2011-2012 Year-End Report from the William O. Douglas Honors College
Completed by: Dr. Matthew Altman, Director, William O. Douglas Honors College
Submitted to: Dr. Tracy Pellett, Associate Provost
August 2012
Assessment
The 2011-2012 Assessment Report is included as part of this year-end report.
Activities
Once again, the DHC successfully integrated its academics with cultural events and
research opportunities for DHC students and faculty. In addition to a cultural event in the fall, we
had strong participation in SOURCE and the Western Regional Honors Council (WRHC)
conference, and social events that developed a sense of community among the students and
faculty.
Cultural event
Limited financial resources this year meant that we could only have one cultural event:
DHC students attended a performance of the play Red at the Seattle Repertory Theatre in fall
2011.
University-Wide Event
This year the DHC sponsored a lecture series titled “The Thin Tweed Line,” on the
history of education and the concept of the university. The series was led by Steve Jackson
(Communication) and is posted on the web. It also included guest lecturers.
Symposium on University Research and Creative Expression (SOURCE)
Eighteen DHC students presented papers at the Symposium on University Research and
Creative Expression (SOURCE) in May 2012: Taylor Baker, Katie Berberick, Amanda Berndt,
Kyle Grove, Ben Livingston, Sarah Nassif, Reesa Nelson, Jesse Hegstrom Oakey, Terri Pace,
Kelley Pierre, Alyson Savage, Michelle Schlonga, Alec Schmidt, Alanna Shores, Cody Taylor,
Amanda Tompkins, Mark Weidenaar, and Natasha Wood. This is an increase in student
participation, which was already strong: fifteen students in 2010-2011, ten students in 20092010, and ten students in 2008-2009.
Two faculty members in the DHC, Liahna Armstrong and Wayne Quirk, also led a panel
to discuss their DHC course, DHC 270: Baseball in American Life and Culture.
The DHC is disproportionately represented at SOURCE. Most DHC courses have strong
writing components, and DHC faculty members are encouraging students to participate in
SOURCE.
Western Regional Honors Council (WRHC) conference
The DHC is a member of the Western Regional Honors Council (WRHC), and it is
important for the honors students, the DHC, and CWU as a whole that we remain active in the
organization. One of the ways that we accomplish this is to attend the annual conference and
present research there. This year the conference was held in Albuquerque, New Mexico from
March 31-April 2, 2012. Ten students — Matthew Baird, Katie Berberick, Sarah Nassif, Reesa
Nelson, Jesse Hegstrom Oakey, Terri Pace, Alyson Savage, Michelle Schlonga, Cody Taylor,
and Natasha Wood — gave presentations of their work there, and two faculty members —
Matthew Altman and Liahna Armstrong — presented papers on honors pedagogy. This is a very
high rate of participation. As with the previous three years, once again there were more Central
students and instructors presenting than from any other single school.
This continues the high rate of participation that we have had for the past two years: we
sent ten students and two faculty members in 2011, twelve students and three faculty members in
2010, and nine students and three faculty members in 2009.
It should also be noted that Dr. Altman successfully requested funding from the Student
Activity Fee Committee for this trip. No money came out of the DHC budget.
Social events
The DHC had a number of informal social events this year. For example, a welcome
reception for DHC students and faculty was held in Kamola in September. Many other events
were planned in conjunction with the Douglas Honors Living-Learning Community (LLC) in
Kamola Hall. Among other things, events included a “fireside chat” at which Dr. Altman
discussed the upper-division scholarship experience and fielded questions from students,
presentations by DHC students and faculty, and several student-faculty mixers.
Accomplishments
Recruitment
The DHC has been very successful this year with recruitment and retention. More
specific numbers are included in Appendix I, which details the DHC enrollment numbers since
fall 2002.
The number of first-year students continues to rise. In 2007 there were 13 entering
freshmen, in 2008 there were 29 entering freshmen, in 2009 there were 38 entering freshmen, in
2010 there were 54 entering freshmen, and in 2011 there were 59 entering freshmen. As our
budget tightens, however, we need to keep enrollment numbers manageable. The budget issue
has already affected the number of students we can accept. We expect to have between 40 and 50
students in the fall 2012 entering class.
