Department of Religious Studies, Georgia State University
Kathryn McClymond, Chair
Approved by the Religious Studies Faculty, December 5, 2008
Researched, written, and compiled by the Academic Program Review Committee:
Kathryn McClymond, Associate Professor and Chair of the Department APRC
Jonathan Herman, Associate Professor
Timothy Renick, Associate Professor
Kenneth Smith, graduate research assistant

Table B-6
Table B-7
Table E-1
Table E-2
Table G-1
Appendices
Appendix B1
Appendix B2
Appendix B3
Appendix B4
Appendix B5
Appendix C1
Appendix D1
Appendix D2
Appendix D3
Appendix D4
Appendix D5
Appendix D6
Appendix F1
Appendix F2
Appendix F3
Appendix F4
Appendix G1
Appendix G2
Self-Study
Section A
Section B
Section C
Section D
Section E
Section F
Section G
Section H
Tables
Table B-1
Table B-2
Table B-3
Table B-4
Table B-5a
Table B-5b
Table B-5c
2
Table of Contents
Unit Assessment of Strengths and Weaknesses Page 3
Historical and Current Contexts 6
Progress Toward Goals and Objectives 15
Curricula Quality
Student Quality
Faculty Quality
Resource Adequacy
Goals and Objectives
16
17
19
20
23
Faculty Demographics
Faculty Research Productivity
Programs: 3-Year Averages
Retention Rates
Credit Hours by Faculty Type
Credit Hours by Course Level
7
8
9
11
12
13
Credit Hours by Course Level
Summary Tables
Institutional Comparisons
Graduate Admission Test Scores, FY 2006-FY 2008
13
14
14
18
Selection Ratios for Graduate Students, FY 2006 - FY 2008 18
Faculty Ratios
Rationale for choices of peer programs 1
Organization of unit governance and committee structure 2
Department Promotion and Tenure Manual
Current faculty roster
3
29
N/A
Strategic goals at beginning of self-study period 29
Learning outcome statements and assessment plans
Current course syllabi for Writing Intensive courses
Degree requirements for each program
33
37
56
Courses offered over the last three years
Summary results of surveys
Undergraduate and graduate advisement procedures
Definition of graduate faculty
List of graduate faculty
Summary data on student/faculty ratios
University Library Report
Current CVs for full-time faculty members
Faculty participation in development of self-study
59
63
90
91
91
92
141
141
141

3
Section A
The Department of Religious Studies offers the Bachelors and Masters degrees in
Religious Studies. Employing a truly comparative and interdisciplinary model from the outset, Georgia State’s degree programs have been at the leading edge of an important national trend impacting the academic study of religion at public institutions. According to a recent study sponsored by the American Academy of Religion (AAR) and funded by the Teagle Foundation (2008), the number of undergraduate religious studies majors nationwide increased by 22% in the past decade (to an estimated 47,000 students), with like percentage increases in the number of total courses offered, course enrollments, and faculty positions in the field. The number of religious studies majors at public institutions has grown even more rapidly, by 40% during the same period, signifying a sea-change in the field. In the past five years alone, new undergraduate or graduate degree programs or departments of religion have been proposed or established at the
University of Texas, Ohio State University, Florida State University, the University of
Minnesota, the University of North Carolina Charlotte, the University of North Carolina
Asheville, among other public institutions. According to the report: “There is a very real shift occurring in the field of religious studies (continuing trends dating to at least the
1970s)—not a shift away from the study of Western religions per se (indeed, courses in the Introduction to Western Religions were up by 42% during the five-year period), but one away from the study of Christianity in a theological setting.”
A program in religious studies is also consonant with the mission of Georgia State
University. The 2005-2010 GSU Strategic Plan states that a major goal of the University is to “support a curriculum with intercultural and international perspectives” and to provide a “distinctive education” based on Atlanta’s status as an “international center.”
With its focus on the comparative study of religion, the Department of Religious Studies offers over forty courses—from the freshman to the graduate levels—that explore international and intercultural themes. By design, undergraduate majors, as well as students taking a single introductory course, are exposed to significant aspects of multiple religions, both Western and non-Western.
In addition, the Department of Religious Studies is at the forefront of Georgia
State’s efforts to promote interdisciplinary studies. Majors at the undergraduate and graduate levels can take, and have applied to their major, courses from African-American
Studies, Women’s Studies, Political Science, Sociology, Philosophy, History, English,
Art History, Anthropology, and Classics. Reciprocally, courses in Religious Studies constitute an important aspect of the university’s curricula in Middle Eastern Studies,
Classical Studies, Hellenic Studies, Women’s Studies, African American Studies, Jewish
Studies, and Asian Studies, and the program staffs courses cross-listed with Philosophy,
Sociology, History, Film/Communication, and Women’s Studies. Religious Studies faculty members are primary contributors to the Middle East Center, the Honors
Program, Asian Studies, Jewish Studies, and Women’s Studies.
The discipline of religious studies is also heavily focused on developing critical thinking, reading, and writing skills. Student comments indicate that the undergraduate and masters degree programs emphasize the development of these skills; in recognition of this, critical thinking, reading, and writing skills are an integral component of assessment for both the undergraduate and graduate programs. Faculty have demonstrated their commitment to developing these skills with their strong emphasis on reading- and

4 writing-centered course design. In addition, Religious Studies Department faculty have consistently been active participants in the Writing Across the Curriculum program. In all of these efforts, the Department understands its goals to be in close alignment with those of the University and the College of Arts and Sciences.
Quality of Instruction, Research and Service
As will be demonstrated below, data from the Department and the Office of Institutional
Research, comparing the Department’s efforts with other GSU units as well as peer and aspirational institutions, indicates that the Department of Religious Studies has experienced tremendous growth within the last three years (Summer ’05-Summer ’08, the current review period). All indicators associated with instruction, professional development, and service to the University demonstrate that the Department is not only viable, but a vibrant and increasingly significant contributor to the life of the University in terms of enrollments, undergraduate and graduate life, and faculty research.
Enrollments in our courses have increased from 2005 (3262 credit hours) to 2008 (4093 credit hours; see Table B-5a-c). The growth of undergraduate enrollments and Religious
Studies majors have been particularly striking during this period. During the Spring of
2005, we offered 12 sections of undergraduate courses (including on Perspectives section); in the Fall of 2008 we offered 26 sections of undergraduate courses (including four Perspectives sections, as well as eight other Core Curriculum sections taught by
GTAs), with more than 90% of available undergraduate seats filling. In the Spring of
2005, there were approximately 60 declared Religious Studies majors. During each academic year since then, we have added between 30 and 35 new majors; there are now approximately 100 declared majors who are actively registered for courses. It seems that more students change their majors to Religious Studies (or add it as a second major) than change their major from Religious Studies. The quality of our instruction has remained high as well, as evidenced by our annual assessment (see more information below), the strong annual student evaluation scores for faculty (Department average: 4.83), and the fact that Department faculty have won teaching awards at the College, Board of Regents, and national professional (American Academy of Religion) levels.
Similarly, faculty research and service compares favorably with that of faculty at peer and aspirational institutions (see Section F below). Faculty publish books with topranked presses and articles in highly ranked peer-reviewed journals on a par with similar programs. Richard Hecht and William Paden, two distinguished scholars of religion who reviewed the program in 2003, have written, “The quality of its graduates, the volume of its majors, and the dedication of its faculty are simply extraordinary. We believe it is on its way to becoming a national example of how an urban, state research university can serve its constituencies.”
Strategic Focus
The Department has developed its program taking 3 factors into account: foundational disciplinary requirements; student interest, as evidenced by high enrollments and specific demands for courses; and perceived local, University System-wide, and regional needs.
In terms of foundational disciplinary requirements, Department programs introduce students to the fundamental content and broad theoretical approaches required for an introductory knowledge of the field at both the undergraduate and graduate levels.

