Assessment Report Standard Format
July 1, 2009 - June 30, 2010
PROGRAM(S) ASSESSED Sociology
ASSESSMENT COORDINATOR Tracey Steele
YEAR 2 of a 4 YEAR CYCLE
1. ASSESSMENT MEASURES EMPLOYED
Briefly describe the assessment measures employed during the year.
What was done?
1). A senior survey was administered via electronic mail, 2) The average GPA of graduating seniors
was calculated, and 3) The number of letters of recommendations written by faculty for students
pursuing graduate education was counted.
Who participated in the process?
Assessment committee chair Tracey Steele sent the invitation to participate by email to all Sociology
seniors (with a total of 175 hour completed N=35) in October-November 2010. Senior administrative
staff (Susan Schultheis) identified relevant participants and collected contact information for the pool of
students selected for the senior survey.
Information relevant to calculation of the average grade point average for graduation seniors was
collected by administrative staff members Susan Schultheis and Mary Zurawka .
Assessment committee chair Tracey Steele requested input from all full-time faculty in the Department
of Sociology via email regarding the number of letters of recommendation written for students pursuing
graduate education.
What challenges (if any) were encountered?
Only three students responded to the electronic request for the senior survey despite two follow up
requests for participation.
2. ASSESSMENT FINDINGS
List the objectives and outcomes assessed during the year, and briefly describe the findings
for each.
The learning objectives within the sociology program are: 1) Prepare students for employment with
substantive content and skill set of the social sciences, 2) Preparing students for graduate training, 3)
Prepare students for responsible social action, and 4) Prepare students with general critical thinking skill
set for life-long learning. Measures utilized this year speak to outcomes 1, 2 and 4.
Graduating seniors had an overall GPA of 2.59, which is only a minor decrease over the previous period
(2.65) and demonstrates successful student attainment of objectives 1 and 2.
Responding faculty (N=7) wrote a total of 36 letters of recommendation for students going on to
graduate education during this period. Except for the case of a two students who were accepted to the
ABS program, only one faculty member was aware of whether any students for which they wrote letters
were accepted by the school(s) to which the student applied.
The senior survey produced some surprising consistencies. All three of the participants (83%) plan to
attend graduate school at some time in the future. Two intend to apply immediately to graduate school
(with one specifically indicating the ABS program at WSU), while the third student planned to apply “at
some point”. Two felt that the program had adequately prepared them to meet their career goals and one
qualified his/her response by sharing the observation that the special topics classes were the most
beneficial in providing usable and applicable knowledge. Cited strengths of the department included
diverse faculty (two cited particularly “inspirational”/”awesome” instructors), the challenging content of
courses, opportunity for internships, and a good mix of required and elective courses. Weaknesses
included too many options to choose from, confusion about semester transition, perceived ‘easiness’
and/or poor teaching skills of a few faculty, and an insufficient number of special topics classes. Two
students felt they might have benefited from learning more about how to find materials for term papers.
All three students appreciated gender/sexuality courses and two specifically cited appreciating the
content and rigor of methods and theory. In fact, one student requested more methods courses. The
report concludes that advising and scheduling are the areas where we can make the most meaningful
improvements to the program.
3. PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS
List planned or actual curriculum changes, teaching methods…that are in response to the
assessment findings.
Planned changes include the possible imposition of exit interviews in lieu of senior surveys for
graduating students and the discussion of portfolio collection with department faculty. In addition, the
department will also consider mirroring criminal justice advising mechanisms to aid students in course
planning.
4. ASSESSMENT PLAN COMPLIANCE
Explain deviations from the plan (if any).
The practice of portfolio collection has never been implemented within the department so analysis could
not be conducted. There has been insufficient planning for execution of this task but the assessment
committee will bring this issue to the department for improvement/resolution.
Due to time constraints, and traditionally low turnout, this year, the practice of conducting focus groups
with graduating seniors was merged with a senior survey. As discussed above, the possibility of
mandating exit surveys will be discussed with program faculty with an eye towards improving levels of
student input as to their perceptions of program performance.
5. NEW ASSESSMENT DEVELOPMENTS
Describe developments (if any) regarding assessment measures, communication, faculty or
staff involvement, benchmarking, or other assessment variables.
Tracey Steele is the chair of the Assessment and Retention committee for the 2009-2010 academic year.
Michael Norris is the second committee member and will take over as chair for 2010-2011 when Dr.
Steele rotates off the committee.
The practice of senior focus groups will be taken up again in the spring. To improve participation the
groups may be expanded to include juniors of advanced status and incentives (e.g. pizza) may be
included.