Program Review
Graduate Humanities
College of Liberal Arts
November 2013
MARSHALL UNIVERSITY
College/School Dean’s Recommendation
Deans, please indicate your recommendation and submit the rationale.
Recommendation:
1 – Continuation of the program at the current level of activity
Rationale:
(If you recommend a program for resource development identify all areas for specific development)
The Graduate Humanities program is a model of educational excellence achieved with limited
resources. The program offers a comprehensive, interdisciplinary curriculum. Students with
backgrounds in the arts, history, literature, education, religious studies, cultural studies,
archaeology, classics, communication studies, modern languages and anthropology pursue
individualized programs of study with a strong emphasis on community-based projects
emphasizing research, writing and service. The 20 graduates of the program during the review
period completed over 40 research projects. The students entering the program have
exemplary records and measures of their exit abilities indicate that they are among the best
qualified graduates of any master’s program at Marshall University.
As noted in this report, the program has seen a loss of faculty resources during the review
period. Only one full-time faculty member remains to advise all students in the program,
manage multiple community partnership projects, procure grant funding, direct theses, and
maintain the level of research and scholarship expected of graduate faculty. Adjunct faculty are
appropriately credentialed and committed to the success of students in the program. However,
their availability to direct research is limited leading to a decline in opportunities for students to
pursue thesis projects due to limited faculty resources. Despite these limited resources the
program generates an average of over 1500 SCH’s per year. The program has been successful
in attracting outside funding through a number of grants and community partnerships. The
reputation of the program is such that a number of state and national agencies have
approached the director about funded research projects. The director has completed six
contracts and grants during the review period and turned away several additional opportunities
due to lack of time and resources.
The graduate Humanities program has a remarkable record, considering the meager resources
provided to administer the program. In the current budget climate, resource development is not
being requested. But this program should be considered for such development as soon as
resources are available.
__R.B. Bookwalter_____________
Signature of the Dean
___11-7-2013______________
Date
Program Review
Graduate Humanities Program
College of Liberal Arts
Marshall University
AY 2013 - 2014
Dr. Stephen J. Kopp, President
Dr. Robert Bookwalter, Interim Dean
Dr. Luke Eric Lassiter, Director
Program Review
Graduate Humanities Program
Table of Contents
Section I:
Consistency with University Mission
1
Section II:
Adequacy of the Program
2
Section III:
Program Viability
18
Section IV:
Necessity of the Program
20
Appendix I:
Required/Elective Course Work in the Program
21
Appendix II:
Faculty Data Sheet
22
Appendix III:
Entrance Abilities of Past Five Years of Graduates
37
Appendix IV:
Exit Abilities of Past Five Years of Graduates
38
Appendix V:
Assessment Summary
39
Appendix VI:
Program Course Enrollment
41
Appendix VII
Program Enrollment: Master of Arts in Humanities
42
Appendix VIII
Job and Graduate School Placement Rates
44
Appendix IX
Assessment Letters: Humanities - MA
45
Marshall University
Program Review
Program: ____________________________________________________
Graduate Humanities
College: _____________________________________________________
College of Liberal Arts
AY 2003 – 2004
Date of Last Review: ___________________________________________
Section I: Consistency with University Mission
Program Mission and Description
The Graduate Humanities Program is a multidisciplinary program bringing together students and
faculty from a variety of backgrounds to collaboratively explore the interdisciplinary intersections
of the arts, historical, cultural and literary studies within an open, exploratory, and experimental
graduate-level educational environment.
The Master of Arts in Humanities adapts the advanced study of the humanities to the personal
interests of a broad spectrum of students. The program provides these students with varied
undergraduate backgrounds the opportunity to continue their studies at the graduate level with
an integrated and interdisciplinary perspective on human inquiry. The courses enhance the
student's ability to deal critically and flexibly with intellectual, social, political, historical, literary,
or artistic issues with a broad humanistic perspective.
The Master of Arts in Humanities differs from traditional humanities programs. Although
conventional in that disciplinary studies are an integral part of the program, its interdisciplinary
approach offers new perspectives on a variety of fields. A common core provides intellectual
coherence in a degree with significant flexibility. Working closely with an advisor, a student
develops an individual Plan of Study that may bring together two or more fields within the
humanities. The Program has four tracks of study (below) and thus uses five alpha designators:
HUMN:
A&S:
CULS:
HIST:
LITS:
Humanities
Arts and Society
Cultural Studies
Historical Studies
Literary Studies
The Graduate Humanities Program also accommodates professional development students and
lifelong learners.
Non-degree courses have been developed to provide professional
development for teachers. The Program also offers a graduate Certificate in Appalachian
Studies and, in collaboration with Women’s Studies Program, a Certificate in Women’s Studies.
The interdisciplinary thrust of these certificates allows graduate students and professionals from
a variety of fields to develop their knowledge of the Appalachian region.
The Graduate Humanities Program is a full member of the Association of Graduate Liberal
Studies Programs, based at Duke University.
1
Support for the College Mission
The Graduate Humanities Program and its MA Humanities Program supports the College of
Liberal Arts mission in at least three ways: it prepares students (1) to think critically within
interdisciplinary contexts; (2) to develop and apply intellectual skills uniquely engendered by the
critical and interdisciplinary study of the arts, cultural, historical, and literary studies; and (3) to
engage their local and regional communities as world citizens.
Support for the University Mission
As a unit focused on intellectual development, graduate research, and creative activity, the
Graduate Humanities Program and its MA Humanities Program remains firmly committed to
actively facilitating learning through the preservation, discovery, synthesis, and dissemination of
knowledge in at least four ways: (1) engagement with established and seasoned knowledge via
actual, serious and rigorous exegesis of original texts throughout the students’ training; (2)
facilitation of original graduate-level research via project-based classwork and final projects
and/or theses; (3) synthesis of complex ideas in every aspect of the student's training from
classwork to comprehensive exams to project-based culminating experiences; and (4)
publication of graduate work in various venues, as well as -- and importantly -- via publicly
oriented curricula and programming involving students, faculty, and local communities in
authentic project-based collaborative research, creative activity, and dissemination.
Section II: Adequacy of the Program
1. Curriculum
All degree students are required to complete 36 or 39 semester hours of coursework,
including a required core, an area of interest, electives, and a final research product (thesis
or project) (see Appendix I). Individual plans of study require a prescribed humanities "core"
of four courses (12 hours), designed to acquaint the student with the methodology,
materials, and problems of interdisciplinary study and research within the context of
humanistic study. One of these courses, Humanities 604, Expository Writing for Research,
develops graduate writing skills.
Each student selects one of the following areas of interest or develops a narrowed emphasis
which combines one or more of these areas: Arts and Society (A&S), Cultural Studies
(CULS), Historical Studies (HIST), or Literary Studies (LITS). A minimum of 15 hours is
required in the concentration. A specific core course is required for each area of interest.
Within each area, a student may select courses to develop personal interests.
Students also have an opportunity for humanities electives (3-12 hours). Many choose
additional courses to add depth to their primary interest; others use the electives to develop
a second area of interest.
Many students elect to integrate the Certificate of Appalachian or Certificate of Women’s
Studies into their Plans of Study, thus generating a Certificate as well as Master’s Degree
upon graduation.
2
2. Faculty
At its inception in 1979, the Graduate Humanities Program was designed to employ adjunct
faculty from other colleges and universities for course delivery. It reflected the initial mission
of the Graduate College to cooperate with the four-year institutions in providing quality
graduate education in the southern sixteen counties of West Virginia.
Since 1979, the Program faculty has included at least one full-time faculty member (the
Program Director), joint appointments, and adjunct faculty. From 1993 to 1997, the Program
had a second full-time faculty member, but now only has one full time faculty appointment
(the Program Director).
The current Program Director is jointly appointed in the College of Liberal Arts and the
College of Education and Professional Development (the college which now integrates what
was until Summer 2013 the Graduate School of Education and Professional Development).
For COLA, the Director coordinates the MA in Humanities and the Appalachian Studies
Certificate; teaches graduate seminars in the humanities; directs and serves on student
thesis and project committees; advises all Program students; and serves in various
interdisciplinary initiatives for the college, including outreach and the growing of communityuniversity collaborative partnerships (such as the Glenwood Project [see below]). For
COEPD, the Graduate Humanities Director teaches doctoral seminars in research methods;
chairs and serves on doctoral dissertation committees; and serves the college in various
administrative capacities (including as Coordinator of the Certificate in Program Evaluation).
To maintain graduate status in both colleges, the Director conducts ongoing research and
regularly publishes scholarship in the humanities and social sciences (see Appendix II).
During the last five year review period, the Program had two joint appointments: one with Dr.
Francis Simone in the Graduate College of Education and Professional Development; the
other with Dr. Chris Green in the Department of English (both ended in Spring 2013 due to a
retirement and a resignation, respectively).
The part-time faculty who teach in the Program provide critical flexibility in course offerings.
To ensure continuity, "permanent" adjunct faculty have been identified. They teach courses
regularly, including the core classes; they also serve on examining committees, direct
theses, and mentor research projects. Some are members of the Graduate Humanities
Advisory Committee, which addresses policy issues, program changes, and quality
concerns.
All full-time and joint appointment faculty hold doctorates; the majority of classes are taught
by faculty with doctorates and/or terminal degrees (e.g., MFA). Most part-time faculty who
do not have doctorates usually teach courses in such specialized areas as film and creative
writing or are team teaching with a Ph.D.
3. Students
a. Entrance standards: Criteria for admission as a degree student in Humanities
include:
•
a score at or above the 60th percentile on the verbal section of the Graduate
Record Examination’s Aptitude Test, or an equivalent score on the Miller
Analogies Test;
3
•
•
an undergraduate major in the humanities broadly defined (including but not
limited to fields such as philosophy, history, English, religious studies, folklore,
anthropology, archaeology, classics, the arts, modern languages, and
communication studies); and
an overall undergraduate grade point average of 3.0 (A=4.0) or a 3.5 graduate
average.
Applicants who do not meet these criteria are denied full admission, but they may be
offered provisional enrollment with conditions to be met for program admission
(grades of "A" or "B" in the first twelve hours of courses, which must include
Humanities 604 and one other core course).
b. Entrance and Exit Abilities of Past Five Years of Graduates: Students entering the
Graduate Humanities Program are among the most capable in the Marshall University
Graduate College. The undergraduate GPA mean of gradutes admitted during the fiveyear review period (Fall 2008 - Spring 2013) was 3.696. The GRE verbal score (mean)
for Program degree students during this same five-year period was 563; the MAT mean
was 416. (See Appendix III and IV for more information.) By the end of their program,
Graduate Humanities students have completed a coherent Plan of Study emphasizing a
concentration in one of the areas of the humanities (A&S, CULS, HIST, or LITS). After a
minimum of twenty-four credit hours but before beginning the independent research
project, students must pass a comprehensive examination evaluated by three
professors. Students who complete the M.A. in Humanities have demonstrated skills in
oral and written expression and the ability to deal critically with a wide range of issues
within an interdisciplinary perspective. The final research project demonstrates the
student's ability to organize and complete independent study and articulate the findings
in acceptable form. The graduate cumulative grade point average for the review period
(ranging from 3.70 to 4.00) suggests that Humanities degree students, whatever their
undergraduate experiences, have matured and have met the demands of the course of
study.
