Case Document 8-1. Ariel’s Informal Report
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
April 5, 2007
TO:
Dr. Scott Austin
A&M Philosophy Department Undergraduate Advisor
FROM:
Ariel Chisholm
A&M Philosophy Department B.A. Program Graduate
SUBJECT:
Curriculum Assessment Report
Attached is my report assessing the A&M Philosophy Department’s
undergraduate degree plan and course curriculum. I prepared this report at the request of
the A&M Philosophy Department faculty, in accordance with Texas A&M’s universitywide Quality Enhancement Planning efforts.
This report presents a broad analysis of the Philosophy Department’s course
curriculum and presents suggestions on how that curriculum might be enhanced. As a
recent graduate, my recommendations reflect needs I had in pursuing the curriculum.
I appreciate the opportunity to contribute observations and recommendations to
this project and hope the university will continue to assess curriculum.
Assessment Report--1
TO:
All A&M Philosophy Department Faculty
FROM:
Ariel Chisholm
A&M Philosophy Department B.A. Program Graduate
SUBJECT:
Requested Student Assessment of the Texas A&M Philosophy
Department’s Undergraduate Curriculum
Introduction
As part of Texas A&M’s commitment to university-wide Quality Enhancement
Planning, The Texas A&M Philosophy Department requested that I draft a memo report
assessing the current Philosophy Department degree plan and curriculum, and include
suggestions on how the philosophy curriculum might be bettered. This is my resulting
report, along with my suggestions for enhancing the curriculum.
I thank the entire Philosophy Department for giving me a chance to share my
thoughts about this wonderful program. The A&M Philosophy faculty is a committed and
passionate group of teachers; and I am in their debt for much of my academic success to
date.
With these thoughts in mind, I have focused my report on a set of changes to the
Department’s curriculum that I think would improve future philosophy student’s learning
experiences. I believe the department should provide an earlier and more widespread
introduction to rudimentary sentential logic and predicate logic theory, in all Philosophy
Department courses.
Curricular Recommendations
All of the undergraduate philosophy courses that I have taken from the A&M
Philosophy Department each require, to some degree or another, a basic grasp of the idea
of formal rules to logical argument. Unfortunately, not many classes cover the most
elementary of these rules.
The Philosophy Department has, of course, a rigorous block of logic courses,
starting with PHIL 240 Intro to Logic. The problem is that this may not be the first, or
even among the first, philosophy courses in which many beginning philosophy students
enroll.
As an undergraduate, I myself managed to take five different 3-hour philosophy
classes, including two 300-level classes, before taking PHIL 240. Much of the material in
the prior classes would have been easier to analyze if I had been armed with a
groundwork understanding of some of the basic, rudimentary rules of sentential and
predicate logic.
Assessment Report--2
I particularly remember encountering Anselm’s ontological proof of the existence
of God in my Philosophy of Religion course, and trying to read literary critiques of the
proof (already itself a very sophisticated argument) that utilized sentential and predicate
logic formulas and equations. The book material, and the teacher in class, seemed to take
it for granted that everyone could follow along with such material, but I clumsily
struggled with it until I took PHIL 240, several semesters later.
Student learning in the Department can be improved across the degree plan if
efforts are made to enroll students in an introductory logic course earlier in their
philosophy studies, and also if efforts are taken to keep students in all Department
courses well-familiar with rudimentary sentential and predicate logic theory.
The Philosophy Department Degree Plan
The Department’s degree plan is divided into the standard block of courses
required by the Texas A&M University College of Liberal Arts (this block of courses will
not be discussed in this report), as well as a block of philosophy courses that can be
customized to fill in nine areas of departmentally required philosophical study, as
diagramed in this Philosophy Department web chart:
AREA
COURSES
Logic
One of these
courses is
required:
240, Introduction to Logic
341, Symbolic Logic
342, Symbolic Logic II
Epistemology/Philosophy of
Science
One of these
courses is
required:
305, Philosophy of Natural Science
307. Philosophy of Social Science
351, Theory of Knowledge
Metaphysics and Ontology
One of these
courses is
required:
320, Philosophy of Mind
331, Philosophy of Religion
361, Metaphysics
Value Theory
One of these
courses is
required:
330, Philosophy of Art
332, Social / Political Philosophy
381, Ethical Theory
The Continental Tradition
One of these
courses is
required:
414, 19th Century Philosophy
418, Phenomenology / Existentialism
419, Current Continental Philosophy
The Anglo-American Tradition
One of these
courses is
required:
415, Classical American Philosophy
416, Recent British / American Philosophy
424, Philosophy of Language
History of Classical Philosophy
This course
410, Classical Philosophy
History of Modern Philosophy
This course
413, Modern Philosophy
Philosophy Electives
Any two courses
PHILOSOPHY COURSES REQUIRED FOR A PHILOSOPHY B.A. , ACCORDING TO PHILOSOPHY.TAMU.EDU
Assessment Report--3
Among the above-listed courses, only Metaphysics requires PHIL 240 Intro to
Logic as a prerequisite (as well it should); but all other classes can be taken without
having ever studied even the most elementary rules of premise-conclusion, sentential, and
predicate logic. It has occurred to me that this may be a bit like a physics department
rarely requiring their students to take math courses commensurate with their physics
studies.
Discussion of Specific Courses
Three specific courses currently do not have a logic course prerequisite. I
specifically recommend that these courses include some sort of rudimentary logic
instruction. These classes are PHIL 331 Philosophy of Religion, PHIL 381 Ethical
Theory, and PHIL 424 Philosophy of Language. Each of these courses includes study
material far too informed by sentential and predicate logic, for a student to fully
appreciate the material without an introductory logic class.
Conclusion
The Philosophy Department teaches several courses that could greatly benefit
from being taught concurrently with rudimentary sentential and predicate logic material.
The department does not now teach these courses concordantly with its introductory logic
class, and I think this hinders student comprehension of the material. If the Philosophy
Department refines its approach to PHIL 331, 381, and 424 courses to include more basic
logic instruction, students could come away from these classes with a much better
understanding of the course material.
Assessment Report--4