President Gaudino set an unofficial goal for us to reach a total of 150 students in the
DHC. We achieved that in AY 2011-2012, only three years into the new DHC curriculum.
So far, students have been a bit slow to join the DHC’s upper-division scholarship
experience. However, recruitment for fall 2012 looks strong. Recruitment of transfer students
and Running Start students is especially good.
Once again, recruitment is strong because the DHC has used every opportunity to contact
potential students: e-mails and mailings to high school teachers and advisors; participation in
academic fairs and open houses; personal letters, emails, and phone calls to students who have
expressed interest in or applied to Central; flyers given to potential students at on-campus events,
etc. In addition, the director has met personally with a number of students and parents.
Bloomer Scholarship
This year the Bloomer Scholarship Committee selected four students to receive the
Bloomer Scholarship: Bryan Elliott ($250), Jesse Hegstrom Oakey ($250), Lauren Messmore
($250), and Abigail Root ($250).
Budget
Although we have had a much higher enrollment this year than in previous years, and we
have had to offer many more credit hours’ worth of classes, we have been able to do so while
remaining within the budget that we have had for several years. This affected the number of
cultural events we could offer, however, and it did not allow us to pay for any outside speakers to
come to campus.
DHC Advisory Committee
The DHC director met regularly this year with the DHC Advisory Committee, which
reviewed course proposals in the fall, advised on recruitment, discussed possible changes to the
DHC curriculum, and reviewed the charter for the new DHC External Advisory Board. The
committee also wrote a letter in support of DHC director Altman’s tenure application.
Course proposals
The DHC received a number of excellent proposals (approximately twenty) from faculty
members throughout the university who are interested in teaching in the DHC. Seven new
courses were selected to be offered for the first time in AY 2012-2013.
DHC External Advisory Board
DHC director Altman wrote a charter and recruited members for the new DHC External
Advisory Board, which had its first meeting in June 2012. The board is comprised of DHC
alumni and important members of the Ellensburg community.
Areas of improvement
Because of the growth in enrollment, we will need to address budget concerns in AY
2012-2013. Associate Provost Pellett has committed to covering any shortfall that the DHC faces
in AY 2012-2013 due to increased course offerings. However, DHC director Altman will submit
a request in fall 2012 for the DHC’s base budget to be increased in subsequent years.
The DHC has become a destination for the best and brightest students in the Northwest.
Many students tell me and their academic advisors that they chose to attend Central because of
the DHC. The new curriculum is going strong and is achieving goals for academic rigor, student
satisfaction, and enrollment. We must continue this strong record of service to students and the
university as a whole.
Central Washington University
Assessment of Student Learning
Annual Report
Academic Year of Report:
College:
2011-2012
William O. Douglas Honors College
Check here if your assessment report covers all undergraduate degree programs: [n/a]
Check here if your assessment report covers all graduate degree programs: [n/a]
Vision
The William O. Douglas Honors College is a regional and national center of academic
excellence where an ethical commitment to learning is integrated with a passionate spirit of
inquiry and a critical understanding of the responsibilities of global citizenship. By bringing
together the great ideas from diverse traditions of knowledge around the world for analysis and
understanding, the college promotes independent thinking and prepares creative and innovative
leaders to meet emerging challenges of local, national, and international issues.
Mission
The William O. Douglas Honors College expands the general educational experience of talented
undergraduate students at Central Washington University through an enriched program of studies
in the arts, humanities, and natural and social sciences. With an interdisciplinary core curriculum
and upper-division scholarship experiences, the honors college encourages students to develop
their abilities in reading, writing, critical thinking, and public speaking, skills that are necessary
for them to become responsible and productive citizens.
1. What student learning outcomes were assessed this year, and why?
In fall 2010, the Douglas Honors College Curriculum Committee wrote an assessment plan for
the new honors curriculum.
● This assessment plan includes three college goals:
1. In education, the DHC will:
a) provide students with a broad liberal arts education, drawing on a number of time periods,
cultures, disciplines, and viewpoints.
b) train students to become effective communicators by developing their skills as speakers and
writers.
c) train students to apply critical thinking and analytical reasoning to both contemporary and
enduring issues.
d) help students to be able and willing to challenge assumptions and consider multiple
perspectives.
e) expose students and faculty to premier cultural events in the Northwest.