4. Resources
a. Financial: The Program’s allocated budget for FY 2014 is $30,210 (adjunct faculty,
benefits, operating expenses, etc.). As the Program Director is now jointly appointed in
the College of Education and Professional Development (for which the Director teaches
courses in research methods, chairs and serves on doctoral committees, and
Coordinates the COEPD Certificate in Program Evaluation; time is split 50/50 between
the Program and COEPD), costs of the MA Program to the university have been
reduced significantly. Another important cost saving includes secretarial support to the
Program, which is provided by the College of Education and Professional Development
as a part of the Director’s joint-appointment arrangement. In addition to the monies
allocated to the Graduate Humanities Program, additional activities are supported by
third-party contracts and grants. For example, the Glenwood Project—a three-phase
multi-year university-community partnership initiative that began in 2006 and ended in
2013—generated $126,345 (which includes three major grants from the West Virginia
Humanities Council, cash contributions from organizations such as the Historic
Glenwood Foundation, and in-kind contributions from a variety of Marshall University
units).
4
As per what resource changes would occur if the program were terminated as a degree
program, the only resource changes would involve salaries and operating expenses.
Most courses taught require no special facilities. With this in mind, only the current
office spaces and the classrooms used would be available. Because the only full-time
faculty member, the Program Director, holds a doctorate in anthropology and is tenured,
it is not likely that significant savings from salary would be realized.
As per how such a termination might affect the university, four overarching
consequences come to mind. First and foremost, the Graduate Humanities Program
provides one of the university’s few options for graduate students to study in a wideranging interdisciplinary program, one that currently spans across the liberal arts,
including the humanities as well as the social sciences. This option exists in over one
hundred institutions in the United States, ranging from small liberal arts colleges to major
universities. It would be unfortunate indeed if Marshall University withdrew this option.
Second, the Graduate Humanities Program provides one of the few opportunities for
adults and working professionals—particularly those residing in southern West Virginia—
to receive interdisciplinary graduate education in the content fields of history, literature,
art history, and cultural studies. Many of these adults and working professionals, for
example, are secondary teachers who elect to get an advanced degree in a content area
within the Humanities degree (especially in historical / cultural studies and literary
studies). Third, the Graduate Humanities Program hosts the university’s and region’s
only Certificate in Appalachian Studies, which is an integral part of the university’s
commitment to Appalachian Studies in particular and to the Appalachian region more
generally. Finally, the Graduate Humanities program currently offers neutral space for
faculty from different disciplines to work together, to generate interdisciplinary
opportunities for students, and to grow university-community partnerships and projects
(see, e.g., those mentioned below in the section “improving program quality”).
b. Facilities: Most of the courses in the Graduate Humanities Program use standard
classrooms and available audio-visual equipment (computer and digital projector, CD
player, DVD/VCR and monitor, etc.).
As with all programs at the University, it is
important that the teaching facilities be appropriate for adult students. Because the
Graduate Humanities Program is located on the South Charleston campus, wellequipped classrooms are available for the classes. Several Graduate Humanities faculty
use Blackboard for course delivery. In this same vein, the Graduate Humanities
Program benefits from expanded course delivery in sites such as Summersville, which
allows for effective outreach to sites outside Kanawha County.
Especially important to the Program is the on-campus library facility. Indeed, the
Graduate Humanities Program’s faculty, staff, and students rely heavily on the services
provided by library staff at the Graduate College Library, who field research requests,
facilitate interlibrary loans, and locate books, articles, and other resources on and off site
for the Program. Having this access to library resources (both in person and on-line) is
especially important for the graduate students in southern West Virginia and for working
adults across the service area. In addition to these services, the Graduate College
library staff and the Program are currently working together to chart several new
collaborative and interdisciplinary initiatives that bring the Program’s outreach mission
and that of the library’s into the same stream. For example, during the current review
period (2010-2011) we collaboratively launched the Local Artists Series, which
highlighted the work of local artists. (Further information about the series and the
5
individual exhibits can be found on our website at www.marshall.edu/graduate
humanities.)
5. Assessment Information
a. Summary information: Students enrolled in the Graduate Humanities Program are
assessed according to outcomes described below. The responsibility for assessment
falls on the Program Director. In an interdisciplinary program with individual plans of
study, the outcomes that can be assessed are perhaps more general or global than in
other programs.
Since the last Program Review, the Program has engaged in various stages of the
Marshall University’s Higher Learning Commission Open Pathways Demonstration
Project, and reoriented several of the Program’s student learning outcomes thusly:
•
Student Learning Outcomes
Providing students with an integrated and interdisciplinary perspective on
human inquiry, the program should enhance the graduate's ability to deal
critically and flexibly with intellectual, social, political, historical, literary, or
artistic issues through a broad humanistic perspective. By the time a student
graduates from the Graduate Humanities Program, then, faculty expect
students to:
(1) exhibit high-order critical thinking skills;
(2) express sensitivity to and articulation of interdisciplinary knowledge
and concepts;
(3) demonstrate cognizance of the wide range of study made possible by
the humanities;
(4) relate an aesthetic valuation for how the humanities informs larger
concepts of human diversity and multiculturalism;
(5) demonstrate, diagnose, and formulate hermeneutic synthesis and
evaluation of the broader applications of humanities-based
knowledge; and
(6) develop advanced competence in writing and communicating the
humanities via various media.
These learning outcomes have been more carefully clarified in the past
academic year based on feedback and program participation in the MU HLC
Pathways Demonstration Project. See Appendix V for more information.
•
Assessment Measures (assessed at five different points):
1. Admissions to Program
Students seeking a Master of Arts in Humanities must meet the following
requirements: (1) a score in the 60th percentile on the verbal section of the
Graduate Record Examination (GRE) General Test or an equivalent score on
the Miller Analogies Test (MAT); (2) an undergraduate major in the
humanities (broadly defined, including fields such as philosophy, history,
English, religious studies, folklore, anthropology, archaeology, classics, the
6
arts, modern languages, and communication studies); and an overall
undergraduate grade point average of 3.0; and (3) write a brief essay that
explains the degree goals and the reasons for selecting the Humanities
Program. Data on student progress is initiated upon admission and
maintained throughout their tenure in the Program.
2. Curriculum Planning and Design Conferences & Semester Review
Each of these students must meet with the Program Director several times
during their tenure in the Graduate Humanities Program. During these
conferences, in addition to developing and recurrently reviewing the student’s
Plan of Study, students are interviewed about their progress in the program,
engaged and re-engaged in the planning and design of their evolving
curriculum, and assessed as to whether learning outcomes are being met.
Since mid-2011, the Program Director has implemented a review of the file of
each enrolled student at the conclusion of each semester (this practice is
based on feedback from the Office of Assessment & Program Review of the
2010 Graduate Humanities Program assessment report, received 8 June
2011). Based on interview notes collecting during Curriculum Planning and
Design Conferences, the review of Assessment Day activities, and the
analysis of collected class materials when appropriate, the Program Director
is now endeavoring to assess student progress concerning, in particular,
learning outcomes valued by the Program (high-order critical thinking skills,
sensitivity to and articulation of interdisciplinary knowledge and concepts,
etc.). In the spirit of evaluating and assessing the progress of each student,
each learning outcome includes an attached rubric of “needs improvement,”
“making satisfactory progress,” or, when further information is needed,
“unable to access at present / more information needed.” These ongoing
assessments are then provided back to students during follow-up Curriculum
Planning and Design Conferences.
3. Comprehensive Examination
Prior to taking the comprehensive exam, a candidate must have completed
24 hours of course work, including all core classes, and have a 3.0 grade
point average. Three examiners construct the comprehensive examination
for the student based on the individual plan of study. The comprehensive
exam focuses on two core areas and the area of concentration (Arts &
Society, Literary Studies, Cultural Studies, or Historical Studies). The student
must pass the examination before progressing to the final research project.
In addition to the learning outcomes identified above, further outcomes being
measured include the ability to analyze texts and images from more than one
particular perspective, knowledge of research methods/critical issues in two
core areas, knowledge of major figures/issues in area of concentration,
written proficiency, and technological competence.
Rubric for Exams: the Program utilizes a “pass with honors,” “pass,” “fail,”
“retake” rubric for the exams. Pulling from broad literatures, engaging in
reflective and critical thinking, doing comparative analysis, creating new
linkages, analyzing and evaluating texts, the Program expects 100% of
7
students to pass the exam accordingly (with “pass with honors” reserved for
the most exceptional exam responses).
4. Research Assignment (thesis or project)
In addition to the learning outcomes outlined above, outcomes being
measured at this stage (compiled by the thesis committee or project mentor)
include production of an appropriate piece of research, one that begins with
formulating an interdisciplinary research question; written and oral proficiency
(product and presentation of research in symposium or thesis defense); and
technological competence in carrying out research and producing the
document.
5. Exit Surveys
Soon after graduation, each student is asked to fill out an exit survey, a
survey used to assess the learning outcomes listed above. These data are
compiled and maintained by the Project Director.
See Appendix V for more information on Assessments Points 1 - 5.
•
Standards/Benchmarks
The Graduate Humanities Program standards/benchmarks are tied to the
student learning outcomes and assessment measures (see Appendix V), and
include the following expectations:
(1) All graduates are expected to complete coursework, pass
comprehensive exams, and complete the final thesis/project within 7
years.
(2) Comprehensive exams should exhibit the ability to analyze texts and
images from more than one particular perspective, knowledge of research
methods/critical issues in two core areas, knowledge of major
figures/issues in area of concentration, written proficiency, and
technological competence.
(3) The final project/thesis must reach a standard of production of an
appropriate piece of research, one that begins with formulating an
interdisciplinary research question; written and oral proficiency (product
and presentation of research in a symposium or thesis defense); and
technological competence in carrying out research and producing the
document.
(4) All students should have the option to develop study in public/applied
humanities.
8
•
Results/Analysis
Analysis of the relationships between student outcomes, assessment
tools/measures, and standards/benchmarks since the last Program Review
suggests that while Admission into the Program (assessment data collection tool
#1) and initial Curriculum Planning and Design Conferences (assessment data
collection tool #2) articulate trajectories for (and assessment of) the maintenance
of individual student achievement; ongoing Curriculum Planning and Design
Conferences (assessment data collection tool #2), the comprehensive exam
(assessment data collection tool #3), the final project/thesis (assessment data
collection tool #4), and exit surveys (assessment data collection tool #5)
articulate trajectories for improving and/or growing the program.
As per the chart of relationships lined out in Appendix V, the Program evaluates
students’ abilities to “exhibit high-order critical thinking skills; express sensitivity
and articulation of interdisciplinary knowledge and concepts; demonstrate
cognizance of the wide range of study made possible by the humanities; relate
an aesthetic valuation for how the humanities informs larger concepts of human
diversity and multiculturalism” via Admission into Program data collection;
Curriculum Planning and Design Conferences (interviews); Comprehension
Exams (knowledge and skill assessment); Thesis and/or Project (Independent
Research Symposium) and Exit Surveys. All graduates are expected to pass
and complete coursework, pass comprehensive exams, and complete the final
thesis/project within 7 years. Comprehensive exams should exhibit the ability to
analyze texts and images from more than one particular perspective, knowledge
of research methods/critical issues in two core areas, knowledge of major
figures/issues in area of concentration, written proficiency, and technological
competence. Pulling from broad literatures, engaging in reflective and critical
thinking, doing comparative analysis, creating new linkages, analyzing and
evaluating texts, the Program expects 100% of students to pass the exam
accordingly (with “pass with honors” reserved for the most exceptional exam
responses). And the final project/thesis must reach a standard of production of
an appropriate piece of research, one that begins with formulating an
interdisciplinary research question; written and oral proficiency (product and
presentation of research in symposium or thesis defense); and technological
competence in carrying out research and producing the document.
Analysis of the comprehensive exams over the five-year review period suggests
that while most students are often well prepared for this assessment, in a few
cases, students must re-take their exams. Based on yearly assessments, the
percentage of students having to take the exam more than once has begun to
decline since the last review period, suggesting that previous findings from earlier
assessment reports and reviews (i.e., that individualized instruction on the
articulation of interdisciplinary knowledge and concepts should be addressed
more carefully before students take the exam either in the classroom or via
independent faculty-student meetings) are beginning to take hold.
