Department of Criminal Justice &
Sociology
School of Liberal Arts
B.S. in Sociology
CIP Code: 451101
Program Code: 180
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
1
Sociology Learning Outcomes
1.
Students will demonstrate competency in the field of Sociology in general.
2.
Students will demonstrate competency in the core areas of Sociology (general theory,
research methods, and statistics).
3.
Students will demonstrate competency in critical thinking.
4.
Students will demonstrate competency in applying sociological theories to a variety of
sociological phenomena.
5.
Students will demonstrate competency in conducting social research, including
conceptualization, analysis, and interpretation.
6.
Students will demonstrate competency in writing effectively.
7.
Students will demonstrate computer literacy.
The Sociology Program is not accredited by an outside organization.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
2
Sociology Learning Outcomes, cont.
How all of the Sociology Learning Outcomes Incorporate Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy
1.
Students are expected to remember (Level I) a wide range of sociological concepts, including theories
and methodological/statistical techniques (Learning Outcomes 1-2).
2.
Students are also expected to be able to understand, apply, and analyze (Levels 2-4) these sociological
theories, methodologies, and statistical techniques in the proper contexts (Learning Outcomes 1, 2, and
4).
3.
Students are also expected to evaluate (Level 5) these concepts, theories, methodologies, and statistical
procedures by applying critical thinking skills (Learning Outcomes 1-3, 4).
4.
Students are also expected to create (Level 6) a research paper that requires them to state hypotheses,
test them using the appropriate statistical procedure, and interpret their findings (Learning Outcome 56).
Source for Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy: Forehand, Mary. 2005. “Bloom’s Taxonomy: Original and Revised,” in M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging
Perspectives on Learning, Teaching, and Technology. Retrieved on August 27, 2008, from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
3
Alignment of Outcomes
Alignment of Sociology Program Objectives with
Cameron University’s Mission Statement
CAMERON UNIVERISITY MISSION STATEMENT
Cameron University provides a diverse and dynamic student body access to quality educational opportunities;
fosters a student-centered academic environment that combines innovative classroom teaching with
experiential learning; prepares students for professional success, responsible citizenship, life-long learning, and
meaningful contributions to a rapidly changing world; and is a driving force in the cultural life and economic
development of the region.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
4
Alignment of Outcomes
Alignment of Sociology Program Objectives with the
School of Liberal Art’s Mission Statement
SCHOOL OF LIBERAL ARTS MISSION STATEMENT
The mission of the School of Liberal Arts is to offer quality associate and baccalaureate programs in the fine
arts, humanities, and social sciences. The School also plays an important role in general education. In our
programs and course offerings, the School of Liberal Arts fosters a student-centered academic environment, in
keeping with the mission of the University, and is dedicated to guiding students to the highest possible
standard of achievement.
The School of Liberal Arts also actively seeks to make the University a driving force in the cultural life and
economic development of the region by encouraging faculty scholarship, developing partnerships with the
community, and producing concerts, recitals, theatre productions, art exhibitions, lectures, symposia,
workshops, camps, and public forums which enrich the intellectual and cultural lives of all of our constituents.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
5
Alignment of Outcomes
Alignment of Sociology Program Objectives with the
Department of Criminal Justice and Sociology’s Mission Statement
DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND SOCIOLOGY MISSION STATEMENT
The Department of Criminal Justice and Sociology at Cameron University offers programs leading to a Bachelor
of Science degree with a major in Criminal Justice, a Bachelor of Science degree with a major in Sociology, and
an Associate Degree in Applied Science in Criminal Justice. Our academic programs empower students to
explore their interests, express their ideas, and experience the pride of uncovering new knowledge.
The Criminal Justice programs allow students to learn about the etiology of crime and societal reaction to the
causes of crime. The role of law enforcement agencies, courts, correctional agencies, and private agencies that
assist in the prevention and control of crime and delinquency are within the purview of the Criminal Justice
programs.
