Assessment Report
July 1, 2006 – June 30, 2007
DEPT / PROGRAM ASSESSED:
Graduate Program, History
ASSESSMENT COORDINATOR: Paul Douglas Lockhart
YEAR 3 of a 5 Year Cycle
1. ASSESSMENT MEASURES EMPLOYED.
The measures used for the current Assessment (2006-07) for the History Department’s
Graduate Program are roughly the same as those used in the previous (2005-06)
assessment: Student Paper Portfolios, exit interviews and exit questionnaires, and
informal contacts with alumni of the graduate program. One new measure has been added
this year, in accordance with the Program Assessment Plan for the History Graduate
Program: written alumni surveys, which—in accordance with the Program Assessment
Plan—are to be administered every five years, starting with the academic year 2006-07.
Although Prof. Paul Douglas Lockhart is the principal coordinator for this Assessment,
Lockhart has only recently taken over the position of Director of Graduate Studies,
History, from Prof. John W. Sherman (effective September 1, 2007); hence much of the
preliminary work to the writing of this report has been done by Prof. Sherman. The
Department of History’s Graduate Studies Committee participated in the evaluation of
the Student Paper Portfolios.
2. ASSESSMENT FINDINGS
The Graduate Program in History has been evaluated with regard to the four Program
Objectives listed in the program’s Assessment Plan, viz.:
1. Graduates will communicate a sophisticated knowledge of History and
disseminate it to the general public through publications (in books, journals,
magazines, newspapers) and in Public History forums (presentations, displays,
projects, websites, mass media).
Findings: The Assessment finds that objective 1 has been met. Although our students
have not produced any publications worthy of note in Year 3 of the assessment cycle,
students from the Public History track have been active as usual in presenting history
through museum exhibits.
2. Graduates will encourage others to explore and understand the historical context
of their lives through public contact in societies, historical organizations,
community and social groups, museums and archives.
Findings: The Assessment finds that objective 2 has been met. As in previous years,
alumni of the Graduate Program are active participants in the Society of American
Archivists, the Ohio Academy of History, and the Organization of American
Historians, among other groups, as paper presenters and as conference attendees.
1
3. Graduates will continue to develop their own appreciation and knowledge of
History through contact and friendship with other historians (through the
department, alumni, and professional organizations), and through a continued
quest for knowledge by readings and perhaps archival research.
Findings: The Assessment finds that objective 3 has been met. Contacts with our
alumni show that, as above, our graduates continue to “network” with other
historians, especially at major national and regional conferences, and to maintain an
active interest in professional development.
4. Students who desire to do so will be prepared to matriculate into Ph.D. programs
or teach; Graduates in the Public History plan will be qualified to obtain
employment in historical organizations, archives, or museums.
Findings: The Assessment finds that objective 4 has been met. Out of the eighteen
(18) recently-graduated MA students in our program who sought employment in
history or public history, fifteen (15) of them—just over 83%--have been able to find
employment in their field. Our one thesis plan student who defended his MA thesis
this year is now in the process of applying to several Ph.D. programs in history.
The Assessment has also addressed the five Learning Outcomes listed in the program’s
Assessment Plan. This evaluation has been based primarily upon the Student Paper
Portfolios, each of which include, inter alia, papers from the required Historical Methods
class (HST700), as well as from a variety of 700-level reading seminars. The papers in
these portfolios were read and evaluated by the directors of the Graduate and Public
History programs, as well as by the members of the History Department’s Graduate
Studies Committee.
1. Students will display the analytical, research, and writing skills required to
address historical research problems in a long research paper or thesis.
2. Students will be able to read critically and assess historical scholarship in their
fields of study.