5
Undergraduate majors are required to take a World Religions class introducing them to the world’s most influential religious traditions. In addition, majors are required to take an Introduction to Religion class that introduces students to major themes in the study of religion (ethics, gender, ritual, creation myths, etc.). Thus our majors graduate with a clear sense of the intellectual terrain of the discipline of religious studies. Perhaps most importantly, students gain the ability to understand and appreciate a religious tradition different from their own, and the need to distinguish between believing a religion and understanding a religion. Similarly, graduate students are trained in the methodological skills and distinct theoretical approaches that currently shape the academic study of religion, preparing them for research at the doctoral level as well as undergraduate instruction.
In addition, the Department has responded to student interest in its hiring and course development. Prior to 2005, the Department offered courses in Christian Ethics,
American Religions, Islam, Chinese Religions, Judaism, and Hinduism. Faculty turnover has required the Department to replace faculty in Islam and American religions, but in addition we have hired a specialist in Ancient Mediterranean religions as well as a faculty member with specialization in race and religion. The research and teaching foci of these hires were driven in large part by the expressed interests of our undergraduate and graduate students; strong student enrollments have confirmed that these were appropriate fields in which to hire.
Finally, the Department has grown with an eye toward local, system-wide, and regional needs. Currently, no other university in the Atlanta area offers an M.A. in
Religious Studies that offers a non-sectarian, comparative focus similar to the program at
GSU. The only other school within the University of Georgia system to offer a masters degree is the University of Georgia, which is not a practical alternative for many Atlantabased students. Our strong graduate enrollments demonstrate that the GSU program meets the need for a strong metropolitan area masters degree program in religious studies.
The nature of the Department’s program also reflects the religious, ethnic, and cultural diversity of Atlanta. The Department has self-consciously committed itself to a comparative focus, requiring both undergraduate and graduate students to be exposed to multiple religious traditions throughout their coursework. In so doing, the Department reflects the diverse nature of Atlanta and, more broadly, American culture.
The program is also an active community participant, best known for its commitment to the comparative approach. Faculty have been active in community events around the city (e.g., Atlanta Interfaith Broadcasters training sessions, Islamic Speakers
Bureau Awards Dinner), educating staff about the various religious communities in
Atlanta. In addition, numerous local schools, religious institutions, news sources, and community organizations (e.g., Faith Alliance of Metropolitan Atlanta) routinely contact the Department for information regarding religious events in our city.
Financial Resource Analysis
The Department’s budget is almost entirely committed to faculty salaries and graduate student support. Funding for supplies and three administrative staff members are shared with the Department of Philosophy. Given the limited budget, the program has been remarkably successful at recruiting and retaining faculty, developing a popular and wellrespected graduate program, and generating increasing undergraduate and graduate

6 enrollments. It is clear, however, that faculty salaries are low when compared with faculty at peer and aspirational institutions. For example, assistant professor salaries range for the review period averaged $52,000; UGA assistant professors averaged $56-
57,000, with assistant professors at other institutions earning as much as $75,000.
Faculty at the associate and full professor level experience comparable pay disparities.
Even given the current difficult economic times, it is clear that in order to be able to retain top-quality junior faculty, it will be important for GSU to provide economic incentive, in the form of salary and research support that is competitive with similar institutions.
Historical Overview
Section B: Historical and Current Contexts
In the late 1980s, the university hired its first tenure-track lines in Religious Studies. In
1991, Georgia State University began offering a B.A. in Religious Studies. At the time, the Religious Studies Program and all of its core faculty members were housed in the
Department of Philosophy. Promotion and tenure, curricular, and other major decisions were made by the entire faculty of the Department of Philosophy. In the early years, the program distinguished itself by robust enrollments and by the exceptional accomplishments of its students—two trends that continue to this day (and that will be discussed below).
In the late 1990s, a number of procedural changes helped to establish more autonomy for Religious Studies; tenure and curricular recommendations began to be made by the Religious Studies faculty to the full faculty of the combined department, and a Religious Studies “track” was established within the existing Philosophy M.A. program. Focus on Religious Studies within the Philosophy M.A. program became highly popular with students, and the number of Masters students who completed the
Religious Studies track topped or rivaled the number of students graduating in
Philosophy. In 2004, the Board of Regents approved a proposal for an M.A. in Religious
Studies, establishing only the second such degree program in the state. The new program hit the ground running with a first class of 14 students in the fall of 2004 (with approximately half of the students shifting over from the Philosophy M.A. program).
Among that inaugural group, graduates were accepted into Ph.D. programs at Duke,
Emory, and McGill. In 2005 Georgia State University established the Department of
Religious Studies as an autonomous unit, though the new department continued to share staff and office space with Philosophy, as it does to this day. As with the B.A. and M.A. programs, the department is only the second in the field among the 35 units of the
University System of Georgia. Most recently, the department successfully proposed that one of its courses, “Introduction to World Religions,” be added to the core curriculum of the university in the humanities area. The proposal required approval at the state-widesystem level since the University System of Georgia supports a “common core,” i.e., a course satisfying a core requirement in one institution satisfies the requirement in all institutions. The core course was approved in 2008. The course will provide teaching opportunities for our graduate students within the discipline (they previously taught a
Philosophy course in critical thinking), as well as expose the department to a large group of freshmen and sophomores.

7
The nature of the program is, in part, a product of its environment. Atlanta is an ideal place to conduct the comparative study of religion. Changes in American immigration patterns have impacted Georgia as much as any state in the union. New immigrant communities are flourishing in the state, in general, and in metro-Atlanta, in particular. If the state of Georgia is to face the challenges of the new century and fulfill the opportunities presented by its expanding diversity, it will need scholars trained in the understanding of religion. In fact, the Department in Religious Studies at Georgia State already is providing a forum for such training. It was named an official partner in the
“Pluralism Project”—a decade-long effort spear-headed by Harvaard University
Professor Diana Eck—to survey and assess the diversity of American religions at the turn of the millennium ( www.pluralism.org
). Students in Religious Studies have, over a five year period, conducted fieldwork on dozens of Atlanta communities, discovering and documenting, for instance, over fifteen Wiccan covens in the state. Three years ago, five
Georgia State undergraduate students who had participated in the project presented their findings at an annual meeting of the American Academy of Religion.
Current Program Overview
This Self-Study will review the Department of Religious Studies Department over a three-year period, from its inauguration as a stand-alone department in Summer 2005 through Summer 2008. Where appropriate, note will be taken of changes that took effect in Fall 2008 as a result of efforts made during the review period. A review of the
Department’s current profile demonstrates that the unit has grown rapidly in its first three years as a stand-alone department, and is now in a position to 1) strengthen several new initiatives, and 2) continue its growth in several key areas.
Faculty Demographics
During this study’s three-year review period, the number of tenured and tenure-track faculty decreased from 6 to 5 in Fall ‘07-Summer ’08, then returned to 6 in Fall ’08
(Table B-1).
Table B-1: Faculty Demographic Information
Tenured Tenure-Track Non Tenure-Track
Year
FY
2006
Status Pro f.
Gender
Assoc. Asst. Prof. Assoc. Asst. Permanent Visiting PT Other
FT* (specify)
2M
1M
FY
2007
Minority
Gender
2M
FY
2008
Minority
Gender
2M
Minority
*Includes instructors and lecturers
1M