The Sociology degree provides critical knowledge to students on social institutions, social change, and
consequences of human behavior. Students learn to apply research skills and theoretical knowledge to the
challenging issues of our times. Graduates of our programs find employment with criminal justice agencies,
social services, government agencies, teaching, or proceed to graduate school.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
6
Alignment of Outcomes
Alignment of Sociology Program Objectives with Cameron University,
School of Liberal Arts, and the Department of Criminal Justice and Sociology
Mission Statements
The Sociology Program, in the spirit of the mission statements of the university, school, and department, serves
a variety of students in Southwest Oklahoma. The Program provides a diverse student population with:
1.
An intellectual challenge through its curriculum and diverse faculty expertise. This curriculum
emphasizes the complexity of the social world, along with the integration of theoretical
frameworks, methodological techniques, and critical thinking skills required to conduct meaningful
social research in order to better understand social life and human behavior.
2.
Various student-centered learning opportunities, such as learning how to apply sociological theory
to understanding social forces and writing research papers with elements of statistical analysis.
The core required courses in the Sociology Program are aligned with national trends in the discipline, providing
students with the necessary background to succeed in the private or public sector, or in pursuit of graduate
education in sociology.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
7
Alignment of Outcomes
Alignment of Sociology Program Objectives with
Cameron University’s Strategic Plan 2013
The Sociology Program has learning outcomes that are in sync with Cameron University’s Plan 2013 focusing on
choices for the second century of the institution’s existence. Here are some of the ways that the program
contributes to the goals identified in Plan 2013:
University of Choice: The program is staffed by terminal degreed high quality faculty ensuring course delivery
in multiple formats. Faculty participate in the yearly program assessment processes and in maintaining existing
accreditations.
College Experience of Choice: The Sociology Club promotes a sense of community among students and faculty
through projects geared towards helping local community groups. The Sociology International Honor Society
Alpha Kappa Delta engages students in academic activities. Also, faculty participate in the general advisement
of all Sociology majors.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
8
Measures of Learning Outcomes
Direct Measures
Components of The Educational Testing Service MFT in Sociology are used for Learning Outcomes 1-3.
Students are expected to score at or above the national average on the relevant parts of the MFT in
Sociology for these Learning Outcomes to be met.
1.
2.
3.
We use the MFT Total Score to measure Learning Outcome #1.
We use the MFT Subscore 1 (Core Sociology) to measure Learning Outcome #2.
We use the MFT Subscore 2 (Critical Thinking) to measure Learning Outcome #3.
Paper subscores from Sociology courses are used to assess Learning Outcomes 4-6.
Aggregate student averages are expected to be 70% or above for these Learning Outcomes to be met.
4.
5.
6.
We use theoretical application subscores from papers written in Sociology courses to measure Learning Outcome
#4.
We use the total score from the research paper required in SOCI 2223 – Methods in Social Research to measure
Learning Outcome #5.
We use writing quality subscores from papers written in Sociology courses to measure Learning Outcome #6.
Passing grade (D or better) in CIS 1013 – Intro to Computer Information Systems is used to assess Learning
Outcome #7.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
9
Measures of Learning Outcomes
Indirect Measures
The Sociology Program currently does not incorporate any indirect measures for assessing learning outcomes.
Our main focus has been to improve the reliability and validity of the direct measures. Results from previously
used student surveys suggested the Sociology Program was meeting the needs of students, yet MFT scores
were below the national average.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
10
Measures of Learning Outcomes
Strategies Addressing Shortfalls in Student Learning
1.
The Sociology Program requires that Sociology majors earn a C or better in all five courses required for
the B.S. in Sociology. Any student who fails to earn at least a C in any one of these courses must repeat
the course until this requirement is met.
2.
The Sociology faculty use the Early Alert system in AggieAccess to alert students about poor grades.
3.
The Sociology faculty have mentioned in previous assessment reports our consideration of using SOCI
4793 – Senior Seminar as a required capstone course for two purposes:
i.
ii.
The course would serve as a method to address some of the shortfalls by summarizing
sociological theories, methods, and major concepts for students in their senior year.
