration of CLA curricular programs include:

- Distance Degree Program implementation revision plan; - General Studies program reconfiguration, brochure and website development; - Teacher preparation programs – massive revision effort in response to the state reconfiguration of teaching endorsement menu and new requirements in student learning outcomes; required development of learning outcomes matrixes for each secondary school teaching endorsement and ongoing course revision to accommodate new state requirements; at the same time CLA lost faculty in three endorsement areas. - Participation in several grant-funded Teaching and Learning initiatives (CO-TEACH, PT3, Critical Thinking, Visible Knowledge); - Degree program requirements revision (Asian Studies, CES, Communication, English, History, Music); - Pre-law program options expansion and revision, brochure development; - On-line course development (American Studies, Communication, English, History, Foreign Languages and Cultures).

1 - Foreign Languages – instruction in Asian languages expanded, new European languages added.

Advising:

The College of Liberal Arts and individual departments have been revising their advising procedures to respond to assessment data collected for various majors. They have taken a number of new steps in addition to established assessment procedures (listed below). These activities support the WSU Strategic Plan Goal “To provide the best undergraduate experience at a research university”:

- Academic Coordinator position created in 1999; - Advising Center planning included in the College Strategic Plan; - Advising and Advisor Training – held several CLA advisor training workshops, encouraged participation of College advisors in Alive advising and training, subscription to the advisor list-serve; - General Studies advising – new staff hired in 2002; - American Diversity “D” General Education requirement - developed a significant number of these GER courses, including Distance versions; - Tier III “T” General Education requirement – developed new courses, including Distance versions; - Internationalization – all CLA departments have study-abroad course numbers, for lower and upper division. Degree programs in Foreign Languages and Asian Studies encourage or require study abroad; - Internships – opportunities expanded in Anthropology, Communication, Criminal Justice, Political Science, Psychology, Public History, Sociology; - Collaboration with other colleges – active collaboration with the College of Education on the part of the five degree programs involved in secondary teaching endorsement preparation; Women’s Studies collaboration with Colleges of Sciences and Engineering; Asia Program and Foreign Languages collaborating with International Business. - Teniwe residential academic program, assessed by Student Services – expanded participation; - Developed and implemented criteria and procedure guidelines for promotion of long- term adjunct faculty to the rank of Senior Instructor and for promotion of clinical faculty to Associate and Full ranks; - Sought and obtained external funding for College scholarships, to benefit (1) academic high achievers, (2) underrepresented groups, and (3) teacher preparation majors.

Graduate Education and Research:

The College of Liberal Arts has proposed or implemented the following new steps that support of the WSU Strategic Plan Goal “Nurture a world-class environment for research, scholarship, graduate education, the arts, and engagement”:

2 - Introduced a grant-writing support program - Obtained federal funding for the planning of the Plateau Studies Center; - Discussed institutional collaboration on a Northwest Regional Native American Project with universities in four northwestern states;. - Sought and obtained internal and external funding for graduate scholarships, to benefit academic high achievers and underrepresented groups; - Collaborated with neighboring states’ institutions in developing graduate programs (MA in History at Vancouver with Portland State University, MA in Philosophy at Pullman with University of Idaho); - Expanded undergraduate research opportunities (Anthropology, Psychology); - Increased number of graduate courses taught entirely on-line (American Studies, Communication, English, Foreign Languages and Cultures).

Emerging trends:

- Interdepartmental collaboration and coordination (resulting in interdisciplinary majors such as DTC and minors such as Film Studies, Global Studies, etc.); - Portfolio use for Learning Outcomes assessment (Philosophy, Foreign Languages, English, Communication); - Assessment instrument development; - Review and revision of Foundation courses, Writing in the Major “M” courses, emerging concept of Signature courses; - Departmental advising restructuring (History, Poli Sci, Sociology). - Increase in the number of majors (especially in Communication, Women’s Studies, Philosophy); - Interdisciplinary Tier III course development for General Education; - Theater - emergence of Theater Improvisation groups; - Collaboration with College of Business and Economics to accommodate Foreign Language requirement in International Business major; - Collaboration with College of Business and Economics to accommodate changing program requirements for Business majors and non-majors.

Assessment:

The College has made ongoing assessment an integral part of its teaching, research, and administration. The College has a Strategic Plan which is coordinated with the University Strategic Plan and is reviewed, updated, and revised on an ongoing basis. Assessment takes place at the class, major, department, and college levels. Distance Degree course development, revision and rotation is determined on the basis of assessment data. The methods and instruments employed include the following:

– Assessment data are collected through learning outcomes assessment (by departments), student teaching evaluations (administered each semester for each course), faculty performance review (by senior colleagues, chair, and dean), and alumni surveys.

3 – The College has a permanent representative (Associate Dean) on the University Accountability, Accreditation, and Assessment Advisory Board. – CLA orientation for new faculty (held in early Fall beginning AY 2002), new chairs orientation, and Tenure and Promotion faculty workshops include assessment information. – Information regarding assessment needs and methodology is shared with department chairs and program directors at the bi-weekly meetings of chairs of college departments, meetings of the CLA Leadership Team which take place twice a semester, and electronically through the weekly CLA Announcements and the college list-serves. – College-level surveys. In 1999, the College of Liberal Arts took part in a sample alumni survey administered by the University. In Spring 2004, the College will participate in the student engagement survey (NSSE) across all departments and all majors.

External assessment of the following CLA programs is conducted periodically by professional accreditation bodies: – Teacher Preparation programs (secondary school endorsements) – National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE 2002 review); – Music - National Association of Schools of Music (NASM, 2002 review); – Speech and Hearing Sciences M.A. program (American Speech and Hearing Association).

Individual departmental assessment plans and instruments are described in executive summaries that follow in alphabetical order of units.

Program in American Studies

American Studies uses interdisciplinary approaches to explore the many ways in which scholars analyze the historical development and current nature of American culture and society. The program emphasizes a method that compares and synthesizes insights drawn from such fields as American history, American literature, ethnic and women’s studies, political science, sociology, communications and anthropology, as well as training in the interdisciplinary field of American studies itself. The general objective of the program is to provide students with a more in-depth portrait of American culture than they may get from isolated disciplines, and in so doing foster a more complex, self- reflexive and critical sense of our multicultural past, present and likely future.

Undergraduate Assessment

2A. Expected Learning Outcomes:

 broad, critical knowledge of American cultural history  capacity to write clear, analytical prose  ability to read and assess documentary evidence from a variety of written genres  capacity to compare and integrate knowledge from several disciplinary perspectives

4  ability to think critically about the limits of disciplinary knowledges  developed research skills, including handling of primary and secondary sources, library use and online scholarly search tools  developed sense of engaged, critical citizenship

2B. End of Program Assessment Tools:

For the undergraduate major, achievement of the historical knowledge base is to be measured by reviewing evidence of successful completion of a series of historically based courses. The capstone courses, Am St 470, 471 472, 473, 474 or 475 shall be used to assess the student’s critical thinking and writing skills, capacity to integrate knowledge critically from several disciplines, and research skills. These courses shall continue to entail extensive class discussions, essay exams, and research papers. A grade for this course is to be supplemented by a narrative description of the performance of each major in the course. If any doubt about the student’s achievement of the program goals arises, they shall be requested to submit a portfolio of at least three essays or essay exams written in core courses of the major. Graduating majors and minors shall take part in a formal exit interview process that will assess their achievement of the goals outlined above and solicit input regarding the usefulness of the program in meeting the goals set by the students. All of this information for each student will be compiled and assessed by the Program Director in consultation with the Director’s Advisory Committee and other relevant faculty members. Each year the Director and the Advisory Committee shall use the results of these assessments to review curriculum and program requirements for the major and the minor in American Studies.

Graduate Program Assessment

2A. Expected Learning Outcomes:

 broad, critical knowledge of American cultural history  capacity to write clear, publishable analytic prose  ability to read and assess documentary evidence from a variety of written genres  capacity to compare and integrate knowledge from several disciplinary perspectives  ability to think critically about the limits of disciplinary knowledges  developed research skills, including handling of primary and secondary sources, library use and online scholarly search tools  developed sense of engaged, critical citizenship  professional competency is a discipline and in an interdisciplinary area of specialization  high level of competency as a teacher of undergraduate students

2B. Assessment Tools

The American Studies program offers a written review of every MA and PhD candidate each spring. The written evaluation is read by the student in the presence of the program director, discussed and signed by the director and the student. A portfolio process is used to evaluate student progress toward the PhD preliminary exam. That portfolio includes

5 two publishable papers, developed beyond initial seminar paper form that must have been delivered at a significant professional conference. The portfolio must also include a “position paper’ that locates the student’s body of work in the context of major scholarly issues in the larger field. This portfolio is evaluated by the student’s doctoral committee and revised prior to the oral preliminary exam. The final assessment tool for the MA and the PhD is of course the final thesis defense.

All of our students receive opportunities to teach courses, not just serve as graders. Before entering the classroom, they take part in rigorous TA workshops in their respective teaching units. They are closely mentored, especially during the first year. Advanced PhD students are given increasingly upper division courses to teach during the school year and the summer session. The professional pedagogical development of the student is evaluated carefully each semester via student evaluations, and periodic in class reviews by faculty. The end of year assessment of each graduate student includes discussion of teaching as well as progress in their coursework and scholarly writing.

Department of Anthropology

Anthropology Goals and Objects/Mission

Anthropology is the study of human diversity in the broadest sense. We ask and attempt to address the most basic questions about the nature of culture, the origins of humans, and human variability. Anthropologists study the interactions between our biological heritage and our learned cultural heritages. Anthropologists are important components of projects that deal with landscape development, human impact studies, cultural resource use, crime scene investigations, and internationalization projects. In addition, anthropologists investigate the unwritten human past that accounts for over 99% of all human existence.

Through world-class research and instruction, the Anthropology Department at Washington State University seeks to inform the public, students, and the profession on these aspects of human diversity. Many of our students go on to make careers in one of the sub-disciplines of anthropology (bioanthropology, archaeology, cultural anthropology, or linguistics). However, many of our students who did not later pursue careers in anthropology tell us that their experiences here greatly enriched their perspectives on life and learning in other fields. Our goal is to continue to pursue an understanding of and to foster a holistic sense of the complex human condition in all of its diversity.

The Department of Anthropology offers a BA in Anthropology at the Pullman campus and a BA in Anthropology at the Vancouver campus. In addition, a MA and PhD are offered at the Pullman campus. These graduate degrees are partitioned into three programs, socio-cultural anthropology, evolutionary anthropology, and archaeology.

1. Major Changes since the 1999 accreditation report

6 New Programs/Requirements:

In 2002 the Department of Anthropology added a third track to its graduate program. Previously we offered an MA and PhD in Anthropology with specialties (tracks) in either archaeology or socio-cultural anthropology. We now offer a track in evolutionary anthropology. This track cross-cuts the fields of biological anthropology, archaeology, and socio-cultural anthropology.

For the past year we have been deliberating upon a new department-wide core course program for incoming graduate students. This will go into effect in Fall 2004. The new core program consists of three graduate level theory courses taken from each of the tracks in our graduate program. This new core system was instituted to ensure that all graduate students (regardless of specialty) would gain a uniform background in the three areas of our program. We also instituted the core program to help facilitate assessment of our incoming graduate student population. Each of the three courses is graded by a team of two faculty members. This gives a minimum of six different faculty exposure to classroom performance of our new graduate student population.

New/Modified Courses:

Anthropology 214, “Gender and Culture in America” fulfills the new diversity “D” General Education requirement. Anthropology 260, “Introduction to Physical Anthropology,” increased from 3 to 4 credits with a laboratory requirement. Anthropology 275, “Anthropology Study Abroad.” Anthropology 468, “Sex, Evolution and Human Nature,” an upper level writing course (GER Tier III course).

New Faculty:

Five new hires in Archaeology, one faculty in Evolutionary Anthropology and one in Cultural Anthropology.

2A. Intended Educational Program Outcomes:

B.A. Degree in Anthropology

The Department of Anthropology offers a comprehensive four-field program of study in socio-cultural, biological, and linguistic anthropology and in archaeology to our majors. Though most of our majors have a particular interest either in archaeology or in socio- cultural anthropology, they all emerge from the program with a thorough grounding in the four fields of anthropology. In the course of their progress in the major they are exposed to classic ethnography (in 401), hands-on training in archaeology (in 230), and laboratory investigation in biological anthropology (in 260).

M.A. Degree in Anthropology

7 The M.A. program in socio-cultural anthropology offers appropriate training for those seeking teaching positions in community colleges or four-year colleges with undergraduate programs in anthropology or general social sciences. It also qualifies individuals for non-academic positions where graduate training in anthropology is desirable—for example international development, social service work, high school teaching, and social marketing. M.A. graduates in archaeology are expected to qualify for holding responsible positions in the cultural resource management (CRM) field (either with consulting firms or with public agencies); in museums; or as faculty in community colleges. Graduate students in the evolutionary anthropology track completing an M.A. are primarily preparing themselves for entry into a Ph.D. program.

Ph.D. Degree in Anthropology

The socio-cultural anthropology program and the evolutionary anthropology program are oriented mainly towards producing scholars with a doctorate in anthropology for work in the academic sector. Ph.D. graduates in archaeology are expected to be qualified for faculty positions in colleges or universities; for positions in consulting firms requiring design and supervision of research; or for supervisory positions in federal, state or tribal CRM programs.

2B. Assessment Measures:

A minimum of 33 ANTH credits is required, including two Writing-in-the-Major [M] courses. Students are strongly encouraged to obtain some field experience in one of the anthropological sub-disciplines. The Department offers field schools in archaeology during the summer. We provide our undergraduate students with multiple opportunities to participate in on-going research efforts with faculty and advanced graduate students. Our field school projects, museum research projects, and laboratory projects have engaged our undergraduate students in "hands-on" opportunities to do real on-going research.

The program assessments for the MA degree include: -annual review of students by all track faculty; -completion of all required coursework with a grade of “B” or greater; -completion of a thesis or publishable paper; -successful oral examination.

The program assessments for the PhD degree include: -annual review of students by all track faculty;

8 -completion of all required coursework with a grade of “B” or greater; -successful completion of a two day written preliminary examination; -successful completion of an oral preliminary examination; -completion of a dissertation; -successful defense of a dissertation;

2C. Utilization of Assessment Information:

All majors must take our capstone course (Anthropology 490, Integrated Themes in Anthropology) during their last year in our program. We use this class to evaluate student comprehension of the four subfields of our discipline, their ability to understand human diversity in the broadest sense, and their comprehension of the nature of culture and the origin of human variability from a cultural and biological perspective. This course allows us to measure our effectiveness in training students with our existing curriculum and major requirements.