Analysis of the final project/thesis over the five-year review period suggests that
the majority of students who complete their coursework in a timely manner also
complete the final thesis or research project. Based on yearly assessments,
most students complete research projects with only a small percentage
9
completing theses. Exit surveys and interviews conducted during Curriculum
Planning and Design Conferences suggest that many students shift from the
thesis to the project option, or choose the project option outright because the
Program does not have enough full-time faculty (the Program Director is the only
FT faculty) to serve as advisors for all thesis topics (only FT faculty can serve as
thesis advisors; the many PT faculty who serve in the program cannot serve in
this role). While the Program has no doubt that the Research Project offers
students the opportunity to engage in high-order critical thinking skills, the more
limited opportunity of the thesis option clearly presents an obstacle for some
students to achieve the fullest articulation of this end.
As per the chart of relationships lined out in Appendix V, the Program also
evaluates students’ abilities to “demonstrate, diagnose, and formulate
hermeneutic synthesis and evaluation of the broader applications of humanitiesbased knowledge; and finally, develop advanced competence in writing and
communicating the humanities via various media” via exit Surveys and
Curriculum Planning and Design Conferences meetings (interviews).
All
students should have the option to develop study in public/applied humanities.
Analysis of Exit surveys and interviews conducting during Curriculum Planning
and Design Conferences indicate that students continue to be extremely satisfied
with the Program and are achieving the program goals and most if not all the
learning outcomes. Many students, however, continue to express interest in
developing more applied curriculum and more instruction on hermeneutic
synthesis and evaluation of the broader applications of humanities-based
knowledge.
•
Action Taken
Based on the aforementioned analysis, the Program has acted on three fronts:
(1) Program faculty continue to discuss ways to implement more focused
preparations for student comprehensive exams and for the articulation of
interdisciplinary knowledge and concepts via classroom instruction and
independent faculty-student meetings prior to the exam; (2) the Program
continues to provide students with varied and creative options for student work to
be carried out for the project option; however, the Program also continues to
seek monies externally, and seek other opportunities within COLA and between
and among colleges (such as COEPD) to secure the participation of more FT
faculty willing to direct theses; and (3) the Program continues to develop its
Public Humanities Project (see below), including developing new curriculum in
applied humanities, obtaining monies to provide students with opportunities for
applied work in humanities settings, and other programs and initiatives (e.g., the
Glenwood Project).
10
b. Other Learning and Service Activities: As in previous review periods, ongoing
assessment of the Graduate Humanities Program has generated several initiatives and
projects meant to enhance the Program’s effectiveness, especially in the area of
developing and growing public and applied humanities for our students and augmenting
humanities-based outreach in our local communities. Some examples of this work since
the last review period include:
•
Public Humanities Project—a continued initiative to augment, strengthen, and
grow a curriculum in public and applied humanities, one meant to directly benefit
both our students and the communities and organizations surrounding the
Marshall University Graduate College. See http://www.marshall.edu/graduate
humanities/about/projects-and-publications/projects/ for more information.
•
The Glenwood Project—funded by the West Virginia Humanities Council and
other local organizations such as the Historic Glenwood Foundation, the project
engages students, faculty, and community members in the history of Charleston
and the Kanawha Valley through the interdisciplinary study of the Glenwood
Estate on Charleston’s West Side. In its three phases from 2006 to 2013, the
project generated $126,345 (which includes three major grants from the West
Virginia Humanities Council, cash contributions from organizations such as the
Historic Glenwood Foundation, and in-kind contributions from a variety of
Marshall University units). Over the course of the three-phase project, Graduate
Humanities faculty and students have organized several symposia and graduate
seminars for the project; built a traveling exhibit that has now traveled to over a
dozen sties across southern West Virginia; conducted an oral history survey in
conjunction with the project; and presented and written several papers on the
history of the site. See http://www.marshall.edu/graduatehumanities/the-glen
wood-project/ for more information.
•
Friends of the Humanities Initiative—a partnership of Graduate Humanities
alumni, faculty, staff, student, and local community members interested in
expanding project options for students and augmenting public and applied
outreach and engagement—which continued during the review period. See
http://www.marshall.edu/graduatehumanities/about/friends-of-the-humanities/ for
more information.
•
Museum Studies and Exhibit Design—due to student interest and the
extensive knowledge and expertise of Mark Tobin Moore (who taught regularly in
our Program during the review period), the Program began offering occasional
seminars in museum studies and exhibit design, which engendered several local
exhibits in and around Charleston. See http://www.marshall.edu/graduate
humanities/about/projects-and-publications/projects/ for more information.
•
Local Artists Series—during the review period (until 2011), the Program
initiated a partnership with the MUGC-South Charleston University Libraries to
host exhibits highlighting the work of a local artist in around southern West
Virginia. See http://www.marshall.edu/graduatehumanities/about/projects-andpublications/projects/local-artists-series/ for more information.
11
•
•
Occasional Publications of the Graduate Humanities Program—since the
last review period, the Program has initiated the “Occasional Publications” series,
which has featured limited publications of Graduate Humanities Program student
and faculty creative work. Examples include:
o
Nine Windows Anthology— written by a group of faculty and students,
the anthology grew out of a creative writing seminar taught by Dr. Fran
Simone.
See http://www.marshall.edu/graduatehumanities/occasionalpublications/ for more information.
o
Constellations—to mark the Program’s 30th anniversary, students and
faculty compiled a book of writings and other creative works by Graduate
Humanities Program faculty and students involved in the Program over
the past thirty years. The work, titled Constellations, and edited by
Kathryn Santiago (’09) in collaboration with Penna Design, was printed by
the University of Nebraska Press. More about the book is posted on
http://www.marshall.edu/graduatehumanities/occasional-publications/.
o
Hank Keeling: A Life in Art—a writing project conducted in conjunction
with our Museum Studies and Exhibit Design project (above), this book
project brought together students with numerous community partners to
explore questions about what it means to inhabit a life in art.
Appropriately titled “A Life in Art: Hank Keeling,” the seminar focused on
the life and works of the late West Virginia artist and educator Henry C.
Keeling (1924-2010), or “Hank,” as he was known by most. The process
engendered a traveling exhibit and this exhibit catalog/book, which
features works by Keeling as well as research, testimonies, and
reflections by students and others who helped bring the project to life.
See See http://www.marshall.edu/graduatehumanities/occasional-publica
tions/ for more information for more information.
Academic Journals Based in the Graduate Humanities Program—since the
last review period, two academic journals have been based in the Graduate
Humanities Program (in which students have been involved at various levels):
o
Collaborative Anthropologies—a journal edited by the Program’s
Director, Dr. Luke Eric Lassiter. Published annually by the University of
Nebraska Press, the journal is meant to engage the growing and everwidening discussion of collaborative research and practice in
anthropology and in closely related fields. http://www.marshall.edu/
graduatehumanities/journals/ for more information.
o
West Virginia Archaeologist—a journal edited by Dr. Robert Maslowski,
who has long been associated with the Graduate Humanities Program.
Published by the West Virginia Archaeological Society, the journal
publishes articles on prehistoric and historic archeology, notes and
comments and book reviews on the archeology of West Virginia and
surrounding states. See http://www.marshall.edu/graduatehumanities/
journals/ for more information.
12
c. Plans for Program Improvement: Based on assessment data collected over the
past five years, plans for program improvement over the next five years include:
(1) Review of the comprehensive exam as an assessment measure (by Spring
2017). As per discussions of program faculty, and data gathered via the
Program’s exit surveys, assessment data seem to suggest that the role of the
comprehensive exam should be examined further on at least two different levels:
(a) to what extent more focused preparations for student comprehensive exams
and for the articulation of interdisciplinary knowledge and concepts via classroom
instruction and independent faculty-student meetings prior to the exam are
effective; and (b) whether the comprehensive exam should be replaced or
expanded by another measure (e.g., portfolio) at this juncture of study in the MA
Program. Students report high satisfaction with the comprehensive exam,
reporting, for example, that “I loved studying for the exam”; “I think the exam is
necessary, and I had a strangely positive experience with it”; and “I think the
comprehensive exam is a fair and a fundamental part of the program.” So this
review and assessment must be carefully and thoughtfully administered.
(2) Development of plan for expansion of project and thesis options for students
(by Spring 2015). As per discussions of program faculty, and data gathered via
the Program’s exit surveys, assessment data seem to suggest that the Program
continues to provide students with varied and creative options for student work to
be carried out for the project and thesis option. As several students have noted in
their exit surveys, the final project is a fundamental and important part of the
program. “The experience was absolutely wonderful,” writes one student; “and I
learned so much and had so much fun. I wish every student could have a project
that was as great to do as mine.” Another concurs: “I’m immensely proud of the
outcome.” But during the last review period the Program has lost several key
faculty (due to several retirements, a resignation, and an untimely death). For
example: due to a retirement and a resignation in 2012, the program no longer
enjoys any jointly appointed faculty outside of the Director. This has severely
limited options for students enrolled in the Program. While the Director is
diligently seeking new joint appointments as of this writing, it will be a central
component of the plan to expand project and thesis options for students.
Seeking other opportunities within COLA and between and among colleges (such
as COEPD) to secure the participation of more FT faculty willing to direct theses
will also be critical to this plan.
.
(3) Reassessment of the Public Humanities Project and development of revised
plan to include new curriculum in applied and public humanities (by Spring 2018).
As per discussions of program faculty, and data gathered via the Program’s exit
surveys, assessment data seem to suggest that the Public Humanities Project
has produced a high level of interaction with applied and public humanities (via
projects such as the Glenwood Project, Friends of the Humanities Initiative,
Museum Studies and Exhibit Design curricula, the Local Artists series, and the
Occasional Publications of the Graduate Humanities Program). It also led to the
development of new curriculum, engagement with outside organizations and
funding agencies, and opportunities for addressing theory/practice divides within
the humanities-based fields. “When you get down and are working with your
hands,” writes one student about a traveling exhibit she helped build for the
Glenwood Project, “and doing something that will be seen by a ton of people, it’s
just an awesome experience. To know that you helped create something that
13
hundreds will enjoy gives you a great sense of accomplishment.” Though
components of the Public Humanities Project will continue for the next five years,
major components of the Public Humanities Project (such as the Glenwood
Project) have now run their course;. The Program’s Public Humanities Project is
now at an important juncture. The project needs to be reviewed and assessed
carefully; and a new plan for engaging students in applied and public humanities
work will be developed to expand Program options for students along these lines.
d. Graduate satisfaction: The Graduate Humanities Program sends exit surveys to its
recent graduates each year. In addition to accessing the satisfaction with and impact of
core courses, the effectiveness of faculty, the comprehensive exams, and the final
research project/thesis (which the Program compiles for annual assessment data), the
exit survey also solicits suggestions for growing and improving the Program (such as
assessing new areas for Program offerings). Since the last program review, 10 of the 20
total Humanities graduates (50%) have answered the exit survey. Responses are varied
and diverse; however, students generally report a high satisfaction with core courses
(they seem to especially appreciate HUMN 604: Expository Writing for Research and the
various Special Topics courses the Program offers); the effectiveness of faculty; the
comprehensive exam experience and the flexibility with the project/thesis. Suggestions
for growing and improving the Program include expanding the range of options for
course offerings; increasing the number and diversity of faculty (and thus research
project/thesis options), and augmenting and growing the more public/applied humanities
initiatives and programs.