This Assessment takes these two Learning Outcomes together as one, not only
because they are so closely related, but also because the way in which the Student
Paper Portfolios were evaluated in 2006-07 does not make a clear distinction between
these two Learning Outcomes. Instead, the Graduate Studies Committee was asked to
evaluate the Student Paper Proposals by rating them in three categories: “Clarity of
Writing,” “Cogency of Ideas,” and “Quality of Research.” In each category, each
paper in each portfolio was given a score (low to high) of 1 to 10. In the program’s
Assessment Plan, the benchmarks for “success” in this evaluation would be as
follows: (a)a score of six (6) or higher in any category would rate as an acceptable
level of performance; (b)at least ninety percent (90%) of the Portfolios would be
required to meet a level of “6” or above in the evaluation process.
2
Measured by these benchmarks, Learning Outcomes 1 and 2 were met successfully. A
full 100% of the student portfolios met—or, rather, actually exceeded—the minimum
acceptable level of “6” in each of the three evaluated categories. The mean score for
all students for all three of the individual criteria ranged between 8 and 9, with a
grand mean of over 8.6. Judged by these scores, all of the Student Paper Portfolios
demonstrate that our students in 2006-07 displayed the requisite abilities to analyze,
research, and write about historical research problems, and to be able to read and
critically analyze historical scholarship in their fields of study.
3. Students in the Public History plan will have the requisite skills, knowledge, and
experience to work as a professional in an historical organization, archives or
museum.
4. Students in the Public History plan will be able to take complex historical
phenomena and present it [sic] in a way that makes it accessible to the public
while not compromising its complexity.
As with Learning Outcomes Nos. 1 and 2, this Assessment takes these two closely
related Learning Outcomes together. The 2006-07 written alumni surveys, as well as
the written summaries of graduate exit interviews, confirm that these Learning
Outcomes have been fulfilled. As noted under Objective 4 above, the vast majority of
our recent Public History graduates have been able to find professional employment
in their field; one of our current students has also managed to secure a prestigious
internship at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland. This neatly confirms the
fulfillment of Learning Objective 3. Exit interviews and project and internship
reports, likewise, confirm the fulfillment of Learning Objective 4, that Public History
students can present historical phenomena in a way that is accessible to the public.
5. Students will have a solid historiographical knowledge of their specialty or topic
fields, with a thorough understanding of the major historical arguments and
schools of thought that have shaped historiographical debates.
The department’s Graduate Studies Committee evaluated and passed three Course
Intensive Track Paper Projects during the academic year, and one Thesis Track
student successfully defended his thesis, confirming that this final Learning Outcome
has been fulfilled.
3. PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS
The Findings of this Assessment indicate continued progress towards the Program
Improvements proposed in Year 1 of the assessment cycle, along the same lines as were
observed in the Year 2 assessment. Exit interviews and especially the newly-instituted
written alumni surveys, implemented for the first time this year, suggest not only overall
success in this program, particularly with public history as measured in terms of job
placement, but also of student satisfaction with the preparation students have received in
the History Graduate Program at Wright State. One area in which students expressed
some degree of frustration—especially within the alumni surveys—is the frequency with
which graduate-level seminars are offered; as was suggested in last year’s assessment,
3
perhaps the “increased availability of graduate seminars, with…a distinction between
readings-oriented and research/writing-oriented seminars” could be implemented. And
while the mean scores assigned to the Student Paper Portfolios by the departmental
Graduate Studies Committee are satisfactory, they could certainly stand further
improvement, which the enforcement of more rigorous standards within graduate
seminars, the required HST700 (Historical Methods) course in particular, could help to
accomplish.
4. ASSESSMENT PLAN COMPLIANCE
In Year 3 of the assessment cycle, problems previously encountered in the compilation of
Student Paper Portfolios have been further redressed, so that the dearth of papers in these
portfolios experienced in Year 1 is now behind us. All student papers from all sections of
HST700 (Historical Methods) are now routinely included in the portfolios.
5. NEW ASSESSMENT DEVELOPMENTS
The written alumni surveys were implemented this year, with very positive results,
adding a dimension to this year’s Findings that had heretofore been lacking. In Year 4, it
is hoped that we can add more graduate-level papers, especially from seminar courses, to
each student’s Paper Portfolio.
4