We are currently working on a plan to use this class to administer a survey instrument for all majors related to their future plans. We would like to collect information on where our majors hope to go after leaving our program and what they feel their experience in our program has given them to help accomplish their future goals. We hope to then gather follow-up information on our majors and compare their expected goals with actual accomplishments. We propose that the University Alumni Association of Development Office help with the tracking of our graduates.

Virtually 100% of our MA students move on towards either their education in a PhD program (here or elsewhere), or take positions in the federal, state or private sectors as archaeologists or anthropologists. Most socio-cultural graduate go on to do PhD work and most archaeology graduate students go on to enter the work force as professional archaeologists. Less than half of the archaeology graduates go on to do PhD work immediately after finishing their MA degrees. We have not graduated a student from our new program in evolutionary anthropology yet.

Our Ph.D. program has approximately a 100% placement rate for our students in either academic or research and service related positions. Our profession is small enough that we are able to monitor the placement and progress of our PhD graduates via membership in professional societies and institutional registrations. We use placement of our graduates to help craft our course offerings and to help structure our individual programs towards specific areas of research and investigation.

3. Professional or Specialized Accreditation

9 The Department of Anthropology does not have a specialized accreditation for any of its degree programs.

Asia Program

1. Changes since the 1999 Accreditation Review.

The Asia Program has been striving to develop an interdisciplinary curriculum that embraces both breadth and depth through which Asian Studies majors will be able to understand the complexity and diversity of Asian cultures and societies. Changes in faculty and course offerings in the past five years have necessitated adjustments to the program=s curriculum. The rigid requirements in the existing five tracks (China, Japan, South Asia, the Middle East, and comprehensive) have made it difficult to incorporate new courses developed by our faculty. Moreover, certain Asian language courses (such as Hindi and Arabic) are no longer available at Washington State University which made it practically impossible for students to pursue the tracks in South Asia and the Middle East. Upon careful review of the entire curriculum, the Asia Program faculty decided in Fall 2003 to create a more flexible, trackless requirements. The new proposed degree program will allow students to choose the extent of depth and breadth as they wish, so long as they fulfill the requirements for language (16 credit hours of an Asian language), geographic distribution, and disciplinary distribution. The new curriculum will allow students to either develop an focus on a particular area of study or to pursue a broad cross-regional and interdisciplinary program of study. The new curriculum also emphasizes the importance of study abroad; it will allow students to use study abroad to satisfy part of the language requirements.

In the last two years, the Asia Program has been able to retain more than ten majors.

2. End of Program Assessment

Degree offered: Bachelor of Arts in Asian Studies.

2A. Intended Educational Program Outcomes

-To offer a comprehensive knowledge of Asia through the interdisciplinary study of history, language, culture, religion, society, economy, and politics.

-To deepen students= appreciation of the complexity and diversity of Asia through in- depth examination of specific aspects of individual regions

2B. Outcomes Assessment

At present, Asia Program administers an exit questionnaire to graduating Asian Studies majors. Asia Program is a multidisciplinary, interdepartmental program. Faculty teaching Asian studies courses are domiciled in participating departments. All Asia-prefix courses

10 are cross-listed, except for Asia 301 (East Meets West), Study Abroad (201and 401), and Independent Study (499). Learning outcomes for these courses are set by home departments; student evaluations are regularly administered by departments who offer the courses.

Once the new degree curriculum structure for the program is approved, the Asia Program faculty will address the need to develop new instruments and methods of assessment for the program objectives stated above and specific learning outcomes.

3. Professional or Specialized Accreditation: not applicable.

Department of Comparative Ethnic Studies (CES)

Please note: The CES Assessment Plan is a work in progress. The plan is expected to be completed by May, 2004 and ready for implementation by Fall, 2004.

1. Major Changes since the 1999 NASC review

Department Name Change

In May 2002, the tenure-track faculty of the (then) Department of Comparative American Cultures (CAC) voted to change the department name to “Comparative Ethnic Studies” (CES) to help fulfill the department and WSU's mission of educating students to live and work in a multicultural world. The new name will assist students in applying to Ethnic Studies graduate programs or careers and help the department gain national and international visibility, becoming affiliated with the National Association for Ethnic Studies (NAES). Despite the name change, the teaching, research, community service and other duties carried out in the department will continue to be interdisciplinary, comparative, and global.

Faculty Turnover since 1998:

The Department has a new chair, who is one of four continuing faculty. Nine faculty were lost and five new faculty hired (one at a senior rank).

Changes in Curriculum for Majors and Minors

A proposed curricular reform for the Department of Comparative Ethnic Studies is currently under review in the university system. This reform represents a reduction in the number of major options offered our students, while maintaining the core interests and identity of CES. The proposed changes reflect: a reduction in our budget, including a reduction in the number of tenure-track faculty; increased efficiency and clarity for student advising; increased flexibility of course selections for students and of course offerings for faculty; the direction of the field of ethnic studies and our department’s name change from Comparative American Cultures to Comparative Ethnic Studies.

11 More specifically, this proposed reform addresses the following current issues and concerns:

In 2000, CES (then CAC) added four major options for students to those previously in place, resulting in a total of six options, with only seven tenure-track faculty. The proposed reform offers only one major option, with courses to be selected from two groupings, or clusters, of courses. The two different clusters of courses represent the foundations and future directions of ethnic studies. The sequences in Cluster I focus on the four ethnic/racial groups that have historically been part of ethnic studies courses in the United States – African Americans, Latinas/os, Asian Americans/Pacific Islanders, and American Indians. The selections in Cluster II represent topic areas across ethnic/racial, sexual orientation, gender, religious, socio-economic status, and national groups.

The four core courses, required of all majors, provide students with the critical foundations of ethnic studies. Please see Appendix I for a copy of the curriculum change document, including schedule of studies and advising sheet.

2A. Intended Educational Outcomes.

At the completion of their baccalaureate degree studies in the Department of Comparative Ethnic Studies, students will have the skills to: 1. Be conversant in the field of Ethnic Studies, understanding and articulating, through critically analytic verbal and written communication skills, its historical development, key concepts, theories and methods, central debates, problems, and possibilities in an increasingly global context. 2. Critique Eurocentrism, understanding prevailing Eurocentric formations on race and ethnicity as they have contributed to social conflict, economic and political inequalities in the United States and internationally. 3. Advocate for social justice for Communities of Color in the Pacific Northwest, especially with respect to tribal nations and recent immigrants, and understand the regional articulations of race, gender, sexuality, class, ability, and the interconnections between corporate farming, immigration, and consumption 4. Critically and responsibly engage in their civic responsibility as global citizens, with an enhanced critical consciousness, understanding processes and consequences of colonization and empire, and of nationalism on daily lives in the U.S, and understanding perspectives connecting U.S. racialized groups to other groups across the globe. 5. Locate themselves in a complex, unequal, and often contradictory world, being reflective, and understanding and articulating their privileges and the implications of their race/ethnicity and socio-economic status. 6. Think critically about the social constructions of race over time, having a broad understanding about the relationship between race and institutional structures, and individual and collective identities, ideologies, and images, understanding difference between individual and institutional/structural racism, and issues of power, appropriation, essentialism.

12 7. Appreciate the histories, significance, and possibilities of marginalized and racialized people, understanding the concept of subjective realities and construals, especially the distinction between traditional, mainstream historical narratives, and narratives from the perspectives of marginalized, racialized groups; demonstrate knowledge of major developments in ethnic formations and relations as they shape U.S. culture. 8. Be literate about popular culture, demonstrating ability to decode racial meanings of media texts; organizing, Examining films, television, music, sports and other forms of media for the deployment of race; 9. Engage the world around them critically, defining and challenging normative views and values, especially with respect to Whiteness, Maleness, and heterosexuality as normative systems. 10. Effect and understand the processes of resistance and social change, conceptualizing and articulating the history and processes of resistance against systems of oppression, challenging the paradigmatic assumptions of progress, understanding the connection between social change and struggle 11. Apply curricular knowledge, serving in internships, demonstrating preparation for careers and/or educational pursuits in graduate and professional schools.

2B. Assessment of Outcomes

CES is in the process of structuring assessments for each of the outcomes named below. Assessment plans will be in place by May 1, 2004. Plans will be implemented in Fall, 2004, with the first outcomes available in Spring, 2005. A. Demand for program B. Greater external recognition C. Writing portfolio D. Diversity of Students and Faculty E. End of Program assessment 1. Student Portfolio 2. Internship 3. Exit Interview 4. Alumni Interview 5. Alumni survey

2C. Utilization of Assessment Information

The survey tools will be developed by May, 2004. In addition, a significant alumni research project will begin in spring 2004; its intent will be to track the employment, graduate education, and life experience of many of the program’s alumni. Outcome data will be utilized to improve overall program and specific course goals. Assessment outcomes will inform program goals by Spring, 2005, and assessment tools and processes will be amended as indicated necessary by assessment outcomes, by Fall, 2005.

Edward R. Murrow School of Communication

13 1: Major Changes since 1999:

1A. New Programs: Ph.D. Program in Communication with a major emphasis on intercultural communication (2002). 1B. New Facilities: Completion of a building addition (occupancy in January 2004) which includes teaching computer labs, research labs, a digital television news studio and a small auditorium/classroom. This new facility will improve the School’s capability to educate students in the new communication and computer technologies. Faculty capabilities for innovative research that can better serve the School’s professional and academic constituents also will be significantly improved. 1C. Raised standards for acceptance into the major. Because of increased demand and considering relatively stagnant resources, the School has raised certification standards for the communication major to maintain enrollments at about 650 majors. Approximately 60 % of first time applicants (beginning juniors) are accepted out of a pool of approximately 750 pre-majors each year. The average grade point average of students accepted into the major is 3.0. Majors are admitted according to a GPA ranking system. Applicants who do not get accepted on the basis of GPA may appeal on the basis of professional and life experiences and other abilities. 1D. Diversity efforts. Increased efforts to diversify the faculty and student population. The School conducts a summer workshop for Native American high school students. Faculty have visited high schools which are predominantly minority to recruit students. The School has one of the most diverse faculties (about 33% minorities) and student bodies (about 15 percent minorities) in the university. 1E. Special Achievements. Some of the School’s graduate research programs have been cited in the top 11% nationally (telecommunications research, interpersonal/communication apprehension, intercultural communication.) The School’s broadcasting program (television news) maintains its ranking as the fourth best in the nation. 1F. Terminated the photography program because it was expensive and outdated (was still using chemicals.) 1G. Suspended the M.A. program in the Tri-Cities branch campus because one faculty member (only one funded) could not handle the load.

The School expects that graduates will: 1. Master professional competencies in their majors (advertising, broadcasting, communication studies, journalism, public relations) to be effective practitioners and leaders in their professions; 2. Develop an understanding of responsibility and ethics to be ethical practitioners and leaders in their professions; 3. Develop an understanding and appreciation of other cultures to function effectively as citizens and professionals in a multicultural society; 4. Think critically and analytically; 5. Communicate effectively in writing and orally;

14 6. Develop a sense of good citizenship to participate actively in civic and political affairs of their communities.

2B. Assessment of intended outcomes

Intended outcomes are assessed by the following :

1. Capstone courses All students are required to complete capstone courses in their majors. In these senior seminars students demonstrate in papers, tests and class discussions that they have mastered the competencies required in the outcomes. Measures of success are successful completion of the course with a grade of C or better and feedback from the instructors.

2. Internships Approximately two-thirds of communication majors enroll in internships for professional experience outside the classroom, usually off campus, and during their senior year. Successful completion requires satisfactory evaluations from a faculty director and an intern site (a professional) supervisor. These evaluations assess the student’s competencies required in the outcomes above.

3. Class Evaluations All classes in the Murrow School of Communication are evaluated at the end of the regular semester and summer terms. Students are asked to evaluate the value of the course and the effectiveness of the instructor using numeric scales and open ended questions. Results are returned to the instructor and the director. They are used in merit ratings of the faculty (in addition to other measures of effective teaching.)

4. Surveys of graduating seniors Graduating seniors are asked to complete a questionnaire asking them about job placement, to evaluate the value of their education in the School, and for suggestions on how academic programs can be improved.

Information from capstone courses, internships, class evaluations and surveys of graduating seniors is studied by the director and shared with all faculty except for class evaluations which are discussed only with the instructor. Action items are developed by the director in consultation with the faculty, and referred to appropriate faculty committees (e.g., curriculum committee) for possible implementation.

3. Profesional or Specialized Accreditation. No professional accreditation.

Department of English

15 1. Major Changes since 1999:

Curricular changes: Undergraduate Program in English. In spring 2001 changes were made in the English Teaching Option; In spring 2002 the Creative Writing Option was im[plemented.

New Degree hosted: The Department now hosts and administers a collaborative B.A. degree program in Digital Technology and Culture; the program, previously constituted as a General Studies option in Electronic Media and Culture (2000-2003), originated at WSUV, is now growing at Pullman, and will be implemented at WSU-TC effective Fall 2004.

Program Demand: After a decline in the number of majors, beginning in the academic year 2002-2003, the department has seen a modest growth in enrollments on the Pullman campus. As of October 2002, there were 200 active, on-campus first majors and an additional 19 second major or second degree candidates, as well as approximately 9 Electronic Media and Culture General Studies majors.

The B.A. in English degree offers several options in the major listed below in catalog order:

A. The General option [I]. B. The Graduate Study Preparation option [II]. C. The English/Teaching option [III]. D. The English/Prelaw option [IV]. E. The English/Business option [V]. F. The Creative Writing option [VI].

Educational Outcomes for Undergraduate Options I-V

The major's core requirements are based on the expectation that students will graduate with high-level skills in writing, critical reading, and critical thinking; with knowledge of a range of English and American literature by diverse voices in different genres and time periods; with the ability to apply various critical and theoretical approaches to understanding written discourse; with experience in studying literature within historical and cultural contexts; with knowledge of debates over canon construction and of contributions by writers of color; and with experience in examining how such factors as culture, class, gender, race, and sexual orientation shape literary production and critical reception. These common outcomes are the focus of department’s current assessment system, as summarized in section III below. [NOTE: These outcomes were redefined for the new Creative Writing option; their formulation is in the process of revision as the department’s creative writing faculty works with its first full cohort of majors and designs assessment measures relevant to their training.]