8
The percentage of female T/TT faculty was 17% (1 out of 6) until Fall ‘08. In addition, during the review period, the department has consistently had one-half of a Visiting
Instructor (shared with Philosophy) available to teach. Within the review period, the number of associate professors increased (from 2 to 4, including the one female faculty member), and the number of assistant professors decreased (from 50%, 3 out of 6, to
17%, 1 out of 6). There are no full professors. The department is committed to increasing the representation of women and minority faculty in its ranks. Because of hires finalized in Spring ’08, the current percentage of TT women faculty has doubled to 34% (2 out of
6); the percentage of minority faculty members has increased from 0% to 17% (from 0 out of 6 to 1 out of 6). In addition, the department is committed to supporting its faculty through promotion to full professor; we currently have one faculty member under review for promotion to full professor.
The department lost two TT faculty during the review period, but also hired one
TT faculty member (two more TT faculty began teaching in Fall ’08). These hires have made it possible 1) to offer courses previously unavailable; 2) to expand course offerings in areas with modest representation in Fall ’05; and 3) to deepen its graduate-level offerings. For example, with the hire of Louis A. Ruprecht, Jr., the department began to offer courses in Ancient Mediterranean religions that had not been offered previously, along with a course in “Religion and Sexuality” and the course “Jesus Inside and Outside of the Gospels.” All of these courses (and particularly the last two) have been tremendously popular. In addition, because of our growth we have been able to expand our offerings in the Eastern traditions, specifically courses in Chinese and Hindu religions that supplement pre-existing courses. Finally, with the growth in faculty in Fall
’08, we have been able to offer more graduate-only seminars (1-2 seminars per semester rather than 1 per year) as well as a Theories and Methods course for incoming graduate students.
Faculty Research Productivity
The faculty have been tremendously productive, particularly given the fact that instruction and service demands are spread over a small number of faculty in a young, rapidly growing program. Over the review period, the faculty published 5 books, 35 articles, 7 book chapters, 30 reference entries and 17 reviews (Table B-2), comparing favorably with faculty members at both the peer and aspirational institutions (Table B-7).
In addition, faculty continue to be active in professional conference presentations, and they have been awarded both internal and external grants.
TABLE B-2: Individual and Departmental Productivity, Fall 2005-Summer 2008
Conference
Presentations
Year
Publications
(Articles,
Chapters,
Reviews)
(Refereed)
Amt. Of
External
Funding
Amt. Of
Internal
Funding
Scholarly
Works
(encyclopedia entries)
Professor 2 $6,000 3
1
2005-
2007
Professor
2
Professor
3
3 17 1

9
Professor
4
Professor
5
Professor
6
Professor
7
Professor
8
Professor
9
5 2
16 $75,000 3
4 1
$8,000 3
4
2
3-Year
Avg.
Faculty morale is uniformly high. In the standard questions asked of all GSU faculty during self-review, the Department of Religious Studies ranked higher than the GSU average in every area except for one (See Appendix D5, “Summary Results of Surveys”).
In evaluating the scholarship of the faculty, the Department faculty ranked its scholarship as 3.86 (as compared with an average GSU faculty response of 4.26). However, GSU’s publication record, when adjusted for faculty size, is comparable to both its peer institutions and its aspirational institutions, based on the data available to us, particularly in terms of books and peer-reviewed articles (See Section F below regarding faculty productivity). Faculty research at GSU has been aided by a well-considered College workload policy, and by departmental research support in the form of graduate research assistants, summer research stipends, and funds for travel to conferences and archives.
The current statewide fiscal situation is of concern, because of its potential impact on faculty research.
It is clear that faculty at GSU are more heavily engaged in departmental and professional service than peers at other institutions (Table B-7). In addition, faculty are active professionally, mostly through official service to the American Academy of
Religion, our national professional organization. GSU faculty hold 8 formal positions within the AAR (on average, 1.3 positions per faculty member). Compare this to colleagues at our peer institutions, who hold an average of 0.27 AAR service positions, and colleagues at aspirational institutions, who hold an average of 0.64 AAR positions per faculty member. In addition, because of the small size of the Department and its rapid growth, there have been extensive service demands placed upon junior faculty. As the
Department grows, and as more faculty are awarded tenure and senior status, the service demands placed on faculty, particularly junior faculty, should diminish.
Programs
The department offers Bachelors and Masters of Arts degrees.
Table B-3: Program Enrollment Numbers
3 YR. AVG.
Degrees Degrees Degrees Degrees
Program Major Majors Conferred Majors Conferred Majors Conferred Majors Conferred

10
The B.A. program, which was initiated nearly two decades ago when Religious Studies was a small wing of the Philosophy Department, has seen significant growth since the establishment of a stand-alone department and the concomitant addition of new faculty.
The number of active majors has increased by more than 50% over the past three years, and the quality of our students has continued to be strong. Our graduates have been accepted to prestigious graduate programs in Religious Studies and other areas (e.g.
Education, Law, English) and have gone on to successful careers in such wide-ranging fields as human services, business, government, media, and ministry. Over the last year, two of the University-wide valedictorians were Religious Studies majors.
Faculty assessment of our graduating majors indicates that a broad consensus that majors have been achieving high levels of competence in various historical and theoretical areas. Moreover, surveys from departing majors indicate consistent satisfaction with the quality of the program, with special praise given to the diversity of course offerings, the high quality of the program, with special praise given to the students and faculty. Nevertheless, we are taking steps to guarantee that students get more consistent direction in learning research methods in religious studies, the one are that undergraduates ranked highly, but not as high as the other areas of assessment in their survey responses (see Appendix D5).
To comply with newly-established University requirements for CTW courses, the department has developed two courses (Rels 3750, Theories of Religion, and Rels 4750, an upper-level undergraduate CTW course) to be offered beginning Fall ‘09. Assuming that the two searches currently underway in Religious Studies are concluded successfully, the department will be able to meet the CTW curriculum demands effectively.
The M.A. program, inaugurated in Fall 2005, has been a striking success. The first cohort included 17 students (some of whom had been previously enrolled in the
Philosophy Masters degree program); in Spring 2008 we admitted 16 students who began their study in Fall ’08. The quality of our incoming masters level students has remained steady since the program began. In Fall ’05 the average GRE verbal score was 594; the class admitted in Spring ’08 had a slightly higher average GRE verbal score of 598.
Graduates of our masters program are already being admitted to top-ranked doctoral programs, including Boston University, Duke Divinity School, Emory University, McGill
University, New York University, Princeton University, University of California Santa
Barbara, often with partial to full funding.
Survey results indicate that graduate students are extremely satisfied with their experience in the Department. In the Graduate Student Survey Findings (Appendix D5), students rank the Department significantly higher in 6 categories related to their experience than their peers in other GSU programs, placing us in the top percentile in five of the six categories. The minimal dissatisfaction expressed in the sixth category response (size of class) reflects the fact that most of the classes offered to graduate students prior to Fall ’08 were combined upper level undergraduate/graduate classes; as

11 of Fall ’08, that has changed. As of Fall ’09, we will be able to offer 2 graduate level seminars each semester.
Where students did request changes in the program, the Department seems to have anticipated all of these concerns. For example, one student wrote, “I would love to see opportunities for religious studies graduate students to actually teach religious studies courses.” As of Spring ’09, a course will be offered that trains students to teach an
“Introduction to World Religions” class, and graduate students will begin teaching in
Summer ’09. Not only will this help the Department offer the Core course to GSU undergrads, but it will also provide useful teaching experience for the masters students who intend to apply for doctoral programs.
The Department has done very well with its recruitment and retention of graduate students (average 50.5% retention rate over 2 years, comparable with reporting peer institutions retention rates).
Table B-4: Retention by Major, Academic Years 2005-2008 (Listed as 01, 02, & 03)
Fall 01
Juniors Retained
Grad by
1 Yr Grad
Ret Retained by
2 Yr Grad
Ret Retained by
Fall
02 03
Fall
03 Rate Fall
Fall
04
3 Yr Grad
Ret Retained by
4 Yr
Ret
Fall
05 Rate
N 6 4 0
Fall 01
Juniors Retained
Grad by
Fall
1 YR
RET Retained
Grad by
Fall
04
2 YR
RET
N 1 1 0
Retained
Fall 03
Juniors Retained
Grad by
Fall
1 YR
RET Retained
Grad by
Fall
05
Grad by
Fall
05
3 YR
RET Retained
100% 0% 100%
2 YR
RET Retained
Grad by
Fall
06
3 YR
RET Retained
N 3 2 1 3 1 2
Grad by
Fall
06
4 YR
RET
Rate
Grad by
Fall
07
4 YR
RET
Rate
However, our retention and graduation rates are lower than those of our aspirational institutions (Table B7). We believe that decreasing the teaching expectations and increasing the financial support will be key to improving these rates. Typical incoming graduate funding packages for the Department is $6000 + tuition waiver for the first year, in exchange for up to 10 hours of work per week as a GRA. In the second year, students who receive aid are guaranteed funding as Teaching Assistants, at the rate of $1,000 per credit hour. By contrast, several of our peer and aspirational institutions offer similar financial aid packages, but often without the requirement to work as a GRA or GTA
(Table B7). As a result of the work requirement, many full-time masters students in the
Department 1) incur significant student loans, and 2) slow down their progress to graduation, particularly in the second year when they are teaching as many as 5 sections of a 2 credit hour course. In Fall ’09, when students begin to shift to teaching a 3 credit hour course, their number of class sections may decrease (from 5 sections to 3 sections per year), but their workload will remain roughly the same in terms of credit hour generation (decreasing slightly from 10 credit hours over the course of a year to 9). Our desire is to increase graduate support so that 1) we can reduce the workload of funded