During the review period, graduates were also contacted for follow-up interviews about
their overall satisfaction with the Program. (These interviews were conducted as part of
a larger survey of our alumni. See http://www.marshall.edu/graduatehumanities/
about/our-alumni/ for more information.) Though the Graduate Humanities Program
provides students with a learned degree (not a vocational one), and though the Program
does not prepare graduates for particular professions, students were also surveyed
about their current employment (see Appendix VIII). These interviews engendered a
wide range of responses, but it seems abundantly clear that graduates remain extremely
satisfied with their degree experience. Some examples of the many responses received:
“The Marshall Humanities Program revitalized my faith in education. Yes, I realize that
sounds cliché. Overly romanticized. But it’s completely true. In the Humanities Program,
people weren’t concerned with the competitiveness of academia- they were concerned
with me and my goals. I have never felt more encouraged in my academic pursuits. I also
met a diverse group of people. Vastly intelligent. A well-traveled bartender with a love for
Dostoyevsky. A computer-savvy servicewoman. A PR rep. Teachers, students, parents,
retail workers. I grew so much in my understanding of the diverse human experience
through listening to others tell their life stories. All coming together for the same goal.
Much like the humanities themselves. I learned about the importance of connections
across the disciplines. How it’s less important for your writing to sound smart than it is for
it to be written clearly. I am currently employed at a local historic house because of
connections I made through the program. I also am in the last stages of getting my
teaching certification. If I hadn’t gotten my MA in Humanities, I definitely would not be
where I am now. I would not have regained my faith in the educational process and would
not have continued. It is a learning experience that has forever changed my life.” (Ashley
Clark ’10)
14
“It is most difficult to put into words…the program helped me not only academically but
culturally. It was truly enriching and helped me fit in by getting to know the region and the
people. I also valued getting to know the teachers and my classmates.” (Antonio
Jiménez-Góngora ’10)
“One thing in particular I found valuable while in the program was the intellectual
challenge it offered through instruction, but also through those involved and fellow
students. The program offered the means by which I could learn to look beyond analysis
and the process of breaking things down and to consider meaning and experience as
relevant to understanding anything. The term ‘lifelong learning’ gets thrown around quite
a bit by various disciplines — to get a job, to get a degree, etc.; however, it seems that it
is only within humanities that the term is committed as part of the essence of being
human.” (Renae Bonnett ’11)
“The program was an incredible asset to my personal and professional growth, it allowed
me to understand core concepts of humanities and a solid foundation to apply them and
utilize public humanities. When people asked me in what area I was getting my M.A.,
their next question was invariably what will I do with a Humanities degree. My answer
to that was/is anything my heart and mind desires to create: this is the gift of the
Graduate Humanities Program, that if you can create it, it can be a reality. The field is
wide open for those with backgrounds in liberal arts, and with diverse life experiences
such as mine.” (Gabriella Williamson ’12)
e. Previous five years of evaluations of annual assessment reports: These
evaluation letters are included in Appendix IX.
6. Previous Reviews
At its meeting on April 24, 2009, the Marshall University Board of Governors
recommended that the Master of Arts in Humanities continue with identification for
resource development. The program requested additional faculty to enhance and
support the program. But the Board of Governors recommended deferring any
commitment to resource enhancement at the time due to budget constraints. It
approved Provost Ormiston’s recommendation to President Kopp, which reads: “I
recommend deferring any commitment to resource enhancement at this time. The
uncertainties of the current budget discussions at the state-level, the uncertainties of the
continuing impact of the nation’s economy on the state budget situation, and, thus, the
uncertainties of how the university’s budget will be affected (directly or indirectly), call for
a more deliberate and circumspect process of academic program planning. The
academic deans and I have begun the process of identifying criteria for establishing
priorities of program development and enhancement. We are in the early phases of that
discussion. However, our discussions have focused on the need to integrate the
university’s program review process with the productivity criteria and expectations used
in developing the annual HEPC Compact Report. A closer alignment of the criteria and
standards in the program review process with the Compact Report should provide us
with a clearer understanding for developing the university’s academic priorities. Once
criteria for priority planning have been established, the seven (7) undergraduate and
graduate programs included on this list, as well as those programs from previous
program review cycles, will be reviewed in accord with those standards for resource
development and enhancement.” Given these developments, the Program subsequently
received no resource development.
15
7. Weaknesses and Deficiencies Noted in Last Program Review
In the Program’s last review, submitted in academic year 2008 – 2009, the Master of
Arts in Humanities identified the following weaknesses:
•
•
•
By far the greatest weakness of the Program is having only one full-time faculty
member, the Program Director, to which all student advising, achievement and
success is tied. Having at least one additional full-time faculty would bring more
stability and continuity to the Program, increasing its visibility and impact, not to
mention increasing course delivery, assisting with advising, and supervising
independent research—all of which could potentially have a dramatic impact on
promotion, recruitment, and retention.
A related issue is the Program’s ability to provide a broader range of
opportunities for students seeking the thesis option. A good many students must
opt for a research project instead of a thesis as the number of full-time MU
faculty who teach in the Program—and thus the range of related academic
interests—is limited (e.g., to the specialties of the Program Director).
As the Program seeks to augment its public/applied curriculum and grow its
outreach and university-community partnership opportunities, the ability to
capitalize on those opportunities is severely limited to the Program Director’s
individual capacity to accept and manage these projects independently as per
the absence of other full-time humanities faculty. While the Program has
engaged in several outreach and university-community research initiatives (e.g.,
the Glenwood Project), the Program receives multiple requests to conduct
historic, ethnographic, and humanities-based research beyond its capacity to
entertain—i.e., research the Program has had to decline due to a lack of
available full-time personnel with expertise in humanities-based research and
dissemination. Many of these requests stem from major project requests with
great potential to involve large numbers of students and even generate capital for
the Program and University. In the past year alone, for example, the Program
Director has turned away or deferred specific and individualized humanitiesbased research requests form the National Park Service, West Virginia Center on
Budget and Policy, and the West Virginia Humanities Council. Having another
full-time faculty member would no doubt grow the Program’s potential to field and
accept requests, organize student involvement in graduate-level research, and
potentially, generate revenue for the program.
Resource development slated for the Program per the last Program Review (see Item #6
directly above) would have, of course, directly impacted a fuller resolution of these
identified weaknesses. But given that resource development was not forthcoming, the
Director and associated faculty worked within these limitations to address these
weaknesses on at least three fronts: (1) seeking out and increasing joint-appointments;
(2) developing greater involvement in the Program by adjunct and other associated
faculty, especially those who can assist in the thesis option; and (3) expanding
applied/public humanities options via the development of the Public Humanities Project
in concert with outside nonprofit organizations (such as the Historic Glenwood
Foundation, who has helped to fund significant portions of the Glenwood Project).
16
8. Current Strengths/Weaknesses
As noted in sections above and in previous reviews, the Program continues to exhibit
strengths in several areas, including:
•
The teaching faculty, both full-time and part-time, are academically well-prepared
and engaged in research and other professional activities. Although the Program
employs many part-time faculty, several have been part of the Program for many
years and feel ownership in it. These “senior” adjuncts—many of them senior
faculty at colleges and universities—teach regularly, serve as comprehensive
examiners, and supervise research projects. Part-time faculty are valued for their
commitment to the Program. Several are members of the Advisory Committee.
•
The quality of students enrolled in Graduate Humanities courses continues to
reflect well on the Program and the Graduate College. They also represent a
diversity of background not found in other graduate programs in South
Charleston.
•
Graduate Humanities classes are available to other graduate programs, such as
Elementary and Secondary Education and Counseling in COEPD.
•
Graduate Humanities courses and workshops are appropriate for lifelong
learners. As an interdisciplinary program, Graduate Humanities provides a
natural environment for faculty from several disciplines to work together in
providing educational experiences for different audiences.
•
The Program continues to attract diversely trained students, and graduates
express high satisfaction with their education. Graduate students elect the M.A.
in Humanities as a program that meets personal educational goals.
•
The flexibility in the program, with individual plans of study, and with
opportunities to focus in a particular area of study (A&S, CULS, HIST, or LITS)
allows the Program to meet the professional development needs of teachers and
other professionals via traditional course offerings as well as through third-party
contracts that the Program provides as professional development for teachers.
•
The Program is a full member of the Association for Liberal Studies Program, an
organization, based at Duke University, for networking and program assessment.
•
The Program’s ongoing collaborations with other colleges and programs, such as
the College of Education and Professional Development, augments an
interdisciplinary exploration of the arts, culture, literature, and history within an
open, exploratory, and experimental graduate-level educational environment.
•
The Program has a long history of engaging in local and regional outreach
initiatives, community-university partnerships and programs; and has great
potential to expand these programs and initiatives.
17
Though some of the Program’s weaknesses have been directly addressed and partly
resolved, as in our last Program Review, weaknesses continue to be reflected along the
following lines:
•
By far the greatest weakness of the Program continues to be having only one
full-time faculty member, the Program Director, to which all student advising,
achievement and success is tied. Having at least one additional full-time faculty
would bring more stability and continuity to the Program, increasing its visibility
and impact, not to mention increasing course delivery, assisting with advising,
and supervising independent research—all of which could potentially have a
dramatic impact on promotion, recruitment, and retention.
•
A related issue is the Program’s continued ability to provide a broader range of
opportunities for students seeking the thesis option. A good many students must
opt for a research project instead of a thesis as the number of full-time MU
faculty who teach in the Program—and thus the range of related academic
interests—continues to be limited (e.g., to the specialties of the Program
Director).
Because resource development along these lines appears to be unlikely, as noted
above, the Director and associated faculty have worked within these limitations to
address these weaknesses on at least three fronts: (1) seeking out and increasing jointappointments; (2) developing greater involvement in the Program by adjunct and other
associated faculty, especially those who can assist in the thesis option; and (3)
expanding applied/public humanities options via the development of the Public
Humanities Project in concert with outside nonprofit organizations (such as the Historic
Glenwood Foundation, who has helped to fund significant portions of the Glenwood
Project).
Section III: Program Viability
1. Articulation Agreements
The Graduate Humanities Program has no formal articulation agreements with other
institutions.
2. Off-Campus/Distance Delivery Courses
The vast majority of the Program’s seminars are offered on the South Charleston
campus. During the review period, the Program cooperated with faculty at Summersville
and Beckley sites using technology enhanced seminars to delivery content. (See
Appendix VI.)
3. Online Courses
During the current review period, several courses (in concentrations A&S CULS, HIST,
or LITS) were delivered as hybrid “mixed” technology-enhanced seminars (see Appendix
VI). No courses were delivered fully online.
18
4. Service Courses
Because of the nature of graduate education, there are no departmental courses from
Graduate Humanities currently required for students in degree programs in departments
in the College of Liberal Arts in Huntington or in other colleges and programs such as in
units in the College of Education and Professional Development (COEPD) in South
Charleston. The Program does, however, provide professional development courses for
K-12 teachers in cooperation with COEPD. These “staff development” courses are listed
as HUMN 560, 561, and 563 in Appendix VI.
5. Program Course Enrollment
Required Program area core courses (HUMN 600, 601, 602, 603, 604, 605, 680 and
681) are scheduled on a rotation. All degree students take these courses, but most are
also open to any graduate student. Only HUMN 680 and 681 (independent research
project/thesis) are restricted to degree students in Humanities who have passed the
comprehensive examination and/or students who are competing their Appalachian
Studies or Women’s Studies Certificate (in the case of HUMN 680). Electives are
selected to satisfy the area of interest in the Plan of Study. These electives are also
open to any graduate student. When classes fail to achieve sufficient enrollment, they
are normally reassigned as “arranged” courses (with an adjustment in compensation for
the part-time graduate instructor). (See Appendix VI.)
