FINAL DRAFT
Academic Program Review SUMMARY*
Department under review______Philosophy_________________________
Date self-study received in Dean’s office
Feb 2013
Date of external consultant’s review Dec 2012
Date APR received report June 2013
APR’S summary of self-study (first two boxes must be completed)
APR’s summary of how the academic program attempts to reach its goals and objectives
and the extent to which those goals and objectives have been achieved.
The Philosophy Department’s mission is to “nurture excellence in philosophy in thought and
practice throughout the University and the region” (APR Self-Study, p. 1). Departmental goals are met
through a curriculum with strong foundational and advanced courses typical of a philosophy major, in
addition to courses that complement other university programs. The mission also embraces quality teaching,
research, service and furthering inclusive excellence. It is noted by the external reviewer that the program
exhibits both “depth and breadth” (External Review, p. 2).
The Philosophy Department reports that a wide array of courses offered within a small department
and the independent research capstone course distinguishes the major. It should be noted that 32 upperdivision courses are taught by six full-time faculty and include several specializations (20 courses are
scheduled regularly over a 2-year timetable, although low enrollment does sometimes result in cancellation
of a course scheduled). Beyond the required major, other potential offerings are for courses germane to
several programs on campus (some required, some not), and two offerings are cross-listed with the
Psychology Department.
With enrollment languishing in the College of Liberal Studies, the current review shows that
Philosophy is also experiencing a slight decline in majors, noting from 2002/03 (50 majors/21 graduates)
through 2008/09 (41 majors/12 graduates). The number of minors has held steady over this same period of
time. Nevertheless, the department is continuing to assess the program, identifying priorities and planning
how to best strengthen the program, majors and enrollment.
APR’s comments including:
Notable strengths:
 A sound foundation in core philosophical courses.
 A wide range of courses for both the philosophy major and for other programs.
 Strong department commitment to offer a significant breadth of courses in order to meet student
interest and needs.
 Faculty are well-connected with students and provide quality mentoring.
Notable weaknesses:
 While there is a noted effort to address assessment of student learning outcomes, continued work is
needed in systematic assessment of the program and courses.
 A decline in both majors and enrollment in introductory general education courses.
 A mismatch between department by-laws with respect to teaching, research, and service, and what
seems to be actual practice (see Personnel section).
1
FINAL DRAFT
APR comments on any/all of the six specific components of the self-study (if applicable)
Self Study: Purposes
 The Department has identified six major goals to outline their mission. Two departmental goals are
related to excellence in dedicated teaching, professional service including faculty presentations and
publications, and university service on department and university committees.
 One goal is focused on a department dedicated to research, including undergraduate research.
 Additional goals address the provision of a distinctive student education: 1) supporting a quality major
and minor in Philosophy while reinforcing the general education curriculum and serving other university
programs (targeting depth and breadth); and 2) delivering exceptional “advising, training, and
mentoring” of philosophy majors and minors. The curriculum is described below. The second goal is
gauged through requiring philosophy majors to meet with an advisor before each semester.
 The last goal addresses inclusive excellence. This is achieved, in part, through the diverse array of
course offerings and through the hiring of faculty with varied backgrounds and areas of expertise.
Self Study: Curriculum
The major in Philosophy is 30 credits, with the common core being 18 credits plus 12 credits of
electives.
Core
3 credits: foundation/introductory course (selected from 2 courses)
3 credits: logic
3 credits: ethics (selected from 3 courses)
6 credits: history of philosophy (selected from 2 courses)
3 credits: Capstone course
18 credits
Electives
12 Remaining credits (4 credits, minimum, must be at the 300/400 level)
The minor in philosophy includes 3 credits in an introductory course, 6 credits in the history of philosophy,
and 9 remaining credits in electives. Therefore, the philosophy minor is flexible because of the many
courses offered at the upper-division course level.
The requirements in both the major and the minor allow students to attain strong foundations in general
philosophy, yet acquire a broad array of knowledge of their own philosophical interests, which supports the
departmental goals of breadth and depth. Six courses are offered within various general education
categories: Humanistic Studies, Mathematical/Logical Systems/Modern Languages, Minority
Cultures/Multiracial Women’s Studies and Arts. According to WINGS, 20 upper-division courses are
scheduled regularly over a 2-year timetable. Due to the high number of offerings, some upper-division
courses can only be offered every fourth semester. Having said that, the Philosophy Department has assured
APR and the UDS supports that students graduate in a timely manner because the major is so flexible.
The Department demonstrates a commitment to serving other programs by offering additional philosophy
courses. These courses are offered occasionally and on demand.
Self Study: Assessment of Student Learning & Degree of Program Success
Assessment Plan
The APR Self-Study devoted a large section to assessment, although a number of the conclusions thus far
are achieved through in-depth discussion among faculty. The Assessment portion of the document
identified many ideas, and the items reviewed for this summary will be the following: student learning
outcomes for the program, a report of progress on indirect and direct data plans, program changes made thus
2
FINAL DRAFT
far, and general education.