Students would take the MFT in Sociology online in this course and their MFT score would count
as part of their overall course grade. This would incentivize better performance on the exam. As it
stands now, no extrinsic incentives exist for students to perform to the best of their ability on the
MFT.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
11
Report on Previous Priority Outcomes
The three outcomes listed below were unmet in the 2007-2008 Academic Year and were consequently included
as our three priority outcomes for the 2008-2009 Academic Year PQIR.
PO #1:
PO #2:
PO #3:
Students will demonstrate competency in the field of Sociology in general.
Students will demonstrate competency in the core areas of Sociology (general theory, research
methods, and statistics).
Students will demonstrate competency in critical thinking.
Each outcome will be discussed in the next several slides, including historical trends and actions taken to
resolve outcome shortfall.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
12
Report on Previous Priority Outcomes
Program Outcome 1: Students will demonstrate competency in the field of Sociology in general.
Multi-year data between Fall 2004 and Spring 2009 indicate an initial drop in scores in relation to the national average followed by a more recent
increase in scores. This outcome is considered to be our most important Program Outcome, so even though the five-year trend was positive over
the past two years, we still included it as a priority outcome simply because the objective was unmet.
Specific actions taken to address this outcome:
The sociology faculty continuously evaluate the adequacy of course materials and seek to diversify course offerings in order to address
variegated MFT assessment areas. In addition to regularly offering core courses and independent studies, the Sociology faculty offer at
least 12 non-overlapping elective courses over two academic years to increase overall student competency in the field. This is on average
15 credit hours more than the required 21 elective hours in a given two year period. The faculty members encourage all majors to
explore more elective courses in Sociology.
The Sociology faculty also submitted and received approval to add a course on Social Psychology. This area is incorporated into the
Sociology MFT, so students who take SOCI 3223 – Social Psychology should improve on their overall performance on the MFT.
04-05
MFT Total
Score
05-06
06-07
07-08
08-09
CU
Nat Avg
CU
Nat Avg
CU
Nat Avg
CU
Nat Avg
CU
Nat Avg
147.7
148.6
146.2
148.6
142.3
148.4
148.6
149.2
148.1
148.4
CU score is .6%
below Nat Avg
CU score is 1.6%
below Nat Avg
CU score is 4.1%
below Nat Avg
CU score is .4%
below Nat Avg
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
CU score is .2%
below Nat Avg
13
Report on Previous Priority Outcomes
Program Outcome 1: Students will demonstrate competency in the field of Sociology in general.
Update:
The Sociology faculty concluded in the fall of 2009 to continue our strategy of high standards for student learning and
ensuring that course grades are closely aligned with student learning and performance throughout the 2009-2010 academic
year.
This decision was based on the closing gap between CU student scores and national scores for the two previous years.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
14
Report on Previous Priority Outcomes
Program Outcome 2: Students will demonstrate competency in the core areas of Sociology (general theory,
research methods, and statistics)
Multi-year data between Fall 2004 and Spring 2009 indicate an initial drop in scores in relation to the national average followed by a more recent
increase in scores.
Specific actions taken to address this outcome:
In response to MFT scores on Statistics and Research Methods, the faculty member teaching these courses has included an innovative
teaching strategy that involves students writing their own statistics problems. Students first practice problems written by the professor
and then write their own to demonstrate a more complete understanding of hypothesis testing and the appropriateness of particular
statistical procedures and research methods based on level of measurement. This task is aligned with Bloom’s revised taxonomy that
emphasizes deeper understanding among students.
In response to MFT scores on Sociological Theory, the faculty member teaching the course sees that inclusive and balanced treatment of
discrete topics requires equal distribution of instructional effort. Accordingly, the range of subject coverage has recently been broadened
at the expense of an in-depth treatment of select topics. The time constraint in covering a list of theories in one semester is mitigated by
utilizing a series of study questions, summary handouts, and short monographs prepared by the professor and distributed to students in
an effort to expand coverage. The professor also holds out-of-class discussion sessions every week. Students who attend these sessions
find them very helpful, and the overall class performance on exams has improved.