12 students as they move through the program; 2) more students can receive aid; and 3) we can offer bigger packages to particularly desirable students.
Despite these difficulties, M.A. retention rates have been strong since the establishment of the Masters program. Tables generated by OIR indicate the number of students entering the M.A. program (Table B-3) and our retention and graduation rates are strong. This is a result of several factors: a required orientation for new masters students just prior to their first semester; required appointments with the Graduate
Director each semester to review the progress toward degree; an increasing number of small, seminar-style classes; informal social and research events throughout the academic year, including our Research Lunch events in which faculty share their current research; intensive mentoring by faculty outside of the classroom; and enthusiastic informal peer mentoring by senior graduate students. Students encourage one another to attend the discipline’s national professional conference (American Academy of Religion) and to participate in the discipline’s regional professional conference (Southeast Commission for the Study of Religion). Students also present their research in an annual Department
Student Symposium, and some students have been able to publish their research.
1
While the program prepares students for doctoral programs, many students terminate their training with the masters degree. In the student survey comments, one student asked that the Department reinstitute a workshop that was offered previously on careers outside of academia that one could pursue after earning a B.A. or M.A. in
Religious Studies. Particularly given the difficult job market for students with degrees in
Religious Studies at any level, this would be a worthwhile event to restore. It should be noted that several of our masters students have obtained teaching positions at colleges in
Georgia and out-of-state (e.g., Georgia Perimeter College, Georgia Highlands College,
Spelman College, Diablo Valley College) .
Credit Hours
Tables B-5a, B-5b, and B-5c provide information regarding credit hours by faculty type and by course level respectively during the review period
Table B-5a: FY 2006 Credit Hours Generated by Level and Faculty Type
TYPE CORE LOWER UPPER GRAD TOTAL
TENURE TRACK
NONTENURE
TRACK
PTI
GTA
1,113
OTHER
1
See, for example, student work featured in the September 2008 issue of the CSSR Bulletin and Claire
Murata Kooy’s chapter “Hindu Death and Dying Rituals in America” in the 3-volume series Religion,
Death and Dying in America forthcoming from Praeger.

13
Table B-5b: FY 2007 Credit Hours Generated by Level and Faculty Type
TYPE CORE LOWER UPPER GRAD TOTAL
TENURE TRACK
NONTENURE
TRACK
PTI
GTA
OTHER
1,264
276
1,264
276
TOTAL 1,828
Table B-5c: FY 2008 Credit Hours Generated by Level and Faculty Type
TYPE CORE LOWER UPPER GRAD TOTAL
TENURE TRACK
NONTENURE
TRACK
PTI
GTA
OTHER
526 526
The Department has been on a growth path in terms of credit hours, both in undergraduate and graduate course enrollments (when adjusted for numbers of faculty).
Since Fall 2002, the Department has seen an increase in total credit hours of over 25%.
Ups and downs in credit hour generation over the years reflect growth or decline in the number of tenure-track faculty; as the number of tenure-track hires increase, we see a steady growth in credit hours generated by full-time faculty. Similarly, fluctuations in the number of credit hours generated by part-time faculty fluctuate with our staffing.
Program Relevance
The Department’s programs are particularly relevant to society’s concerns and needs at this time, as discussed in Section A above. Particularly in a post-9/11 world, the importance of religion as one mode through which individuals and cultures express their identity is clear. In addition, as our society becomes increasingly pluralistic within and more engaged with other cultures, it will be increasingly important for GSU graduates to demonstrate their knowledge of and ability to work with members of cultures other than their own. Courses offered at the Core (Rels 2010), undergraduate lower division (World
Religions, Introduction to Religion), undergraduate upper division (Topics in Religious
Studies), and graduate levels (Theories of Religion, Topics in Religious Studies) introduce students to the need to think about the role of religion in local, national, and international contexts.
Institutional Comparison
Five peer and aspirational institutions were selected for comparison purposes (Appendix
B1). Religious Studies identified 3 peer institutions and 3 aspirational institutions for comparison purposes. The 3 peer institutions were University of Georgia; Missouri State

14
University; and University of South Florida. The 3 aspirational institutions were Florida
State University, University of Iowa, and Temple University. Questionnaires were sent to the chairs of the departments of religious studies at each institution; 5 institutions responded (the University of Iowa was dealing with the after effects of serious storm activity and was unable to respond).
Table B-6a: Summary Table: CH by Faculty Type
FY 06 FY 07 FY 08
3 YR
AVG
Ten Prof
T Asc P
T Ast P
TT Ast P
Total TT
NTT
Total FT
2 3 3 2.7
TT Prof
TT Asc P 1 1 1 1.0
3 2 1 2.0
6 6 5 5.7
2 1 1 1.3
8 7 6 7.0
PTI
GTA 6 2 2.7
Total PT 6 2 2.7
Table B-6b: Summary Table: CH by Course Level
FY
06 FY 07 FY 08
3 YR
AVG
UG Core 220 1828 1,352 1133.3
UG Lower 69 7 25.3
UG Upper 2,613 1,891 2,211 2238.3
Grad 360 550 523 477.7
Table B-7: Summary Table with Institutional Comparisons for 2007-2008 Academic Year
FL State
Faculty composition
South
Florida
9 12 11 15 18
3 2 8 3 2
2 1 2 2 2
Tenure track faculty
Non-tenure track faculty
Staff composition
Full-time administrative staff
Part-time administrative staff
Full-time technical support staff
Part-time technical support staff
Faculty publications
Books
Peer-Reviewed Articles
Encyclopedia Articles
Review Articles
Book Chapters
Faculty conference presentations
61
2
1.52
0
0
3
3
1
9
.1253
5
9
0 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0
2 3 0 8 8
0 0 4 4 0
32

