OFFICE OF GENERAL EDUCATION
A-218C
160 Convent Avenue
New York, NY 10031
GENERAL EDUCATION (W) PERSPECTIVE ASSESSMENT REPORT
Date of report:
Friday, February 12, 2016
Course:
Philosophy 102
Materials used, n:
27
Rubric/Scoring standard used: Gen Ed rubrics for writing, critical thinking and info. literacy
Date of assessment:
June, 2014
Assessment Team
Jennifer Morton, Carolyn Plunkett, Robert Robinson
Members:
Coordination / Oversight:
Ana Vasović, Coordinator for General Education
WRITING SKILLS
Writing – average scores *
Thesis
Spring 12
Spring 13
Spring 14
2.02
2.20
2.40
Structure and
Organization
2.20
2.33
2.56
Evidence and
Development
2.19
2.44
2.30
Mechanics
and Style
2.37
2.27
2.56
Strengths:
In general students had a clear understanding of the progression of an argumentative essay -introduce a topic, outline an argument, provide some objection to that argument -- and this may
reflect the format of the assignment. Most had mastered the typical 5-paragraph essay with an
introduction and conclusion. Most students had paragraphs that had a central idea.
Nearly all papers had a thesis statement that elucidated the purpose of the paper, even though the
purpose wasn’t always argumentative or analytical. Grammar and mechanics were good overall
Weaknesses/Concerns:
While students have a broad understanding of the general form, they don't seem to have a strong
grasp of the right way to organize thoughts inside a paragraph to strengthen their arguments. In
particular, when students are making an argument, they should work on drawing the connections
from sentence to sentence in order to lead the reader to the conclusion. The conclusion of the
paper should be more carefully tied to the argument of the paper.
Other comments:
Very few of the paper topics mention the appropriate scope of the argument. Instructors should
remind students that they can only make a very modest point in a paper of this size.
Conclusions varied in scope and purpose. We might think about the purpose of a conclusion in
our disciple – to wrap up an argument and indicate consequences of the position defended.
1
CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS
Critical Thinking – average scores
Spring 12
Spring 13
Spring 14
Explanation
of issues
Evidence
Context &
Assumptions
Student's
Position
Conclusions
2.46
2.22
1.94
1.58
1.86
2.56
2.50
2.38
2.15
2.06
2.44
2.47
2.21
2.09
2.06
Strengths:
Compared to initial assessments in the course, instructors have improved in directing students
towards staking out a critical position by explicitly mentioning this in their assignments.
Consequently students continue to improve on this score and most papers have a point of view
rather than just summarizing other authors. Most students address at least two competing views
on a subject and some students put forward criticisms of the authors’ arguments.
Some papers did a great job of incorporating analysis throughout and not reserving analysis for
one paragraph at the end (though many papers did that, as well!)
Weaknesses/Concerns:
Students should focus on being very clear about which claim or part of an argument they are
contesting. Often they give general, largely irrelevant, or completely unsupported objections to an
argument, and then conclude that it is not right. Students should develop a focused counterargument instead of critiquing many aspects of a view. Though some students are critical of the
authors’ arguments, many of them are not sufficiently critical of their own position. Very few
took into consideration counter-arguments to their own view.
Other comments:
Instructors should instruct students on the appropriate argumentative scope for a paper of this
size. We might think about what students should be expected to critically evaluate – the premises
of an argument? Whether the premises support a conclusion? The implications of adopting a
conclusion? These are all, of course, worthy of evaluation, but different prompts asked students to
evaluate different aspects of the argument or its consequences. Do we want to streamline that?
How can we make better prompts to pinpoint more narrowly the focus of critical analysis?
Conclusions varied in scope and purpose. We might think about the purpose of a conclusion in
our disciple – to wrap up an argument and indicate consequences of the position defended.
2
INFORMATION LITERACY SKILLS
Information Literacy – average scores *
Spring 12
Spring 13
Spring 14
Understand info
needs / search
efficiently
Evaluate
info sources
Credibility of
sources
2.58
N/A
1.97
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Use info
ethically
2.17
2.85
1.81
The assessment team decided in Sp 14 term to look at IL issue more in depth, not just whether students had cited but
whether they had used outside sources intelligently. Since the bar was set higher, the scores are not exactly
comparable to previous semsters.
Strengths:
Most students distinguish their position from those of the authors they are discussing. Most
students discuss at least one author. They tend not to plagiarize at all, and make some attempt at a
well formatted bibliography.
Weaknesses/Concerns:
Works cited pages are missing or absent from many papers. Many students do not cite at all and
bibliographies are generally poorly formatted. Hardly any papers credited using an outside
source.
PERSPECIVE SPECIFIC INFORMATION - Logical-Philosophical
Course/divisional learning outcomes assessed
Average score
Logical-Philosophical: Experience with analytic and/or philosophical reasoning,
to examine fundamental questions of ethics, justice and epistemology
Sp. 12 - 2.42
Sp. 13 - 2.43
To what extent does a student engage in a philosophical discussion and analysis Sp. 14 - 2.51
To what extent does the student “get” the problem or question at stake, and
answer it appropriately.