04-05
MFT Core
Soc Score
05-06
06-07
07-08
08-09
CU
Nat Avg
CU
Nat Avg
CU
Nat Avg
CU
Nat Avg
CU
Nat Avg
47.5
49.6
44.0
49.6
42.3
49.2
47.4
49.5
47.8
48.9
CU score is 4.2%
below Nat Avg
CU score is 11.3%
below Nat Avg
CU score is 14.0%
below Nat Avg
CU score is 4.2%
below Nat Avg
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
CU score is 2.2%
below Nat Avg
15
Report on Previous Priority Outcomes
Program Outcome 2: Students will demonstrate competency in the core areas of Sociology (general theory,
research methods, and statistics).
Update:
The Sociology faculty continued these practices throughout the 2009-2010 academic year, given that gap in CU scores and
national scores was closing.
Furthermore, the statistics course includes a Blackboard supplement that contains numerous practice problems with answers
provided, along with practice exams to help students better learn the material and prepare for examinations.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
16
Report on Previous Priority Outcomes
Program Outcome 3: Students will demonstrate competency in critical thinking.
Multi-year data between Fall 2004 and Spring 2009 indicate an initial drop in scores in relation to the national average followed by a more recent
increase in scores. Note that the CU score was slightly above the national average for this outcome.
Specific actions taken to address this outcome:
The Sociology faculty stress the construction of sound and valid argumentation in writing assignments. In all upper-division courses,
students are required to provide rationales for the positions they assume or the claims they advance.
Overall, the faculty members stress critical thinking strategies that are integrating (showing how concepts/statements interrelate to
support the issue under discussion), comparative (contrasting thematic points in and across texts or authors), applying (interpreting a
structured event in society from a theoretical perspective or showing how such a perspective might explain it), and inquisitive (deriving
questions, answers, implications, inferences, and assumptions from given information).
Furthermore, students in SOCI 1113 (online), SOCI 2013, and SOCI 2223 solve hypothesis testing problems that emphasize the critical
evaluation of statistical results to derive the proper conclusions.
04-05
MFT
Critical
Thinking
Score
05-06
06-07
07-08
08-09
CU
Nat Avg
CU
Nat Avg
CU
Nat Avg
CU
Nat Avg
CU
Nat Avg
46.9
48.7
45.8
48.7
40.2
48.5
48.0
49.2
48.5
48.3
CU score is 3.7%
below Nat Avg
CU score is 6.0%
below Nat Avg
CU score is 17.1%
below Nat Avg
CU score is 2.4%
below Nat Avg
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
CU score is .4%
above Nat Avg
17
Report on Previous Priority Outcomes
Program Outcome 3: Students will demonstrate competency in critical thinking.
Update:
The Sociology faculty decided to essentially keep doing what we had been doing over the past year or so, given that the CU score for this
outcome was .4% higher than the national average in 2008-2009, when it was 17.1% below the national average just two years prior.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
18
Priority Outcomes Reported This Year
Student-Learning Outcomes and Measurements
Program Outcome #1
MEASUREMENTS OF STUDENT LEARNING OR SERVICE OUTCOME
PROGRAM
OUTCOME
PO #1: Students will
demonstrate
competency in the
field of Sociology in
general.
CURRICULUM
AREA OR TARGET
AUDIENCE
All Sociology courses.
Measurements
We use the Sociology
MFT Total Score to
measure this outcome.
Methods used to
determine validity
of measurement
instruments
Methods used
to determine
reliability of
measurements
The faculty have 15 years
of historical data on 281
Sociology graduates. We
use this historical data to
run correlation analyses
using student overall GPA
and MFT Total Score.
Statistically significant
positive relationships are
evidence of some degree
of validity.
ETS releases
national average
scores every year.
These scores are
fairly consistent
over the years.
