2013 Program Learning Outcomes Assessment
Précis
The department of Anthropology offers a BA in Anthropology, the BA in Behavioral Science, and an MA in Applied
Anthropology. The Department also offers minors in Native American Studies, and Values, Technology and Society.
The new VTS minor was only introduced in January 2013. The Department has also been given the green light by
the Administration to develop and Organizational Studies major. The integration and synergy of these varied
program offerings underscores the vitality and interdisciplinary of the Anthropology program, yet also presents
some challenges to assessment. The Anthropology Department has organized under thematic Umbrellas of; The
Anthropology of Wellness; The Anthropology of Human Adaptability and Materiality; and Knowledge in Action.
These themes structure curricula, assessment, and long term program planning. Strategically all program
assessment is subsumed under the Umbrellas model which provides a consistent and robust format for examining
program outcomes.
During the previous Assessment cycle each of the majors and master programs were assessed. Each has a set of
Program Learning Objectives designed to guide programmatic learning. We identified our Assessment Progress as
Developed or Highly Developed in all categories of the Assessment matrix. We continue to pursue specific and
strategic program goals that enhance our original assessment and currently see no need to revise our earlier
assessment. It is too early to assess the VTS minor as it has only just recently been introduced to students and has
not yet granted a degree.
Assessment
Anthropology Major
In terms of Assessable Outcomes the Anthropology major has been evaluated by the department as Developed
according to the language of the WASC assessment matrix. Students are provided with specific ways in which
learning will be gauged and are informed how mastery of skills can be demonstrated, in some cases with detailed
rubrics. While we do not apply uniform rubrics in measuring outcomes in most classes owing to the unique quality
of the discipline, which does not easily conform to a rubric, some instructors do make use of these for particular
assignments.
During the past semester we focused on assessing PLO 1 and 3 of the Anthropology Major giving attention to
specific operationalized elements. Several courses provide relevant content. Two courses were identified as
especially salient for assessing PLO 1 and 3. Instructors were requested to discuss evidence of relevant content,
describe the methods used to inform on student mastery (essays, projects, exams, etc.) and to offer assessment of
learning.
PLO 1 Understanding culture as the distinguishing phenomenon of human life, and the relationship of human
biology and evolution.
Ability to analyze a particular social situation (“slice of life”) as a sociocultural system
Ability to analyze a physical trait or behavior, demonstrating how biology and culture are mutually
interdependent factors
Ability to frame inquiry around major anthropological ideas
Ability to do cross cultural comparisons.
Ability to identify environmental, biological, material, and cognitive processes related to culture change.
PLO 3 Knowledge of the significant findings of archaeology, cultural anthropology, and physical anthropology, and
familiarity of the important issues in each sub-discipline.
Demonstrable literacy of world ethnographic, archaeological, and physical anthropological studies and
findings—at least 10 ethnographies, at least 10 archaeological sites, and at least 10 major finds in
biological anthropology.
Ability to synthesize information for different areas of anthropology
Courses used for assessment:
During the Spring Semester the following courses provided frameworks for evaluating PLO 1 and 3: ANTH11
Introduction to Cultural Anthropology, ANTH12 Introduction to Physical Anthropology, ANTH13 Introduction to
2013 Program Learning Outcomes Assessment
Archaeology, ANTH115 Emerging Global Cultures, ANTH140 Human Sexuality *(GE) ANTH143 Culture and
Adaptation, ANTH151 Modernity and Disease, ANTH157 Forensic Anthropology, ANTH179 Anthropology of
Mexico, (and to a lesser extent, ANTH162 Aztec, Maya, Inca).
Assessment
Both PLO 1 and 3 are related in that each essentially examines the relationship between biology and culture and
the interaction of culture with environment. Because not all students take all of these courses, (Behavioral Science
students are able to take these courses to satisfy degree requirements), it is significant that we have overlapping
content which ensures the majority of students in our programs receive relevant content related to the PLO.
Outcomes:
All courses were found to have content and assessment activities relevant to the two PLOs. For instance, in
ANTH157 Forensics, students learn to identify specific bone markers related to physical activity or as indicators of
cultural behaviors. In ANTH 143 Culture and Adaptation, students learn about physiological adaptations to
differing environments and culturally based subsistence strategies. In ANTH162 Aztec, Maya, Inca, students learn
about the cultural practices of cranial deformation, or biocultural indicators of rank and privilege similar to cultural
practices discussed in ANTH140 Human Sexuality, which also explores the cultural context of body modification.
Health, disease, cultural practices related to food procurement, nutrition, and ways in which human interaction
with environments leads to social and cultural adaptations are core content in three of the above listed courses.
Instruments for assessing proficiency and understanding included essays, group projects and presentations,
objective exam questions, and topical term papers. Overall, we determined that these PLO are widely
disseminated to the majority of students. Further, the majority of students are demonstrating moderate to
sophisticated comprehension.
The Masters in Applied Anthropology
Under the criterion used by the WASC matrix the Program in Applied Anthropology was assessed by the
department as Highly Developed. The seven Learning Objectives for the program are clear and professionally
applicable. Expectations are distinct and faculty is in agreement concerning mastery. However, as stated in our
initial WASC based assessment for the Road to 2014, the department recognized areas for improvement. One of
these areas was the need for students to improve presentational skills and another was a need to better
understand how students were internalizing lessons associated with political and ethical issues as they obtain with
personal expectations and application. During the Spring Semseter presentation skills were given priority in the
graduate courses. In ANTH234 and ANTH235 students tackled multiple assignments requiring presentations--in
groups and individually—and in mixed media, including video. Although students made multiple presentations
faculty felt that standards were only just satisfactory and greater individualized evaluation may be necessary to
achieve the desired levels.
Graduate Program Applied Anthropology
No specific PLO for the Graduate Program was evaluated during the Spring 2013 semester, however, in meetings
among faculty, the overlap of content, consistency, and redundancy across the curriculum were sought with the
purpose of ensuring appropriate integration of the graduate courses under the Umbrella model we implemented
last year, and to reduce or refine redundant readings. We have also initiated a Five Year Action Plan in alignment
with Program Planning.
Summary and Planning
The “Umbrella” model is now in place and all curriculum is gradually being integrated. What this means is we are
seeking ways in which course content shares themes or addresses thematic content from different disciplinary
perspectives. This was the focus of the faculty in the end of year meeting.
Actionable Items and Discussion
The permanent faculty and department lecturers met on three occasions to review the results of actions taken
since our last assessment, the most recent occurring just before the end of the semester. Our conversation last
semester centered on deficiency of student writing skills (and need for more robust standards) and deficiency
2013 Program Learning Outcomes Assessment
among students of critical thinking recognized in the major and the GE offerings. At the time it was decided that
stricter writing standards were needed at both undergraduate and graduate levels. During our Spring meeting we
learned the results of our pilot (in a single course) of stricter writing standards. The outcomes were that students
improved their writing as the instructor demanded improvements in proofreading and increased attention by
students to detail. [The specific action was that students were informed that more than ten errors in a paper
would result in a failing grade for the assignment. The outcome was papers with very few errors. Students were
given a chance to turn in papers early for review as well peer review.] We will implement this approach to writing
in several classes in the Fall 2013 Semester. We also examined the outcomes of increased opportunities for
presentations. We have determined that, while we see improvement, more opportunities must be worked into the
curriculum. In terms of PLO 1 and 3, no action is viewed as necessary and no changes are planned. In the Fall of
2013 we will again stress writing proficiency and clarity as these are cornerstones to successful academic careers.