16 As majors, students in Options I-V are also expected to develop a particular area of intellectual interest in their undergraduate studies in English. In consultation with their advisors, students select concentrations of four or more related courses in such areas as English literature, American literature, literature and criticism, literature and gender identity, language and linguistics, teaching, and professional or creative writing and rhetoric. The area of concentration is completed with a capstone course (a small-group senior seminar or, with advisor approval, an individual senior project or internship). At present, outcomes of specific options are assessed only on the “Exit Questionnaire” described below.

All options in the major are evaluated continually in an end-of-program assessment process which provides the student with feedback early in the major based on a checklist evaluation of his or her strengths and weaknesses in the skills and knowledges taught in Engl 302 Writing about Literature [M, W]. Students are required to deposit in their files a sample of their writing from Engl 302 taken at the beginning of the studies, a sample of their writing from an upper-division literature course taken at the end of their program, as well as an “Exit Questionnaire” in which they assess both their own skills as well as the program as a whole, [Creative Writing students provide writing samples from Engl 251 Introduction to Creative Writing and from a 400-level creative-writing workshop respectively.] These various elements are assembled into confidential, end-of-program assessment portfolios that the department uses to evaluate the effectiveness of its requirements.

Assessment of New Curriculum by Graduating Seniors

Since the implementation of the new requirements, the department has asked each graduating major on the Pullman campus to complete a comprehensive “Exit Questionnaire.” In AY 2001-2002, selected “Exit Questionnaire” responses were used by an ad hoc chair’s committee that re-examined both undergraduate and graduate program design—without recommending significant changes. In the fall of 2002, all “Exit Questionnaire” data received to date, as well as data from a synchronic survey of faculty who were teaching and students who were enrolled in graduate and undergraduate courses that fall, were systematically compiled for the “Self Study” required for the WSU Program Review. In addition, the Undergraduate Studies Committee had a large sample of “Undergraduate Assessment Portfolios” reviewed in the spring of 2003, the reported analysis of which will be reviewed in AY 2003-04.

Graduate Programs: The English Department at Washington State University offers graduate programs leading to the degrees of Master of Arts (M.A.) and Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.). Students in both the M.A. and Ph.D. programs may elect to concentrate either on literary study (British, American, and post-colonial Anglophone literatures) or on rhetoric and composition. The English Department has also, in the recent past, offered the degree of

17 Master of Arts in English Teaching (M.A.E.T.), and it is currently planning a reconfiguration of this degree in an exclusively online format. Finally, the Department participates in WSU’s interdisciplinary American Studies program, which offers opportunities for M.A. and Ph.D. students to take specialized seminars in American Studies.

Outcomes Assessment

In the interests of outcome assessment, the English Department Graduate Program conducts an annual self-study. Every second semester graduate students prepare a yearly report which functions both as an account of individual progress and as an evaluation of the department’s graduate program, faculty, and curriculum. The annual reports are collected by the Director of Graduate Studies and distributed to all members of the Graduate Studies Committee, which meets bi-weekly throughout the year. Once the reports have been read and discussed by the Graduate Studies Committee, their suggestions are taken into account as potential recommendations for revisions to the graduate program. In this way the program insures that its expected outcomes are routinely assessed and that assessment information is routinely utilized for ongoing departmental and programmatic change.

English Department Graduate Survey Responses, Fall 2002

In November 2002, a ten-question survey was distributed to graduate students at all levels in the English Department. Eleven MA students and 17 PhD candidates completed and returned the survey, encompassing both the literature and composition/rhetoric tracks. As the respective responses of these two levels of students differed significantly at times, the answers are broken down below based on the program in which the students are enrolled.

2C. Utilization of Assessment Information for Improving Outcomes.

Faculty advisors have the responsibility of reviewing with each student in the major the assessment of that student’s strengths and weakness as recorded on the “Engl 302 Checklist”. The Undergraduate Studies Committee has the responsibility of sampling the materials in the “End-of-Program Assessment Portfolio” and has regularly done so since spring 2001 with the data gathered in the “Exit Questionnaire.” On the basis of those data, the system of assigning advisors and scheduling advisor appointments was revised in fall 2001 and the committee recently recommended funding a staff position to do entry-level advising with all new majors (departmental budgets have yet to permit the creation of such a position). In the spring and fall of 2003, the 2002 self-study document has been one foundation for departmental discussions of its “Five-Year” strategic plan. The results of this process, scheduled for initial completion in December 2003, suggest that the faculty will be making a range of changes in the undergraduate programs to demonstrate greater programmatic coherence and effectiveness.

18 Department of Fine Arts Degrees offered: Bachelor of Arts in Fine Arts (BAFA) Bachelor of Fine Arts (BFA) Masters of Fine Arts (MFA)

2A. Intended Educational program Outcomes:

BAFA By the end of the BAFA program of study, a student should: - have a broad understanding of the visual arts within a liberal arts degree with a clear understanding of the terms: subject matter, form and content; - have an understanding of basic studio production; - be able to articulate in visual form a range of approaches, from a representational point of view to ideas that are more conceptual in focus; - have a broad understanding of art history from a culturally diverse global perspective that includes contemporary trends and theory; - have the ability to make critical judgments about contemporary art and culture; - have an acceptable command of verbal and written expression in addition to visual expression.

BFA By the end of the BFA program of study, a student should: - have a working knowledge of the processes and media that produce works of visual art, including a clear understanding of the terms: subject matter, form and content; - have specialized technical, conceptual and imaginative expertise in a given field; - be able to articulate in visual form a range of approaches, from a representational point of view to ideas that are more conceptual in focus; - have a broad understanding of art history from a culturally diverse global perspective that includes contemporary trends and theory; - have the ability to make critical judgments about contemporary art and culture; - have an acceptable command of verbal and written expression in addition to visual expression.

MFA By the end of the MFA program of study, a student should have all of the BFA outcomes listed for the BFA program, but with - a greater sophistication and refinement in technique, especially in the major field of concentration; - a more thorough grounding in art history, theory, and criticism; - preparation adequate to move into a professional career as artist, teacher, etc.

2B. Assessment of Expected Outcomes:

19 BFA and BAFA The above outcomes are learned through studio practice in the areas of foundation, drawing, painting, sculpture, ceramics, printmaking, photography, and electronic/digital imaging. As a general liberal arts degree, the BAFA students do not have as rigorous an assessment process throughout their student career as do the BFA students (see below). Assessment generally in both degrees is tracked through the broad range of classes students take and their successful completion of these. In these classes, evidence of learning is gauged through critiques, written materials, and the quality of the artwork completed.

Students understanding of art is further supported by a substantial grounding in art history. The ability to express themselves verbally and in writing also occurs through the required art history courses, which include two ‘writing in the major’ classes. Students in both the BAFA and BFA programs must take 18 credits of art history, essentially, an art history minor. Evidence of learning is evaluated in art history exams, papers, and presentations.

BFA Assessment in the BFA program begins with the certification process itself. This requires students to prepare and present a portfolio of their work for the faculty to review. In a sense, the BFA certification process also is a way to assess the BAFA program, since the successful candidates are usually already certified as BAFA students. On average, 60% of those who apply for the BFA program are accepted.

BFA students have a thorough end of program assessment that includes: 1) a final gallery exhibition in the undergraduate studio (Gallery 3) under the direction of the undergraduate coordinator 2) a written statement describing the content of the exhibition and issues involved in their work 3) a final critique during the exhibition with a committee of two faculty members 4) submission of a portfolio (slides, cd, or disc) that documents the exhibit 5) completion of a ‘capstone’ professional methods seminar (FA 498)

Additional forms of assessment for undergraduates in both programs include reviews held in the fall semester for awards of studio space in the undergraduate studio area and in spring for several scholarships for undergraduates.

In addition, student evaluations are done for every undergraduate class taught. The chair and class instructor review these evaluations to stimulate improvement in the teaching environment.

The Department of Fine Arts is currently developing additional mechanisms for end of program assessment that we will begin implementing this year. These include: 1) an end of program survey to be given to graduating seniors in the ‘writing in the major’ courses to assess various aspects of their learning experience in the department

20 2) surveys to be sent to graduates one year and five years after graduation to track employment and artistic endeavor at these points after graduation 3) exit interviews with graduating BFA students as part of their final critique.

MFA MFA students are assessed regularly throughout their two-year program. The graduate program in fine arts is based on a tutorial system in which students sign up for meetings with several faculty members and schedule one-on-one studio visits. They also take three seminars in art history, theory, and professional practices.

The faculty reviews the MFA students at the end of their first semester. At the end of the first year, the students mount an exhibition of work completed, prepare a written statement, and meet with a faculty committee that assesses their progress to that point.

The MFA experience culminates with a group exhibition in the university’s Museum of Art. Students must write a thesis, and meet during the exhibit with their graduate faculty committee for a final critique/defense.

A form of post-graduate assessment occurs with the mounting of a ‘one-year later’ exhibit held each year in Gallery 2, where last year’s MFA graduates are invited to send current work. The undergraduates held their own ‘one-year later’ exhibit of the recent BFA graduates last year; they plan to make it an annual event as well.

The Department is planning a one and five-year later survey for MFA graduates similar to the one for undergraduates.

Our graduates are very good about informing the department when they find jobs. This information suggests that about 80% of our MFA graduates find jobs in the arts within 3- 5 years. We plan to begin this year to develop databases to better track this type of information for both BFA and MFA graduates.

The Department of Fine Arts faculty is committed to providing the best educational experience possible for our students. We take seriously the class evaluations done each semester. Feedback from these is regularly incorporated into course curricula.

We have held departmental retreats four of the last five years, with the next one planned for January 2004. One of the top priorities at these retreats is the quality of, and ways to improve, both the undergraduate and graduate programs. At one of these, for example, the faculty discussed the need to strengthen the foundation skills of our students. The result was a change in curriculum where 2-dimensional art was separated from 3- dimensional with the creation of a class for each, rather than one class.

The faculty fully intends the implementation of exit and post-graduate surveys to begin this year so that the information from them can begin to be utilized as a tool for future

21 ways to improve student outcomes. Better tracking of our graduates is an important goal for the Department. We have begun to work with the Alumni Relations office, who recently provided us with updated computerized lists of FA graduates. These surveys will help us to determine that our graduates have the knowledge and skills required to practice the profession, and to identify any possible weaknesses so that we can propose and implement any needed program revisions.

Department of Foreign Languages and Cultures

The Department of Foreign Languages and Cultures (DFLC) resides in the newly remodeled Thompson Hall. In the spirit of the many changes we have made in the last few years, our 1. Major Changes since the 1999 accreditation report. New Name The Department has changed its name, from “Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures” to “Department of Foreign Languages and Cultures”. We shall continue to address literary concerns, but we are also very interested in cultural developments in general and film studies in particular.

New or remodeled facilities

The remodeling of Thompson Hall, completed in December 1999, provided the much- needed new computing and multi-media teaching equipment that offer significant improvements in the teaching facility infrastructure. The Language Learning Resource Center has two large and well-equipped lab facilities with computers and audio/video multi-media equipment plus a much faster 100-base computing network to facilitate the language teaching/learning process.

New faculty

The department has increased the number of foreign languages it offers, replaced a professor in German and strengthened its offering in Spanish, the only language in which we offer a Master’s Degree. New hires include tenure-track assistant professors of Chinese, German, Spanish (two); and instructors in the Classics (Latin), French, Japanese, Italian, and Spanish (a full time instructor and a .25).

Major curricular revisions

From the year 2001 to the present date, the department engaged in major curricular revision that affected all our offerings in very significant ways. All in all, 253 major and minor curricular changes have been devised, submitted, and the vast majority was approved. Our new curriculum is the same for all languages. Those that do not offer baccalaureates have identical courses for the first two years of FL learning.

22 Several considerations prompted us to make these changes, and one of them related directly to program assessment. At sectional as well as entire-faculty meetings, we came to the realization that we had to adjust our programs to the needs of students and the realities of the marketplace. What we were hearing from our students was that the literature courses we were offering were the least valuable to them, because their own interests, as well as the interest of prospective employers, was in creating a foreign language specialist who was as strong as possible in the language skills (Comprehension, Speaking, Reading and Writing), in addition to having the best understanding possible of cultural matters.

Succinctly stated, our revisions brought about the following results:

 A commitment to preserve a very strong core of skill language courses. This language core is common to all languages taught in the department, whether a BA is offered in the language or not.  The elimination of some of the requirements in traditional literature courses.  The strengthening of our cultural offerings and the creation of new foreign language film courses, in two categories: courses taught in English and courses taught in the original languages.

The chart below is based on information 2000-2003 and shows student credit hours (SCH) and majors (including graduate students). It includes a comparison of our faculty FTE levels and enrollment stats for a base period of 1998 (pre-cuts) to our current status in 2003 (post-cuts). Please note that our SCH in 1998 were 4302 and we had an FTE of 18; in 2003, the SCH was 4038, but with an FTE of only 13. The data clearly show that we are indeed “doing more with less” and have successfully revamped our curriculum to match student needs/demand with the available faculty resources.

% % % Avg %Incr in 2004 to 1998 2000 2001 Incr 2002 Incr 2003 Incr Incr Restore 1998 Level

SCH 4302 3330 3535 6% 3810 8% 4038 6% 6.7% 6.50% Majs 85 59 62 5% 77 24% 82 6% 11.7% 3.60%

FTE 18 16 15 14 13

Administrative Systems/Staff Review and Reorganization Project

During the last 5 years, many duties and responsibilities that were in the past assigned to personnel in the offices of Purchasing, Travel, Controller, Payroll, Employment, and Registrar have been handed down to the staff in departments. In addition, the staff at WSU has been expected to learn and apply new technology and software, new skills demanded by the nature of the work itself, and new systems that have been developed and implemented by WSU’s Central Administration Offices (Central). There has been no increase in the FTE or promotion in job classification for departmental staff to match the increased workload and level of complexity of the work. We have decided to evaluate, plan, and take action now to correct current discrepancies and prepare to handle the

23 future more effectively. To this end, we will be spending the 2003-2004 academic year conducting an audit, review, and assessment of departmental administrative systems and staffing. The resulting system should allow the department the flexibility it needs to accomplish continuous alignment between departmental priorities, strategic plans, and budget plans and the performance and outcomes of support staff.

Other achievements

Department faculty include the Executive Director of the Rocky Mountain Modern Language Association; the Secretariat and the Editorial and Executive Staff of the RMMLA also reside at WSU, and we are responsible for the publication of the Association’s journal, The Rocky Mountain Review of Language and Literature.

In Spring 2003, we held our first symposium for high school teachers on Foreign Languages and Bilingual Education., co-sponsored by the College of Education, the College of Liberal Arts, and the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction of the State of Washington.