15
Average teaching course-load per/term
Faculty research honors, grants, awards
Salary range
Full Professor
Associate Professor
Assistant Professor
Non-Tenure Track
2
N5
NA
55-6211
52
2 3 2 2/2 2
N6 N7 N8 N9
70-75k 54-71k 66-75k DNR
65-70k 45-47k 56-57k 75k
N10
DNR
60k
DNR
27,50012
Research & travel funding
Service commitments
$1,200 per/yr
AAR
Other national or international professional organizations
8
3
Editorial boards
Journals published by department
Degrees offered
B.A.
2
0
M.A.
Ph.D.
Number of students per/degree program
B.A.
M.A.
Ph.D.
Average enrollment per/course
Undergraduate
Graduate
Yes
Yes
No
97
18
NA
GSU
41
2618
Service courses offered?
Average scores
N19
GRE
Undergraduate GPA
Tuition Waiver
1304
3.42
Percentage MAs completed in 4 years?
Financial support for incoming MA students
N24
Yes
N13
0
9
3
5
2,700 per/crs
N14 N15
3
2
N16
2
0
N17
19
6-7
3 2 11 3
DNR DNR DNR 1
6-7
6
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
80 28 32 18 19
NA NA NA 52 38
Univ. of S.
Florida
MI State UGA Temple FL State
40-50 42.6 42.4
DNR 16.1 6.8
N20 N21 N22 N23
No
2.5-3.0 DNR 3.53 3.65 3.63
Fee Waiver
Stipend
No
6k
“only GTAs” Yes
DNR
DNR
Yes
Up to
Partial N
25
No Yes
See above No Yes
See above No 7k
Percentage That Receive Support?
Measurement of learning outcomes
50%
Yes27
7k26
30% 50% 35% None
Yes Yes
Yes
N30
Yes
N28 N29 N31
95%
DNR
DNR: did not respond.
Note that the Department compares favorably not only with peer institutions, but also with the aspirational institutions when adjusted for faculty size. Details regarding faculty research productivity will be discussed in Section F; at this point it is useful to note that although the GSU Department is still relatively young, it is strong in virtually every program area: faculty research productivity, degree programs offered, student quality, enrollment, and retention. Areas for improvement will be discussed in the relevant sections below.
Section C: Progress Toward Goals and Objectives
This is the first time the Department of Religious Studies has undergone a program review, since the Department was only established as a stand-alone unit in 2005.

16
However, as part of the review of the Philosophy and Religious Studies programs conducted in 2003, certain goals and objectives were established in the areas of Teaching; and Service. Creative and Scholarly Activity (see Appendix C1). Since that time, the now free-standing Department of Religious Studies has accomplished almost all of the goals listed in this program review. Most significantly, as discussed previously, the program was established as a stand-alone Department in Summer 2005. This was accomplished in compliance within the organizational and financial parameters established by the Dean’s Office, namely, that the new Department of Religious Studies continue to share space and staff with the Department of Philosophy. The separation has enabled the Department to begin to build an independent reputation for top-quality education as a liberal arts major within the College, as a graduate program, and for faculty research (see Table B-7 above and Sections D, E, and F below). At the same time, the Department of Religious Studies has made significant changes to develop its program and to contribute to the broader missions of the College and the University.
First, two recent hires have made it possible to offer a broader range of courses to undergraduates, including Writing Across the Curriculum courses, graduate level seminars and, beginning in 2009, Core course offerings and two CTW courses. Second, the Department established an independent Masters degree program. As is clear from
Table B-7, our program is already competitive in attracting strong applicants on par with graduate students enrolled in our peer and aspirational institutions. At the same time, the faculty have continued to make significant instructional and service contributions to the
College and University, as well as develop impressive academic reputations.
Currently, the Department is hiring two tenure-track lines, one to replace our
American religions faculty member who left, and one new line. Assuming we are able to hire successfully this year, the Department will have fulfilled all of the goals and objectives laid out in its earlier review as a program in the Department of Philosophy.
Section D: Curriculum Quality
As the Department of Religious Studies was established, guidelines for assessing the undergraduate and graduate students were established in light of the curricular goals and objectives described in Section C. The complete Assessment Plans for both the B.A. and the M.A. in Religious Studies, including Assessment Procedures and the Elements of
Assessment, are provided in Appendix D-1. Here we provide an overview of the
Analysis of the Assessment Plans to date.
Assessment Plan for the B.A. in Religious Studies
For undergraduate students, the assessment guidelines have been revised each year since
2005 in response to feedback.
Analysis: The most recent data indicates that 75% of the students assessed (~ 50% of the total graduating majors) are ranked above average or higher in terms of the content knowledge exhibited in their student papers; 67% of the students are ranked above average or higher in terms of the skills demonstrated in their student papers; and no students ranked below average for any of the eight articulated goals. In the students’ comments, at least half of the respondents made particular mention of the strength and/or helpfulness of faculty and staff, the breadth of course offerings, the emphasis on learning

17 a wide range of religious traditions, the stress on enhancement of technical and research skills, the value of the Pluralism Project as a research experience for students, and the occasion for friendships among students in the Department. No single aspect of the program was cited by more than one student as an area for improvement. This
Assessment indicates that students receiving the B.A. in Religious Studies are, as a whole, achieving the Department’s articulated learning goals. In no single area of evaluation did students rate their experience lower than 4.25 (on a 5.0 scale); the average score assigned by students was over 4.6. This positive evaluation was corroborated by the overall high grades assigned by faculty evaluators to the student papers, in the areas of both intellectual content and technical skills (3.11 on a 4.0 scale).
Assessment Plan for the M.A. in Religious Studies
For masters students, the assessment guidelines have been revised each year in response to feedback.
Analysis: The most recent data (Spring 2008) yields the following conclusions:
- 75% of our masters students are graded B or higher for the historical content evaluation of their M.A. theses.
- 75% of our masters students are graded B or higher for the theoretical content evaluation of their M.A. theses.
- Narrative comments by faculty indicated that the masters theses “demonstrated broad historical, theological, methodological expertise.”
- 79% of theses were ranked B or higher (36% were ranked A- or higher) for the critical thinking/writing skills demonstrated.
- Narrative comments indicated that “theses demonstrate appropriate critical thinking and writing skills, although students’ abilities vary more widely in these skills than in content-oriented outcomes.”
In summary, appropriate assessment mechanisms have been in place since the establishment of the Department in Summer 2005. Assessment strategies have been revised annually as data suggests the need for change. Current data indicates that the
Department is successful in achieving its stated goals for both undergraduate and graduate students, both in terms of content learning and in terms of skill development.
Section E: Student Quality
Input Quality Metrics
There are no minimum requirements for undergraduate majors. The major consists of 24 semester hours of coursework in Religious Studies at the 3000-level or above. There are two required courses--Rels 3050 and Rels 3270--but the major allows for a great deal of flexibility.
A grade of C or higher is required in all courses applied to the major. The
Department does not keep track of average annual SAT scores or Freshman Indexes for its undergraduate majors.
There are no fixed minimum requirements for graduate students, but in general students who are accepted to the masters program have an average GRE verbal score of
550 or better and an average GRE analytical score of 5 or 6. It is impossible to calculate an average GPA, since our incoming students often come from 2 or more different

18 undergraduate programs and/or have a previous advanced degree, which is considered upon their application to our program.
Table E-1: Mean Standardized Graduate Admission Test Scores, FY ‘06 - FY ‘08
Academic APPLIED ACCEPTED ENROLLED
FY Degree Major Verb Quant Total Verb Quant Total Verb Quant Total
FY06 MA REL 529
FY07 MA REL 573
FY08 MA REL 515 1040
Table E-2: Selection Ratio of Applicant/Accepted Graduate Students, FY ‘06 - FY
‘08
ACADEMIC PROGRAM # OF # OF
FY DEGREE MAJOR CONC APPLICANTS ACCEPTED RATIO
FY06 MA REL
FY07 MA REL
FY08 MA REL
Output Quality Metrics
Output quality is measured by several criteria. Assessment practices (see Section D above) indicate that undergraduate students are meeting the goals and objectives desired in learning outcomes. At least 4 undergraduates have presented their work at the annual
College Undergraduate Research Day, and in 2007 the top student award was given to a
Department of Religious Studies undergraduate. The B.A. Program’s students have produced more Honors theses than has any major at the University other than Psychology
(which has over fifteen times the number of students) and have gone on to study religion further at Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Virginia, Brown, Berkeley,
Santa Barbara, Vanderbilt, Virginia, Chicago, Columbia, Georgetown, Emory and other top graduate programs , some with partial or full funding. In addition, undergraduate majors have been admitted to strong graduate programs in other fields, including the law school program at Georgia State University.
Average GRE scores and GPAs for incoming masters students are comparable to those of incoming masters students at the peer and aspirational institutions (see Table B-
6). In addition, assessment information indicates that the majority of undergraduate and masters students are meeting the goals and objectives desired in learning outcomes (see
Section D above). Placement in doctoral programs for masters students has been strong.
In addition to strong admissions to top doctoral programs, every graduate of the masters program who has applied for a teaching position in a local or out-of-state college has been hired for the desired position. Our graduate students have been published and are active in professional presentations. Since Summer 2005, students have made 2 presentations at our discipline’s regional professional conference and 3 presentations to the Department. Finally, surveys completed by graduates of the undergraduate and masters programs indicate a high level of achievement (See Appendix D5).