The following link
describes the evaluation
process used by ETS
when developing the
MFT:
http://www.ets.org/mft/
about/content
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Schedule for
measurements
Fall and Spring
Semesters.
The following link
describes the
evaluation process
used by ETS when
developing the
MFT:
http://www.ets.or
g/mft/about/cont
ent
19
Priority Outcomes Reported This Year
Display of Assessment Data
Program Outcome #1
Student Total Score
on MFT (N=13)
Did Student Meet
Program Objective
132
No
147
No
148
No
151
Yes
151
Yes
151
Yes
144
No
142
No
151
Yes
171
Yes
134
No
137
No
136
No
Percentage of Students
Meeting Program
Objective
CU Average in Relation
to National Average
National average is 148.1
38.5%
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
CU average is 1.6% below
the national average.
20
Priority Outcomes Reported This Year
Analysis of Assessment Data
Program Outcome #1
PO #1: Students will demonstrate competency in the field of Sociology in general.
The Sociology Faculty have made requests in the past for comparative MFT data on peer institutions, but have never received
such data.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
21
Priority Outcomes Reported This Year
Action Plan
Program Outcome #1
The Sociology faculty have restructured the prerequisites for many Sociology courses this academic year. While SOCI 1113
(Introductory Sociology) remains a prerequisite for virtually all of our courses, we now require students to also have , at minimum,
junior standing to take 4000-level Sociology courses. This should be beneficial in a couple of ways:
1. These 2000- and 3000-level courses, including statistics, research methods, and theory, will provide a more sound
foundation for student success if they are taken prior to taking 4000-level courses.
2. This will require students to take more 2000- and 3000-level Sociology courses earlier in their academic career. They
are more likely to succeed in these than in 4000-level courses, thereby positively influencing student retention.
These course prerequisite changes are consistent with the guidelines published in “Liberal Learning and the Sociology
Major Updated: Meeting the Challenge of Teaching Sociology in the Twenty-First Century,” published by the American
Sociological Association in 2004.
The Sociology faculty have also restricted the number of repeats for the Internship in Sociology and Independent Study courses.
Previously, students could repeat both of these courses for a total of six credit hours each. With that arrangement, Sociology
students could possibly take 12 credit hours on non-substantive Sociology coursework out of 21 credit hours of Sociology electives
required for the major. Now, Sociology students will only be able to take up to three credit hours for each course, thereby
requiring them to take more substantive Sociology courses that will hopefully increase student learning in the discipline.
Status of these recommended course changes: the Curriculum Committee approved these changes on October 18, 2010.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
22
Priority Outcomes Reported This Year
Action Plan
Program Outcome #1, cont.
The Sociology faculty have finally decided to create a capstone course instead of modifying the existing Senior Seminar course
(SOCI 4793). This will be a 3-credit hour course that is intended to integrate important sociological concepts, theories, methods,
and critical thinking skills. Program assessment will be a component of this course in which student performance on the MFT will
factor into their course grade, thereby providing an incentive for students to take the exam more seriously.
The inclusion of the capstone course into the curriculum is consistent with the recommendations of the ASA Task Force on
the Undergraduate Major in their report entitled “Liberal Learning and the Sociology Major Updated: Meeting the
challenge of Teaching Sociology in the Twenty-First Century.”
Correlations of course grades and scores on the MFT consistently show a relationship between the two. As student GPA drops, so
do scores on the MFT. This suggests that the faculty might try harder to better motivate students to do better in all of their
courses. However, the faculty recognize their limitation in this matter, yet feel that it is important to expand our efforts further.
The Sociology faculty will continue to utilize various assignments and teaching strategies recommended in previous PQIR reports.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
23
Priority Outcomes Reported This Year
Student-Learning Outcomes and Measurements
Program Outcome #2
MEASUREMENTS OF STUDENT LEARNING OR SERVICE OUTCOME
PROGRAM
OUTCOME
PO #2: Students will
demonstrate
competency in the
core areas of
Sociology (general
theory, research
methods, and
statistics).