Student Learning Outcomes for the Program
The Department reports that the one over-arching goal is “to produce competent and creative Philosophy
majors” (APR Self-Study, p. 3), which encompasses students engaging in philosophical discussion and
research, situating their efforts with relevant philosophical contexts, and using appropriate methods to make
an independent contribution.
While the Philosophy Department had a list of topics as their objectives previously, the present assessment
plan encompasses 5 student learning objectives for students:
1) demonstrating a grasp of philosophical concepts;
2) exhibiting an understanding of the history of philosophy;
3) constructing clear, well-argued essays;
4) responding effectively to challenging philosophical criticisms; and,
5) effectively applying philosophical material to social issues.
Regarding the first learning objective, the Self-Study reports using direct methods to assess in all upperlevel courses, although these methods are not explicitly described. The plan is to take two years to evaluate
each objective, which is needed, given that courses might only be offered every 4th semester. This
committee notes that, with this schedule, it will take 10 years for the department to effectively evaluate its
entire set of student learning objectives in its upper-level courses.
Assessment Data: Direct
The Philosophy Department reports that assessment data was provided through Biennial Assessment
Reports, which were accepted by the College of Liberal Studies. However, the APR Committee had only
access to one report and no data was provided. Having said that, the Philosophy Department does have
assessment goals: 1) majors in the department should demonstrate competency in relation to the 5 learning
objectives; 2) students gain admittance to graduate schools; and, 3) students procure undergraduate research
grants. However, the data (and how the data was collected) to support these statements is unclear. The
department reports steady improvement in capstone presentations, and improvement in students identifying
criticisms and responding to criticisms in their work. These statements appear to be faculty opinion thus far,
as no specific measures are reported.
An example of direct assessment data is identified as the PHL 496 coursework. While a lengthy explanation
of changes to PHL 496 was provided, no clear student data was offered in support of these changes.
Assessment Data: Indirect
The department reports the following measures as indirect data: 1) student comments; 2) faculty judgment
of the competence levels in two student philosophy undergraduate organizations; 3) performance of teaching
assistants in intro philosophy courses; and 4) major exit surveys that ask for feedback on the major. No
survey data or collections of student comments were provided for review.
Program Changes in Response to Data:
1) Capstone Course: changes have been made in relation to adding units of coursework, although no
rationale was provided (i.e. data). Examples of changes were adding topics such as a library
training session, career-preparation, and discussion of philosophical sources, and also more formal
consultation with faculty members most aligned with their research.
2) Curricular changes were made with new courses being added, in relation to several areas of
philosophy, as a result of new hires.
General Education Student Learning Outcomes
3
FINAL DRAFT
For each of the department’s general education offerings, the following were documented:
1) student learning outcomes;
2) the general education outcome under assessment;
3) knowledge gained from the assessment; and,
4) changes that were made as a result of the assessment data.
The department listed 5 general education courses. Each course had four student learning objectives, and
was measured through various techniques, including an assessment essay, a pre/post test, a matching test,
and two different 12-page papers. The measures in this section were clearly documented. Relevance was
clear, and it was clear what student learning objectives were being assessed, and how they were being
assessed. Results were clearly documented, along with changes made based on the obtained data. Having
said that, the raw data should have been included as an appendix with the study.
Self Study: Previous Academic Program Review and New Program Initiatives
The 2005 APR report is now 9 years ago. This report had noted that the department was beginning to
investigate how other Philosophy departments across the nation conducted their capstone courses,
“especially in terms of purpose and outcomes and how their assessment has been planned and conducted in
general (2005 APR, p. 4).
Recommendations were solved by including library training and encouraging earlier feedback in the
capstone projects have been implemented, as reported herein. Additionally, the request to develop
assessment measures for the general education program has been completed (i.e., an essay in the
Introduction courses and a pre/post test in Intro to Logic).
Self Study: Personnel
With the Fall 2013 hire, there are 6 full-time faculty in the department, with all members tenured
except for two. It is understood that the faculty have been teaching overloads due to external issues. An area
to note is that actual teaching responsibilities and loads do not reflect departmental by-laws. The external
reviewer notes that the by-laws state a 40:30:30 ratio for teaching, research and service, but faculty load
ratios appear closer to a 60:20:20 ratio.
Self Study: Support for Achieving Academic Program Goals (Resources)
There were no deficiencies reported in this area. In the 2011-2012 Departmental Summary report,
numerous grants from UW-L and the College of Liberal Studies were received, and supported work on
curriculum revisions and development in the areas of inclusive-excellence, lesson study, and new
coursework, showing that there are resources available to support curriculum revision and development.
Rising costs in printing, with flat-line budgets, have pushed instructors to utilize D2L, thereby
pushing printing costs to students. While the department reported that office space would need to be located
for the new Fall 2013 hire, it is assumed that the move of the Department to Centennial Hall aided in
resolving a space issue.
The department noted that a reallocation of program assistant time may need to be considered, given
that the work load for the 50% position (shared by the philosophy, environmental studies, and international
studies programs), is more than the 50% allocation. Neither the external reviewer nor the Dean’s office
commented on this area.