2. In scholarship, the DHC will:
a) support faculty and student research and creative endeavors.
3. In service, the DHC will:
a) sponsor relevant public presentations and colloquia.
b) contribute to interdisciplinary activities and university-wide forums.
● The assessment plan also includes five student learning outcomes:
1. Students will learn to discern themes and worldviews in global canonical texts. They will gain
multi- and interdisciplinary knowledge about literature, philosophy, religion, political theory,
history, the physical sciences, and the social sciences.
2. Students will be able to identify themes that develop and persist over time and across cultures.
Students will relate ideas from the past to current cultural and social issues.
3. Students will cultivate their own positions on contemporary and enduring issues based on
research, and develop the skills to support them with argument and evidence, both in written and
oral form.
4. While engaging in civil discussions, students will develop the ability to present opposing
positions and provide constructive criticism.
5. Students will demonstrate an open-minded but critical understanding of great works of human
culture in order to appreciate and assess other views.
2. How were they assessed?
DHC Goal 1: We used written essays and examinations, student presentations, senior theses,
student and faculty participation in conferences, and sponsorship of university-wide events and
interdisciplinary programs. Data was collected in fall, winter, and spring quarters from selected
DHC courses.
DHC Goal 2: We collected information about student and faculty presentations at conferences.
This information was collected during spring quarter.
DHC Goal 3: We collected information about university-wide events and interdisciplinary
programs that the DHC had sponsored or co-sponsored.
Student Learning Outcome 1: This outcome focuses on student learning to discern themes and
worldviews in global canonical text as well students gaining multi- and interdisciplinary
knowledge about literature, philosophy, religion, political theory, history and the philosophy of
science. To assess our achievement of this outcome, selected DHC instructors evaluated capstone
projects in their respective courses.
Student Learning Outcome 2: This outcome focuses on students’ ability to identify themes that
persist over time and across cultures, and to relate ideas from the past to current cultural and
social issues. To assess our achievement of this outcome, selected DHC instructors evaluated
capstone projects in their respective courses.
Student Learning Outcome 3: This outcome focuses on students’ ability to cultivate their own
positions on original source material and to develop the skills to support them with argument and
evidence, both in written and oral form. To assess our achievement of this outcome, selected
DHC instructors evaluated capstone projects in their respective courses.
Student Learning Outcome 4: This outcome focuses on engaging students in civil discussions
and developing the ability to present opposing positions and provide constructive criticism. To
assess our achievement of this outcome, selected DHC instructors evaluated capstone projects in
their respective courses.
Student Learning Outcome 5: This outcome focuses on demonstrating an open-minded but
critical understanding of great works of human culture in order to appreciate and assess other
views. To assess our achievement of this outcome, selected DHC instructors evaluated capstone
projects in their respective courses.
3. What was learned?
Department Goal 1: Education
a. Student retention
The criterion of achievement is to have 75% of enrolled freshmen complete the core
curriculum.
With the new curriculum, this is a bit hard to measure, since people complete their core
requirements at different times in their college careers — usually sometime after their
sophomore years. As a rough measure, I am comparing the number of sophomores completing
their second year (in spring 2012) with the number of those students who entered the program in
(fall 2010).
54 students entered the program in fall 2010, and 39 students of those students remained
at the end of their sophomore year. 72.2% of enrolled freshmen completed the core curriculum.
This does not meet our goal for student retention.
There are some confounding factors in this measurement, however. For example, the
number of juniors increased, which may indicate that some students ended their sophomore year
with enough credits to qualify as juniors. Also, students may not have enrolled in DHC courses
at the end of their sophomore year because they completed the DHC core curriculum early. This
is entirely possible, given the number of transfer, AP, and Running Start credits that our students
are bringing in with them. Because of the complexity of the new DHC curriculum, it is very
difficult to track students.
b. Required coursework
The criterion of achievement is for 75% of students to obtain at least “met expectations”
for Outcome #1 on the standard rubric. This year we are assessing a selection of classes in the
core DHC curriculum and in the upper-division. (On the advice of Associate Provost Pellett, we
are not assessing every DHC class.) Assessment data from the courses is included in Appendix
II.
