Understanding Plural Societiesunderstanding Plural Societies

Each General Education category is grounded in a set of learning outcomes. For the full set of learning outcomes for Understanding Plural Societies courses see: www.gened.umd.edu This rubric is designed as a tool to assess activities aimed at student gains in the follow learning outcome(s) for the Understanding Plural Societies General Education Category:

At the completion of this course, students will be able to: 1. Demonstrate understanding of the basis of human diversity and socially-driven constructions of difference: biological, cultural, historical, social, economic, or ideological. 2. Demonstrate understanding of fundamental concepts and methods that produce knowledge about plural societies and systems of classification. 3. Explicate the policies, social structures, ideologies or institutional structures that do or do not create inequalities based on notions of human difference. 4. Interrogate, critique, or question traditional hierarchies or social categories 5. Analyze forms and traditions of thought or expression in relation to cultural, historical, political, and social contexts, as for example, dance, foodways, literature, music, and philosophical and religious traditions. 6. Use a comparative, intersectional, or relational framework to examine the experiences, cultures, or histories of two or more social groups or constituencies within a single society or across societies, or within a single historical timeframe or across historical time.

Criterion Descriptions of levels of student performance for review of student Advanced Proficient Beginning Unacceptable work Concepts In addition to accurately recalling, defining, Accurately recalls, defines and Correctly recognizes or defines Cannot consistently define or Can articulate and describing key concepts, is able to describes many key concepts core concepts but has difficulty describe core concepts when fundamental concepts explain theories underlying key concepts Can articulate theories associated recalling key ideas or describing these are presented and one or more bases and distinguishes between examples with and relationships among key relationships between concepts Fails to understand many simple for human diversity Can differentiate related concepts that are concepts and provides limited Shows some capacity to apply relationships among concepts (biological, cultural, distinct from each other examples related to concepts concepts, theories or empirical Relies on peers or instructor to historical, social, Can apply (e.g., complicates, challenges, Can apply concepts in contexts observations to examples apply concepts even in contexts economic, or ideology). opens up) key concepts or theories to discussed in class or readings described in course discussed explicitly in class or (Learning outcome 1) novel contexts and provides specific readings examples

May 14, 2015 Methods Explains how to apply methodology and Is able to describe methods used and Recognizes methods used & Cannot recognize methods used or Can describe or use derive a valid interpretation from this type of information or analysis type(s) of data produced the type(s) of data produced methodologies (close application produced Does not fully appreciate the Is unable to distinguish acceptable readings, historical Can describe rationale underlying methods Can explain why a method is used but rationale underlying use of from unsound applications of analysis, qualitative and their unique benefits and drawbacks does not comprehend the full range method(s) method interviews, survey Critically evaluates quality of information of benefits and drawbacks Recognizes that methods can be Is unaware of how to determine research, etc.) that or analysis produced, based on Is able to distinguish stronger from used well vs. poorly (e.g., that differences in quality of produce knowledge methodologies used to generate weaker applications of a given various methods differ in quality information or analysis about human diversity information method of data produced) and plural societies. (Learning outcome #2) Critical evaluation Consistently distinguishes evidence from Is able to differentiate between Recognizes that evidence differs Fails to identify logical flaws in Offers critical analysis: interpretation evidence and interpretation from interpretation but has reasoning or exhibits logical  Of social or Recognizes conditions under which Sometimes recognizes assumptions difficulty applying these fallacies in own arguments institutional structures assumptions are and are not defensible and their role in modifying concepts correctly Fails to identify the ways in which or ideologies that create Consistently applies an intersectional or conclusions (i.e., does not do this Is able to differentiate stronger multiple identities might be or disrupt hierarchies, comparative framework to illustrate consistently) from weaker reasoning at a represented or instituted or how  Of traditional complex understanding of identity Is able to apply an intersectional or gross level when evaluating they might inform one another hierarchies or social formation comparative framework to argument strength categories, or Recognizes that identity formation is understand identity formation Can give an example of an  Using comparative, relational across groups and that relative Recognizes that identity formation is intersectional or comparative intersectional or power can be an important factor in relational across groups framework relational frameworks intergroup relations (Learning outcomes #3,4,5, & 6) The Rubric was developed by the Faculty Board, supported by the Office of Undergraduate Studies and the Office of Institutional Research, Planning, and Assessment with the instructors upon review of the AAC&U VALUE rubrics and according to standards determined by the Faculty Board for student performance in the General Education courses. The rubric defines the standards for student performance in courses at the University of Maryland.

May 14, 2015