Assessment of Student Learning - Minnesota State University Moorhead

Anthropology
Assessment Report
January 2004

A university-approved assessment of student outcomes was used to measure performance in anthropology only. The geoscience major has only been in place for one year, and there are no graduating students, nor any with enough coursework to make an assessment possible.

Assessment efforts in the previous biennium generated a grant proposal to purchase laptop computers and projectors for use in classrooms, particularly in lower level, large enrollment sections. The results of this have been positive, and at the present time three of the seven department members use the new technology more or less daily, and three others have made occasional use of this equipment. Furthermore, in an effort to engage students in more classroom activity, students have been encouraged to make use of the new technology to present ‘power point’ class reports. This equipment was also used during the Student Academic Conference in 2003. Furthermore, two faculty members in anthropology wrote and received a CTL grant from MnSCU to purchase classroom-teaching aids in biological anthropology and archaeology. A year-long ‘classroom in a classroom’ experiment resulted in a report submitted to MSUM and to MnSCU regarding the educational merits of breaking large lectures into smaller sections for a more successful learning experience. This specifically addressed program goals 2-4 (see Table 1, below). No curricular changes (in the form of new courses or program requirements) were initiated in the current biennium. Numerous important changes in anthropology were made in 1999-2000, and the program itself was not judged in need of any modifications.

In 2002 a Geosciences major was created, however, the newness of this program makes any assessment of student outcomes impossible at the present. As students complete the four-year program in the next biennium it may be possible to conduct an assessment of this program. Geosciences has developed an assessment instrument, which is being submitted with this report. Geoscience faculty will begin applying it as students complete the program.

The current assessment of anthropology students was accomplished through the use of a standard form completed for every anthropology student that enrolled in the senior seminar. This form requires the instructor of the course to rate each student under a set of criteria that are designed to measure student progress toward departmental goals, as set out in the departmental mission statement and published in the MSUM Bulletin and Undergraduate Catalog (1999-2001). This process provides numeric results and serves to generate discussion about anthropology student outcomes, since the seminar class is designed for majors and is normally taken only by anthropology students. This course also serves as the upper level writing requirement for the anthropology students.

The assessment forms rate students on a scale of 1-9 (poor to excellent) and completing them results in a characterization of the senior anthropology students by numeric scores. The average score for anthropology students assessed in this way from 2001-2003 is listed in the table below. These scores indicate that anthropology students are leaving MSUM having met many of the academic goals set for them by the anthropology faculty. However, there are modest differences in scores. Notice especially that the lowest score is for speaking ability, and the greatest variation in measured skills is for writing.

Table 1: Assessment of Anthropology Majors

Goal	Mean Score	Range	SD
Commitment to Learning	6.9	5	1.4
Understanding Anthropology	7.1	5	1.5
Works with Concepts in Field	6.8	5	1.5
Thinks Critically	6.6	5	1.7
Can Use Social Research	6.8	5	1.4
Organizes Knowledge	6.9	4	1.6
Uses Resources Effectively	6.2	4	1.4
Speaking Ability	4.3	7	1.6
Writing Ability	6.9	5	2.2
	Avg. of means = 6.5

More significant than the scores presented in table 1 are the discussions among faculty regarding these results. An assessment meeting was held in January, 2004, to discuss the program performance over the past two years. All agreed that more must be done to improve student’s ability to speak about anthropology and social issues generally, and to be able to take research data, organize them, and subject them to appropriate analytical protocols, and very importantly, apply these concepts to a variety of situations. Students are generally very good at learning ideas in definitional terms. Their main problem is working with ideas and applying them to novel contexts. The faculty also agrees that students need serious training in writing technical and professional-style reports. Some students, on being given upper level assignments, are not even aware of the basic standards of citation (author, date, title, publisher). The faculty discussion of speaking and writing abilities highlights one of the major problems in anthropology (and, we believe, other social sciences). Many of our lower level courses are offered to large numbers of students, where writing assignments and working in small groups to encourage discussion are not practical. By the time majors move to upper level courses, they have had few writing assignments or opportunities to work in smaller groups where discussion is a realistic option.

A possible solution to the problems addressed here is to develop a short course, perhaps one credit, which could be offered by the department chair. This course would consist of five weeks of instruction is using the library and internet for anthropological research, citation and paper formats, applying ideas to a variety of contexts, professional portfolios and the like. This could be offered initially as a Topics course for elective credit, and made a permanent part of the curriculum if it was judged to be successful. Another solution to this problem is to reduce the size of lower level anthropology courses as is done in art, music, or philosophy, or to offer lab-type classes as in many of the sciences.

In general terms the results of assessment are mostly favorable. Many students enter the field of anthropology after graduation, either as employed, entry-level professionals, or as graduate students. Students who leave the MSUM anthropology program report back on the high quality of their educational experience at MSUM.