We offer Baccalaureates in French, German, and Spanish, and Minors in Chinese, French, German, Spanish, Russian, and a Film Studies Minor. Other Minors are offered in French, German, Latin American and Russian Area Studies. We also offer courses in Latin, Italian, and Japanese. We are in the process of implementing two-year programs in Japanese and Italian. These two languages do not offer a Minor at this point. A Master’s degree is offered in Spanish.

The outcomes for all majors or minors are aligned with the ACTFL standards regarding communication and culture.

2B. Assessment of Expected Outcomes

We are in the process of adopting a revised evaluation system of our graduating seniors. The Department would like to obtain information from three types of students: a) majors in FL, b) prospective teachers of FL, and c) FL minors, and students who have been enrolled in programs that do not offer a minor at this point.

The assessments process will involve three components: (1) an End-of-Program Writing Portfolio, (2) an evaluation of the student’s ability to communicate through student’s performance in the courses taken, and (3) a Student Questionnaire.

For general information a about the ACTFL(The American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages) see http://www.actfl.org/public/articles/details.cfm?id=33.

The ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines for speaking and writing can be found at the following link, under publications:

24 http://www.actfl.org/index.cfm?weburl=/public/articles/index.cfm?cat=28

Written Evaluation

Teaching Majors:  All of the above plus one exam and one project each from ForL 440 and For L 441.  Evaluation of prospective teachers will also use as reference the World Languages Endorsement Program matrix, prepared by the Department faculty and submitted to the state Office of Superintendant of Public Instruction.

Minors and students who have completed a program not offering a minor:  Two written examples, either from a culture/film/literature course (may be in English) and one from a language course such as 306, 307, or 308. Non-Teaching Majors:  One example from a language course (i.e., 306, 307, 308, 309, 407, 408).

 One example from a 300-level culture, film or literature course (310, 311, 320, 321, 350, 351, 360, 361). In some cases, we here we will consider submissions from FL courses taught in English at the 100-level.  One example from a 400 level literature course (450, 451, 452).

All students (Majors or Minors) may use one writing sample from an accredited study abroad program, but must submit it for review and approval from one of the WSU language instructors, and submit it with the same form as the other samples.

Certificates, if and when we have them at the undergraduate level, could use a national/international language proficiency exam certification at a specific level as the end-of-program assessment tool.

Evaluation of oral proficiency

Rather than submitting the students to a very stressful oral interview, each student’s oral proficiency will be discussed and rated by the different instructors who have had the student in one or more of their courses at the sectional meetings (see below). In those languages for which there is only one instructor, this instructor will be responsible for rating each of the students.

Exit Questionnaire for Graduating Majors, Minors, and two-year program students:

For assessment purposes, the Department has been organized according to languages that offer the B.A. and those that do not. Each of the languages that offer the B.A. (French, German, Spanish) constitutes a separate section, and the languages that do not at this point offer the B.A. (Chinese, Italian, Japanese, Latin, Russian) constitute one section.

25 A rating form will be drafted and each section will first rate each of the students belonging to that section (majors, minors, two-year-program students). The rating will be holistic (Superior, Above Average, Average, Below Average) and it will correspond to the expected outcomes mentioned above, so each student will receive a rating according to the Communication and the Culture standards. Faculty of the language section will meet to assess the strength of each language program. Each section will give due consideration to the student questionnaires, and every effort should be made to “connect the dots”. For programmatic adjustments or changes, the section will report their findings and recommendation to the Department’s Advisory Committee, which in turn will report to the Chair. Final decision affecting entire programs will be reached by consensus at a faculty meeting called by the Chair. We intend to put this plan into effect in the spring of 2004.

Master’s Degree in Spanish:

The MA program underwent a thorough curriculum reorganization, with the creation of several new courses, particularly in the area of Foreign Language Pedagogy. We added a thesis option, a second-foreign language option, and increased the credit requirements. We are proud of our record with our MA program. We have been particularly successful in:

1. Attracting students from all over the United States, and several foreign countries. 2. Supplementing our assigned number of Teaching Assistant positions (8) through other sources (Graduate School, McNair Scholars Program, Honors College) to increase the number to an average of 12. We feel, however that the College of Liberal Arts should fund at least 10 positions. 3. Organizing and funding through scholarships a graduate exchange program with the prestigious Universidad de las Américas, in Puebla, Mexico. 4. Providing partial scholarship support for our students to attend academic conferences and become familiarized with this aspect of our scholarly endeavors. 5. Providing partial scholarship support for students’ applications to PhD programs. Related to this, we have been successful in placing students in competitive doctoral programs such as UC at Berkeley, U of Massachusetts at Amherst, Arizona State University, Johns Hopkins, Yale, and Stanford. 6. Helping those that choose not to pursue a doctoral degree obtain a satisfying job in such diverse areas as K-14 education, social services, business, and scholarly presses.

Graduate students are evaluated through their written and oral exams, and there is a mid- way check-point in which faculty are asked to report on the graduate students’ performance, and a report is sent to them and filed for future reference. Those students working as Teaching Assistants receive special training, and constant supervision during their four semesters working as instructors in the program.

26 Given the small number of students involved, the faculty has never had a problem in discerning their attitudes and opinions about the M.A. program. For a full description of the Spanish M.A. Program, please see: http://www.forlang.wsu.edu/ .

General Studies (Liberal Arts programs)

The Liberal Arts General Studies Program is housed in the College of Liberal Arts and offers programs in Pullman, Tri-Cities, Vancouver, and the Distance Degree Programs (DDP). General Studies is named a “program” rather than a “department.” There are three degrees/majors and one certificate offered and only two courses listed – GENST 400 and LIB A 497. Students assemble curricula for their degrees (through engagement with advisors some of whom are faculty and some of whom are professional advisors) by combining courses offered in departments across the College of Liberal Arts and, in some cases, outside the College.

The report herein set forth is the result of work on the Pullman program since January 2003, and of coordination of the Pullman program with the General Studies programs at Tri-Cities, Vancouver, and DDP. This coordinated work advances program assessment for General Studies well beyond the 1999 Self Study.

Degrees, Options, and Certificate: Bachelor of Arts in Humanities: options in General Humanities, Religious Studies, Linguistics, International Area Studies, Classical Studies; Bachelor of Arts in Social Sciences: option in General Social Sciences; Bachelor of Liberal Arts; Certificate in American Indian Studies.

1.Major Changes since the 1999 Review

Programs Added/Deleted: the BA in Humanities added to Distance Degree Programs (DDP); Certificate in American Indian Studies added in Pullman; Electronic Media and Culture (formerly an option BA in Humanities) granted separate degree status effective fall 2003 and transferred to the English Department as the BA in Digital Technology and Culture (offered in Pullman, Tri-Cities, and Vancouver).

New Faculty/Staff: Director of Liberal Arts General Studies, located at Pullman and coordinating all sites; full-time Program Coordinator and 0.5 time advisor at Pullman, Liberal Arts campus Directors at Vancouver (new hire) and Tri-Cities. New Areas of Activity: significant syllabus change for GENST 400 (available on request). Central to the syllabus changes are 1) a clarification of the writing assignments for this 1-credit senior-level course, and 2) statement of specific learning goals for the course.

27 Relocation and Remodeled Facilities: Pullman Liberal Arts General Studies now housed in Smith Gym until January 2005.

Greater External Recognition: Beginning in 2003, the program initiated a shift to describing the program as a “degree of choice – the student’s choice.” The program’s new web site and brochure highlight the role of student engagement in the program.

Major Curricular Revisions: In addition to the syllabus changes in GENST 400, the program is exploring use of LIB A 497 as an avenue for service learning and internship experiences.

Alignment with WSU Strategic Priorities: Curricular revisions listed above relate directly to university Strategic Goals under the main goal of “best undergraduate experience in a research university” and to development of “trust and respect” for diverse approaches to education and community effort.

Demand for Program: Between fall 2002 and fall 2003, total enrollment in General Studies degrees increased from 1125 to 1305 (actual enrollment fall 2003); the largest increase was in the Distance Degree Programs.

2A. Intended Leaning Outcomes

Program Learning Goals: The Liberal Arts General Studies Program subscribes to the learning goals of the General Education Program and, at the program level, has partially defined educational outcomes for its degree and certificate students. Refinement of these goals and assessment processes is ongoing. Learning Goals for each degree program and certificate below are laid out in a set of charts (available on request).

Programs Offered (Locations) (P = Pullman, TC = Tri-Cities, V = Vancouver, DDP = Distance Degree)

Bachelor of Arts in Humanities: General Humanities (P, TC, V, DDP) Religious Studies (P) Linguistics (P) International Area Studies (P) Classical Studies (P)

Bachelor of Arts in Social Sciences: General Social Sciences (P, TC, V, DDP)

Bachelor of Liberal Arts (P)

Certificate in American Indian Studies (P)

28 2B. Assessment of Learning Outcomes

Preamble: Implementation of Assessment Steps

The General Education Program has assessment steps for the Writing Program and Learning Goals for General Education. These apply to all General Studies degrees; data are gathered and reviewed for all undergraduate students.

Individual courses offered in departments selected by General Studies students no doubt make use of assessment processes in departments offering the courses. Student selections are so broadly distributed that no specific learning goals come from these courses in relation to the General Studies degrees.

The 1999 NASC Report College of Liberal Arts section cited a plan in General Studies to create a “professional portfolio of writing” as an assessment tool. This plan is the basis for the GENST 400 course. The Assessment Steps below have been formalized in preparation for the NASC Five-year Interim Review. Additional goals and assessment processes will be developed beginning in Spring 2004.

The intent is to begin gathering data during AY 2003-2004. Annual data gathering on grade point averages, writing portfolio outcomes, and graduation rates of students began Fall 2003. Survey tools for enrolled students will be developed during the 2004-2005 period. A significant alumni research project will begin in spring 2004; its intent will be to track the employment, graduate education, and life experience of many of the program’s alumni. As a result of these efforts, a more integrated cycle of assessment and program improvement should be in evidence by the regular 10-year NASC review.

Proposed Sequence of Formal Assessment Steps

ENTRY DATA Gather the following data: Freshman and other Native (non-transfer) students selecting General Studies after the freshman year: HS GPA, SAT test scores, English Placement and Math Placement results; Transfer students: transfer GPA, English and Math placements if taken at WSU.

MID-STAGE DATA: Gather the following data: All students in program: GPA at 60-to-89 credits, GPA at 90-to-120 credits, results of Writing Portfolio (including required registration in GENED 302 for example), survey of student experience (questions on reasons for selection of program, advising, course selections and area combinations, perceptions of program quality and experience, recommendations for improvement); Survey of Advisor experiences: questions to be developed.

END OF PROGRAM DATA: Gather the following data:

29 All students in program: graduation GPA cumulative and major, total credits completed for degree, selection of areas and concentrations, number of withdrawals used, number of courses repeated, results from enrollment in GENST 400 (analysis of Senior Experience papers for writing quality and for content in relation to synthesis of studies in relation to community and planned vocation), exit survey of student experiences (similar questions to mid-stage survey plus sense of fulfillment of expectations); Survey of Advisor experiences: questions to be developed. ALUMNI DATA: Gather the following data: All graduates of program for whom viable addresses are available: survey of alumni experiences (some questions similar to mid-stage and senior surveys, plus employment and/or graduate school placement, sense of preparedness from program, sense of connection between program and alumni experiences in community and vocation).

EMPLOYER DATA: Gather the following data: Once identified by alumni, contact employers; query: alumni preparedness in general, preparedness in relation to a General Studies type of degree, comparisons to traditional single-area majors, suggestions for improvement.

All degrees in Liberal Arts General Studies require completion of the General Education Requirement (GER) plus the additional graduation requirements of the colleges of Liberal Arts and Sciences (CLA, CoS). All degrees in Liberal Arts General Studies consist of three main components: a) the GER plus CLA/CoS requirements, b) the option requirements of 39 or 40 credits respective to the option, and c) free electives.

Bachelor of Arts in Humanities OR Social Sciences (P, TC, V, DDP) Learning Goal Where/How Assessed Results and Changes Made Since 1999 Ability to devise an Advising, surveys, GenSt Upgraded advising staff, approved, coherent program 400 use of surveys, GenSt 400 of study which fulfills an changes, General Studies academic or career goal Program coordination (catalog, all sites) across all venues – Pullman, Vancouver, Tri- Cities, DDP Demonstrate analysis, GER, various courses, Use of surveys, GenSt 400 synthesis, and surveys, GenSt 400, [M] changes communication skills courses (Vancouver web site) Demonstrate skills in GER, Writing Portfolio, Use of surveys, GenSt 400 communication, writing, General Studies majors, changes problem solving, and critical GenSt 400, [M] courses thinking with a focus on the humanities (DDP web site) Demonstrate preparation for Surveys of alumni and Use of surveys, GenSt 400 careers, including a wide employers, GenSt 400 changes, consideration of

30 variety based on breadth of broadening this list of alumni careers careers Consider adding learning goal in community involvement

A few specific Learning Goals apply to tracks within the Humanities degree, to the Bachelor of Liberal Arts degree (has a specific senior project which may be research oriented) and the Certificate in American Indian Studies.

- Review the numeric data and written commentary annually; - Evaluate campuses and DDP separately since constituencies differ; draw some comparisons if useful and as commonalities of program across venues dictate; - Examine program components (GER, General Studies major, free electives) for revision in relation to findings; - Propose and implement program revisions.

3. Professional or Specialized Accreditation

Not Applicable.

Department of History

Undergraduate Degree Program

1. Major Changes:

Undergraduate Advising

Since the 1999 Accreditation Review the department modified the practice of undergraduate advising. Our new system is based on two assumptions: 1) that students want knowledgeable advisors and 2) that faculty who do not want to advise, but are forced to do it, will not do a particularly good job. Therefore, faculty who want to advise are encouraged to do so. Faculty who do not want to advise must perform some other service to the department in consultation with the chair. The core of faculty advisers (all tenured or tenure-track) are supplemented by advisors drawn from our non-tenure-track faculty. These advisers are paid a small stipend for this work by the department.

In addition, the department has created a director of undergraduate education. This person serves as a mentor to the department’s advisers and schedules periodic meetings of advisers to disseminate information and deal with problems that have appeared.

2A. Intended Learning Outcomes.

31 The Department of History's Undergraduate Degree Program is designed to produce several outcomes. We expect students who complete the requirements for an undergraduate major in History: 1) to express sophisticated and abstract concepts clearly in writing; 2) to be familiar with the nature of historical argument and methodologies; 3) to frame research topics and do research at an appropriate undergraduate level; 4) to have a mastery of the broad outlines of historical developments, themes, issues, and patterns; 5) to develop critical thinking skills that will allow and encourage them to become life-long learners.