CURRICULUM
AREA OR TARGET
AUDIENCE
Measurements
SOCI 1113, SOCI
2013, SOCI 2223,
SOCI 3123.
We use the MFT Core
Sociology Score to
measure this outcome.
These concepts are
also covered in
Sociology elective
courses as well.
Methods used to
determine validity
of measurement
instruments
Methods used
to determine
reliability of
measurements
The faculty have 15 years
of historical data on 281
Sociology graduates. We
use this historical data to
run correlation analyses
using student Sociology
Core GPA (Statistics,
Research Methods, and
Theory) and MFT Core
Sociology Score.
Statistically significant
positive relationships are
evidence of some degree
of validity.
ETS releases
national average
scores every year.
These scores are
fairly consistent
over the years.
The following link
describes the evaluation
process used by ETS
when developing the
MFT:
http://www.ets.org/mft/
about/content
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Schedule for
measurements
Fall and Spring
Semesters.
The following link
describes the
evaluation process
used by ETS when
developing the
MFT:
http://www.ets.or
g/mft/about/cont
ent
24
Priority Outcomes Reported This Year
Display of Assessment Data
Program Outcome #2
Student Core Sociology
Score on MFT (N=13)
Did Student Meet
Program Objective
38
No
50
Yes
43
No
43
No
47
No
58
Yes
38
No
38
No
45
No
70
Yes
26
No
34
No
41
No
Percentage of Students
Meeting Program
Objective
CU Average in Relation
to National Average
National average is 48.7
23.1%
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
CU average is 10.3%
below the national
average.
25
Priority Outcomes Reported This Year
Analysis of Assessment Data
Program Outcome #2
PO #2: Students will demonstrate competency in the core areas of Sociology (theory, methods, and statistics).
The Sociology Faculty have made requests in the past for comparative MFT data on peer institutions, but are yet to receive this data.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
26
Priority Outcomes Reported This Year
Action Plan
Program Outcome #2
The Sociology faculty have restructured the prerequisites for many Sociology courses this academic year. While SOCI 1113
(Introductory Sociology) remains a prerequisite for virtually all of our courses, we now require students to also have , at minimum,
junior standing to take 4000-level Sociology courses. This should be beneficial in a couple of ways:
1. These 2000- and 3000-level courses, including statistics, research methods, and theory, will provide a more sound
foundation for student success if they are taken prior to taking 4000-level courses.
2. This will require students to take more 2000- and 3000-level Sociology courses earlier in their academic career. They are
more likely to succeed in these than in 4000-level courses, thereby positively influencing student retention.
The Sociology faculty have finally decided to create a capstone course instead of modifying the existing Senior Seminar course
(SOCI 4793). This will be a 3-credit hour course that is intended to integrate important sociological concepts, theories, methods,
and critical thinking skills. Program assessment will be a component of this course in which student performance on the MFT will
factor into their course grade, thereby providing an incentive for students to take the exam more seriously.
Correlations of course grades and scores on the MFT consistently show a relationship between the two. As student GPA drops, so
do scores on the MFT. This suggests that the faculty might try harder to better motivate students to do better in all of their courses.
However, the faculty recognize their limitation in this matter, yet feel that it is important to expand our efforts further.
The Sociology faculty will continue to utilize various assignments and teaching strategies recommended in previous PQIR reports.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
27
Priority Outcomes Reported This Year
Student-Learning Outcomes and Measurements
Program Outcome #3
MEASUREMENTS OF STUDENT LEARNING OR SERVICE OUTCOME
PROGRAM
OUTCOME
PO #3: Students will
demonstrate
competency in
critical thinking.
CURRICULUM
AREA OR TARGET
AUDIENCE
All Sociology courses.
Measurements
We use the MFT
Critical Thinking Score
to measure this
outcome.
Methods used to
determine validity
of measurement
instruments
Methods used
to determine
reliability of
measurements
The faculty have 15 years
of historical data on 281
Sociology graduates. We
use this historical data to
run correlation analyses
using student Sociology
Core GPA (Statistics,
Research Methods, and
Theory) and MFT Critical
Thinking Score.
