Spring 2015 SLO/PLO/ILO ASSESSMENT REPORT
Date: 6/24/2015
Name of Person Reporting: Mark Pursley
Name of Department and/or Discipline: Philosophy
1. What courses/certificates/programs have you assessed this past semester?
For spring 2015, three course SLOs and one ILO were completed. Course SLO assessments
were completed for Philosophy 1, Philosophy 6 and Philosophy 20.
2. Summarize the analysis of your assessment results for the spring semester course
assessments in your area. Did the students achieve the established benchmarks
(standards for student success)?
In all assessments, the benchmark of 70% was achieved.
For Philosophy 1, Introduction to Philosophy, the SLO assessed was:
Differentiate among major schools of thought
The rubric score was 84 %
Assessment:
The assessment was based on a final exam essay question asking students to compare two
contrasting philosophical theories. They had a choice of comparing Kant and Mill by applying
ethical theory to a case study; or contrasting Christian and atheistic existentialism by comparing
Tolstoy and Camus.
I was pleased that the majority of students assessed were able to apply the theories correctly.
Some of the responses were a bit superficial. They understand that utilitarianism looks at the
consequences of an action to assess whether it is good or bad, but they tend to forget that
when looking at consequences one has to think long term and big picture. This is a mistake that
many critics of utilitarianism make so it doesn’t overly concern me that many of my students
make it as well.
No modifications are needed based on this assessment.
For Philosophy 6, Logic in Practice, the SLO assessed was: Identify the structure of an argument.
The rubric score was 83%
Assessment: For this assessment students were given an argument that has four premises and
a conclusion (the argument is an adapted version of a famous argument on the abortion issue
by philosopher Mary Anne Warren). Being a member of the human species is not a necessary
condition for a being a person in the moral sense, because an alien from another planet could be
a person without being a member of the human species. Being a member of the human species
is not a sufficient condition for being a person in the moral sense, since someone who is brain
dead in an irreversible coma is still a member of the human species but no longer a person in the
moral sense. Hence, being a member of the human species is neither a necessary nor a
sufficient condition for being a person in the moral sense. Students were asked to diagram the
structure of the argument. For full credit they need to correctly identify the conclusion and the
four premises and to note that premise two supports premise one and that premise four
supports premise three
I was pleased that the majority of students succeeded. Almost everyone correctly identified
the conclusion. Some students did not identify all four premises and some did not correctly
identify both instances of premise support.
No modifications are needed based on this assessment.
For Philosophy 20, Ethics, the SLO assessed was:
Analyze the views of some historically significant moral philosophers.
The rubric score achieved was 74%
Assessment Analysis
This assessment used the rubric for assessing information competency, and was used to assess
both the SLO for Phil 20 and the ILO for information competency. Students were assessed
based on the 7-10 page research paper on an ethical theory or ethical issue, with the
requirement that philosophical sources be used in researching the topic. Most students did use
philosophical sources although some used internet sources that were not peer reviewed
philosophy journal articles. It is difficult for students to approach complex ethical issues in an
unbiased and impartial way. They tend to look for sources that support their pre-critical
opinion on the issue and to not adequately address concerns raised by opposing points of view.
This is an ongoing challenge for teaching the ethics course.
No modifications are required based on this assessment.
3. Based on the discussion and analysis of your assessment results, what changes have you
made or do you plan to make?
For Philosophy 1 I want to continue to emphasize the application of theory to specific cases.
The readings are pretty abstract and difficult. Students need more examples to see how
metaphysical, epistemological, and ethical issues underlie many contemporary moral and
social controversies.
For Philosophy 6 I want to improve my presentation on inductive reasoning and develop an
assessment. I’m succeeding in teaching them the formal techniques for evaluating
deductive arguments but I’m not sure they are as competent in analyzing causal, analogical,
and statistical arguments. I want to include a discussion of Bayesian theory to address this
concern.
For Philosophy 33 I want students to learn to apply the historical critical method to religions
other than Judaism and Christianity. The method arose in the west and is only beginning to
be applied in other traditions.
For Philosophy 20 I want to continue to stress the importance of using evidence and
argument to support beliefs about ethical issues and the virtues of objective, impartial
reasoning.
I also want to increase their proficiency in applying virtue theory, Kantian theory, and
utilitarianism to contemporary moral controversies.
4. Follow up on previous assessments:
(1) If this SLO was assessed previously, compare the results with the earlier assessments.
Have the recommended changes been implemented?
(2) How have the findings led to improved student learning and the achievement of the
college mission?
The Philosophy 1 assessment saw an improvement from 73% to 84% over the previous
assessment. The Philosophy 6 assessment improved from 78% to 83%, and the Philosophy
20 assessment saw a slight decrease from 77% to 74%.
All recommended changes have been implemented except that the college is no longer
funding a philosophy tutor.
The assessments reveal that students in philosophy courses are attaining the desired
competencies and improving their skills of critical analysis. The philosophy discipline
contributes to the college mission by providing a supportive learning environment for
students, by assisting in the development of their critical thinking skills, and by refining
academic skills that prepare them for university transfer and success in the workplace.
Having a philosophy tutor in the Learning Center to help students with essay writing and
logic techniques would be a welcome asset.
5. How have the results of your assessments been shared and discussed among the
members of your program? (Provide dates and any minutes of meetings as evidence.)
There are no other philosophy instructors on campus. I’m hoping to get the discipline
committee active in the fall.
6. How have the results of your assessments been shared and discussed with members of
your advisory committee (if vocational program)?
NA
7. What resource requests are planned as a result of the assessments?
I’m continuing to request a philosophy tutor to assist students in the learning center.
8. Have the assessment results been posted on the online system?
Yes