Instructors in the Department of History assess these intended outcomes in two principal ways. First, we do so through a combination of in-class and out-of-class graded assignments, including a variety of examinations, research papers, book reviews, "think pieces," and quizzes. The results of these assignments ("grades") are two-fold: they inform students about their progress in a particular course, and how their progress meets instructors' expectations; they also inform instructors about how successfully their course objectives and goals have been received by their students. Second, we use our "end-of-program" assessment. The Department of History's capstone course is a required senior-level seminar (Hist. 469). This course, with an enrollment limit of fifteen students, focuses on the production of a significant research paper by each student. The subsequent assessment of the student papers takes two forms. First, of course, each paper receives a grade and comments from the instructor. In the vast majority of cases, instructors also meet individually with each student several times during the semester to offer constructive criticism about the development of the research project.

Second, each Hist. 469 instructor must fill out a detailed form that assesses each student's work in the course. These forms are scrutinized periodically by the department's committee on the undergraduate curriculum to see if they suggest the need for changes in our undergraduate requirements.

3. Utilization of assessment information

The department's Committee on the Undergraduate Curriculum periodically reviews Hist 469 evaluation forms to see if they suggest the need for changes in our undergraduate requirements. A few years ago we did modify our undergraduate requirements in light of what our end-of-program data revealed. It became clear that students' performance in the research seminar was not as good as we had hoped, primarily because they lacked sufficient formal training in writing research papers before entering the seminar. As a result, we added a prerequisite to the seminar, Hist. 300 ("Writing about History") a few years ago.

Despite the addition of this new course, problems remain with the level and sophistication of student performance in Hist. 469. At present, our committee on the undergraduate curriculum is considering alternative strategies to bring students

32 up-to-speed in the area of research. The committee is also considering the use of exit interviews of our majors to learn first-hand how our course offerings and departmental objectives meet their needs and expectations. At this writing, the committee has not yet finalized its recommendations to the department.

Graduate Degree Program

2A. Intended program outcomes:

The Department of History's Graduate Degree Programs are designed to produce several outcomes. We expect students who complete the requirements for an advanced degree in History: 1) to express sophisticated and abstract concepts clearly in writing; 2) to be familiar with the nature of historical argument and methodologies; 3) to frame research topics and do research at an appropriate graduate student level; 4) to have a mastery of the broad outlines of historical developments, themes, issues, and patterns within their area(s) of study; 5) to develop critical thinking and writing skills that will allow and encourage them to become successful teachers, researchers and authors.

2B. Learning Outcomes Assessment:

Instructors in the Department of History assess these intended outcomes in two principal ways. First, we do so through a combination of in-class and out-of-class graded assignments, including a variety of examinations and sophisticated research projects. The results of these assignments ("grades") are two-fold: they inform our graduate students about their progress in a particular course, and how their progress meets instructors' expectations; they also inform instructors about how successfully their course objectives and goals have been received by their students. Second, we use the Preliminary Examination (both “writtens” and “orals”) to assess the mastery of selected graduate fields by our Ph.D. candidates. The results of these examinations not only offer an appraisal of graduate student performance, they also indicate the success of our conceptualization of graduate education. Third, we use the required periodic evaluation of graduate students to assess their progress. At the end of each semester, the department's Director of Graduate Studies (DGS) solicits comments from all instructors who taught graduate students about the latter's performance and progress. The DGS uses these instructors' comments to compose letters to all graduate students indicating their strengths, weaknesses, and progress through their intended program of study.

2C. Utilization of Assessment Information We use these data to improve outcomes for future students in several ways. First, the feedback provided to us through assessment method #1 (examinations, etc) and #3 (required graduate student evaluations) encourages a re-examination of our conceptualization of graduate education in the broadest sense, and of what we offer in specific courses as well. As a result of this re-examination, for example, the department’s Graduate Studies Committee is currently reconsidering the ways in which we administer our foreign language requirement and the philosophy that informs the

33 creation of, and relationships among, the various fields of study that we offer. At present, this process is ongoing.

In addition, the required annual review of each graduate student’s performance has already resulted in a thorough and complete revision of our graduate guidelines. The problem that we confronted was that too many of our graduate students were not making satisfactory progress toward the completion of their course of study. The new guidelines created an unambiguous timeline that to which our graduate students must adhere, or run the risk of losing their financial support or their participation in our graduate program.

The department currently has one vacant position, with another vacancy coming at the end of this academic year. The current vacant position is in Public History, one of our most popular and successful graduate fields. If this position is not filled, the number of students in Public History will certainly shrink. If the position is not filled for next year, the director of our Public History track has requested that we not accept any new graduate students in the field next year. We have one Public Historian in the department now, but the program has grown to a size beyond what one faculty member may handle.

S chool of Music and Theatre Arts

Although the School of Music and Theatre Arts continue to function under one name, The Music and Theater programs have in fact functioned as two separate units since the fall of 2001. This separation was officially designated by Interim Provost Ron Hopkins at that time and continues to the present. Discussions on the future administration of the music and theatre units is ongoing. The College of Liberal Arts Plan for 2004/2005 included the following goal: “Develop Integrated Plan for Fine and Performing Arts; Re- direct the Theatre Program as interdisciplinary unit in effort to recruit and maintain top- quality students.” Since the fall of 2001, the Music Program has been under the leadership of its Director while the Theatre Program has been under the leadership of its Program Coordinator (Laurilyn Harris) and responsible directly to Dean Couture. Items such as budget, annual reviews, searches and hiring of new faculty, and the like have been done as separate units.

Music Program

1. Major changes since the 1999 accreditation review:

New Faculty Strategic plan goals for the Music Program included the instruction of students on all musical instruments by full time music faculty. New full time faculty have been hired in oboe, bassoon, voice, piano and cello. Stronger recruitment has resulted in more students in the major and higher quality students in performance ensembles.

New Areas of Research/Service Activity/Excellence

34  Research, preparation, performance and production of musical compositions with digital recording technology has become greatly enhanced for faculty and students through the addition of a 1.5 million dollar digital recording studio.  New areas of excellence include the Festival of Contemporary Art Music (formerly the New Music Festival). This festival will celebrate its 15th Anniversary in spring 2004 with greater visibility, educational activities and outreach. A team from the School of Music and College of Liberal Arts has worked to bring national/international recognition and visibility to this event. Communication with the Seattle Symphony Orchestra (Patricia Costa Kim) has resulted in a performance for music’s Madrigal Singers at Benaroya Hall in March 2004. Grants are being pursued to increase the outreach of the festival to public school music programs in the state.

New or remodeled facilities  Kimbrough Hall addition completed in late 2000. The new Kimbrough Music Building features the following:  New listening library with state of the art technology in audio and video, interactive and on-line learning media;  New piano lab with 17 Yamaha Clavinova keyboards with midi compatible computers and software;  110 seat lecture-recital hall with advanced instructional technology;  Large rehearsal room with two grand pianos;  Digital recording studio with state of the art technology, world’s finest 9 foot piano (Fazioli), and electronic lab;  15 new studios for faculty and graduate teaching assistants.

Greater external recognition

Faculty and students in the Music Program continue to substantiate greater external recognition at regional, national and international levels, including the 2003 Jazziz magazine ranking of WSU among the best jazz programs in the country along with Julliard (New York City) and New England Conservatory (Boston).

Student achievements include placing 2nd (flute) and 3rf (chamber music) in the 2003 Music Teachers National Association Collegiate Competition/National Finals, 2nd place in the 2002 International Trumpet Guild Jazz Improvisation Competition (Manchester, England), 3rd place (trumpet) in the 2001 Music Teachers National Association Collegiate Competition / National Finals (Washington, D.C.), numerous awards at the Lionel Hampton Jazz Festival (Moscow, ID) and University of Northern Colorado Jazz Festival (Greeley) collegiate, and the 2001 M.A. graduate named the Top Female Jazz Vocalist in America by Downbeat Magazine.

Faculty accomplishments in the last five years include: Commission of a chamber work by Prime Minister of Thailand, 2nd prize in the National Excellence in the 2002 Chamber Music Composition Competition, Composer of the Year award (2003) by the Washington State Music Teachers Association, piano concert performances nationally and internationally, including Carnegie Hall (New York City), jazz performances nationally

35 and internationally, numerous publications and performances of works in over 30 countries, performances on CD recordings featured on several labels, Regional/National/International conference presentations

Major curricular revisions

The most recent revisions in curriculum are directly related to the Music Program’s 10 year accreditation visit by the National Association of Schools of Music (NASM) in 2002. To meet NASM national standards, several curricular changes have been made in degree requirements. Other major curricular revisions include:  New degree (2002) – Bachelor of Music in Performance with Emphasis In Jazz Studies (options: flute, saxophone, trumpet, percussion);  New Degree (2002) – Bachelor of Music with Elective Studies In Electrical Engineering/Computer Science;  New Degree (2000) – Bachelor of Music with Elective Studies In Business;  New Degree (2000) – Bachelor of Music in Music Education without certification (certification to be completed in the Masters Degree);  New Minor (1999) – Jazz Studies;

Greater alignment of priorities with WSU Strategic Plan

The Five Year Plan of Objectives and Action Steps (2002-2007) has been developed to meet the unit’s Mission and Program Goals in alignment with the WSU Strategic Plan.

Increasing demand among students for the major Growth in the Music Program continues in several areas, including:  increased demand among students for the major (in particular, in the degree of BM with Elective Studies in Business and in the MA program of graduate study);  increased number of students minoring in music (both the Music Minor and Jazz Studies Minor);  increased credit hour production for the Music Program;  increased student participation in music ensembles (Marching Band and University Singers);

Other achievements In 2002, the School of Music submitted a self study to the National Association of Schools of Music as part of the accreditation process which takes place every 10 years and was visited by the NASM accreditation team in March of that year. The NASM Commission Report was very positive, and the School of Music’s national accreditation was renewed. Suggestions for improvements in curricula were noted by the School of Music in its Optional Response to NASM, and changes implemented.

2 A. Educational Program Outcomes

The School of Music offers theses degrees:

36  Bachelor of Music: Performance  Bachelor of Music: Emphasis in Jazz Studies  Bachelor of Music: Composition  Bachelor of Music with Elective Studies in EE/CS  Bachelor of Music with Elective Studies in Business  Bachelor of Music with Elective Studies in Theatre  Bachelor of Music in Music Education (options)  Choral/General Teaching Endorsement  Instrumental/General teaching Endorsement  Broad Teaching Endorsement  Without certification Bachelor of Arts in Music Master of Arts in Music

Student Learning Outcomes

All undergraduate majors must successfully complete two years of music theory (written and aural), 3 semesters of music history (161,360,361), pass the Piano Proficiency Exam, the Upper Division Exam and the Senior Recital (optional in the BA).

Master of Arts in Music The MA in Music may be earned through studies in the areas of music education, composition, music history and literature, conducting, and performance studies. Though selection of an emphasis is not required, four emphases are available. The program offers both thesis and non-thesis options, designed according to the goals of the student. Composition emphasis students must complete the thesis option.

2B. Assessment Data Course evaluations are given to students at the end of each semester, providing faculty and administration with numeric data and student comments on course elements that were successful and that need improvement. Department also collects data on the job placement of graduating music students, both undergraduate and graduate.

End of Program Assessment data for undergraduate students and graduate students are collected along these parameters:  Upper Division Juries (required in all undergraduate degrees),  Graduating Recitals (required in all undergraduate degrees except the BA),  Music 702 – Master’s Special Problems/Directed Study, and/or Examination,  Music 700 – Master’s Research, Thesis, and/or Examination,  Music 522 – Graduate Recital,  Music 497 – Directed Student Teaching in Music.

Assessment parameters must be passed by the student in the following order of priority: First: Piano Proficiency Exam Second: Upper Division Exam

37 Third: Graduating Recital Fourth:Student Teaching (if in Mus.Ed.) Both the Upper Division Exam and the Graduating Recital serve as a capstone experience for the student, because they require the student to demonstrate that they have assimilated knowledge learned in the core area of music theory and history with applied music experiences learned in studio lessons, master-classes, and ensemble classes. Other areas of undergraduate student assessment include teacher certification requirements, the Piano Proficiency Exam, and studies in core curriculum. Initial steps in collecting these data were made in Fall 2003.

Graduate students are expected to enter the graduate program with skills commensurate with the Music Program’s undergraduate requirements in keyboard, theory, history/ literature and aural studies. Entrance proficiency exams, or portions thereof, not passed successfully are to be reported to the student’s graduate advisor with a recommendation for remedial work. Core curriculum requirements for all graduate students consist of 4 credits of applied and/or ensemble study; 2 credits of Music 560 (Introduction to Graduate Studies); 2 credits of Music 550 (Seminar in Analysis); two elective history/ literature courses (4 credits); and one elective theory course (2 credits).

Information gathered from assessment data has been used to improve the outcomes for future students in several areas. Changes over the past five years which have been made to improve the outcomes for future students include:  Theory Placement Exam for entering freshman  Addition of Remedial Theory courses (Mus 151/152) for students who scored low in placement examination  Syllabi in Class Piano for majors/minors to include element of improvisation  New and improved texts in Class Piano for majors to better prepare students for the Piano Proficiency Exam

Current music faculty and curriculum committee meetings are discussing ways to better integrate core knowledge in music theory and music history with applied courses in music and EOP assessments such as the required graduating recital. Faculty discussions will be held in 2004 regarding developing a “Department/Program Student Outcomes Survey” and/or “conducting exit interviews or focus groups with seniors.”

3. Professional or specialized accreditation.

The School of Music received national accreditation in 2002 by the National Association of Schools of Music. The next expected accreditation review is in the year 2012.

Theater Program

Degree awarded: B.A. in Theatre Arts and Drama. The Program currently numbers about 35 majors.

38 1. Major Changes since the 1999 accreditation report. Since the 1998-99 review the M.A. program has been suspended. The program has lost some permanent faculty and has been working with temporary faculty. During AY 2000- 01, the Theater Program has been made administratively autonomous from the Music Program in the School of Music and Theater Arts. Due to budgetary constraints, the Summer Palace program, usually involving three summer theater productions, was discontinued.

Among the positive changes are: (1) the success of the new Dance curriculum, (2) equipment of a dance studio, (3) new collaborative linkages with the Department of Apparel and Merchandising, (4) participation in the interdisciplinary Film Studies minor, (5) increase in the number of Theater minors (currently about 35 certified minors), and (6) hiring diversity instructors and increasing diversity student enrollment (Dance instructor has been recently promoted to the rank of Senior Instructor; a second diversity hire is adjunct faculty in Drama). (7) Theater students’ initiative has led to emergence of student Improvisation groups, performing during the regular AY and in the summer.

