APPENDIX C
Faculty Reflections on 2008-2009 Assessment
May 8, 2009
[The first part of the discussion among faculty occurs after they were asked to assess they own syllabus for whether or not they incorporated Departmental SLOs and if was apparent, explicitly or implicitly, how student mastery of the SLOs would be assessed.]
We just wanted to have a quick conversation about what you were thinking as you were doing this and some of the challenges we might have with the SLOS you are looking at for your particular courses. How you might put those into your syllabus. Just sort of a general conversation about the process of linking the SLOS to the syllabi and then I will give you the findings.
As you all know this is my first year teaching in our department. I’ve had the wonderful fortune to have our chair mention to me that the need to include SLOS in my course syllabus. That was very helpful for me to think about how to fit in as someone who is trained in an interdisciplinary area of ethnic studies. How do I come into a Sociology department and sort of fit in the teaching and the experience and the training I have into our courses. I really went though and looked at the courses I was assigned and sort of how it’s been spelled out already. Before I even get here I think that I am going to fit in some way. And what Kristin is referring to is my Yes No Yes No because really I’m still getting to know this process as we are I’m sure. I’d ask her question during this process. This is 313 the course I am evaluating the course that I taught in the fall and according to our course core course work section of our catalog basically went down and I just picked which according to the catalog which SLOS to me starting in the fall seemed to apply with what I was doing. I just kind of inserted them I just kind of put them in there. However I only picked two because coming from where I sit number one and number six were SLOS I could wrap my head around. Those seem to me to sort of jive with what I understood as far as what I was to bring and sort of what the expectations of the department are. However two and seven which are also listed as learning objectives that are supposed to be address in 311 313 315 courses I really had trouble wanting to include those in my syllabus. For example number seven applies sociological theory and empirical research to advocate for positive social change. And again this positive and social change advocacy part I don’t get the applied sociological theory part because that’s only part of all that I feel that I am doing because it’s only one disciplinary source of knowledge production that I am addressing in my courses. I didn’t know how strictly I’d be asked to adhere to these so I just didn’t include it. If I am going with strict interpretation then it seems to me that I am not doing that so I am just not going to apply that include that in my syllabus. Then number 2 assess the merit of competing theoretical approaches to formulate empirically researchable questions about social life. It was so vague for me but I assumed this being a sociology department that that would be the merits of competing theoretical approaches would assume sociological. Again so I thought alright I can’t in all good conscious just put that in there that I am doing it. So that’s sort of how I went through and just try to plug in. So it raises the question on interdisciplinary on where that comes in because I am sure that lots of us draw from different bodies of knowledge to teach our courses. There is something that’s linking up well.
26:03 Well that does not fit well with the whole critical race studies concentration because the whole concentration is interdisciplinary because of where race theory is. And we do draw from an interdisciplinary base for that. Interpreting that I would look at it more as apply critical race theories and empirical research to advocate for positive social change. And to assess merits of competing theoretical approaches. And again just theories about race and ethnicity competing theories but race and ethnicities. So if we talked about major paradigms like assimilation theory that transcends just sociology although it really emerges from sociology it gets picked up and moved in a number of different disciplines.
That would be how I read it but I wasn’t sure in terms of the top down how that would reflect on my very first files. That’s how I read it but that would just being me. I wasn’t sure if these were clear enough for me to make that kind of. Well really that’s what I thought but can I do that? Can I just say that’s what I am doing? I didn’t know at the time.
That’s why this discussion is so valuable.
I guess part of Theresa’s comments and in different classes I have interdisciplinary approach also. What I think this speaks to is are we all on board with this is what Garry brought up what are our SLOS and do we want these as it. I know we had to apply them because we are doing this and I think this is super useful and interesting to analyze. But I think the bigger question is we should come up with the ones that we really like and fit all of our classes and are flexible enough to work with critical race with the criminal justice studies with sociology because they are all so inner meshed that we want
Same issues with gender as well. This interdisciplinary field.
It just seems the challenges is in intergrading it is deciding do we even understand and like these to begin with. But I’ll tell you one thing to stick to point is I found that some of the evidence more or less of the three things I was suppose t o do in my 101. There are different parts. The thing about ethics and social justices is under my major subjects of the course but not under my course goals. That sort of pointed to me that I’ve got to either rearticulate or reorganize or something. I’m not losing anything my integrity and my syllabus but just to fit this goal.
Along the same lines for criminology for number six you keep talking about social justice and you know I kept thinking here I have an advanced degree and I am not sure I could give you a concise definition of what social justice is. It’s not here and if I’m having trouble with that I am sure the students are. They are reading it and probably not sure what it is. So even I was kind of am I doing social justice? I think I am I hope I am part of it for me is we can’t come up with one definition just even a little more clarification would help me sort of realize yes I am delivering it or maybe I should deliver it more.