19
Section F: Faculty Quality
As is evident from the information presented in Section B and Table B-6, the Department faculty are particularly strong in terms of research productivity. Amid its rapid growth,
Religious Studies at Georgia State has distinguished itself in a number of ways. Its faculty members, holding doctorates from institutions such as Harvard, Princeton,
University of California at Santa Barbara, University of California at Berkeley, Michigan,
Emory and Princeton, have been awarded numerous national and federal grants, including Fulbright, N.E.H., and American Academy of Religion fellowships. They have been the recipients of university- and state-wide teaching awards, including the Board of
Regents Teaching Excellence Award and the American Academy of Religion Award for
Teaching Excellence.
As stated earlier, the Department’s publication record, when adjusted for faculty size, is comparable to both its peer institutions and its aspirational institutions, based on the data available to us (Table B-2), particularly in terms of books and peer-reviewed articles For example, during the last year, 6 faculty members produced 5 books, an average of 0.83 books per faculty member. Faculty at our peer institutions produced, on average, 0.16 books per faculty member; faculty at our aspirational institutions produced, on average, 0.48 books per faculty member. GSU Department of Religious Studies faculty produced 9 peer-reviewed articles over the last year, an average of 1.5 articles per faculty member. Faculty at peer institutions produced an average of 0.875 articles per faculty member; faculty at our aspirational institutions produced an average of 0.67 articles per faculty member.
The department has been successful in tenure and promotion efforts to date. One faculty member successfully applied for tenure and promotion to associate professor during the review period; currently another faculty member is in the process of being reviewed for tenure and promotion to full professor. No faculty member has failed to secure tenure.
One area for growth is in faculty competition for external grants and awards.
While the data is difficult to compare, faculty at peer and aspirational institutions have generally been more assertive about applying for external research grants than faculty in the Department. In addition, given the small size of the Department faculty, it has not been practical to consider offering teaching leave to any faculty members until recently.
However, during the review period two faculty received major awards (1 Teagle
Foundation grant worth $75,000; 1 NEH Summer Stipend, 2005). In addition, two faculty members were awarded internal Research Initiation Grants (2005-06; Summer
2006) and one was awarded a GSU Scholarly Support Grant (Summer 2008).
Department faculty serve in numerous capacities outside of the department (see
Table B-7). The previous chair was recently promoted to the position of Associate
Provost for Academic Programs; previously, he served as Director of the Honors
Program for a period of time while chairing the Department. Faculty members hold affiliate positions in the Asian Studies Program and the Women’s Studies Institute, as well as executive committee positions for the Jewish Studies Program and the Middle
East Institute. At the College level, one faculty member serves as a Senator for the
Middle East Institute. At the University level, one faculty member has served on and chaired numerous committees (Renick) and another serves on the Academic Petitions
Committee (Herman). Another faculty member serves on the Research Fellowship and

20
Grants Committee and on the URSA Internal Grants Committee (Ruprecht), and a fourth acted as the Senator for the Middle East Institute (McClymond). At the professional level, faculty serve on 8 different committees within the American Academy of Religion, the preeminent professional organization for the profession. Finally, faculty members serve on 3 editorial boards.
Faculty Resources
Section G: Resource Adequacy
During the review period faculty resources were expanded to meet University instructional demands, both in terms of student numbers and disciplinary coverage.
Because of the faculty growth, teaching loads have remained at 2/2 (comparable to peer and aspirational institutions) while the department has been able to offer more class sections, more graduate level seminars, and several 25-seat Writing Across the
Curriculum classes. These small classes are offset with larger introductory classes (45seat World Religions and Introduction to Religion classes) and multiple large (60- to 90seat) sections of Perspectives. Assuming both of the TT hires currently in process are completed successfully, the faculty resources for the Department will be adequate for its instructional needs even while beginning to offer a Core course (beginning Spring 2009) and 2 CTW courses (beginning Fall 2009).
In terms of credit hours, the Department has generated an average of 3875 credit hours over the review period (Table B-6b), with an average of 833.3 credit hours generated by TT faculty and an average of 310.7 credit hours generated by NTT faculty
(Table B-6). The data shows a slight trend toward increasing the number of credit hours generated by TT faculty and toward decreasing the number of hours generated by NTT faculty. No data is available to compare student/faculty ratios with peer or aspirational institutions. There has been a significant increase in the number of undergraduate lower level credit hours generated (from 289 to 1359), a slight decrease in the number of undergraduate upper level credit hours (from 2613 to 2211), and the number of graduate level graduate hours has increased significantly (from 360 to 523).
Administrative Resources
The Department faculty share 3 full-time staff (1 Business Manager, 1 Administrative
Coordinator, and 1 Senior Administrative Coordinator) with the Philosophy Department.
That means that 8 faculty (6 TT, 2 NTT) share 1.5 staff. This is comparable with administrative support provided at the peer and aspirational institutions (Table B-7).
GSU’s Department of Religious Studies offers a staff/faculty ratio of 0.19; other institutions offer a staff/faculty ratio averaging 0.18. Over the review period GSU
Department faculty also had 5 hours of graduate research assistant support available. As the Department grows, we anticipate the need for additional staff, but the arrangement of sharing the staff with Philosophy has proved to be an effective use of resources.
Technological Resources
Faculty members are provided with a desk top computer and a printer in their Department offices, as well as a laptop for home & travel use. The department shares a half-time technical support staff person with the Philosophy Department (therefore 0.25 support for
Religious Studies). In addition, the two departments share a computer lab with 25

21 computers and a printer for graduate student use. Currently these resources are adequate for faculty use.
Space Resources
The unit’s growth and establishment as a stand-alone department has benefited from a new work environment. In Summer ‘05, the Philosophy and Religious Studies departments moved to the 11 th
floor of 34 Peachtree Street, sharing that floor with the
Middle East Institute until Fall ’08. The new space includes a reception area, 2 staff offices, faculty offices, a conference room ( seats 25-30 comfortably ), a seminar room
(seats up to 15), a computer lab for graduate students, shared office space for Teaching
Assistants, and a kitchen area. When the Middle East Institute moved to a different location in Summer ’08, Philosophy and Religious Studies filled all of the existing space.
Currently, all TT faculty members and full-time lecturers receive a private office, while part-time instructors share office space.
Given our anticipated faculty growth (2 new TT hires will come in Fall ’09) and our expanded course offerings (including the new Core course beginning Spring ’09, taught by GTAs), the current space will quickly become inadequate. We anticipate needing more space beginning Fall ’09 for new faculty and Core course GTAs. In addition, Religious Studies and Philosophy graduate course offerings have expanded such that there is frequent competition for the seminar and conference rooms. While neither of these is a pressing concern at the moment, we anticipate needing more office and small classroom space within the next review cycle. In particular, there is limited access to classrooms with complete technical support, and this has been an issue for faculty within the department. As GSU continues its space renovations, increased development of classrooms with Power Point capability (along with DVD, VCR, and internet access) will be crucial.
GSU Foundation Resources
Religious Studies has three Foundation accounts. The Religious Studies departmental fund was established in 2000 to allow for support of the programs and activities of the department, including helping with the costs of bringing major speakers to campus (e.g.,
Jeff Stout, Bruce Lawrence), funding a dinner at the Annual meeting of the American
Academy of Religion for Georgia State students in attendance, and helping to support the cost of graduate student memberships in the AAR. While many contributions to the fund have come from the faculty of the program, one recent undergraduate donated $500 the week after his graduation. The William M. Suttles endowment was finalized in 2002 upon the death of Dr. Suttles, former Provost of Georgia State University. The endowment primarily supports a sizable annual payout to the holder of the William
Suttles Chair of Religious Studies, but there is also an operating budget that can be used to support departmental activities such as the program to host a guest scholar for several days each spring in conjunction with a graduate seminar. In the past this fund has been used to bring in scholars with international reputations for public lectures as well as private conversations with Departmental faculty and graduate students. Finally, the
Katherine B. Moore Religious Studies endowment, established in 2001, is directed to support the departmental awards for outstanding undergraduate major and graduate student in Religious Studies, as well as help to promote the discussion of religion and

