Two courses covered in this general education assessment report are Critical Thinking:
Politics and Law (POL 1000); and American National Government (POL 1010). The first
has one section, while the second comprises eight sections, seven of which are covered
in this report. The one section missing is section 01, taught by Professor Phillip
Beverly, who, in spite of timely notices to all instructors reminding them to conduct
the tests, submitted no pre-test or post-test for his course.
The assessment outcomes for Critical Thinking: Politics and Law (POL 1000) are as
- To be able to find information, evaluate it critically in terms of reliability, and
use it appropriately in thinking and writing.
- To understand and be able to apply some of the basic methods, questions, and vocabularies
of the humanities and the social sciences.
- To understand the role of creativity in problem-solving, addressing issues and concerns,
and generating new knowledge.
- To apply analytical skills to the humanities and social sciences.
- To have an exposure to and appreciation of philosophical, religious, ethical, political,
and scientific ideas of diverse cultures.
The assessment outcomes for American National Government (POL 1010) are as follows:
- To apply the basic methods, questions, and vocabularies of the humanities, mathematics,
the natural sciences, and the social sciences.
- To apply analytical skills, including mathematical reasoning, to the natural sciences,
social sciences, and the humanities.
- To demonstrate knowledge of philosophical, religious, ethical, political, and scientific
ideas of diverse cultures.
To evaluate the realization of the above outcomes, the political science teaching
faculty developed for each course an assessment instrument, made up of questions that
tap into the criteria enumerated above, administered at the beginning of the semester
as pre-test and the same material at the of the semester as post-test. The assessment
for the Critical Thinking course (POL 1000) consists of a series of six short, comprehensive-reading-type
passages, each of which is then followed by a range of multiple-choice questions designed
to test student understanding of that read material. Altogether there are 20 such
multiple-choice questions. The assessment for the American National Government course
(POL 1010) consists of plain multiple-choice questions, unlike the critical thinking
course, not preceded by any reading exercises, that test knowledge in American national
government and Illinois politics. Altogether there are 25 questions, 19 of which are
on American national government and 6 of which are questions on Illinois politics.
POL 1000-01, Critical Thinking: Politics and Law
POL 1010, American National Government
The results summarized above generally demonstrate improved student learning. The
term generally is used advisedly because of the figures from the critical thinking
class which registered a zero median gain, meaning that, between the pre-test and
post-test, learning remained the same unchanged. The result departs unfortunately
from information in the three-year cycle trend for this course which, in spring 2012,
posted a 25% post-test increase over the pre-test number. It is also somewhat puzzling
given that, unlike American national government, discussed next below, there is only
one section of this course, only one instructor, one set of textbooks, and last, but
by no means least, the instrument is based on reading passages of the kind to be expected
in a critical thinking course.
With respect to the American national government, all the sections recorded improved
learning, measured in median gains, with section 4 posting the highest gain, 4.5,
and section 8 least at .5. Collectively, taken as a whole, the sections posted a healthy
median gain of 2.5. These are positive developments, compared, for example, to the
picture from last semester, which was mixed in the sense that some sections posted
increases over the pre-test numbers while others showed decreases. Note, however,
that this semester, unlike spring 2012, compliance in the administration of the pre-tests
and post-tests was better. For example, in the last semester, three sections were
incomplete in that they have only pre-tests without complementary post-tests; and
there were scrantons which could not be used because they were done in ink rather
than in HB pencils necessary for machine grading. None of these problems occurred
this semester, thanks to better compliance, and, where, save for Dr. Beverly, every
other faculty member also participated in the assessments.
While the assessment instruments of the two courses under review generally provide
reliable indication of what our students are learning and not learning, to achieve
enhanced student learning, there is need for the political science faculty to go over
the results in this report in an attempt to stimulate discussion around the findings
presented above, including questions consistently missed on post-tests.
See Part IV above, especially the discussion related to interpretation in the two
paragraphs following the tables.
This report and its entire contents will be disseminated through various avenues that
include publication in the website of the philosophy and political science program.
The assessment accomplishments of the last season are manifold and include less problems
with the administration of the instruments (necessary for complete and accurate report),
more progress toward our goal of 100 percent faculty participation in the assessments,
and a report that, however imperfect, provide generally reliable indication of what
our students are learning or not learning. Unfinished business or lingering challenges
include the need to achieve more consistency across all sections of the American national
government, and, for all two courses, the need to increase the level of attainment
in terms of the assessment scores.
Minutes of program meetings related to the assessment are included here. (See below)
Overall, the assessments for the two courses here under review continue to indicate
that there is general improvement from the beginning of the semester, less so though
critical thinking which showed no change in learning, based on comparison of the median
scores in the pre-test and post-test.
The rest of the comment here is devoted to American national government. Political
science faculty members do not "teach to the instrument." However, there is need for
discussion around the particular questions that are consistently missed or show inadequate
improvement. Because students no longer need to take the course to satisfy the requirement
for the Illinois Constitution Exam, some faculty members no longer integrate materials
on the Illinois Constitution in teaching the course. However, to improve performance
on Illinois questions that students miss often (e.g., voting and election, spending
and the budget, and procedures for amending the Illinois constitution), faculty members
may elect to interject an Illinois context into some of their lectures on American
View the Summary of Results and Trend Data for General Education Assessment Findings