6. Program Enrollment
During the current review period, a total of 33 students were admitted into the Program
(either as conditional, provisional, or fully admitted). While admissions into the Program
have dropped some since the last Program Review, graduation rates have remained
approximately the same (during the last Program review, 22 students graduated from the
Program). See Appendix VII for data enrollment representing fully admitted students
enrolled over the course of the review period.
7. Trend Lines: See Figure 1
8. Enrollment Projections
According to a recent Office of Institutional Research and Planning report (“Marshall
University Degree Program Enrollment: Fall 09 to Fall 13”), enrollments are down in
graduate degree programs across the entire university. The Graduate Humanities
Program is no exception. Though our Program has always been small with modest
resources, we are making concerted efforts to increase applications and enrollment in
the Program over the next five years. Some of these include: (1) increased visits and
presentations to undergraduates in programs in the humanities at Marshall University,
West Virginia State University, and the University of Charleston; (2) increased
advertisements and announcements in local newspapers and other media in the
Charleston area and in the region; and (3) increased partnership and Program branding
with local community groups who share in our humanities-based outreach and education
mission. As of this writing, for example, the Historic Glenwood Foundation has
committed monies for tuition assistance for enrolled students in the Spring 2014
semester.
19
Section IV: Necessity of the Program
1. Advisory Committee
The Graduate Humanities Program Advisory Committee is currently composed of fulltime and part-time faculty. It was originally established in 1991 and reflects the
commitment of part-time faculty to the Program. Their experiences at different
institutions are valuable as we address issues in a non-traditional program.
2. Graduates
Since the last Program Review, 20 students have graduated from the Graduate
Humanities Program with an M.A. in Humanities. The majority of the graduates are
employed. Their places of employment are as varied as the degree opportunities; many
come to our Program as working adults and continue in similar employment tracks after
graduation. Because of the variety in employment, it is not possible to generalize about
salary. Of the 20 graduates to exit our Program since the last Program Review, eight of
the graduates are employed either full or part time in education (secondary and higher
education; teaching and staff); two are in non-profit public sector jobs (one at a house
museum, the other at a recreational facility); two work in State government (one for
Deputy Cabinet Secretary, the other for the Division of Culture & History); two are fulltime farmers (one is a sheep farmer; the other is a grower of organic foods); a few are
self-employed as artists or writers; and several graduates (including many of those
considered in the numbers above) are pursuing further graduate education while
remaining employed in their current jobs.
3. Job Placement
Because the Graduate Humanities Program provides students with a learned degree
(not a vocational one), the M.A. in Humanities is not promoted as a job placement
degree. While some of the Program’s graduates secure employment as a result of
acquiring the degree, many others are already fully employed. Some are retired when
they enter the program; many students take Program courses and seminars as nondegree students for purposes of enrichment. The Graduate Humanities Program
provides only informal advice on employment and recommendations when requested.
Because of networks developed by program faculty, we are often able to direct students
to openings or can provide names to potential employers. Given this, though, faculty
within the Graduate Humanities Program often and regularly work with students to
develop a plan of study and a final project within a particular concentration that may help
to enhance potential employment opportunities expressed by students (e.g., museum
work as per cultural, museum, or Appalachian studies).
20
Appendix I
Required/Elective Course Work in the Program
Degree Program: M.A. in Humanities
Person responsible for the report: Luke Eric Lassiter, Program Director
Total
Required
Hours
Elective Credit Required by the
Major (By Course Number and
Title)
15 - 18
HUMN 604 - Expository Writing for
Research
Area of Concentration – A&S, HIST,
CULS, or LITS (see pp. 212-214 in
the 2006-2008 Graduate Catalog
for the course numbers and titles
from which students choose)
2 of following:
+
Courses Required in Major (By
Course Number and Title)
HUMN 600 - Introduction to Study in the
Humanities
HUMN 601 - Literary Theory and
Criticism
or
HUMN 602 - Historical Studies
or
HUMN 603 - History and Theory of the
Arts
or
HUMN 605 – Western Traditions and
Contemporary Cultures
Elective
Hours
Related Fields Courses
Required
15
3-9
HUMN, A&S, HIST, CULS, or LITS
electives (see pp. 212-214 in the
2006-2008 Graduate Catalog for
the course numbers and titles from
which students choose)
Humanities 680 - Independent Research
Symposium
Humanities 681 - (for thesis option)
Professional society that may have influenced the program offering and/or requirements: Association of Graduate Liberal Studies Programs
21
Total
Related
Hours
36 - 39
Appendix II
Faculty Data Sheet
(Information for the period of this review)
August 8, 2008 - December 30, 2013
Name:
Dr. Luke Eric Lassiter
Rank:
Start Date at Marshall as a Faculty Member:
Status:
Professor
August 15, 2005
Tenured
Highest Degree Earned:
Conferring Institution:
Ph D
Date Degree Received:
1995
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
Area of Degree Specialization:
Anthropology, Social/Cultural Anthropology
Professional Registration/Licensure:
Field of Registration /Licensure:
Agency:
Date Obtained, Expiration Date
List courses you taught during the final two years of this review. If you participated in a team-taught
course, indicate each of them and what percentage of the course you taught. For each course include
the year and semester taught (summer through spring), course number, course title and enrollment.
(Expand the table as necessary)
Term/Year
Fall
2013
Fall
2013
Fall
2013
Fall
2013
Fall
2013
Summer
2013
Course
EDF
620
EDF
679
HUMN
650
HUMN
680
HUMN
680
CULS
611
Title
Mixed Methods Research
Enrolled
7 100%
% Respon
100
Problem Report
1 100%
100
SelTp: Appalachian Religion
1 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
Appal Std: Themes & Voices
5 100%
100
22
Summer
2013
Summer
2013
Summer
2013
Summer
2013
Spring 2013
Spring 2013
Spring 2013
Spring 2013
Spring 2013
Spring 2013
Spring 2013
Spring 2013
Fall 2012
Fall 2012
Fall 2012
Fall 2012
Fall 2012
Summer
2012
Summer
2012
Summer
2012
Summer
2012
Summer
2012
Spring 2012
Fall 2011
Fall 2011
Fall 2011
Fall 2011
Summer
2011
HUMN
600
EDF
679
HUMN
650
HUMN
650
HUMN
680
HUMN
680
HUMN
680
CI 627
Intro to Study in Humanities
3 100%
100
Problem Report
2 100%
100
SelTp: Appalachia & Ireland
1 100%
100
SelTp: Explore Goth Lit
1 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
Program Plan and Evaluation
8 100%
100
HUMN
650
CULS
610
HIST
600
A&S
501
HUMN
650
CULS
600
CULS
610
CULS
600
CULS
540
HUMN
600
HUMN
650
HUMN
650
CULS
610
CULS
500
CI 677
SelTp: Memoir
1 100%
100
Seminar in Appalachian Culture
1 100%
100
SpTp:History of Anthropology
2 100%
100
Stdys/Non-Western Art & Music
1 100%
100
Selected Topics
1 100%
100
SelTp: Native American Studies
1 100%
100
Seminar in Appalachian Culture
1 100%
100
SpTp: Exp Story & (Auto) Bio
4 100%
100
World Religions
1 100%
100
Intro to Study in Humanities
4 100%
100
Selected Topics
1 100%
100
Selected Topics
1 100%
100
Seminar in Appalachian Culture
5 100%
100
Stdys in Thought & Culture
1 100%
100
Writing Publicatn Prof Ed
9 100%
100
HUMN
680
HUMN
680
HUMN
650
CULS
600
HUMN
600
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
SelTp: Project Oral Histories
1 100%
100
SelTp:African Amer Histories
1 100%
100
Intro to Study in Humanities
2 100%
100
23
Summer
2011
Spring 2011
Spring 2011
Spring 2011
Spring 2011
Spring 2011
Spring 2011
Fall 2010
Summer
2010
Summer
2010
Summer
2010
Summer
2010
Spring 2010
Spring 2010
Spring 2010
Spring 2010
Fall 2009
Fall 2009
Fall 2009
Fall 2009
Fall 2009
Fall 2009
Fall 2009
Summer
2009
Summer
2009
Summer
2009
Summer
2009
Summer
2009
HUMN
650
HUMN
680
HUMN
680
HUMN
650
HUMN
650
HUMN
650
CI 677
SelTp:Readings Sports/Culture
1 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
Sel Tp: HUMN Public Relations
1 100%
100
Sl.Tp. Ethnography in/of Appal
1 100%
100
SpTp:Writing for Publication
2 100%
100
Writing Publicatn Prof Ed
7 100%
100
CULS
540
HUMN
680
HUMN
600
HUMN
650
CULS
600
HUMN
680
HUMN
680
HUMN
650
CULS
600
HUMN
680
HUMN
680
HUMN
680
HUMN
680
HUMN
680
HUMN
650
CULS
600
HUMN
680
HUMN
680
HUMN
680
HUMN
600
HUMN
650
World Religions
7 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
Intro to Study in Humanities
5 100%
100
Selected Topics
1 100%
100
SlTp:Calvinism in Appalach Cul
1 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
SelTp:"Glenwood Image & Text"
1 100%
100
SelTp:Song Trad & Musical Exp
3 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
Sel. Tp: Writing & Editing
1 100%
100
SpTp Cntmp Issues/Native N Am
3 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
Intro to Study in Humanities
7 100%
100
Sel.Tp: Publish an Anthology
1 100%
100
24
Spring 2009
Spring 2009
Spring 2009
Spring 2009
Fall 2008
Fall 2008
Fall 2008
Summer
2008
EDF
626
HUMN
680
HUMN
680
HUMN
650
HUMN
680
HUMN
650
HIST
600
HUMN
650
Adv Qualitative Research
7 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
Sel.Tp: Anthropology of Educa
1 100%
100
Independent Research Symposium
1 100%
100
SelTp:Journal of Appal Studies
1 100%
100
SpTp:Social Memory & Oral Hist
9 100%
100
SpTp:Seminar in Public Humn
3 100%
100
NOTE: Part-time adjunct faculty do not need to fill in the remainder of this document.
1)
Scholarship/Research
Contracts, Grants and Sponsored Research
Lassiter, L. E. (International Partner and Consultant), Grant, "Connected Communities
Consortium", United Kingdom Economic & Social Research Council, Funded. (2012 Present).
Lassiter, L. E. (Principal), Grant, "The Glenwood Project, Phase III", West Virginia Humanities
Council, State, Funded. (2011 - 2013).
Lassiter, L. E. (Co-Principal), Heaton, L. (Co-Principal), Sponsored Research, "Evaluation
Research - WVCPD", WV Center for Professional Development, State. (2006 - 2012).
Lassiter, L. E. (Principal), Grant, "GAD Communications Development", General Anthropology
Division, American Anthropological Association, Private. (2007 - 2011).
Lassiter, L. E. (Co-Principal), Campbell, E. (Co-Principal), Sponsored Research, "Collaboration in
Practice: A Qualitative Evaluation of the Partnership Enhancement Program, AMSP-MU",
Appalachian Math and Science Partnership -- MU, U of KY, and NSF. (2007 - 2010).
Lassiter, L. E. (Principal), Grant, "The Glenwood Project, Phase II", West Virginia Humanities
Council, State. (2008 - 2009).
Intellectual Contributions
th
Lassiter, L.E. (forthcoming: 2014). Invitation to Anthropology, 4 edition. Lanham:
AltaMira/Rowman & Littlefield.
25
Lassiter, L. E., Cook, S. R. (forthcoming: 2014). Collaborative Anthropologies, Vol. 5 University of
Nebraska Press.
Lassiter, L. E., Cook, S. R. (forthcoming: 2014). Editors' Introduction. University of Nebraska
Press, 5.