Of 160 total students assessed, 148 students obtained “met expectations” or “exceeded
expectations” for Outcome #1 on the standard rubric, which amounts to a 92.5% success rate.
This exceeds the goal for success in required coursework by a wide margin.
c. Student presentations (university)
The criterion of achievement is to have 10% of upper-division (junior and senior) DHC
students present at SOURCE.
Our current count of upper-division (junior and senior) students is 49, and 18 DHC
students presented papers at SOURCE, which amounts to 36.7% participation. This exceeds the
goal for student presentations (university) by a wide margin.
d. Student presentations (regional/national)
The criterion of achievement is to have 3 upper-division DHC students present at the
Western Regional Honors Council conference (budget permitting).
10 students gave presentations at the WRHC conference. This exceeds the goal for
student presentations (regional/national) by a wide margin.
e. Attendance at cultural events
The criterion of achievement is for 90% of DHC students attend at least one cultural
event per year.
We had one cultural event this year, and 100% of DHC students attended. If students
could not attend the designated cultural event, they attended alternate events with the permission
of their DHC lecture instructor. This exceeds the goal for attendance at cultural events.
Department Goal 2: Scholarship
a. Student presentations (university)
The criterion of achievement is to have 10% of upper-division (junior and senior) DHC
students present at SOURCE.
Our current count of upper-division (junior and senior) students is 49, and 18 DHC
students presented papers at SOURCE, which amounts to 36.7% participation. This exceeds the
goal for student presentations (university) by a wide margin.
b. Student presentations (regional/national)
The criterion of achievement is to have 3 upper-division DHC students present at the
Western Regional Honors Council conference (budget permitting).
10 upper-division DHC students gave presentations at the WRHC conference. This
exceeds the goal for student presentations (regional/national) by a wide margin.
c. Faculty presentations
The criterion of achievement is to have at least 1 DHC faculty member will present at the
Western Regional Honors Council conference (budget permitting).
This year, 2 DHC faculty members presented papers at the WRHC conference. This
exceeds the goal for faculty presentations.
Department Goal 3: Service
a. Sponsorship of university-wide events and interdisciplinary programs
The criterion for achievement in this category is to sponsor at least one talk or panel per
year.
The Douglas Honors College sponsored one university-wide event this year: a lecture
series by Steve Jackson (Communication) and guest lecturers, called “The Thin Tweed Line.”
The series covered the history of education and the concept of the university. This meets the goal
for university service.
Individual course assessment
In previous years, we assessed each course in the DHC. I was informed that it was
unnecessary to assess each course every year. Therefore, this year we will only be assessing the
program as a whole. Collected data from the courses is available in Appendix II.
During the next academic year, I will work with the DHC Advisory Committee to
develop a schedule for assessing particular courses on a rotating basis.
4. What will the college do as a result of this information?
This data is being submitted as part of the DHC’s year-end report, as requested by the
Associate Provost.
In fall 2012, the director of the DHC will discuss this data with DHC faculty and the
DHC Advisory Committee. We will also develop a schedule for assessing particular courses on a
rotating basis.
5. What did the college do in response to last year’s assessment information?
In response to last year’s assessment information, we developed a more selective strategy
for gathering data from individual classes. This year we only got assessment data from a
selection of DHC courses. In coming years, we will target particular courses on a rotating basis.
6. Questions or suggestions concerning Assessment of Student Learning at CWU:
None.