Strengths:
Students grasped the general philosophical issue or question at stake. Text explication was for the
most part good. This is an important philosophical skill as well. Papers showed that students
understood that there were several positions on the given issue and most students also took a
position of their own.
Weaknesses/Concerns:
Text explication could be more methodical – explaining authors’ arguments as a series of
premises; using terms like premise, conclusion, assumption, etc. This is a way of getting at what’s
at stake in an argument – trying to boil down a complicated or long paper into a few bullet points
requires knowing what to look for and knowing what’s relevant for the problem to be addressed.
Students’ critical evaluation of arguments was often problematic, not well-support, or not wellargued for.
Students’ explanation of arguments was too driven by their own position instead of being fair and
balanced to competing positions. There was very little mention of or attention to counterarguments to students’ own position or assumptions.
Other comments:
Lots of ethics papers! Are we making good on justice and epistemology as well?
3
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This was round 3 of assessment in PHIL 102 class. Assessments were conducted once a year, for
three years in a row by a team of instructors lead by the course coordinator Jennifer Morton.
Based on early assessment data, faculty training sessions were instituted and led by Jennifer
Morton before the beginning of each semester. The goal of these sessions was to familiarize
instructors with requirements of the course and the General Education Program. During the
sessions, assessment data and findings were shared with instructors with specific discussion on
what constitutes effective writing assignments.
The effects of this work can be seen in round 3 of assessment. Students’ writing and critical
thinking has improved. Also improved are the actual assignments which allow students to
demonstrate their skills and knowledge. Based on these findings, assessment will not need to
continue in the near future and current faculty development policy will remain in place.
Additional recommendations to further help with student learning are listed below:
Institutional level:
 Assign a WAC fellow to work with the department/course to develop guides for effective
writing assignments and writing pedagogy
Departmental level:
 Adopt department-wide standards for bibliographies and citations
In class:
 Focus on organizing sentences in paragraphs so as to support the topic sentence.
Discuss topic sentences with students. Tell students that one should be able to read the
intro, topic sentences, and conclusion, and be able to understand the purpose of the essay,
the thesis, how you defend it, and why it matters
 Use templates for intro paragraph/thesis statements
 Rethinking “evidence” in philosophy – it’s often other philosophical texts, but also can
be personal anecdotes, psychology or sociology, literature, etc. Getting clear on what
constitutes evidence and what evidence is appropriate for different claims
 Assign very narrow topics help to focus the issue, and may help to aid in critical
thinking. Use of book They Say/I Say may be helpful in all intro courses to explain the
point of engaging in philosophical discourse and writing.
 Explain how to build an argument so that each sentence builds on the previous one and
leads to the conclusion (ideally, the topic sentence). Explain why one strong developed
argument is better than having several unsubstantiated objections.
 Discuss citation practices. Explicitly direct students to have a works cited page or the
appropriate bibliographic information in footnotes. Freshman English should teach them
how to construct a bibliography, how to cite papers, and possibly why to do it. Student
could be given a template for their MS Word which already has citations built in.
 Require students to use outside book source.
 Add drama to philosophical problems. What’s really at stake in the problem of evil?
Why does it matter whether there are rational arguments for the existence of God? Why
does whether or not I have free will matter? Students should “get” that these are
important questions. Organizing classes by questions or problems rather than topics
might help.
* Scale 1-4 reflects the ability range from the beginning level to the accomplished level – it is
meant as a “college span” scale; it is expected that the majority of freshmen would not be at the
“accomplished” end of the scale.
1 – beginning
2- developing
3 – competent
4 – accomplished
4
General Education Program Learning Outcomes
Proficiencies
Writing and Communication Skills
The student will be able to:
 formulate a clear thesis
 provide coherent, unified and effective organization of a paper
 develop abundant details and examples that provide evidence in support of sound logic
 use standard diction, grammar and mechanics of English
Critical Thinking skills (adapted from AACU Critical Thinking VALUE rubric)
The student will be able to:
 clearly frame an issue or problem and consider it critically
 select, use, and evaluate information to investigate a claim or point of view
 analyze his or her and others’ assumptions and evaluate relevance of contexts when
presenting a position
 present a position taking into account its complexities and limits as well as others points of view
 develop logical conclusions based on evaluation of evidence
Information literacy skills
The student will be able to:
 demonstrate a clear understanding of information needs and ability to search efficiently
 effectively evaluate information sources
 articulate credibility of sources
 use information ethically
Perspectives







Artistic: An awareness of artistic issues from a critical perspective
Global History and Culture: Familiarity with belief systems, history, social dynamics
of a society outside of the Euro-American tradition
Literary: An introduction to the methods and concerns of literary analysis, with close
reading and attention to historical context
Logical/Philosophical: Experience with analytic and/or philosophical reasoning, to examine
fundamental questions of ethics, justice and epistemology
Natural/Scientific and Natural/Scientific with an Interactive Component: Experience with
the techniques and methodologies of science including experience gathering and interpreting
data.
Self and Society: An awareness of ethical and societal justice as well as theories and
methods in the study of individuals and society issues (gender, race, class, etc.)
US Society: Knowledge of selected events and key topics in the development of US
society, through various tools and analytic approach.
5