Liberal Arts Essentials Assessment Plan
Course: PHIL: 350
Writing Unit:
Instructor(s):
Methods: Final Paper; LAE Course Evaluation Form
LAE Category: Western Heritage, A
Goal 1: Muskingum students will develop skills in perception, analysis and expression.
Objective:
Learning Objective 1:
A Muskingum College student will be able to define a meaningful issue (or problem)
related to an academic area of study, formulate a position (or solution or argument) on
that issue, and communicate his or her position effectively to a professional audience.
First Evidence Stream:
A. Student work examined
List the tasks used to measure the objective (e.g., exams, research project/paper assignments,
presentation or class assignment) and attach a copy of each along with the Departmental plan.
 Students write a final paper on the argument of one or more philosophers covered in the
course. Students are required to explain a philosopher’s argument, assumptions, and
underlying philosophical problems. They are required to evaluate the argument, offering
reasons for or against it. The student is usually required to respond to possible objections
to his/her own view.
 The second stream of evidence will be the LAE Course Evaluation Form given in the last
week of class.
B. Scoring Criteria
Briefly explain the criteria used to evaluate student performance in relation to the learning
objective (i.e., what constitutes advanced, proficient, partially proficient, not proficient, etc.)
Attach copies of measurement instrument or rubric.
Approved 9/2011
Final Paper Rubric
Paper Objective
4
3
1) The paper
The paper offers The paper offers
offers an accurate a completely
an interpretation
interpretation of a accurate
of a
philosophical
interpretation of philosophical
argument and/or
a philosophical
argument and/or
concept.
argument and/or concept with two
concept.
or less minor
errors and no
major error (s).
2) The paper
communicates
the interpretation
and evaluation in
correct English
and an organized
structure.
3) The paper
offers a reasoned
evaluation of the
philosophical
argument and/or
concept.
The paper
communicates
the interpretation
and evaluation in
correct English
with no major
error(s) in
grammar or
structure.
The paper offers
a fully reasoned
evaluation of the
philosophical
argument.
The paper
communicates
the interpretation
and evaluation
with three or less
major errors in
grammar or
structure.
The paper offers
a reasoned
evaluation of the
philosophical
argument with at
least one major
reason for the
evaluation.
2
The paper offers
an interpretation
of a
philosophical
argument and/or
idea with more
than two minor
errors and no
more than one
major error (s).
The paper
communicates
the interpretation
and evaluation
with more than
three major
errors in
grammar or
structure.
The paper offers
an evaluation of
the philosophical
argument with
one or two minor
reasons for the
evaluation.
1
The paper does
not offer an
interpretation, or
the interpretation
is completely
erroneous.
The paper fails to
communicate an
interpretation and
evaluation
because of deep
grammatical and
organizational
flaws.
The paper does
not offer an
evaluation of the
philosophical
argument/concept
due to absence of
reasoned
argument.
 Score: +_______/12
 Advanced: 10-12
 Proficient: 7-9
 Not Proficient: 1-6
Second Evidence Stream: The course evaluation form will be used.
Exceeding expectations will be defined as a student giving an average score across the
four questions of 3.68 – 5.00.
Meeting expectations will be defined as a student giving an average score across the
four questions of 2.33 - 3.67.
Failing to meet expectations will be defined as a student giving an average score across
the four questions of 1 – 2.32.
Approved 9/2011
Stream One Paper Example:
Phil 350: Philosophy Paper Assignment #1
 The main goal of these papers is to explain and evaluate the arguments from one of the
major philosophers that we are covering: Kant, Hegel, Marx, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche,
Emerson. These papers are due before class on the date marked “draft one.” You must
submit a first draft. The optional second draft provides you with the opportunity to
improve your grade.
 Draft one of paper one is due before class on February 1st. Submit the paper as an email attachment in Microsoft word to tlekan@muskingum.edu. You should make sure
that you save the paper as “your name, draft 1, paper 1.”
 The default assignment is to answer one of these two questions. You are free to choose
to write on another topic of your own choosing, however, you must make an office hour
appointment to discuss this before you hand in the paper. Unless you do so, you are
expected to write on one of the two questions below.
1)
_____ Paper adequately explains Kant’s view that space and time are pure forms of intuition,
showing how arithmetic and geometry allow for synthetic a priori judgments.
_____ Paper explains whether Does Kant’s argument succeeds or not.
_____ Paper is written in correct English.
_____ Paper offers citations in proper format.
2)
______ Paper explains Kant’s view that causality is a category that makes experience possible,
but is not derived from experience. Paper shows how this is supposed to support the idea that we
have synthetic a priori knowledge of the laws of nature.
_____ Paper explains whether Kant’s argument succeeds or not.
_____ Paper is written in correct English.
_____ Paper offers citations in proper format.
THE FIRST STEP OF THE PAPER IS TO EXPLAIN PHILOSPOHICAL ARGUMENTS
ON SOME TOPIC. This step will involve some degree of interpretation of the philosophical
texts. View your task as quoting the philosopher, and then offering an explanation of what he is
trying to say in your own words.
6/11
Approved 9/2011
THE SECOND STEP OF THE PAPER IS TO EVALUATE the argument. Does it seem
right or wrong? Does it seem flawed in some way? What could be done to improve the
approach? What examples might support or contradict the idea offered by the philosopher.
Special 350 Requirements
1) The main goal of this paper is to interpret and evaluate the arguments and ideas presented in
the texts of the philosophers. Therefore, most of your focus should be on the actual texts by the
authors Kant, Hegel, Marx, Kierkegaard, Emerson, or Nietzsche. If you do choose to bring in
some of the explanatory secondary literature in our packet by Schacht, Marcuse or others, you
should do so sparingly.
2) If you wish to incorporate ANY secondary sources, you must present these sources to the
instructor during an office hour appointment. Please note that use of secondary sources
(web sites, books) without prior approval may result in a failing grade.
Approved 9/2011