Freshmen
Sophomore
Junior
Senior
Total Students
Fall 2002
Winter 2003
Spring 2003
Diff. Start/Finish
30
26
21
9
8
9
8
0
19
17
14
5
10
10
10
0
67
62
53
14
Average
60.67
Attrition Rate
20.90%
Fall 2003
Winter 2004
Spring 2004
Diff. Start/Finish
31
21
20
11
17
15
14
3
5
7
7
-2
15
18
15
0
68
61
56
12
Average
61.67
Attrition Rate
17.65%
Fall 2004
Winter 2005
Spring 2005
Diff. Start/Finish
16
14
11
5
20
16
13
7
14
12
12
2
7
6
5
2
57
48
41
16
Average
48.67
Attrition Rate
28.07%
Fall 2005
Winter 2006
Spring 2006
Diff. Start/Finish
23
17
15
8
7
7
7
0
10
8
8
2
9
10
9
0
49
42
39
10
Average
43.33
Attrition Rate
20.41%
Fall 2006
Winter 2007
Spring 2007
Diff. Start/Finish
22
19
16
6
15
14
14
1
8
6
6
2
9
8
9
0
54
47
45
9
Average
48.67
Attrition Rate
16.67%
Fall 2007
Winter 2008
Spring 2008
Diff. Start/Finish
13
15
11
2
9
7
7
2
10
11
10
0
6
6
7
-1
38
39
35
3
Average
37.33
Attrition Rate
7.89%
Fall 2008
Winter 2009
Spring 2009
Diff. Start/Finish
29
23
17
12*
9
9
7
2
8
7
7
1
9
8
9
0
55
47
40
15
Average
47.33
Attrition Rate*
27.27%
*Note: Enrollment of first-year students during the three quarters does not necessarily indicate which
students remain and which have withdrawn from the program. Because these students will be transitioning
to the new curriculum next year, some of them opted to take only two quarters this year even though they
remain in the DHC. The supposed attrition rate is artificially inflated and does not reflect the actual number
of first-year students who will continue to their sophomore year and beyond.
Fall 2009
Winter 2010
Spring 2010
Diff. Start/Finish
39
39
40
1
18
18
16
-2
7
7
9
2
7
9
7
0
71
73
72
1
Average
72
Attrition
0
Fall 2009
Winter 2010
Spring 2010
Diff. Start/Finish
39
39
40
1
18
18
16
-2
7
7
9
2
7
9
7
0
71
73
72
1
Average
72
Attrition
0
Fall 2010
Winter 2011
Spring 2011
Diff. Start/Finish
UDSE - A&H
UDSE - SHP
54
51
52
-2
33
32
32
-1
16
20
30
4
7
6
6
-1
110
109
120
0
Average
113
Attrition
0
5
5
Fall 2011
Winter 2012
Spring 2012
Diff. Start/Finish
UDSE - A&H
UDSE - SHP
59
53
55
4
42
41
39
3
38
33
32
6
19
17
17
2
158
144
143
15
Average
148
Attrition‡
9.49%
18
14
Appendix II: Course assessment
Key:
Student learning outcomes for DHC 140/1, 150/1, 160/1, 250/1, 260/1:
#1: Examines the significance of ideas in a variety of contexts
#2: Effectiveness of communication
#3: Critical thinking skills
Student learning outcomes for DHC 270:
#1: Examines the significance of ideas in a variety of contexts
#2: Inquiry and/or connections across disciplines
#3: Effectiveness of communication
#4: Critical thinking skills
Student numbers: Exceeds expectations/Meets expectations/Does not meet expectations
Fall 2011
DHC 141 (Harper)
Outcome 1: 4/11/6
Outcome 2: 4/9/8
Outcome 3: 4/12/5
Winter 2012
DHC 150 (Peacock)
Outcome 1: 4/15/0
Outcome 2: 4/14/1
Outcome 3: 4/15/0
Spring 2012
DHC 141 (Turcotte)
Outcome 1: 4/13/1
Outcome 2: 3/12/3
Outcome 3: 4/12/2
DHC 150 (Peacock)
Outcome 1: 9/13/0
Outcome 2: 5/11/6
Outcome 3: 7/13/2
DHC 380 (Palmquist)
Outcome 1: 18/6/0
Outcome 2: 15/9/0
Outcome 3: 14/10/0
DHC 250 (Sun)
Outcome 1: 5/10/1
Outcome 2: 6/8/2
Outcome 3: 5/9/2
DHC 260 (Schnelle)
Outcome 1: 6/7/3
Outcome 2: 4/6/6
Outcome 3: 9/5/2
DHC 399 (Altman)
Outcome 1: 12/7/1
Outcome 2: 18/1/1
Outcome 3: 12/7/1
DHC 301 (Gookin)
Outcome 1: 1/3/0
Outcome 2: 3/1/0
Outcome 3: 4/0/0