Campbell, E. A., Lassiter, L. E. (forthcoming: 2014). Doing Ethnography Today: Theoretical
Issues and Pragmatic Concerns. Co-authored with Elizabeth Campbell. Oxford: WileyBlackwell.
Lassiter, L. E. (2012). "To Fill in the Piece of the Middletown Puzzle": Lessons from Re-studying
Middletown. Sociological Review, 60, 421-37.
Lassiter, L. E., Cook, S. R. (2012). Collaborative Anthropologies, Vol. 5 University of Nebraska
Press.
Lassiter, L. E., Cook, S. R. (2012). Editors' Introduction. University of Nebraska Press, 5, vii-viii.
Lassiter, L. E., Cook, S. R. (2011). Collaborative Anthropologies, Volume 4 University of
Nebraska Press.
Lassiter, L. E. (2011). Director's Statement Hank Keeling: A Life in Art (Exhibit Catalog).
Lassiter, L. E., Cook, S. R. (2011). Editors' Introduction. Collaborative Anthropologies, 4, vii-viii.
Boyd, C. E., Lassiter, L. E. (2011). Explorations in Cultural Anthropology. Lanham MD: AltaMira
Press.
Lassiter, L. E. (2010). "Kiowa Hymns" (narrative history) “Cheevers Toppah: Renewed Spirit,
Harmonized Church Hymns of the Kiowa" (produced by Canyon Records).
Lassiter, L. E., Cook, S. R. (2010). Collaborative Anthropologies, Volume 3 University of
Nebraska Press.
Lassiter, L. E., Cook, S. R. (2010). Editors' Introduction. Collaborative Anthropologies, 3, vii-ix.
Campbell, E., Lassiter, L. E. (2010). From Collaborative Ethnography to Collaborative Pedagogy:
Reflections on the Other Side of Middletown Project and Community-University Research
Partnerships". Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 41, 370-385.
Lassiter, L. E. (2010). Invitation to Anthropology, Taiwanese Translation Socio Publishing Co.,
Ltd..
Lassiter, L. E., Campbell, E. (2010). Serious Fieldwork: On Re-functioning Ethnographic
Pedagogies Anthropology News (published by the Ameican Anthropological Association).
Lassiter, L. E., Campbell, E. (2010). What Will We Have Ethnography Do?. Qualitative Inquiry,
16, 757-767.
26
Lassiter, L. E. (2009). "Thickening" the Complexities of Collaboration Society for Applied
Anthropology Newsletter (published by the Society for Applied Anthropology).
Lassiter, L. E. (2009). American Indian Music Encyclopedia of Oklahoma History and Culture
(published by the Oklahoma Historical Society).
Lassiter, L. E., Cook, S. R. (2009). Collaborative Anthropologies, Volume 2 University of
Nebraska Press.
Lassiter, L. E. (2009). Editor's Introduction. Collaborative Anthropologies, 2, vii-viii.
Lassiter, L. E. (2009). Foreword Constellations: An Anthology of the Graduate Humanities
Program, Celebrating Thirty Years (1979-2009) (Program Publication).
Lassiter, L. E. (2009). Invitation to Anthropology, 3rd Edition. Lanham MD: AltaMira Press.
Lassiter, L. E., Cook, S. R. (2008). Collaborative Anthropologies, Volume 1 University of
Nebraska Press.
Fluehr-Lobban, C., Lassiter, L. E. (2008). Discussion and Debate: On the SfAA Panel, "Working
with Government Agencies Society for Applied Anthropology Newsletter (published by the
Society for Applied Anthropology).
Lassiter, L. E. (2008). Editor's Introduction. Collaborative Anthropologies, 1, vii-xii.
Lassiter, L. E. (2008). Invitation to Anthropology, Chinese Translation Peking University Press.
Lassiter, L. E. (2008). Moving Past Public Anthropology and Doing Collaborative Research. In
Carla Guerron-Montero (Ed.), (pp. 70-86). WDC: Careers in Applied Anthropology: Advice
from Practitioners and Academics (book published by the American Anthropological
Association).
Lassiter, L. E. (2008). The Story of a Collaborative Project. In Timothy P. Fong (Ed.), (pp. 469489). Hoboken, NJ: Ethnic Studies Resaerch: Approaches and Perspectives (book published
by Rowman & Littlefield).
Presentations
Lassiter, L. E. (Presenter & Author), Invited Presentation/Paper, Institute of Black Life, University
of South Florida, “Collaborative Ethnography in/with African American Communities.” Other,
Academic, Regional, Invited. (forthcoming: 2014).
Lassiter, L. E. (Presenter & Author), Invited Presentation/Paper, Department of Anthropology,
Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, "Collaborative Anthropologies: Where to Next?",
Other, Academic, Regional, Invited. (2013).
27
Lassiter, L. E. (Presenter & Author), Invited Presentation/Paper, Native American Studies
Program, Dartmouth College, Dartmouth, New Hampshire, “Collaborative Research in Kiowa
and Native American Studies: Reflections on Past, Present, and Future Trends”, Other,
Academic, Regional, Invited. (2013).
Lassiter, L. E. (Presenter & Author), Paper, One hundred-twelfth Annual Meeting of the American
Anthropological Association, American Anthropological Association, Chicago, “What Does it
Mean to Co-Produce Knowledge?” Conference, Academic, National, peer-reviewed/refereed.
(2013).
Lassiter, L. E. (Presenter & Author), Invited Presentation/Paper, Department of Anthropology,
University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, "Is Collaborative Ethnography Finished?", Other,
Academic, Regional, Invited. (2012).
Lassiter, L. E. (Panelist), Paper, One hundred-eleventh Annual Meeting of the American
Anthropological Association, American Anthropological Association, San Francisco,
California, "What Does it Mean to be an Anthropologist?", Conference, Academic,
International, peer-reviewed/refereed, published in proceedings, Invited. (2012).
Lassiter, L. E. (Presenter & Author), Paper, Department of Anthropology, University of British
Columbia, Vancouver BC, Canada, ""Collaborative (Participatory) Research in Anthropology:
Concerning its Current Conditions and Future Trajectories" (Invited Talk)", Invited. (2011).
Lassiter, L. E. (Presenter & Author), Oral Presentation, Community University Partnership
Programme (Cupp) International Seminar Series, University of Brighton, Brighton, England,
""Collaborative Community Research: A View from the United States" (Invited Talk)", Other,
Academic, Local, Invited. (2011).
Lassiter, L. E., Campbell, E., Oral Presentation, Collaborative Methods in Community Research
Workshop, School of Sociololgy and Social Policy, University of Nottingham, Nottingham,
England, "“Fieldwork Methods and the Experience of Working Collaboratively”", Workshop,
Academic, Regional, Invited. (2011).
Lassiter, L. E. (Presenter & Author), Paper, Community Re-studies Symposium, School of
Sociology and Social Policy, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom, Nottingham,
England, "“’To Fill in the Missing Piece of the Middletown Puzzle’: Lessons from Re-studying
Middletown"", Conference, Academic, Regional, peer-reviewed/refereed, published
elsewhere, Invited. (2011).
Lassiter, L. E. (Presenter & Author), Paper, One hundred-ninth Annual Meeting of the American
Anthropological Association, American Anthropological Association, New Orleans, "“‘Do You
Really Want This?’: On Personal Motives and Intentions for Doing Anthropological Work.”
Comments for the Invited Roundtable, “Anthropological Motives.”", Conference, Academic,
National, peer-reviewed/refereed, Invited. (2010).
Lassiter, L. E. (Presenter & Author), Paper, Department of Anthropology, Georgetown University,
WDC, "“Prospects for Collaborative Anthropologies" (Invited Talk)", Invited. (2010).
28
Lassiter, L. E. (Presenter & Author), Paper, One hundred-eighth Annual Meeting of the American
Anthropological Association, American Anthropological Association, Philadelphia, "“ReImagining Collaborative Activisms.” Paper presented for Invited Session, “Equal
Opportunities, Cultural Rights, and Ethics of Fieldwork and Publication.”", Conference,
Academic, National, peer-reviewed/refereed, Invited. (2009).
Lassiter, L. E., Oral Presentation, University of the South, Sewanee, Tennessee, "“New
Developments in Student Ethnography" (Invited Talk)", Invited. (2009).
Lassiter, L. E. (Presenter & Author), Campbell, E. (Author Only), Paper, Ethnography-as-Activism
Workgroup, Rackham Graduate School, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, "“What
Will We Have Ethnography Do?” (Inivted Talk)", published elsewhere, Invited. (2009).
Lassiter, L. E. (Presenter & Author), Paper, One hundred-seventh Annual Meeting of the
American Anthropological Association, American Anthropological Association, San Francisco,
"“Collaborations, Complicities, Complexities.” Invited Panel Participant for “Indigenous
Agendas: Perspectives on Collaboration with American Indian Communities.”", Conference,
Academic, National, peer-reviewed/refereed, Invited. (2008).
Lassiter, L. E. (Presenter & Author), Paper, One hundred-seventh Annual Meeting of the
American Anthropological Association, American Anthropological Association, San Francisco,
"“When We Disagree: On Engaging the Force of Difference in Collaborative, Reciprocal and
Participatory Researches.” Paper presented for Invited Session, “Toward Critical
Collaborative and Reciprocal Researches.”", Conference, Academic, National, peerreviewed/refereed, Invited. (2008).
Lassiter, L. E. (Presenter & Author), Paper, Sixty-eighth Annual Meeting of the Society for Applied
Anthropology, Society for Applied Anthropology, Memphis TN, "“Moving Past Public
Anthropology and Doing Collaborative Research.”", Conference, Academic, National, peerreviewed/refereed, published elsewhere, Accepted. (2008).
Lassiter, L. E. (Discussant), Paper, Sixty-eighth Annual Meeting of the Society for Applied
Anthropology, Society for Applied Anthropology, Memphis TN, "“On University-Community
Collaborative Research Partnerships: Comments on the ‘Engaged Research in Practice: the
UBC/Gitxaala Nation Graduate Fieldschool’”", Conference, Academic, National, peerreviewed/refereed, Accepted. (2008).
Directed Student Learning and Research
Hvizdak, L., Research, Dissertation Committee Chair, GSEPD-Elementary/Sec Educa
Department. (2013 - Present).
Rushton, C., Research, Dissertation Committee Member, GSEPD-Elementary/Sec Educa
Department. (2012 - Present).
Clapman, S., Research, Dissertation Committee Member, GSEPD-Leadership Studies
Department, In-Process. (2011 - Present).
29
Craig, B., Research, Directed Final MA Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680, 3 credit
hours, "History of Mountain State Press (working title)", In-Process. (2013 - Present).
Quinlan, C., Research, Directed Final MA Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680, 3 credit
hours, “Little League Histories and Futures” (working title)", In-Process. (2013 - Present).
Kuemmel, W., Research, Directed Final MA Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680, 3
credit hours, "Shifting Appalachian Economies (working title)", In-Process. (2011 - Present).
Carlson, A., Research, Dissertation Committee Chair, GSEPD-Elementary/Sec Educa
Department, In-Process. (2010 - Present).
Lawson, K., Research, Dissertation Committee Chair, GSEPD-Elementary/Sec Educa
Department. (2010 - Present).
Green, J., Research, Dissertation Committee Member, GSEPD-Leadership Studies Department,
In-Process. (2009 - Present).
Adkins, M., Research, Dissertation Committee Member, GSEPD-Leadership Studies Department,
In-Process. (2009 - Present).
Ferrell, S., Research, Directed MA Final Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680, 3 credit
hours, "Change in Perceptions of Appalachia (working title)", In-Process. (2009 - Present).