I am just duck tailing off Marisol’s point. I know when we had only did this with the team I had included only the front part of my syllabus because teaching on WebCt the other part showed that what I was doing in the course was really embedded in the calendar. And then it seemed to me that what I was doing with SLOS was much more embedded in the assignments I get. I don’t have a tendency to front load stuff into my syllabus. It’s loaded in parceled into the assignments and so that it really couldn’t be seen. But I don’t know it’s a conversation I think is it important to front load this stuff? Or is it important for us to have a sense of what we are doing and have a conversation about it or all of that. I think it would be helpful to think about that.
I was going to add to what Garry said too about reframing what we say in Social Theory because I have been doing mine for my 495 class but I am looking at my SLOS for the soc department when I have crim major that have to take the internship. I honestly don’t change what I do based on what it says for the guidelines for the crim majors. So I think finding some language that encompasses a broader scope that way would be important since that is our goal to keep that embedded in all the same race. I honestly didn’t think of the ones or get to the ones and would I change what I was doing based on that.
Other comments?
I am sort of interested in how we raise students sort of into the process of understanding what a course objective is and how they themselves can measure their own progress. Periodically include in my assignments I try to actually look at the assignments and this meets this objective this objective or that objective and then I have had students actually go back and look at the course objectives and say which one are you interested in? What does this mean to you? And then at the end of the semester have them go back and say what course objective did you learn or whatever but not on any kind of consistent basis. But after today I will probably think more about it.
It seems like there is another opportunity we have which is besides looking at our syllabi for what of these SLOS is in there is to look and see what we have in there there’s maybe not reflected here. We can revisit these and see if there are some things we want to add. I saw really cool things in people’s syllabi that weren’t on that list of seven. I think that it’s an opportunity to share what we were doing is working really well.
Teaching I am sure applied to the real world. I didn’t feel like I saw that on there that’s basically all we do in that class I get in the real world and take everything you’ve learned. That was one of the things that I fell in love with this program was that everybody encouraged me to do this in the real world. I think that is important to have as one of our service learning objectives.
I like what Marisol was saying earlier in our group about getting them to connect private troubles to social issues. I think that is a huge part of what we do because they are so locked into their experience. How do we get them to reach out from there. There’s some things that are not incorporated in here I don’t think we should look at these SLOS as static.
I think that number six I have had a little bit of problems not meaning I have problems it exists I have some problems with how it’s framed because to me number is I’m reading it’s about questioning sociology. This is understanding ethical and social justice applications of sociological inquiry. I’m reading that as being questioning sociology itself. That is what I intended by that question right?
In part
Is there something else I’m missing?
We don’t know the intent. None of us here wrote me so we can only interpret.
Who wrote them?
Bob Roberts
I also see number six as being very related to what Mary was saying. Because I see ethical use of knowledge as applied in the real world.
Right.
I thought number six was once we had the sociology knowledge understanding the ethical and social justice implications of that.
It’s a valid interpretation but it’s an entirely different interpretation. This is more about the issue of knowledge being reflexive. Are we reflexive in our creation of knowledge?
What are the implications of taking particular perspectives and lines of actions that emanate to those.
This strikes me as an old book I read long ago sort of the misuses of social science. Some of you may have read that. I think that number six is trying to get at that. Because the knowledge that we produce can’t actually be used for good or for real and I guess the one that sticks in my mind most is the anthological study in the Philippines and they began to find out that the group they were quote on quote studying had certain beliefs. Well guess who got a hold of it was the CIA and at that point then there becomes a problem and of course laud humphreys you know what we normally teach in a course. O I think that’s maybe I want to say intent but maybe the spirit behind number six was developed. I think we sort of knew that.
I have interpreted with service learning too there is a whole literature a body of literature on the ethical implications of doing service learning of going into a service setting and the attitudes they take with them into that.
So is this a question of rephrasing an explicitness? I.e. if we had varying definitions an undoubted consensus is easily made. Is this about being more specific about that so the duel meaning is a possibly? Maybe what we are really talking about is how do you become a sociological practitioner in a moral spirit? And our commitment to social justice.
As we talk about it number six to me is about assessing the value of the literature that you are using which is actually embedded in number there. Locate analyze and assess whether or not how the literature applies to the issues. The biases is in the literature and that seems to be some of what is in number six. Maybe six is more global.
I don’t think of six as only embedded into the literature.
One of the things I think that this issue touches on is something we talked about in the team and I can’t remember who first identified this. Especially when you look at it might instructive as you are now going to go home and peruse the catalog to look at some of the learning outcomes for some of the other departments and some of our seem like statements of values. So they are open to these sorts of interpretation what does it really mean and some of them in other department s are much more specific and concrete and so I think there’s room for both statements of values but then out of that what actually do you want a student to know or be able to do would be the student learning outcome. That might be useful distinction to keep in mind.
Garry brought up about are we following something the emanates from the top. I think that this is a useful exercise. Because I know for me in giving students various assignments and things they have to do is always so important for them to see that as meaningful somehow and so it became clear to me earlier on that we needed some transparency in why am I doing this particular activity whatever it is. I think this is just a way to think about that. This is what they call them they up there but I really think we could be much more organic then these were developed in terms of having a conversation about what is it we are doing and want to be doing and have a more collected spirit.