Assessment Report Standard Format
July 1, 2007 - June 30, 2008
PROGRAM ASSESSED Liberal Studies
ASSESSMENT COORDINATOR
Dr. Valerie Stoker (using data compiled primarily by Dr. Mark Sirkin)
YEAR
4
of a
5
YEAR CYCLE
1. ASSESSMENT MEASURES EMPLOYED
Briefly describe the assessment measures employed during the year.
What was done?
 Exit interviews were held with students completing the Program in May and July,
2008.
 A random sample of nine term papers from the portfolios submitted by our graduates
was reviewed by the committee.
Who participated in the process?
 Dr. Mark Sirkin, the program director who has since retired, did the interviewing.
 Valerie Stoker, Carol Nathanson, and Gary Pacernick assisted Dr. Sirkin with the
portfolio review
What challenges (if any) were encountered?
 Coordination of schedules of participants
2. ASSESSMENT FINDINGS
List the objectives and outcomes assessed during the year, and briefly describe the findings
for each.
Each year we attempt to assess all of our program’s objectives and outcomes in our
Oct. 19, 2004 assessment plan.
The program’s objectives are as follows:
Graduates of this program will:
1. be prepared to obtain employment in occupations related to their concentrations and other
coursework,
2. be prepared to pursue graduate study in programs related to their concentration and other
coursework,
1
3. have satisfied their desire for personal enrichment and understanding based on the
courses they chose as Liberal Studies majors, and themselves and others, and
understanding of their own personal values.
I currently have no data regarding objective number one and plan to modify this objective of the
program in future. As to 2, some students have entered the M.A. program in English at WSU and
13 students made the Dean’s list, indicating they might do well in graduate school should they
choose to pursue it. For 3, based on exit interviews, students appear satisfied that the courses
they have taken have enhanced their enrichment and understanding.
The exit interviews were generally positive, reflecting satisfaction with the program’s flexibility
(mentioned six times). Students like the freedom to take different subjects and take the courses
they most enjoy. One student said she didn’t like the professional component, but understood
why we have it.

The learning objectives are:
(1) critical thinking/logical reasoning skills,
(2) effective writing skills,
(3) effective research skills, and
(4) ability to use an interdisciplinary perspective.
The term papers got mixed reviews from the committee members who read them. There was
consensus on 4 out of the 10 papers, with the other papers receiving grades that ranged from C to
A. This probably reflects both the fact that the committee consists of people from different
disciplines and that there was little consistency in the types of papers students were being asked
to write. In general, the papers received Bs and As and, thus, arguably reflect high performance
among our graduates. However, the definition of a research paper seems to vary a lot from one
class to the next.
3. PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS
List planned or actual changes (if any) to curriculum, teaching methods, facilities, or services
that are in response to the assessment findings.
As the new director of the program, the major initiative I am pursuing for this year is to update
students’ DARS reports so they can do more self-monitoring. This will cut back on the need for
advising somewhat, although students will still need approval for certain courses and to map out
an overall plan. Once I have sufficiently updated the DARS reports, I will seek out assistance
from other faculty members for more advising. My current Graduate Assistant is doing a great
job as have GA’s in the past, according to Dr. Sirkin. However, there are too many students to be
adequately advised by two people. I would like for whoever is brought in as an advisor to have
clean and accurate records. This is why I am delaying the process of identifying someone until I
have sorted out students’ DARS reports.
I am tentatively considering having tracks within the program so that students who are interested
can have a more focused and coherent course of study. However, that too will be in the distant
future.
2
4. ASSESSMENT PLAN COMPLIANCE
Explain deviations from the plan (if any).
There were no deviations.
5. NEW ASSESSMENT DEVELOPMENTS
Describe developments (if any) regarding assessment measures, communication, faculty or staff
involvement, benchmarking, or other assessment variables.
As stated above, I would like there to be more faculty advisors in Liberal Studies in the next 2 to
3 years. In the long term, I’d like to develop different courses of study that have a bit more
thematic coherence. It might be nice to have different tracks within the major that are more
focused than just ‘humanities’ or ‘social sciences’. For example, some students could take the
‘Religion, Politics, and the Public” track and take specific courses in religion, political science,
and philosophy that deal with related issues. Or, there could be a fieldwork/demographics track
of some sort that would combine sociology/anthropology, religion, political science and related
courses in some interesting ways. There could also be an applied ethics track that would combine
philosophy and social work. But this is all hypothetical at this point and I would not want these
tracks to interfere with the principal goal of Liberal Studies which is to provide flexibility to
students who can’t complete a traditional major.
Currently, 94 students are enrolled, 21 of which have newly joined the program. We clearly
continue to attract majors and are meeting a need at Wright State University.
3