Calwell, B., Research, Dissertation Committee Member, GSEPD-Leadership Studies Department,
In-Process. (2007 - Present).
Bissett, B., Research, Dissertation Committee Member, GSEPD-Leadership Studies Department,
In-Process. (2007 - Present).
East, K., Research, Dissertation Committee Member, GSEPD-Elementary/Sec Educa
Department, In-Process. (2006 - Present).
Pruett, K., Research, Directed Final MA Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680, 3 credit
hours, "African American History in Charleston (working title)", In-Process. (2011 - 2013).
Yaun, J., Research, Dissertation Committee Member, GSEPD-Leadership Studies Department,
In-Process. (2010 - 2013).
Faulkner, P., Research, Dissertation Committee Member, GSEPD-Leadership Studies
Department. (2008 - 2013).
Durst, K., Directed Individual/Independent Study, Humanities Department, HUMN, 650,
“Appalachian Religions”. (2013).
Fitzpatrick, A., Directed Individual/Independent Study, GSEPD-Elementary/Sec Educa
Department, EDF, 679, “Problem Report”. (2013).
30
Lawson, K., Directed Individual/Independent Study, GSEPD-Elementary/Sec Educa Department,
EDF, 679, “Problem Report”. (2013).
Scudder, S., Directed Individual/Independent Study, Humanities Department, HUMN, 650, 3
credit hours, "Gothic Literature". (2013).
Wood, A., Learning, Directed Individual/Independent Study, Humanities Department, CULS, 610,
3 credit hours, "Appalachian Culture". (2012).
Holley, A., Directed Individual/Independent Study, Humanities Department, HUMN, 650, 3 credit
hours, "Appalachian Studies Study Abroad". (2012).
Fisher, D., Learning, Directed Individual/Independent Study, Humanities Department, HUMN,
650, 3 credit hours, "Multiple Intelligences Cross-Culturally". (2012).
May, E., Learning, Directed Individual/Independent Study, Humanities Department, CULS, 600, 3
credit hours, "Native American Studies". (2012).
May, E., Learning, Directed Individual/Independent Study, Humanities Department, HUMN, 650,
3 credit hours, "Museum Studies". (2012).
Goodwin, L., Learning, Directed Individual/Independent Study, Humanities Department, CULS,
500, 3 credit hours, "Studies in Thought & Culture". (2012).
Goodwin, L., Learning, Directed Individual/Independent Study, Humanities Department, CULS,
540, 3 credit hours, "World Religions". (2012).
Lynch, J., Research, Directed Final MA Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680, 3 credit
hours, "Art in Everyday Life (tentative title)", In-Process. (2011 - 2012).
Pierce, C., Research, Dissertation Committee Member, GSEPD-Leadership Studies Department,
In-Process. (2009 - 2012).
Alderman, P., Research, Dissertation Committee Member, GSEPD-Leadership Studies
Department, In-Process. (2008 - 2012).
Cline, J., Research, Dissertation Committee Member, GSEPD-Leadership Studies Department,
In-Process. (2006 - 2012).
Williamson, A., Learning, Directed Individual/Independent Study, Humanities Department, HUMN,
650, 3 credit hours, ""Humanities Public Relations"", Completed. (2011).
Quinlan, C., Learning, Directed Individual/Independent Study, Humanities Department, HST, 650,
3 credit hours, ""Project Oral Histories"", Completed. (2011).
Quinlan, C., Learning, Directed Individual/Independent Study, Humanities Department, HUMN,
650, 3 credit hours, ""Readings in Sports & Culture in Appalachia"", Completed. (2011).
Pruett, K., Learning, Directed Individual/Independent Study, Humanities Department, HUMN, 650,
31
3 credit hours, ""African American Histories"", Completed. (2011).
Kuemmel, W., Learning, Directed Individual/Independent Study, Humanities Department, HUMN,
650, 3 credit hours, ""Ethnography in/of Appalachia"", Completed. (2011).
Bonnett, R., Research, Directed Final MA Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680, 3 credit
hours, ""Conduits and Conveyances: Humanities and Life-Long Learning"", Completed.
(2011).
Bissett, B., Learning, Directed Individual/Independent Study, GSEPD-Leadership Studies
Department, HUMN, 650, 3 credit hours, ""Appalachian Studies Bibliography"", Completed.
(2010 - 2011).
Williamson, A., Research, Directed MA Final Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680, 3
credit hours, ""My Adventures in Graduate Admissions"", Completed. (2010 - 2011).
Olson, L., Research, Dissertation Committee Member, GSEPD-Elementary/Sec Educa
Department, Completed. (2006 - 2011).
Clark, A., Learning, Directed Individual/Independent Study, Humanities Department, HUMN, 650,
3 credit hours, ""Glenwood Image and Text"", Completed. (2010).
Straight, J., Learning, Directed Individual/Independent Study, Humanities Department, HUMN,
650, 3 credit hours, ""Calvinism in Appalachian Culture"", Completed. (2010).
Clark, A., Research, Directed MA Final Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680, 3 credit
hours, ""Glenwood Inventory Project"", Completed. (2010).
Pauley, B., Research, Directed Appalachian Studies Final Project, Humanities Department,
HUMN, 680, 3 credit hours. (2010).
Scott, A., Research, Directed MA Final Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680, 3 credit
hours, ""Family, Flowers, and Fancies: The Essence of Appalachia in the Poetry of Rose
Burton Isaacs"", Completed. (2009 - 2010).
Jimenez-Gongora, A., Research, Directed MA Final Project, Humanities Department, HUMN,
680, 3 credit hours, ""The Hispanic Population in Southern West Virginia"", Completed. (2009
- 2010).
Ahangardezfooli, J., Research, Directed MA Final Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680,
3 credit hours, ""Perceptions of Muslim Women in America"", Completed. (2009 - 2010).
Pruitt, K., Research, Directed MA Final Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680, 3 credit
hours, ""The Major Woodram House: A Project in Historical Preservation"", Completed. (2009
- 2010).
McComas, K., Research, Dissertation Committee Member, GSEPD-Leadership Studies
Department, Completed. (2007 - 2010).
32
Clark, A., Learning, Directed Individual/Independent Study, Humanities Department, HUMN, 650,
3 credit hours, ""Writing & Editing"", Completed. (2009).
McComas, K., Learning, Directed Individual/Independent Study, GSEPD-Leadership Studies
Department, HUMN, 650, 3 credit hours, ""Anthropology of Education"", Completed. (2009).
Santiago, K., Learning, Directed Individual/Independent Study, Humanities Department, HUMN,
650, 3 credit hours, ""Publish an Anthology"", Completed. (2009).
Pauley, B., Research, Directed MA Final Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680, 3 credit
hours, ""Eliza Poe: The Shadow that Breathed Over Edgar Allen Poe's Shoulder and Defined
his Fictional Women"". (2009).
Santiago, K., Research, Directed MA Final Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680, 3 credit
hours, ""Constellations: An Anthology of the Marshall University Graduate Humanities
Program, Celebrating Thirty Years (1979-2009)", Completed. (2009).
Varney, L., Research, Directed MA Final Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680, 3 credit
hours, ""Relics of the Confederacy: The Feminine Experience in the American Civil War"",
Completed. (2009).
Miller, T., Research, Directed MA Final Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680, 3 credit
hours, ""Much Ado about Shakespeare"", Completed. (2009).
Kirk, A., Research, Directed Final MA Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680, 3 credit
hours, ""Why Do You Play That? The Mountain Dulcimer in Appalachia"", Completed. (2008 2009).
Holmes, B., Research, Dissertation Committee Member, GSEPD-Elementary/Sec Educa
Department, Completed. (2007 - 2009).
Santiago, K., Learning, Directed Individual/Independent Study, Humanities Department, CULS,
600, 3 credit hours, ""Collaborative Anthropologies"", Completed. (2008).
Ferrell, S., Learning, Directed Individual/Independent Study, Humanities Department, HUMN,
650, 3 credit hours, ""Journal of Appalachian Studies"", Completed. (2008).
Perrine, G., Research, Directed MA Final Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680, 3 credit
hours, ""Appalachian Folklore: A Generational Comparsion"", Completed. (2008).
Settle, A., Research, Directed MA Final Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680, 3 credit
hours, ""Danieal Boone: A Comic Strip and a Connection with Appalachia"", Completed.
(2007 - 2008).
Flaherty, P., Research, Dissertation Committee Member, GSEPD-Elementary/Sec Educa
Department, Completed. (2006 - 2008).
33
Hatfield, P., Research, Directed Final MA Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680, 3 credit
hours, ""Holding Smoke in Your Hands: Stories of Home and Purpose"", Completed. (2006 2008).
Borovicka, Z., Research, Directed MA Final Project, Humanities Department, HUMN, 680, 3
credit hours, ""The Sigma Theta Epsilon, Alpha Chapter Oral History Project"", Completed.
(2006 - 2008).
2)
Service
Department
Director of the Graduate Humanities Program, (2005 - Present).
College
GSEPD Brown Bag Lecture Series (GSEPD), Series Organizer (2006 - Present).
COLA Department Chairs (COLA), Attendee, Meeting (2005 - Present).
Dean's Cabinet (GSEPD), Attendee, Meeting (2005 - Present).
GSEPD Dean Evaluation Consultation Committee, Committee Member (2012).
Promotion and Tenure Committee (COLA), Committee Member (2009 - 2012).
Search Committee for Director of the Simon Perry Center for Constitutional Democracy (COLA),
Committee Member (2010 - 2011).
Search Committee for the Dean of the Graduate College (Graduate College), Committee Member
(2009).
Search Committee for the Dean of the Graduate School of Education and Professional
Development (GSEPD), Committee Member (2009).
Search Committee, Admissions Counselor (Graduate College), Committee Chair (2008).
Doctoral Seminar Planning Committee (GSEPD), Committee Member (2007 - 2008).
Diversity and Social Justice Committee (COEHS & GSEPD), Committee Member (2006 - 2008).
Faculty Concerns Committee (COLA), Committee Member (2005 - 2008).
University
Graduate Council, Committee Member (2013 - Present).
Advisory Board, Center for the Study of Ethnicity and Gender in Appalachia, Committee Member
(2005 - Present).
34
Budget and Academic Policy Committee, Committee Member (2010 - 2013).
Task Force on Academic Restructuring (Office of Academic Affairs), Committee Member (2009 2010).
Faces of Appalachia Awards Committee, Committee Member (2008 - 2009).
Digital Content Management Project Committee (Universities Libraries), Committee Member
(2006 - 2008).
Research and Creative Activities Council, Marshall University Research Corporation, Committee
Member (2005 - 2008).
Professional
President-Elect, General Anthropology Division, American Anthropological Association,
Washington, D.C. (2012 - Present).
Collaborative Anthropologies, Editor, Journal Editor (2008 - Present).
Publications Board, General Anthropology Division, American Anthropological Association, Board
of Advisors of a Company, WDC, USA (2005 - Present).
Executive Board, General Anthropology Division, American Anthropological Association, Board of
Directors of a Company, WDC, USA (2004 - Present).
General Anthropology Divisions of the American Anthropological Association, Officer,
President/Elect/Past, WDC (2012 - 2014).
Director of GAD Communications, General Anthropology Division, American Anthropological
Association, Program Coordinator (2007 - 2012).
Section Editor, General Anthropology Division, Anthropology News, Editor, Journal Editor (2007 2012).
Program Committee for the General Anthropology Division of the American Anthropological
Association, Committee Member (2008 - 2011).
Session Organizer, “Collaborative and Reciprocal Researches.” One hundred-seventh Annual
Meeting of the American Anthropological Association, Program Organizer (2008).
Workshop Organizer/Facilitator, “Collaborative Ethnography: Prospects and Problems.” National
Association for the Practice of Anthropology (NAPA) Workshop. One hundred-sixth Annual
Meeting of the American Anthropological Association, Program Organizer (2008).