2A. Intended Educational program Outcomes:

The WSU Theatre Program provides students with a foundation of acting, directing, production, history and analysis of theatre arts. Coursework is planned to correspond with students’ skill development up to the level of applied competence. By the end of the BA program of study, a student should: - have a broad understanding of theater arts within a liberal arts degree, with a clear understanding of the form, content, and history of the field; - have a broad understanding of visual and speech communication in a range of media and approaches; - have a working knowledge of the processes and media that produce works of theatre arts, including a clear understanding of the terms: subject matter, form and content; - have specialized technical, conceptual, and imaginative expertise in a given field (acting, directing, playwriting, production); - be able to articulate in theater form a range of approaches, from representational to conceptual; - have a broad understanding of theatre arts history from a culturally diverse global perspective that includes contemporary trends and theory; - have the ability to make critical judgments about contemporary and earlier theatre arts and culture; - have an acceptable command of verbal, physical, and written expression.

2B. Assessment of Expected Outcomes:

39 The above outcomes are learned through lecture classes, studio practice, play production, dance recitals, and internships in the Seattle-area theater companies. Evidence of learning is gauged through grades, critiques, written materials, and the quality of the performance work completed. Students’ understanding of theatre arts is further supported by a substantial grounding in theatre and film history. The ability to express themselves verbally and in writing also occurs through the required theater history courses (Theat 365 and 366, the two Writing in the Major [M] classes). The Program will participate in the College-wide survey pool of graduating majors (National Survey of Student Engagement). Specifically, theses are some of the assessment processes employed:  Completion of a capstone professional methods seminar (Theat 496).  All students in acting, directing and production classes participate in class play production activities. Selection for program-scheduled play productions is by audition.  Theater students also get an opportunity to perform in campus group ensembles and in the Music Theater summer production directed by the Music Program.  All students in all dance classes perform in and get a chance to choreograph for the annual dance recital.  Drama productions are submitted for regional competitions and adjudicated by regional theatre faculty consultants.  Students in the Playwriting class have their one-act plays selected to be produced on campus by students in Performance and Directing classes.  Selected one-act plays written by students are submitted for the regional competition in the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts program; at least one play has been selected annually.  Placement of B.A. graduates in graduate of professional schools or programs.

The Program faculty is committed to providing the best educational experience possible for our students. We take seriously the class evaluations done each semester. These are some of the illustrations of how assessment feedback is used.  All undergraduate classes are assessed through student evaluations. The chair and class instructor review these evaluations to stimulate improvement in the teaching environment. Feedback from these is regularly incorporated into course curricula.  Beginning in 2001-02, Theatre faculty started weekly planning meetings designed to assure the program’s vitality and responsiveness to student needs.  The program’s planning committee includes student representatives.  Senior Theatre majors working as TAs contribute to ongoing curriculum review.  Revised course structure resulted in coordinated teaching of classes in acting and directing (Theat 260 and 261).  Increased number of summer course offerings to satisfy student demand after the loss of Summer Palace.

The Theater Major curriculum is currently under review by faculty. The Program in Theater Arts and Drama is scheduled for WSU Program Review in AY 2004-05. Based

40 on the outcomes of these reviews, the program will develop additional or different assessment procedures and instruments.

Department of Philosophy

The Washington State University Department of Philosophy currently offers two programs leading to degrees— the Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy and the Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy Pre-Law.

2A. Learning Outcomes for Degree Programs

The following are primary among the student learning outcomes for majors in the Philosophy Department's degree programs.

. Students will develop and demonstrate their abilities to think philosophically, which is to say, synoptically and critically.

. Students will write with precision and solid argumentation.

. Students will acquire and demonstrate knowledge of and understanding of the history of philosophy through reading and engaging philosophical texts.

. Students will acquire understanding of philosophical methodologies and research techniques and utilize them in research projects.

2B. Means of Assessing Learning Outcomes

For many years, the Philosophy Department assessed student learning outcomes through a two-part method. Students were required to submit in their last semester a writing portfolio of at least three representative papers from at least different areas of philosophy. Students were also interviewed by a panels of three faculty members in thorough exit interviews during their last semeseter. This approach worked well when the department remained small and graduated only a handful of students per year. Significant growth in the numbers of majors over the past few years has made the exit interviews impractical , and in fact interviews were not conducted over the past two years.

The department has been discussing alternate methods of assessment during recent weeks, but the faculty has not yet arrived at consensus. There are three principal alternatives under consideration. The first is a course-based method. We are considering a senior seminar in which students will develop and present research projects as a kind of capstone experience in the major. Peer critique and instructor critique of early drafts and multiple re-writes would be essential parts of such a course. The second alternative is a general exam tailored to the degree program (so that it would be a different exam for Pre- Law majors than for traditional Philosophy majors). The third alternative is an independent study research paper and the public presentation and defense of this paper

41 before the department faculty and students. With each of these alternatives, we expect to continue the requirement of a portfolio of the student’s papers.

In the past, the exit interview method of assessment resulted in a number of changes to the department curriculum centering on issues such as prerequisites, overlapping content of courses, and so on — useful areas of improvement, but not so directly connected to the learning outcomes. The philosophical portfolios did provide information more connected to the outcomes. For any of the three alternative assessment methods discussed above, we expect the information collected to be useful in determining whether the curricula of the degree programs actual provide adequate opportunities for achieving the outcomes. The exam alternative would provide obvious opportunities to use information to adjust course content, but it would also be a good indicator of writing, reasoning and methodology outcomes. The seminar and paper alternatives would provide useful information about writing, reasoning and methodology outcomes that could lead to adjustments of course content and curriculum requirements, but it would be less of an indicator of outcome related to knowledge and understanding of the history of philosophy, as it would be focused on one topic and not demonstrate knowledge of a wide area.

We expect to have a new end of program assessment plan adopted by the faculty in AY 2003-04.

Department of Political Science and Criminal Justice Program

Introduction

The Department of Political Science and Criminal Justice Program (the Department) emphasizes the enhancement of program quality as its overarching goal. Specific goals include: outstanding undergraduate programming; nurturing an environment for high quality research, scholarship, and graduate education; and continuing efforts to develop partnerships with a broad range of stakeholders both inside and outside of Washington State University. These goals are consistent with the strategic planning goals of the College of Liberal Arts (the College) and Washington State University (the University). The Department offers classes in Pullman, Spokane, and Vancouver, and through the Distance Degree Program (DDP).

The Department offers the following degrees:  B.A. in Political Science (with General, Pre-Law, and Teacher Education options);  B.A. in Criminal Justice (including a B.A. offered through DDP);  B.A. in Public Affairs (Vancouver);  M.A. in Political Science;  M.A. in Criminal Justice;  Master’s in Public Affairs (Vancouver campus);

42  Ph.D. in Political Science (with separate tracks in Political Science and in Criminal Justice)1 .

The Department had 24.5 full-time tenured or tenure track faculty in calendar year 2003, including faculty at the Spokane and Vancouver campuses. In AY 2002- 2003 the Department had 553 declared undergraduate majors (15% of the College total) and approximately 145 graduate students in various stages of their programs: 54 students in the Ph.D. program, 56 students in the M.A. program, and approximately 35 students in the M.P.A. program.

1. Major Changes since the 1999 Review.

New Programs added/deleted:

A new Bachelors of Arts in Public Affairs (BAPA) in Vancouver was approved in 1999 and currently has approximately 100 majors. A proposed Ph.D. in Criminal Justice is in the final stages of the approval process.

New Facilities:

Vancouver: Department faculty offices and classrooms moved into the new Multi Media building in January 2003. The classrooms are state of the art with fully integrated "Star Board" technology allowing simultaneous use of internet, video, and other teaching technologies.

New Faculty/Staff:

Four staff hired for the Division of Governmental Studies and Services (Pullman), one staff person hired for the Foley Institute for Public Policy and Public Service (Pullman), two Political Science faculty hired for Pullman, five Criminal Justice faculty hired (one in Vancouver, one in Spokane, and three in Pullman).

New and Enhanced Areas of Activity:  Enhanced development activity, achieving a gift to the University of numerous media market survey data sets valued at more than $10 million.  The Thomas S. Foley Institute strengthened in part by a $3 million appropriation by the United States Congress.  Increased grants and contracts activity in applied policy research, community outreach, and practitioner training, based on collaboration of the Division of Governmental Studies and Services (DGSS), the Masters in Public Affairs program in Vancouver, and the Criminal Justice program in Pullman and Spokane with institutions and policy practitioners across the state.  New Global Studies undergraduate concentration within the Department and 1 1 A proposed Ph.D. in Criminal Justice has been approved by the Washington State University Faculty Senate in Fall 2003 and will be formally considered by the University Regents in the near future.

43 participation in the Global Studies minor in the College of Liberal Arts.  New M.A. concentration in Global Justice and Security is under discussion.  Support of the academic journal French Politics.  Participation in University-wide initiatives Gendering Research Across the Campuses (GRACe).  Participation in post-September 11 initiatives and responses in areas such as global security and justice, homeland security, and in disaster response and recovery.

Major Curricular Revisions

Graduate Programs

The Department recently completed a two- year review of our graduate program and implemented significant changes to the structure of the curriculum. In particular, the Department has attempted to make the most efficient use possible of graduate instructional staff while maintaining the quality of the programs. The MPA has added concentrations in Environmental Policy and Justice Studies in addition to the existing concentrations in Public Policy, Public Administration, and Health Administration. The MPA program also revised the criteria for the Paper of Distinction (Masters thesis) process to make it more “chair driven” and rigorous.

Quality of Programs

One measure of the quality of graduate programs is the placement rate for successful Ph.D. candidates and the quality of the institutions hiring them. Over the last ten years the Department has placed nearly 100% of our Ph.D. students seeking academic employment. Graduates of our M.A. programs have gone on to distinguished careers in a variety of government agencies (local, state and federal) and for non-profit organizations. In their last ranking (1995), the National Research Council rated the department of Political Science among the top three doctoral programs in the Pacific Northwest. In the same study, the Department was ranked 87th among all political science programs in the nation. The Department has undergone a significant and positive change in the make-up of its faculty since 1995. A replication of this study is due in 2004 and the Department will almost certainly rise in the rankings as our reputation catches up with our actual productivity. In a recent study of Social Science Index citations per faculty member, the Department tied for 47th place among political science programs nationwide (this was not far behind the ranking of the political science department at the University of Washington, which ranked 39th).

The Criminal Justice component of the Department is one of the premier programs of its type in the country. The program was rated as the 5th best program in the nation in a comprehensive reputational study of criminal justice departments. Last year, a study of the publishing records of faculty in criminal justice was released. Our program was ranked 8th nationwide in the rate of publications appearing in the top six journals in the

44 field. Although already near the top, the exceptional quality of the recent faculty hires in Criminal Justice will almost certainly bring additional prestige to the program.

Demand for Programs

Demand for Department course offering has increased dramatically since 1999. From Fall 1999 to Fall 2002, undergraduate course enrollments increased by 23% and graduate enrollments increased by 24% during that time period. The Bachelor of Arts in Public Affairs in Vancouver went from a new program to one with 101 majors in 5 years. In the MPA the focus has been on improving quality rather than quantity. One measure of demand is that the percentage of admitted students who actually accept and attend the first semester of classes has grown from 50% in 2001, to 70% in 2002, to 100% in 2003.

2A. Intended Educational Outcomes

The Department’s undergraduate programs are designed to prepare students to be more thoughtful consumers and producers of information related to political phenomena (political science) and the criminal justice system (criminal justice) both in the U.S. and in other nations. The Department’s graduate programs emphasize strong methodological, conceptual, and analytical training to prepare students for challenging positions in the public, private, and non-profit sectors or to enable them to join the academy as teachers and researchers (Ph.D. level).

More specifically, the Department’s programs aim to:  Develop the ability to think critically about political and social values.  Produce graduates with an understanding of the importance of a global perspective on political issues.  Develop the ability to undertake in-depth analyses of political structures.  Develop the ability to analyze the fundamental issues related to the operation of the criminal justice system.  Facilitate the acquisition of knowledge about the fundamental principles of criminal law.  Understand the fundamental theories, frameworks, and models currently offered to explain the existence of criminal behavior.  Prepare students for post-Bachelors degree programs (including graduate and law school) and pre-professional training (particularly in criminal justice).  Prepare students to secure employment in the criminal justice system, to assist current professionals in their career development goals, and to prepare interested students for success in a Ph.D. program.  Develop and cultivate the ability to write, read, and think critically and effectively.

2B. Assessment of Expected Outcomes

The Department utilizes a variety of tools to assess progress toward the intended educational outcomes.

45  Writing in the major courses [M] – two courses required of all majors;  For Political Science majors, successful completion of Political Science 101 (American Politics) (or PS 198 Political Science Honors), PS 102 (Comparative Politics), and PS 103 (International Politics), and of at least one additional elective in each of these major sub-fields of political science.  For Criminal Justice majors, successful completion of CJ 101 (Introduction to the Administration of Criminal Justice), CJ 150 (Organizational Environment of Criminal Justice), CJ 320 (Criminal Law), and CJ 330 (Crime Control Policies), and of at least three additional electives in Criminal Justice.  Faculty are evaluated yearly on the clarity of learning objectives, the rigor of the course syllabus and assignments, and the extent to which course materials are up-to- date and relevant to changes in the world around us. Class materials are also monitored to identify innovative approaches to pedagogy in particular focusing on the use of new technologies, multi-media, the incorporation of “hands on” research, and techniques such as simulations. An examination of class plans show that most faculty incorporate substantial writing assignments into their courses.  Student evaluations consistently show high levels of satisfaction with course materials and instructors (The mean score for all instructional staff members was 4.47 in Fall 2002 on five point scale, a very similar range sshown since 1999).  The Department enhances the undergraduate experience with an active Internship Program (administered by a dedicated graduate student T.A. line) and offers over a dozen undergraduate scholarships and fellowships.  The Department actively promotes and facilitates (through the assignment of faculty advisors) the activities of the local chapter of the undergraduate Honor Societies in both Criminal Justice (Alpha Phi Sigma) and Political Science (Pi Sigma Alpha). These student groups in part act as informal focus groups and provide information relative to expected learning outcomes.  Faculty are expected to maintain an updated Teaching Portfolio. These portfolios are an integral aspect of the Annual Review process and provide information related to teaching goals and philosophies, course materials used, and pedagogic styles that are utilized.  All graduate students who complete their programs are asked to take part in an exit interview. This interview is conducted by the student’s graduate committee and solicits information related to expected learning outcomes.  All Ph.D. students are required to a written “preliminary examination” in three fields of political science or criminal justice prior to advancing to candidacy for the degree.  In 1996, the Department adopted a “committee driven” approach to graduate education. Under this approach, each Masters and Ph.D. student selects at least three members of the graduate faculty (with one serving as Chair) to provide advice and guidance. This structure allows for ongoing monitoring of student progress toward completion of the program.  In Spring 2004 the Department will participate in the National survey of Student Engagement to augment existing quality control measures.  The performance of all graduate students is evaluated on a yearly.