22 democracy on campus. The funds for this endowment, pledged by a senior-citizen graduate of the B.A. program, will not be released until the passing of Ms. Moore.
Library Resources
As the Library Report summarizes, “In general, the University Library’s collection of monographs, serials, and databases supports the Department of Religious Studies’ programs through the master’s level. . . The number of monograph titles supporting the program is, with a few exceptions, appropriate to a religious studies program granting master’s degrees in the comparative study of religion” (see Library report in Appendix
G2). Current library holdings are adequate for undergraduate instruction and research, and for limited graduate and faculty research in specific areas. Not surprisingly, the library resources are strongest in 1) areas that have been represented for a substantial period of time in the Religious Studies program, reflecting the long affiliation with
Philosophy; and in 2) areas of strongest student interest. Specifically, this means that the library’s strongest holdings are Christianity, Ethics, and Philosophy of Religion, with more limited holdings in Eastern Religions, Islam and Judaism. Interlibrary loan privileges assist tremendously in the faculty and students’ ability to conduct research, but there are limitations to what this service can provide. In the future, given the growth within the Department the library should expand its collection in these areas. As the
Library report states, comparisons indicate that “the Library is collecting on a comparatively low level when compared to universities of similar size and with similar programs.”
The Department relies heavily on professional journals, major reference works, and databases to conduct research and complete assignments. The Library Report indicates that electronic resources have been absolutely essential in providing links to journals. This has been particularly important given the Library’s inability to subscribe to new journals over the review period. While the electronic databases provide tremendous support (especially JSTOR and ATLA; see databases listed in Appendix G2), it would be useful to increase the journal holdings, particularly in Eastern religions,
Judaism, and Islam, when the budget allows. Unfortunately, no comparison data regarding library holdings is available from our peer and aspirational institutions. During the next review cycle, it would be helpful to acquire this data and work with the Library to develop a targeted plan for library development.
Table G-1: Student/Faculty Ratios, FY 2006-2008
FY
2006
FY
2007
FY
2008
# TT Faculty
# Undergraduate Majors
# Graduate Majors (All)
UG/TT Ratio
Grad/TT Ratio
6 6 5
57 73 85
17 23 21
9.5 12.2 17.0
2.8 3.8 4.2
# Graduate Faculty
# Ph.D. Students
FY
2006
FY
2007
FY
2008
6 6 5
NA NA NA

23
Ph.D./Grad Faculty Ratio NA NA NA
Section H: Goals and Objectives
Having reviewed the data available, the Department is confident that the Religious
Studies program has been successful in establishing a vibrant undergraduate and masters degree program. In addition, the Department has attracted promising young scholars and seen the development of junior scholars into strong associate professors with national reputations for their research and service in the profession. While growing as a standalone unit, Department faculty have continued to contribute in other ways, as affiliate members of other units and in service roles at the College, University, and System-wide levels. Finally, the Department has proven itself to be a “good citizen” in the programmatic growth of the College, participating actively in programs such as the WAC program; developing courses quickly to meet the new CTW requirements; and contributing to the Core curriculum with its new course offerings.
Given its current strengths and weaknesses, and keeping in mind its mission to the
College and University, the Department has established the following goals and objectives:
GOAL 1: SCHOLARLY ACTIVITY
To raise the emerging national scholarly reputations and accomplishments of the
Department’s faculty to a level competitive with those of the top 5 public Religious
Studies departments in the Southeast
Objective 1: Create an environment in which the young and rapidly growing faculty can reach their scholarly potential.
Rationale : The Department has been in a rapid growth phase since prior to the review period, establishing its profile as a stand-alone Department, making faculty hires (beyond replacement hires), designing the masters program, and developing new course offerings, including a Core course and two CTW courses. In the coming cycle the Department anticipates “maturing” these recent efforts, turning our attention toward refining the undergraduate and graduate programs in light of College- and University-wide challenges and in light of the program’s own growth. In addition, the Department, in effect, recently lost 1 TT instruction line, when the previous chair moved to the Provost’s Office and stopped teaching entirely, and another faculty member assumed the chair’s position and reduced her teaching load by half.
Additional TT lines will not only strengthen the curriculum, but will also allow the faculty members to reach their research potential by giving them the freedom to pursue external grants for release time without feeling that they are handicapping the instructional efforts of the Department. In the past, faculty leaves have simply not been possible because of instructional demands. In addition, faculty will be able to offer more specialized courses reflecting their current research projects, allowing them to explore new ideas while offering instruction. Finally, the overall faculty environment will be richer with the addition of peers with whom to share ideas and engage intellectually.

24
Resources : In terms of hires, the Department anticipates requesting 2 TT faculty lines.
This year we are hiring in one of 3 areas (Early Christianity, Buddhism, or Indigenous
Traditions) to address gaps in our staffing. In the coming cycle we would like to hire in areas that are not filled this year.
Objective 2: Create support structures conducive to the professional advancement and promotion of the faculty.
Rationale : The Department is fully committed to the scholarly growth of its faculty, by providing financial, collegial, and mentoring support so that junior faculty can earn tenure and, just as importantly, associate professors can be promoted to full professor.
While the department has been completely successful in moving its faculty to associate professor status with tenure, the instructional and service demands upon a small faculty have made it difficult for associate level faculty to progress to full professor status. This has been exacerbated by faculty turnover in recent years. Given the growth of the faculty
(and the projected growth with two new TT hires this year), we believe that the administrative burden will be lessened slightly, and that research productivity can increase.
Resources : In particular, the Department will encourage faculty at all levels to apply for an additional 20% in internal and external funding to support research efforts that will lead to promotion.
GOAL 2: PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
To establish the program as one of the top 5 public Religious Studies departments in the Southeast with regard to the quality of student training and the nature of student achievement.
Objective 1: Provide excellent teaching in Core Curriculum and lower-level undergraduate courses.
Rationale : As the program develops and takes on additional instructional responsibilities within the Core Curriculum, the faculty is committed to maintaining the same high instructional standards that currently characterize the Department. In order to do this while offering multiple sections of “Introduction to World Religions” as well as two new
CTW courses, the Department will have to become creative in its use of faculty and graduate student teaching hours. The Department is committed to developing a program in which 1) full-time faculty are offering large sections of Rels 2001 while training and supervising graduate students as they offer smaller sections. The Department plans to offer a 3-tier training program for graduate student instructors, including an initial training semester for graduate students (Rels 8970) that will involve observation, grading, and mock-teaching; a second supervisory semester, during which GTAs in their initial semester of teaching are supervised by a full-time faculty member, including class observation, written evaluations, and the development of a teaching portfolio; and continuing supervision as GTAs move on to subsequent semesters of teaching. This