35
Community
The Glenwood Planning and Outreach Committee, Historic Glenwood Foundation, Inc.,
Chairperson, Charleston, WV, USA (2011 - Present).
Board of Directors, Historic Glenwood Foundation, Inc., Board Member, Charleston, WV, USA
(2009 - Present).
Director of the Kiowa Education Fund, Director, Anadarko, OK, USA (1997 - Present).
Advisory Board, “Project TEACH II: The Constitution in Historical Context,” West Virginia
Regional Education Service Agency, Region III, Dunbar, West Virginia (2006 - 2010).
3)
Professional development activities, including professional organizations to which you belong and
state, regional, national, and international conferences attended. List any panels on which you
chaired or participated. List any offices you hold in professional organizations.
Professional Memberships
National Association for the Practice of Anthropology, NAPA, see
http://practicinganthropology.org/. (2008 - Present).
Society for Applied Anthropology, SfAA, Fellow. (2005 - Present).
Phi Kappa Phi. (2004 - Present).
American Anthropological Association, AAA, President-elect of GAD; Executive Committee of
GAD; GAD Program Director, etc., see www.aaanet.org. (1995 - Present).
4)
Awards/honors (including invitations to speak in your area of expertise) or special recognition.
Awards and Honors
John & Frances Rucker Outstanding Graduate Advisor Award, Marshall University, (2010).
36
Appendix III
Students’ Entrance Abilities for Past Five Years of Graduates: Master of Arts in Humanities
Year
N
Mean
Undergraduate
GPA
Mean GRE
Quantitative
Mean GRE Verbal
Mean GRE
Analytical Writing
Miller Analogies
Mean
2008 – 09
2
3.71
540 (n = 1)
740 (n = 1)
Not available
410 (n = 1)
2009 – 10
8
3.64
595 (n = 2)
440 (n = 2)
Not available
417.33 (n = 6)
2010 – 11
5
3.44
470 (n = 3)
466.67 (n = 3)
Not available
417.5 (n = 2)
2011 – 12
3
4.0
N/A
N/A
Not available
420.33 (n = 3)
2012 - 13
2
3.69
490 (n = 2)
605 (n = 2)
4.75 (n = 2)
N/A
37
Appendix IV
Exit Abilities for Past Five Years of Graduates: Master of Arts in Humanities
Year
N
Mean GPA
Licensure Exam
Results
Certification Test
Results
Other Standardized
Exam Results
2008 – 09
2
3.94
N/A
N/A
N/A
2009 – 10
8
3.82
N/A
N/A
N/A
2010 – 11
5
3.95
N/A
N/A
N/A
2011 – 12
3
4.00
N/A
N/A
N/A
2012 - 13
2
3.70
N/A
N/A
N/A
38
Appendix V
Assessment Summary
Marshall University
Assessment of Student Outcomes: Component/Course/Program Level
5 year summary
Component Area/Program/Discipline: _Graduate Humanities Program_______________
Learning
Outcomes
Persons
Responsible
Assessment Tools
Standards/Benchmarks
Results/Analysis
Action Taken
Graduates of the
Humanities Program
are expected to
exhibit:
exhibit high-order
critical thinking skills;
express sensitivity
and articulation of
interdisciplinary
knowledge and
concepts;
demonstrate
cognizance of the
wide range of study
made possible by the
humanities; relate an
aesthetic valuation for
how the humanities
informs larger
concepts of human
diversity and
multiculturalism;
Graduate
Humanities Program
Director and
Program Faculty
Admission into Program data
collection; Curriculum
Planning and Design
Conferences (interviews);
Comprehension Exams
(knowledge and skill
assessment); Thesis and/or
Project (Independent
Research Symposium) and
Exit Surveys
All graduates are expected to pass
complete coursework, pass
comprehensive exams, and
complete the final thesis/project
within 7 years.
Comprehensive exams should
exhibit the ability to analyze texts
and images from more than one
particular perspective, knowledge
of research methods/critical issues
in two core areas, knowledge of
major figures/issues in area of
concentration, written proficiency,
and technological competence.
Rubric for Exams: the Program
utilizes an “pass with honors,”
“pass,” “fail,” “retake” rubric for the
exams. Pulling from broad
literatures, engaging in reflective
and critical thinking, doing
comparative analysis, creating
new linkages, analyzing and
evaluating texts, the Program
expects 100% of students to pass
the exam accordingly (with “pass
with honors” reserved for the most
exceptional exam responses).
39
Analysis of the comprehensive exams over
the five-year review period suggests that
while most students are often well
prepared for this assessment, in a few
cases, students must re-take their exams.
Based on yearly assessments (see the
Assessment Reports at the end of this
review), the percentage of students having
to take the exam more than once has
begun to decline since the last review
period, suggesting that previous findings
from earlier assessment reports and
reviews (i.e., that individualized instruction
on the articulation of interdisciplinary
knowledge and concepts should be
addressed more carefully before students
take the exam either in the classroom or
via independent faculty-student meetings)
are beginning to take hold.
Program faculty continue to
discuss ways to implement more
focused preparations for student
comprehensive exams and for the
articulation of interdisciplinary
knowledge and concepts via
classroom instruction and
independent faculty-student
meetings prior to the exam.
Demonstrate,
diagnose, and
formulate
hermeneutic
synthesis and
evaluation of the
broader applications
of humanities-based
knowledge; and
finally, develop
advanced
competence in writing
and communicating
the humanities via
various media.
Graduate
Humanities Program
Director and
Program Faculty
Exit Surveys and Curriculum
Planning and Design
Conferences (interviews)
The final project/thesis must reach
a standard of production of an
appropriate piece of research, one
that begins with formulating an
interdisciplinary research question;
written and oral proficiency
(product and presentation of
research in symposium or thesis
defense); and technological
competence in carrying out
research and producing the
document.
Analysis of the final project/thesis over the
five-year review period suggests that the
majority of students who complete their
coursework in a timely manner also
complete the final thesis or research
project. Based on yearly assessments
(see the Assessment Reports at the end of
this review), most students complete
research projects with only a small
percentage completing theses. Exit
surveys and interviews conducting during
Curriculum Planning and Design
Conferences suggest that many students
shift from the thesis to the project option, or
choose the project option outright because
the Program does not have enough fulltime faculty (the Program Director is the
only FT faculty) to serve as advisors for all
thesis topics (only FT faculty can serve as
thesis advisors; the many PT faculty who
serve in the program cannot serve in this
role). While the Program has no doubt that
the Research Project offers students the
opportunity to engage in high-order critical
thinking skills, the more limited opportunity
of the thesis option clearly presents an
obstacle for some students to achieve the
fullest articulation of this end.
The Program continues to provide
students with varied and creative
options for student work to be
carried out for the project option;
however, the Program also
continues to seek monies
externally, and seek other
opportunities within COLA and
between and among colleges to
secure the participation of more FT
faculty willing to direct theses.
All students should have the option
to develop study in public/applied
humanities.
Analysis of Exit surveys and interviews
conducting during Curriculum Planning and
Design Conferences indicate that students
continue to be extremely satisfied with the
Program and are achieving the program
goals and most if not all the learning
outcomes. Many students, however,
continue to express interest in developing
more applied curriculum and more
instruction on hermeneutic synthesis and
evaluation of the broader applications of
humanities-based knowledge.
The Program continues to develop
its Public Humanities Project,
including developing new
curriculum in applied humanities,
obtaining monies to provide
students with opportunities for
applied work in humanities settings,
and other programs and initiatives
(e.g., the Glenwood Project).
40
Appendix VI
Program Course Enrollment
Course
Number
HUMN 560
HUMN 561
HUMN 563
HUMN 600
HUMN 601
HUMN 602
HUMN 603
HUMN 604
HUMN 605
HUMN 650
HUMN 680
HUMN 681
A&S 600
CULS 500
CULS 540
CULS 550
CULS 600
CULS 610
CULS 611
CULS 612
HIST 585
HIST 600
HIST 601
LITS 600
Course Name
Staff Development (Teach Am.
History)
Staff Development (various)
Staff Development (America’s History)
Intro. to Study in the Humanities
Literary Theory and Criticism
Historical Studies
History and Theory of the Arts
Expository Writing for Research
Western Traditions & Cont. Culture
Sel. Topics in Humanities (various)
Independent Research Symposium
Ind. Research Symposium: Thesis
Sel. Topics in Arts & Soc. (various)
Stydys in Thought & Culture
World Religions
Ethics
Sel. Topics in Cultural Stud. (various)
Seminar in Appalachian Culture
App. Studies: Themes & Voices
Time & Place in Appalachia
Coal Mine Life/Work/Culture
Sel. Topics in Hist. Stud. (various)
Historic Preservation
Sel. Topics in Lit. Stud. (various)
R
E
S
DM
L
O
C
S
T
SC
S
S
R
R
R
R
R
R
E
R
R
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
T
T
T
T
T/H
T
T
T
T/H
T
T
T/H
T
T
T
T/H
T/H
T/H
T
T/H
T
T
T/H
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
Year 1
2008-2009
Su
Fa
Sp
6
11
15
7
Year 2
2009-2010
Su
Fa
Sp
Year 3
2010-2011
Su
Fa
Sp
9
Year 4
2011-2012
Su
Fa
7
8
6
Sp
Year 5
2012-2013
Su
Fa
8
17
2
7
Sp
4
5
4
10
5
3
6
8
3
1
1
8
11
1
2
1
3
1
2
5
1
9
1
2
1
1
2
4
5
6
5
3
2
1
3
9
7
2
1
4
3
8
2
4
1
1
7
1
1
9
4
7
3
4
9
1
5
5
10
13
5
10
2
4
2
5
4
4
5
22
5
18
7
6
2
5
Required/Elective: Required = R; Elective = E; Service = S (Please indicate all that apply; e.g. E + S, if the course is both an elective and a service course. Delivery
Method: Traditional = Td, Online = O, Hybrid = H Location: Huntington, South Charleston, Point Pleasant, etc.
41
1
9
9
5
5
1
2
3
Appendix VII
Program Enrollment: Master of Arts in Humanities
Students
Principal Majors Enrolled: MA in Humanities
No Area of Emphasis
Principal Majors Enrolled: MA in Humanities
School Counseling
Year 1
2008-2009
Year 2
2009-2010
Year 3
2010-2011
Year 4
2011-2012
Year 5
2012-2013
20
16
18
8
7
1
Second Majors Enrolled
Third Majors Enrolled
1
Minors: Philosophy
1
Total of Students enrolled in the Program
21
16
18
9
8
Graduates of the Program
2
8
5
3
2
42
Figure 1. Trend Line for Total Enrollment and Program Graduates: Master of Arts in Humanities
25
20
15
Graduates
Total Enrollment
10
5
0
2008-­‐09
2009-­‐10
2010-­‐11
2011-­‐12
43
2012-­‐13
Appendix VIII
Job and Graduate School Placement Rates*
Year
# of graduates
employed in major
field
2008 – 09
# of graduates
employed in
related fields
# of
graduates
employed
outside field
# of graduates
accepted to
Graduate
Programs
1
2009 – 10
4
2010 – 11
1
2011 – 12
1
1
2012 – 13
1
1
Five –Year Total
7
6
# of
graduates
not
accounted
for
1
3
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
4
* Because the Graduate Humanities Program provides students with a learned degree (not, per se, a vocational one), the
M.A. in Humanities is not promoted as a job placement degree. While some of the Program’s graduates secure employment
as a result of acquiring the degree, many others are already fully employed.
44
Appendix IX
Assessment Letters: Humanities - MA
45
46
47