46 The MPA Degree in Vancouver serves a more specialized, “non-traditional” student population than the campuses in Pullman or, in some respects, Spokane. As a consequence, the Department has established additional mechanisms by which to measure progress toward expected learning outcomes. The Department has instituted a number of procedures in order to improve the capabilities of our graduates, beginning with data collection during the first year. All faculty now report their experiences with first year students to a single faculty member who prepares a summary report for circulation among the faculty. The purpose is to look for patterns and "red flags" that might indicate a student is having difficulty. This has been especially helpful in catching and addressing poor writing skills. In response to our findings through this procedure, we are now establishing a graduate research and writing workshop through the WSU Vancouver writing center.

Measures to improve the quality of graduates have focused most directly on the final product, the Paper of Distinction (Masters Thesis). After more than a year of discussion, we shifted to a "chair loaded" process in the spring of 2002. While this is more work for the committee chairs, it insures that the student must meet high quality expectations before they can move the POD to the full committee. We now meet regularly to assess the overall quality of PODs and to review and learn from specific cases. In order to assess the entire MPA and BAPA program, the Department has secured funds from WSUV-CLA to conduct a comprehensive student /alumni /community survey. This is currently underway and we will incorporate its findings into our further program review process.

The Department adheres to the principle that program quality reviews should be an ongoing process. All assessment data are evaluated on a yearly basis. Owing to differences in student profiles, separate review processes are in place at the Vancouver and Spokane campuses. A comprehensive revision of the undergraduate degree requirements for Criminal Justice is currently underway.

3. Professional or specialized accreditation -- not applicable.

Department of Psychology

2A. Intended educational program outcomes. Undergraduate Program Three central program goals define our undergraduate mission--1) communicate competently in the major; 2) demonstrate applied competency in the major, and 3) integrate the knowledge and skills in the major. These program goals are expressed more specifically as a set of sub-goals that directly relate to aspects of the psychology degree curriculum. Those sub-goals include: 1) Learning to write effectively. 2) Learning to think critically about scientific information.

47 3) Learning to apply psychological principles to solve problems. 4) Developing clinical and research skills. 5) Preparing for future employment.

Graduate Programs The Clinical Psychology Program is based on the scientist-practitioner model of training. The primary goal of the program is to train highly competent clinical psychologists. Students are involved in research activities each semester in the Program and clinical practica beginning in the second semester until the start of the 12-month internship. Students whose goal is to work in academia are also expected to develop their instructional skills.

The Clinical Psychology Program has seven specific major objectives. We strive to produce clinical psychologists who will have: (1) outstanding knowledge of the field of scientific psychology; (2) outstanding knowledge of the scientific foundations for the practice of clinical psychology; (3) outstanding knowledge and skills in the assessment and diagnosis of dysfunctional behavior; (4) outstanding knowledge and skills in the design, implementation, and evaluation of psychological interventions for dysfunctional behavior; (5) sensitivity, knowledge, and skills in regard to the role of human diversity in the practice of clinical psychology; (6) an awareness that the field of clinical psychology involves a constantly evolving scientific and professional knowledge base and, as a result of this awareness, the motivation and skills to remain in contact with the evolving knowledge base across their professional careers; and (7) the theoretical and methodological skills to conduct and evaluate research.

2B. Outcomes assessment

Undergraduate Program

A) Pre-Program Assessments: Several indices are used to assess the quality and diversity of students who choose to major in psychology. Several measures collected during Fall 2002 suggest that psychology attracts and retains students with strong academic records. Psychology certified and non-certified majors outperformed all other CLA majors on a number of academic measures (e.g. admission index scores, average high school GPA, average Math SAT score, average Verbal SAT score, average composite SAT, average transfer GPA, and average WSU Cumulative GPA).

B) Mid-Program Assessments: The department uses a number of mid-program assessments to monitor student performance over the course of their academic career. One set of assessments focuses on proficiency in writing:

(1) Writing Portfolio. According to the January, 2002, Internal Report by the Office of Writing Assessment, writing portfolios completed by psychology majors received a higher percentage of “Acceptable” ratings (83.7 percent), a higher percentage of “Pass

48 with Distinction” ratings (11.5 percent), and a lower percentage of “Needs Work” ratings (4.8 percent) than the mean percentages of all majors (80.9 percent, 9.9 percent and 9.2 percent, respectively). (2) Writing in the Major [M] courses. Psychology [M] courses require students to write two major papers during the semester. The format of these papers must conform to the guidelines outlined in the American Psychological Association’s Manual. (3) Applied competence in the major. --Assessment includes student evaluations from undergraduates enrolled in Psych 445 (Practicum) and Psych 498 (Research Participation).

Graduate Programs

Clinical Program

Each student's progress toward the PhD is evaluated in a number of ways--course grades, practicum performance, professional behavior, progress on thesis, progress on preliminary examinations, and progress on dissertation. All aspects of a student's progress (completion of program requirements and acquisition of clinical, teaching, and research skills) are evaluated annually by the clinical faculty at the end of the fall semester. The Director of Clinical Training meets with students identified as “deficient” in some aspect of their program and documents a course of remedial action.

More formal evaluations are completed annually at the end of spring semester. Prior to the spring evaluation meeting, students complete a form summarizing their performance in courses, practica, teaching, and research. Students also meet with their advisor prior to this meeting to discuss their progress. The Director of Clinical Training also obtains written evaluative information from each student’s clinical, teaching, and research supervisors prior to the student evaluation meeting. The entire clinical faculty attends the evaluation meeting. In addition, experimental faculty may attend the meeting or are asked to provide input in writing. At this meeting, each student's progress toward completion of their degree program graduation is discussed in detail on a number of dimensions including (1) quality of academic work; (2) overall clinical skills; (3) overall research skills; (4) progress through the program; (5) performance of assistance duties; (6) openness to supervision; (7) manifestation of appropriate professional and ethical behavior; (8) problem areas, if any, and suggestions for remediation; (9) areas for future growth, and (10) evaluation of overall performance and progress.

Experimental Program

Quality of student performance is assessed at the end of each academic year. The student identifies at least three faculty who are able to comment on the student’s academic development, professional development, and/or performance of assistantship duties. The Director of Experimental Training solicits written input from these faculty and the written comments for all students are distributed to all Experimental faculty members. The Experimental faculty meets to discuss each student, and a written summary of the meeting is prepared and given to the student along with the solicited written input. In this

49 summary the faculty present to the student any concerns about performance deficits, and suggestions for future improvement. The student may write a response which is distributed among the faculty.

2C. Utilization of assessment information

Undergraduate Programs

To facilitate the use of feedback to improve our undergraduate program, the Department of Psychology recently established the position of Director of Undergraduate Training. This person, with the support of a program evaluation committee and a curriculum committee, provides a yearly report to the chair on the success of the program and makes recommendations for changes. For example, in AY 2003-04 the Department of Psychology is in the process of making several changes in the undergraduate program. Based on information gathered from the assessment instruments mentioned above, as well as a critical reassessment of our department goals, we are currently implementing the following changes:

First, we are restructuring the undergraduate psychology degree with two important changes: (a) the development of a Bachelor of Arts degree option and (b) the implementation of several psychology certificate programs. Data from the Senior Exit Survey suggest that the program is effectively achieving four of its five degree goals (i.e. learn to write effectively, learn to think critically about scientific information, learn to apply psychological principles to solve problems and develop clinical and research skills). However, some data suggest that the current curriculum requirements may not match the long-term career goals of most of our graduates. To address these issues, we have developed an alternative Bachelor of Arts degree. This degree option is designed to prepare psychology majors for success in psychology-related careers immediately after graduation from WSU. In doing so, it places emphasis on the practical application of psychological principles to everyday problems and the development of skills necessary for vocational competitiveness. We are awaiting final approval of this degree option by the Higher Education Coordinating Board.

Second, we are expanding students’ opportunities for “hands-on” training in research and practicum experience. Data from the Exit Survey show that 38% of respondents participated in some form of field experience (e.g. Psych 445: Practicum; Psych 498: Research). Because we feel strongly about the value to active learning, we have implemented several changes in this area of the curriculum. For example, 2002-2003 marked the inception of the Undergraduate Research Initiative. This program awards undergraduate grants to students completing independent research projects under the direction of psychology faculty. Additionally, we opened the new Student Human Psychophysiology Laboratory. This lab is equipped with a state-of-the-art EEG machine. It will be used as a resource for both student projects and in-class demonstrations. Lastly, we continue to promote the undergraduate practicum program (i.e. opportunities for on- site, supervised clinical/counseling experience at local and county agencies) as a “highly

50 recommended” option for all psychology majors. Several new sites were added to this program over AY 2002-03.

Third, we are restructuring the undergraduate advising process to make a clearer distinction between course advising and career advising. Peer advisors trained by the Student Advising and Learning Center (SALC) continue to advise all students with fewer than 60 credits. A single Undergraduate Advisor now does all course advising for students with greater than 60 credits. More general career advising is being addressed with a two-tier approach. First, the department hosts two “Advising Workshops” for undergraduates each semester. Second, undergraduates who wish to speak to a faculty advisor about specific career interests are directed to the appropriate faculty member by the Undergraduate Advisor.

Fourth, if the BA proposal is approved, we plan to revise our current Senior Exit Survey to assess the specific goals of both the BS and BA degree options. This evaluation tool will provide valuable feedback regarding the success of our program. We are also exploring different ways to collect information about our alumni in a more systematic manner. Obtaining information about employment rates and employment areas will be important for determining how well our program prepares its majors for success after graduation.

Graduate Programs

The Clinical program, as part of its APA accreditation, must provide yearly reports on the program that include information on how well the program meets its programmatic goals. The directors of both programs meet with the department chair each year to discuss any issues or changes that should be addressed.

The department chair uses the information provided by the Undergraduate Director and the two graduate program directors to prepare a ‘State of the Department” report for the full faculty at the first faculty meeting of every year. At that meeting, the faculty discuss the report and formulate departmental objectives for the coming year.

Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences

The department employs a variety of formative and summative assessments to ascertain current students’ achievement and to improve educational outcomes for future students. Assessments are well developed, span the levels of cognitive processing as delineated in Bloom’s Taxonomy, and comply with standards of our professional accrediting body, the Council on Academic Accreditation in Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.

Undergraduate Program Summative Assessment

51 The undergraduate program in Speech and Hearing Sciences is pre-professional and grounded in the liberal arts. The curriculum facilitates students’ development of critical thinking, oral and written communication, problem solving, and computer literacy necessary for lifelong learning. The summative assessment of undergraduate students is accomplished in the capstone senior seminar (SHS 480).

2A. Educational Program Outcomes

The senior seminar is designed to achieve the following learning outcomes.

Speech and Hearing Sciences graduates will be able to:  Identify factors that may contribute to a communication or hearing disorder;  Critically evaluate tests and procedures used to document communication or hearing disorders;  Write and critique summary statements on diagnostic and therapy progress reports;  Formulate and critique therapy goals and objectives;  Formulate hypotheses as to the likelihood of a treatment’s efficacy;  Assess the ethics of various solutions to clinical problems;  Discuss current and ongoing issues in education and medical service delivery that impact audiologists and speech-language pathologists;  Develop and describe comprehensive assessment and intervention plans for individuals with communication disorders, from the perspectives of both a speech-language pathologist and an audiologist.

2B. Assessment Measures

Undergraduate students demonstrate integration and synthesis of theoretical constructs and clinical applications through a variety of challenging assignments. The expected educational program outcomes are assessed by means of a series of in-class case studies and a final examination incorporating a complex case study. Assessment of writing is based also on performance in the department’s writing in the major ([M]) courses.

Assessment data collected since implementing the senior seminar in 1998 has led to increased use of complex case studies in most undergraduate courses to encourage critical thinking. This focus has helped students attain the expected educational program outcomes of knowledge integration and synthesis across the curriculum. Additional writing assignments have been incorporated to develop students’ technical writing skills and to give them more practice responding to case studies in written form.

Graduate Program Summative Assessment

The master’s program in Speech and Hearing Sciences provides students with a thorough understanding of disorders of hearing, speech, voice, and language across the lifespan

52 and across diverse clinical populations. By applying science and research to clinical practice, graduate students develop proficiency in reasoning and problem solving relative to clinical principles and procedures in diagnosis and treatment.

2A. Educational Program Outcomes

Master of Arts: Speech-Language Pathology Emphasis

The Speech and Hearing Sciences student earning a master’s degree with an emphasis in speech-language pathology will be able to:  Demonstrate knowledge of the basic human communication and swallowing processes;  Demonstrate knowledge of the nature of speech, language, hearing, swallowing and communication disorders and differences;  Demonstrate knowledge of the principles and methods of prevention, assessment, and intervention for people with communication and swallowing disorders;  Demonstrate skills in evaluation, screening and prevention procedures; interpretation, integration and synthesis all information to develop diagnoses and make appropriate recommendations for intervention; and completion of administrative and reporting functions;  Demonstrate skills in developing and setting appropriate intervention plans;  Demonstrate knowledge of the principles and practices of research, including experimental design, statistical methods, and clinical applications.

Master of Arts: Audiology Emphasis

The Speech and Hearing Sciences student earning a master’s degree with an emphasis in audiology will be able to:  Demonstrate knowledge of the basic human auditory and vestibular processes;  Demonstrate knowledge of the nature of auditory and balance disorders;  Demonstrate knowledge of the principles and methods of prevention, identification, assessment, and treatment of auditory and balance disorders;  Demonstrate skills in evaluation, screening and prevention procedures; interpretation, integration and synthesis all information to develop diagnoses and make appropriate recommendations for intervention; and completion of administrative and reporting function;  Demonstrate skill in using instrumentation;  Demonstrate skills in the treatment of individuals with auditory, balance, and related communication disorders;  Demonstrate knowledge of the principles and practices of research, including experimental design, statistical methods, and clinical applications.