Statistically significant
positive relationships are
evidence of some degree
of validity.
ETS releases
national average
scores every year.
These scores are
fairly consistent
over the years.
The following link
describes the evaluation
process used by ETS
when developing the
MFT:
http://www.ets.org/mft/
about/content
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Schedule for
measurements
Fall and Spring
Semesters.
The following link
describes the
evaluation process
used by ETS when
developing the
MFT:
http://www.ets.or
g/mft/about/cont
ent
28
Priority Outcomes Reported This Year
Display of Assessment Data
Program Outcome #3
Student Critical Thinking
Score on MFT (N=13)
Did Student Meet
Program Objective
32
No
46
No
38
No
50
Yes
42
No
48
No
42
No
42
No
44
No
75
Yes
34
No
28
No
34
No
Percentage of Students
Meeting Program
Objective
CU Average in Relation
to National Average
National average is 48.1
15.4%
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
CU average is 11.2%
below the national
average.
29
Priority Outcomes Reported This Year
Analysis of Assessment Data
Program Outcome #3
PO #3: Students will demonstrate competency in critical thinking.
The Sociology Faculty have made requests in the past for comparative MFT data on peer institutions, but have never received
such data.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
30
Priority Outcomes Reported This Year
Action Plan
Program Outcome #3
The Sociology faculty have restructured the prerequisites for many Sociology courses this academic year. While SOCI 1113
(Introductory Sociology) remains a prerequisite for virtually all of our courses, we now require students to also have , at minimum,
junior standing to take 4000-level Sociology courses. This should be beneficial in a couple of ways:
1. These 2000- and 3000-level courses, including statistics, research methods, and theory, will provide a more sound
foundation for student success if they are taken prior to taking 4000-level courses.
2. This will require students to take more 2000- and 3000-level Sociology courses earlier in their academic career. They are
more likely to succeed in these than in 4000-level courses, thereby positively influencing student retention.
The Sociology faculty have finally decided to create a capstone course instead of modifying the existing Senior Seminar course
(SOCI 4793). This will be a 3-credit hour course that is intended to integrate important sociological concepts, theories, methods,
and critical thinking skills. Program assessment will be a component of this course in which student performance on the MFT will
factor into their course grade, thereby providing an incentive for students to take the exam more seriously.
Correlations of course grades and scores on the MFT consistently show a relationship between the two. As student GPA drops, so
do scores on the MFT. This suggests that the faculty might try harder to better motivate students to do better in all of their courses.
However, the faculty recognize their limitation in this matter, yet feel that it is important to expand our efforts further.
The Sociology faculty will continue to utilize various assignments and teaching strategies recommended in previous PQIR reports.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
31
Results of Validity Analysis
Pearson’s correlations among MFT scores used for assessment and student
overall and core GPA (2005-2010)
Total MFT
Score
Core
Sociology
MFT Score
Critical
Thinking
MFT Score
Overall
Retention
GPA
Total MFT
Score
1.00
Core
Sociology
MFT Score
.89**
1.00
Critical
Thinking
MFT Score
.91**
.81**
1.00
Overall
Retention
GPA
.53**
.53**
.49**
1.00
.61**
.59**
.60**
.71**
Core
GPA
Core
GPA
1.00
N=78; All correlations are statistically significant at p<.01
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
37
Ancillary Actions
1.
2.
3.
Request for peer institution data still stands
A majority of courses including all required courses will be optionally available through Blackboard by
2013. It means that the program with 3 faculty will be able to provide courses through on-ground
(night/day) and online delivery methods.
Sociology program at Cameron University will host the 2011 Oklahoma Sociological Association Annual
Meeting and Conference
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
38
Number of Graduates
Published Information on Graduates
25
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Summer
Fall
Spring
9
11
11
7
4
10
5
2
2005-2006
3
2006-2007
5
4
4
2
2
2
2007-2008
2008-2009
2009-2010
Academic Year
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
39