External Reviewer Recommendations
APR’s Comments on External Reviewer (if applicable)
4
FINAL DRAFT
Curriculum
Program Mission: The reviewer felt that the mission was appropriate, and in keeping with other philosophy
majors. He noted a “surprisingly high number of philosophy courses” that were appropriate to other majors.
Program Design: The reviewer noted the depth and breadth of the program. A cautionary observation was
made in relation to the multiplicity of offered courses and also a suggestion to offer courses in a more
predictable rhythm. In addition, the external reviewer noted that not having a philosophy course as a
requirement for general education worked against the Philosophy department’s ability to be a stronger part
of the general education program. He stated that the description of the general education requirement for
humanistic studies, specifically the “…focus on what it means to be human, and what was, is, and should be
valued by human beings,” must be filled by a literature course, rather than students having a choice. While
other courses may be taken as a second elective, Philosophy is only one choice among many.
Assessment: The external reviewer observed that the department has made a plausible plan to engage in
more direct assessment measures, as suggested in the 2004-2005 review, yet also made use of indirect
measures. He noted that there is “clear evidence” that assessment data is being put to good use, as changes
are documented as results from these measures are gained.
Faculty: Credentials were observed to be strong, with a lack of a specialist in Greek philosophy noted
(However, this position was filled in the fall of 2013). He noted the heavy teaching load and encouraged
more contributions of scholarly publications.
Recommendations: These included holding regular meetings, publishing an 8 semester schedule of offered
courses, and a review of the capstone course (specifically the sharing of instruction), along with a
departmental discussion on the nature and demands of philosophy courses in general. Other suggestions
were made in relation to introductory courses, and in developing more cross-listings for the plethora of
courses that are now offered.
Department’s response to the Reviewer Recommendations
APR’s Comments on the Department’s Response (if applicable)
The department’s response addressed all of the points covered in the reviewer’s letter, and listed some of the
actions taken to address concerns. The response concludes with a two-tiered prioritization of goals, namely
main concerns, and long-term concerns. Main concerns include holding regular department meetings,
clarifying department by-laws with respect to division of responsibilities in teaching, research and service,
working with General Education and the College to improve the availability of philosophy courses,
addressing student concerns with feedback on assignments, and rotating the instruction of the capstone
course. Long-term concerns include increasing cross-listings of coursework, creating and advertising a
stable 6 semester offering of coursework, considering revisions to the major itself, and working toward more
unified departmental expectations for introductory and other courses in the major.
Dean’s Letter
APR’s Comments on Dean’s Letter (if applicable)
The Dean focused on the external reviewer’s suggestions for improvement. She noted that rectifying the
place of philosophy in general education and college core requirements cannot be immediately addressed,
given faculty governance. However, she addressed this by forwarding this concern part of a charge to the
appropriate college oversight committee. She also noted that several suggestions have already been
instituted, i.e., a higher-level course in Logic/Classics will take place with a Fall 2013 new hire. In addition,
5
FINAL DRAFT
the capstone seminar started a rotation of instruction in fall 2013.
Dean Benson supports the department in working toward the following: 1) increase of cross-listings of
coursework; 2) discussion of the elimination/substitution of the introductory philosophy course; 3) using
college resources to support publication; 4) discussing workload with regard to department by-laws; 5)
uniformity of course requirements in the introductory course and courses in the major; 6) regularly
scheduled departmental meetings; 7) the publication of a 6-semester schedule of offered courses, working
towards decreasing instances of under-enrolled courses that require cancellation; 8) maintaining a balance of
stability and innovation in its curriculum; and 9) continued assessment of the major.
APR’s Recommendations (must be completed)
Recommendations:
The APR Committee recognizes that the Philosophy department faculty are highly engaged with their
students and are committed to student learning.
With that in mind, the APR Committee recommends:

The Philosophy Department should focus on strengthening enrollment in the program, regardless of
General Education categories or the CLS core. While course revision might be weighed as an
option, the Committee suggests that the department also consider more active recruiting of majors,
promoting the minor with ideal majors (particularly those departments with which philosophy
courses have already been created), and succeed in getting more courses cross-listed with other
departments, as already achieved with Psychology.

The Philosophy Department should focus on program assessment. The 5 identified outcomes are
excellent goals, and all 5 should be analyzed across curriculum (rather than within a single course)
for the next Academic Program Review. The Committee further recommends using resources such
as Dr. Barlow, University Assessment Coordinator, and Dr. Kopp, University Writing Programs
Coordinator, to identify more formal ways of collecting and documenting data especially in writing.
The APR Committee acknowledges the success achieved in general education assessment and
suggests that these strategies might be applied to the overall program across courses.
□ No serious areas to address – review in next regularly scheduled cycle
□ Some areas to address – review in next regularly scheduled cycle
X Some areas to address – department should submit short report on progress to Fac
Senate/Provost’s Office in 3 years
Since the last APR report (2005) had also requested assessment data, the APR Committee recommends
that collected assessment data be provided in the report, along with a numerical analysis of results. For this
Report, at least two of the stated program objectives should be used for assessment. It should be
understood that data for all 5 objectives will be included in the next regularly scheduled APR cycle.
* APR’s report to faculty senate will consist of this completed form in electronic form.
6