2B. Assessment Measures

The summative assessment of candidates for the Master of Arts degree consists of several comprehensive and direct measures. The oral defense of the master’s thesis or research

53 project provides an overall measure of the student’s integration of theoretical constructs and clinical concepts, including knowledge of professional area content and research design. The capstone, full-time clinical internship provides an opportunity to assess the student’s clinical performance through supervisors’ descriptive data and ratings, and by assessing the behavioral gains of the clients/patients assigned to the student-clinician. Educational outcomes are also assessed following graduation. Graduates’ performance on a national examination (Praxis) and feedback obtained from alumni and their employers also provide data regarding our graduates’ preparation and performance.

Information obtained from assessment data has led to a number of curricular changes. Course work and clinical experiences in advanced diagnostic procedures, pediatric swallowing and feeding, and autism and literacy have been added to the speech-language pathology curriculum to better prepare graduates for emerging areas of professional practice. A modest reduction in the number of credits and program time devoted to traditional core speech-language pathology content areas (i.e., stuttering, voice, and cleft palate) has made possible additional course work reflecting the expanded scope of professional practice, without substantially lengthening the required time to degree. Similarly, course work in balance disorders and advanced electrophysiologic procedures has been added to the audiology curriculum to ensure that master’s graduates possess the expected, entry-level professional competencies.

Department of Sociology

The Department of Sociology is housed in the College of Liberal Arts and offers courses in Pullman, Tri-Cities, Vancouver, and the Distance Degree Program. Undergraduate degree is available only on the Pullman Campus.

Undergraduate Degree, Minor and Social Welfare Certificate

Bachelor of Arts in Sociology. URL: (http://libarts.wsu.edu/soc/undprog.htm). The Department also offers a minor in Sociology and a Certificate in Social Welfare, with two sequences: Social Casework and Community Organization.

Master’s of Arts in Sociology Students may earn an M.A. in Sociology through the thesis and non-thesis option. The Department’s strong preference is for the student to pursue the thesis option.

Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology Areas of specialization include: Communities, Criminology and Deviance, Environmental Sociology, Gender, Organizational Sociology, Social Psychology, Social Stratification, Sociology of the Family, and Methods and Statistics. The Department of Sociology is among the top graduate departments in the nation.

54 Alignment with Strategic Plan Goals. Over the past year, the Department has developed and phased in the Signature Course program. Each faculty member has one undergraduate course as his/her “Signature Course.” The Department makes a commitment to allow this faculty member to teach this course on a regular basis (at least once per academic year), and to work with advisors and other venues to insure that Signature Courses attract a strong enrollment. Quite literally, the Department is making an effort to bring world class faculty “face to face” with undergraduate students. The early signs (faculty morale and student evaluations) indicate that this initiative will be successful.

2. INTENDED EDUCATIONAL OUTCOMES, ASSESSMENT OF OUTCOMES, & USE OF ASSESSMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT

These assessment issues will be addressed for each degree the Department offers.

Bachelor of Arts in Sociology

2A. Intended educational outcomes. In accordance with the Five-Year Plan, the Department of Sociology strives to build on its strengths in research and graduate education to contribute to undergraduate education. We believe that our roles in graduate and undergraduate education are closely aligned. The Department of Sociology strives to promote critical thinking, knowledge of contemporary social issues, and the theoretical and methodological tools to be an informed and active citizen, while maintaining small class sizes

2B. Outcomes Assessment. Prior to Fall 2001 the end of program assessment was administered through Sociology 490, the departments required senior capstone course. Each student enrolled in this course was required to complete seven open-ended questions assessing the quality of the Department’s teaching, advising, staff assistance, courses offered, and general curriculum. Beginning Fall 2001, Sociology 490 was re- designated as an elective course, therefore, was no longer required of all majors. To continue to comply with University policy, the department redesigned how it administered its end of program assessment. Currently, all students who have filed for graduation are sent an electronic copy of the assessment questionnaire. Return rates range from 70 – 100%.

2C. Utilization of assessment information to improve the outcomes for future students. Each semester, completed assessment questionnaires are given to the department’s academic advisor for analysis. A report to the Chair is generated from these data. If there is a consistent pattern of concern, either within a semester or across semesters, the chair initiates further investigation and possible action through the department’s established committee structure.

Since 1999, information gleaned from this assessment effort has led to several changes in the program. Student concerns centered on employment issues. Initiatives listed below

55 responded to these concerns. We are monitoring more recent assessments to verify that these initiatives are effective and to see if new issues arise. 1) Abandoning the required Senior Capstone Course (Sociology 490). The feedback received from course evaluations and assessment data suggested that students did not feel that they gained from the reflective and intellectual aspects of this capstone course. Based on this information, the Department decided to remove the Senior Capstone (Sociology 490) requirement and set out to address the employment issues voiced in by students. 2) Addressing employment issues and concerns through student organization. Since 2000, the academic advisor has worked with the Sociology Club, comprised of undergraduate sociology majors, to help students develop a vita, identify employment opportunities, meet with potential employers and otherwise expand employment opportunities after graduation. 3) Revival of Alpha Kappa Delta (Sociology Honor Society). During the 2000-2001 academic year, faculty in the Department of Sociology revived the Washington State University chapter of Alpha Kappa Delta (it ceased to operate in the 1980s). The revival of Alpha Kappa Delta serves three purposes. First,. These interactions of faculty and students outside of the classroom help to (1) build mentoring relationships by bringing students and faculty into direct contact, (2) provide information and support for students considering professional and graduate education, and (3) the AKD newsletter provides information on employment opportunities and career options. 4) Expansion of internship opportunities. The pilot program (summer 2002) was successful and evaluated positively. Steps are underway to expand the number of internships available in coming years.

Master of Arts in Sociology

2A. Intended educational outcomes. The Department emphasizes recruiting and training students for a Ph.D. Required coursework for the M.A. emphasizes social research methodology, social statistics, and social theory, with proseminars organized to promote professional development. Students showing promise for earning a PhD are encouraged to write a master’s thesis (a non-thesis MA is a terminal degree, the student is not permitted to enroll for the PhD). Coursework and the master’s thesis experience are designed to provide students with exposure to professional sociology and to prepare students for PhD coursework and experiences.

2B. Outcomes assessment. In addition to grades received in individual courses, there are two principal assessment efforts:  Outcomes are assessed most closely by the Student Advisory Committee (SAC), a committee of faculty selected by the student to guide him/her through the graduate program.  Each year, the Director of Graduate Studies (DGS) solicits information from students concerning their plans and accomplishments and from faculty who have worked with

56 the students. The DGS prepares a report providing summarizing this information for each student. A letter is prepared for each student that provides feedback on the progress that the student is making and identifying deficiencies (and steps to address these deficiencies).  The faculty also discuss the program and develop changes that can improve the effectiveness of the graduate program.

2C. Utilization of assessment information. The most important change in the M.A. program concerned the sequencing of required courses. As of 1999, students were required to take a graduate level course in research methodology (Sociology 520) and social theory (Sociology 517) during the fall semester of the 1st year. The required course in social statistics (Sociology 521) is offered each spring semester. In the wake of discussions among the faculty and a report prepared by the Director of Graduate Studies, it was determined that offering both social theory (Sociology 517) and research methods (Sociology 520) during the fall semester was counter productive, especially for students who did not major in sociology as undergraduates. As a consequence, course offering were changed: social research methods (Sociology 520) is offered each fall; social theory (Sociology 517) is offered each spring semester. Students have responded favorably to this change, as have the Student Advisory Committees.

Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology

2A. Intended educational outcomes. The Doctor of Philosophy is the terminal degree in the discipline. The outcome sought by the Department is to provide the training and opportunities needed for students to enjoy successful careers as sociologists. The educational objectives are to train students in state of the art theory, methods and statistics. In addition, students are encouraged to undertake research under the supervision and in collaboration with the faculty. When possible, the Department employs PhD students as graduate teaching assistants and provides graduate TA’s with supervision and support as they become accomplished university teachers.

2B. Outcomes assessment. The mechanism involving the Student Advising Committee (SAC) and the annual discussion of each student by the full faculty in the M.A. programis also employed to assess the progress of PhD students. In addition, the Department keeps track of employment experiences of Ph.D. graduates. Since 1980, the Department of Sociology at Washington State University has granted over 100 Ph.D. degrees. Over 60 percent of these graduates secured academic appointments at colleges and universities. Another 35 percent secured comparable research positions with government agencies or private research organizations. For example, our graduates are currently employed at 50+ universities with graduate programs in sociology and a number of government agencies and research organizations.

57 In AY 2001-02, the Department undertook a major overhaul of the graduate program. Prior to this time, in order to be advanced to Ph.D. candidacy students were required to complete Comprehensive Written Examinations in two areas of specialization and to pass an oral examination. Student Advising Committees and the faculty came to the conclusion that the oral examination delayed progress through the program and, this delay in progress did not provide a compensating benefit. That is, students were delaying progress on dissertation research while preparing for the oral exam, but the exam did not serve to make the students better prepared to undertake dissertation research. In addition, the manner in which the oral exam was conducted was inconsistent with procedures widely employed elsewhere in the university. For this reason, the Department has adopted and implemented procedures designed to accelerate progress through the program.

Students are advanced to candidacy at a Ballot Meeting conducted by the Graduate School and in which all sociology faculty may participate. The Ballot Meeting is held no more than 30 days after the completion of the first Comprehensive Written Examination. Members of the Student Advisory Committee must attend and vote. At the Ballot Meeting the Student Advisory Committee will make a recommendation based on the student's performance on the Comprehensive Written Examinations and overall performance in our graduate program. Feedback from students and SAC’s indicate a high level of support for these changes.

3. Professional or specialized accreditation Not applicable.

Department of Women’s Studies

Women’s Studies Program applied for a major during 1997-98, and the Women’s Studies major was approved in the Spring of 1998. In the first year of offering a major, five Women’s Studies majors were graduated. Women’s Studies currently has 33 majors and 30 minors. The Women’s Studies Program also gained departmental status in 2000.

1. Changes since the 1999 Review

1A. New Faculty/Staff: a) Women’s Studies has seen an increase in American Studies graduate T.A.s since the 1999 review. Women’s Studies presently has 3 Ph.D. and 2 M.A. students teaching for the department. b) Women’s Studies hired a faculty member in 2000 with expertise in Chicana and Queer scholarship. c) Given a successful current faculty search, Women’s Studies will maintain its 3 FTE, as two .5 appointments were vacated since the last review. d) Two full-time Women’s Studies instructors were nominated in Fall 2003 for promotion to the senior instructor rank. Their positions have been full-time since1999. The Women’s Studies Department has seen an increase in American Studies Teaching Assistants since 1999, and the American Studies Program has seen an increase in applications to the graduate program from students with Women’s Studies training.

58 1B. New Areas of Activity: (a) Women’s Studies’ capstone course, Theoretical Issues in Women’s Studies (WST 481) has been regularly taught via WHETS for the past three years. (b) An interdisciplinary faculty research group, Gendering Research Across the Campuses (GRACe) was formed during 2002-2003. The group will host a mini- conference on the Pullman campus in February 2004. (c) A National Science Foundation grant was awarded to faculty in Women’s Studies and the College of Science to support a collaborative project between Washington State University, the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation (CCT), Lewis-Clark State College (LSCS), and seven public school districts (2002-2004). (d) Women’s Studies, in partnership with the Women’s Resource Center, has offered the New Leadership Inland Northwest summer institute in 2002 and 2003; the institute is scheduled again for Summer 2004. 1C. Major Curricular Revisions: (a) Women’s Studies revised its core requirements in. (b) In 2000, the American Studies graduate core curriculum was revised to include courses in Ethnic Studies and Women’s Studies. (c) Curriculum was aligned with WSU Strategic Plan. (d) Advising of Women’s Studies students has been improved due to continued training on the part of our Women’s Studies Administrative Manager. The Women’s Studies Chair has also established individual meetings with all new majors to help advise and track their progress. 1D. Increasing Demand Among Students for the Major: The number of majors and minors in Women’s Studies has steadily increased over the years, with 33 majors and 30 minors at present.

2A: Intended Educational Outcomes The Women’s Studies degree curriculum is designed to achieve four major objectives: 1) to provide students with a systematic knowledge of the multidisciplinary scholarship about and by women as well as gender; 2) to educate students concerning the connections between gender, race, class, sexuality, age, ability, and other forms of difference; 3) to enhance the qualifications of students preparing for careers in business, education, health services, government, communications, the sciences and social sciences; 4) to further university and societal goals of diversity and equity; and 5) to prepare students to work for social and institutional change. Women’s Studies courses emphasize collaborative learning and critical thinking. Each student’s academic success and personal awareness is of major importance. Students are encouraged to reevaluate assumptions and analyze the structures and systems controlling and shaping women’s and men’s lives. The interdisciplinary focus and multiple tracks in Women’s Studies reflect a number of educational outcomes. Students with degrees in Women’s Studies will: 1) understand the diversity of women’s experience in different historical and cultural contexts, particularly in the U.S.; 2) understand how sexism, socialization, and internalized sexism function; 3) understand the relationship between gendered expectations in our society and work as well as personal and political contexts; 4) acquire the language for experiences

59 and processes that affect students’ lives, particularly those having to do with gender roles; 5) acquire knowledge about the ways systems of dominance such as sexism and racism function and interact; 6) acquire knowledge about issues related to being a woman such as sexual harassment, sexual violence, and reproduction; and 7) acquire knowledge about women’s cultural contributions, including literature, the visual arts, and music. 2B. Assessment of Outcomes Success in meeting the student learning outcomes outlined above is assessed in the Women’s Studies capstone course, Theoretical Issues in Women’s Studies (WSt 481) and in the Women’s Studies Internship (WSt 410). In addition, a review of the introductory program is carried out every couple of years in order to re-evaluate the topics covered and the effectiveness of the pedagogical approaches. In the Spring semester of each year, Women’s Studies holds an event called “Life After Women’s Studies.” Women’s Studies alumni return for this event and discuss the way in which their Women’s Studies training has affected their working experience after graduation. Women’s Studies uses this event to further assess the Department’s ability to train students for success in the jobs they select after graduation. 2C. Use of Assessments for Improvement Review of the Women’s Studies curriculum occurs regularly, with curricular changes occurring as limitations are revealed. Student commentary has been useful in planning and implementing the graduate school/job application workshop, as well as rethinking the Women’s Studies Introductory course. The Women’s Studies Department, along with other Liberal Arts units, will participate in an independently administered student assessment survey during the Spring of 2004. It is hoped that the outcomes of this survey will allow for better assessment of whether Women’s Studies students are successfully achieving learning objectives set by the unit, and where Women’s Studies might improve its service to students. 3. Professional or Specialized Accreditation Not Applicable.