SACSCOC Fifth Year Interim Report
Spacer
Assessment : 2011 - 2012 : Educational Programs :
Political Science MA
Political Science MA
3 Goals 3 Objectives 3 Indicators 3 Criteria 3 Findings 3 Actions
| GOAL: Written Comprehensive Exams |
| Objective |
|
||||
|
Upon completion of the MA in Political Science program, students will be able to: 1. Explain the key features of methodology. 2. Evaluate political theories and discuss the significant research in one of the program's subject areas: American government, public administration, comparative politics, or international relations. |
| Indicator |
|
|||
| We utilize written comprehensive exams as a tool for measuring graduate students' knowledge and skills. Prior to graduation, students complete two written comprehensive exams in areas relevant to their coursework. Exam questions are written by faculty with expertise in the students' areas of study and the questions are based on the comprehensive exam reading lists and the content of the overview courses (see department level goal of revise written comprehensive exam process for more information on the reading lists and overview courses). Students' exams are graded by at least two faculty members (more when possible) who have expertise in the areas of study pursued by students. Exams are assigned one of the following scores: high pass, pass, and no pass. If the two faculty members issue conflicting scores (e.g., pass and no pass), a third faculty member will be asked to score the exams and issue a final ruling. |
| Criterion |
|
|||
| We expect that at least 80% of our students will pass their exams on the first attempt and that 100% of the students who have to take the exam a second time will pass. Efforts noted in our 2008-2009 actions will be implemented; specifically, we require students to attend a comprehensive exam study skills session conducted by the graduate director and graduate faculty members. Utilizing a rubric developed in the spring of 2010, graduate faculty will determine low pass, pass, and high pass. We believe that this will produce at least 2 high passes for this year's cohort. |
| Finding |
|
|||
|
Students who took the comprehensive exams in 2011 – 2012 all passed on their first attempt. Thus we exceeded our goal of 80% of students passing on their first attempt. We fulfilled the goal of at least two exams being scored in the high pass range. However, faculty scoring the exams concluded that students’ ability to provide a comprehensive description of research literature in their subject area needs to be improved. |
Actions for Objective:
| Action |
|
|||
|
Faculty members are currently revising the content of courses with the goal of creating an overview course for each subject area. The overview courses will improve students’ ability to provide a comprehensive description of research literature in their subject area. We expect to have the course revisions completed by spring 2013. |
| GOAL: Oral Comprehensive Exam |
| Objective |
|
||||
| Students must demonstrate competency in the core areas of political science. These areas include political theory, methodology, and one of the following fields: American government, public administration, comparative politics, international relations, or a third related field outside the department. |
| Indicator |
|
|||
| We utilize oral comprehensive exams as a tool for measuring students' knowledge and skills. After completing the written comprehensive exams, students are required to participate in an oral comprehensive exam. The exam is conducted by faculty members who graded the students' written exams (two faculty graders per exam). During the oral exams students are given the opportunity to elaborate upon sections of their written exams that the faculty members deemed weak. Oral exams are assigned one of the following grades: high pass, pass, and no pass. If the faculty members issue conflicting scores (e.g., pass and no pass), the student will be asked to participate in a second oral exam and during that exam a third faculty member will be asked to score the student's performance and issue a final ruling. |
| Criterion |
|
|||
|
The MA program initiated a requirement that students attend a comprehensive exam study skills session conducted by the MA graduate director and MA graduate faculty members. We expect that of the population that take the exam, 80% will pass on the first attempt and that 100% of those retaking the exam will pass on the second attempt. The graduate faculty will determine low pass, pass, and high pass based on a grading rubric developed by the graduate faulty in the spring of 2010. The department expects two high passes for the cohort taking the exam in 2011-2012. |
| Finding |
|
|||
|
As most of the MA students are full time professionals who do not live near campus, it was difficult to schedule time for oral exams. It was clear that our approach to implement both written and oral exams raised serious logistical issues. |
Actions for Objective:
| Action |
|
|||
|
SHSU policy allows departments to determine whether "comprehensive exams are written, oral, or a combination of the two." In the future we will use only written exams. |
| GOAL: Student Conference Attendance And Professional Writing |
| Objective |
|
||||
|
MA students will be expected to demonstrate their ability to develop a professional conference paper during their second year in the program. |
| Indicator |
|
|||
| MA faculty members and the MA graduate director identify second year graduate students whose professional experience would be enhanced through participation in academic conferences. Students are encouraged to submit their papers for presentation at a professional conference. We believe that the acceptance rate is a good indicator of our students' professional performance as paper proposals are reviewed by members of the scholarly community and are only accepted if the proposals meet the standards set by the scholarly community. |
| Criterion |
|
|||
| At least 50% of our second year students will submit papers for presentation and at least half of the papers will be accepted for presentation. We expect that all of the students accepted to a conference will apply for funding from a variety of sources. |
| Finding |
|
|||
| One of the MA students presented a paper at a professional conference. However, the remaining MA students indicated that participation in professional academic conferences was not an activity that would improve their professional standing. |
Actions for Objective:
| Action |
|
|||
|
In fall 2012 and spring 2013 the graduate director will begin collecting more detailed information about students’ professional goals. Faculty members will design assignments appropriate to the students’ professional goals and require students to complete one of the assignments prior to graduation. For example, if a student wishes to seek employment as a community college instructor, he or she would be required to submit a syllabus and a set of lectures. |
| Closing the Loop |
|
Conference Attendance: In fall 2012 and spring 2013 the graduate director will begin collecting more detailed information about students’ professional goals. Faculty members will design assignments appropriate to the students’ professional goals and require students to complete one of the assignments prior to graduation. For example, if a student wishes to seek employment as a community college instructor, he or she would be required to submit a syllabus and a set of lectures
Written Comprehensive Exams: During the summer of 2012 MA faculty will develop exam questions that require students to demonstrate their knowledge of methods in the context of a subfield based question. The new exams will be implemented in fall of 2012. To address students' knowledge of the literature, syllabi for the overview courses in each subfield will be revised to include the seminal works in the field. Faculty will update the comprehensive reading lists annually. Oral Comprehensive Exams: Oral exams are logistically problematic and thus we decided to rely on written exams. |