25 arrangement will guarantee consistently high quality teaching for undergraduates and sustained instructional training for our graduate students.
Resources : The Department currently has one Lecturer and one full-time Visiting
Instructor. Current plans include reducing the Visiting Instructor line to half-time; enrollment projections suggest that we will actually need one more Lecturer to meet the anticipated demand for Core course and CTW offerings. In order to accomplish this, the
Department will seek approval to hire an additional full-time Lecturer.
Objective 2: Improve and strengthen our assessment of student learning so as to enhance student achievement in light of new College and Department requirements for the major and CTW courses.
Rationale/Resources : As the undergraduate curriculum changes, the assessment procedures need to be modified to reflect these changes and to determine how these changes affect undergraduate majors. The Assessment Committee, in consultation with the Curriculum Committee, will modify the Assessment procedures as necessary.
Objective 3: Bring increasingly diverse methodological expertise to our students, both at the undergraduate and graduate level
Rationale/ Resources : Religious Studies is an interdisciplinary field, with scholars exercising textual, archival, historical, sociological, rhetorical, anthropological, and ethnographic skills (to name a few) in their research. In addition to bringing scholars to the program with expertise in different religious traditions, the faculty have worked to bring in colleagues with diverse methodological approaches to the discipline. As the
Department grows, the faculty are committed to expanding the methodological expertise that new TT hires bring to the program.
Objective 4: Provide financial support and teaching experience that prepares our masters degree students as teachers and highly qualified doctoral students.
Rationale : The Department has established a solid masters degree program, with a strong curriculum. As discussed above with the establishment of the Core course and its accompanying teacher training component, we anticipate being able to prepare graduate students to be extremely effective teachers. In addition, by shifting graduate students to the 3 credit hour Rels 2001 course, we will be able to reduce the number of sections each supported graduate student has to teach from 5 to 3 in the second year (as part of a standard financial package). This is consistent with the attempt within Humanities to reduce what are currently exceedingly heavy teaching loads in order to bring our M.A. graduation/retention rates up to those of aspirational institutions. At the same time, we would like to increase the financial support we are able to offer in several ways.
Resources: Currently we offer 6 $6,000 + tuition waiver packages to incoming graduate students, which require work as research assistants the first year and work as teaching assistants the second year. We would like a) to be able to offer more packages to more of our incoming students (currently 50% of our incoming graduate students receive departmental financial aid packages); b) to increase the dollar amount we are able to offer

26 incoming graduate students to at least $8,000 per year to be more competitive with other masters degree programs; and c) to be able to offer 2 “elite” packages of $10,000 without any research or teaching assistantship requirement as a way of attracting top candidates to our program. The Philosophy Department has offered such packages, and it is clear that offering an “elite” financial support package encourages students to apply and commit to the masters program, even when they are not awarded the package.
Goal 3: Resources
Objective 1: Provide adequate space and technological resources to support classroom instruction and faculty research.
Rationale/Resources : The Department anticipates needing additional space relatively quickly, as the new TT hires are completed this year and as graduate students move into teaching assistant positions. While space issues are not a problem currently, they will be a concern in the next two years. In addition, with the move into the Core, faculty and
GTAs will be requesting tech “savvy” classrooms that can support the regular use of
DVDs and internet sites to supplement lecture material.
1 A note documenting the fluctuating number of faculty: 2- 6- 3- 6?
2 RELS shares three staff members with PHIL.
3 RELS shares one student assistant scheduled 10 hours per/week with PHIL.
N4 “No details on the last year alone are available and everyone is away for the summer, but I can tell you that since
2002 we have made 59 conference presentations in all.”
N5 “Timothy Renick continued a $75,000 grant by the Teagle Foundation to direct a two-year study of the religion major on behalf of the American Academy of Religion, the leading professional organization in the field. Louis
Ruprecht was named to the Committee for Academic Excellence, Best First Book in Religion Award, American
Academy of Religion, reviewer, 2007.
N6 “Three Awards.”
N7 “Honors and awards: John Gammie Disinguished Scholar of the Southwest Commission on Religious Studies;
Regional Scholar of the Central States Region of the Society of Biblical Literature leading to Regional Scholar by the national SBL.
Grants: A total of $49,295.30 was newly awarded for eleven projects in 2007, but this was an unusually good year.”
N8 “Three internal research grants awarded; three3 external research grants awarded; one national book award.”
N9 “Grants: Luce, Fulbright, Pew. Awards: one teaching award; various international recognitions (specifics are unavailable presently).”
N10 “Too many to list, but [the following represents] a sample: fellowship at the Institute for Advanced Studies
(Princeton); six book award nominations; large NEH project grants; named lecturers or lecture series at various institutions; teaching awards.”
11 RELS has one endowed chair, and one faculty member receiving administrative salary. In these two unusual cases, salaries range to 102k.
12 Refers to RELS Visiting Instructor positions.
N13 “Available funding include[s] numerous internal research awards and travel grants; Humanities Council Awards;
NEH Awards; Rhodes, Fullbright.”
N14 “[Funding] [v]aries by year depending on the budget. In FY08 each full-time faculty member was provided $1,850 for participation in conferences. IN FY09 that will be $1,200.”
N15 “[Funding] varies from year to year. An overall estimate for the past three years would be an average of $700 per tenured/tenure-track faculty member, though specific approved amounts vary according to recognized needs of individual faculty.”
N16 “$750 is available annually to each faculty member for travel. Discretionary funds can be used to supplement this in cases of overseas travel for invited presentations.”

27
N17 “Various extensive internal funding [is available], especially for junior faculty, including travel to several meetings yearly, summers off at 13K, research project grants at 21K, and conference/workshop meetings at 40K. The university tops off all outside fellowship offers to reach a faculty member’s salary figure.”
18 This number is high because virtually all graduate courses have been open to undergraduate students as well. Hence, this number (26) refers to the number of students (graduate and undergraduate) typically enrolled in a graduate course.
N19 We offered six “Perspectives” courses focused upon comparative religious cultures.
N20 “Yes, many. Enrollment per year are approximately 3,000.”
N21 “The department offers five courses that count for general education credit (only English offers more), with a total of thirty-four sections of these courses offered in FA07. We also offer honors, television, and evening courses. With our (disproportionately?) large gen ed enrollment, we average about 1,530 students per semester, making us one of the largest departments by enrollment in North America, according to the AAR’s survey data.”
N22 “We offer distance learning classes in RELI 1001 (Intro to Judaism, Islam and
Christianity) and RELI 1002 (Intro to Religions of India, China, & Japan)
Roughly 6-8 new students enroll per year between both courses.”
N23 “We teach multiple sections of “Death and Dying” each semester, and most of them fill. The course is popular because it is writing intensive course, it is in the undergraduate core, and it is a suitable elective for pre-med students.
We also teach courses on racial justice and gender that might be considered “service” courses. “Death and Dying” enrolls over 500 students each year, in my estimation. The others perhaps 100.”
N24 The RELS MA program at GSU began in 2005. Thus far, it is on track for four-year completion rate of 75-80%.
N25 “Departmental Assistantships given to 35% of new incoming Masters students.
This assistantship includes reduced tuition.”
26 “Four kinds: (1) graduate assistantships (tuition and fee waiver and a $7,340 stipend) ; (2) Strong Family Graduate
Scholarship ($5,750 stipend, no tuition and fee waiver); (3) department scholarships ($750-$1000, no tuition and fee waiver); and (4) other financial aid (that is, loans). We usually award six assistantships each year (or about three for incoming students in a given year), one or two Strong scholarships, and one or two department scholarships. So maybe half or a little more of incoming students receive financial aid they don’t have to pay back.”
27 Policy currently under revision; appended form attached.
N28 “Annual Senior Seminar Project for undergraduates; for graduates a Comprehensive Examination.”
N29 “We have an assessment program that is portfolio based. Undergraduates write a general essay when they declare and when they complete the major. Assessment forms are filled out by instructors for majors and grad students in every class. An exit interview is required of graduating undergrad majors. All that being said, our assessment program is neither very rigorous, nor very effectively utilized for student advisement or for program review.”
N30 “For undergraduates: Extensive exit Interviews which include subject content questions are performed with a sample of each Semester’s graduating seniors; analysis of student class evaluations. For Graduates: Students are given a comprehensive exam in their area of study; analysis of student class evaluations.”
N31 “Standard university course evaluations; peer review of teaching; exit interviews with graduates.”