ASSESSMENT REPORT
FOR
Master of Arts in History (MA) (Thesis and Non-Thesis)
Instructional Degree Program
Fall 2003
Assessment Period Covered
February 13, 2004
Date Submitted
Expanded Statement of Institutional Purpose Linkage:
Institutional Mission Reference:
Texas A&M International University, a Member of The Texas A&M
University System, is committed to the preparation of students for leadership
roles in their chosen profession and in increasingly complex, culturally
diverse state, national, and global society … Through instruction, faculty
and student research, and public service, Texas A&M International
University is a strategic point of delivery for well-defined programs
and services that improve the quality of life for citizens of the border
region, the State of Texas, and national and international communities.
College/University Goal(s) Supported:
The College of Arts and Sciences is dedicated to the provision
of programs that prepare students for a variety of professional roles
through enhancement of their abilities to communicate and to understand
and appreciate the world through a broad-based, liberal arts education.
Intended Administrative Objectives:
1. Students completing the History Master’s degree will
understand the theoretical and methodological underpinnings of the
field of History at a level commensurate with graduate knowledge.
2. Students completing the Master’s program will be able to locate,
interpret, and use appropriate available resources for research in History.
3. Students completing the Master’s in History degree will be
prepared for further graduate study.
ASSESSMENT REPORT
FOR
Master of Arts in History (MA) (Thesis and Non-Thesis)
Instructional Degree Program
Fall 2003
Assessment Period Covered
February 13, 2004
Date Submitted
Intended Educational (Student) Outcome:
NOTE: There should be one form for each intended outcome listed. The
intended outcome should be restated in the box immediately below and the intended
outcome number entered in the blank spaces.
1. Students completing the History Master’s degree will understand
the theoretical and methodological underpinnings of the field of History
at a level commensurate with graduate knowledge.
First Means of Assessment for Outcome Identified Above:
1a. Means of Program Assessment & Criteria for Success:
Graduating History Master’s candidates will take a locally-generated
comprehensive examination that measures understanding of the theoretical
and methodological underpinnings of the field of History commensurate
with graduate knowledge. The examination will be team graded by History
faculty, using a rubric ranging from 1 (poor) to 4 (excellent). The
average score on the examination will not fall below 3 on the rubric.
1a. Summary of Assessment Data Collected:
Two Master’s candidates took comprehensive examinations and answered
two History questions each. One student scored 4 on the general
rubric; the other scored 3.
1a. Use of Results to Improve Instructional Program:
Numbers are too small to generate definitive answers, and History
faculty will continue to gather data on comprehensive examinations.
Second Means of Assessment for Outcome Identified Above:
1b. Means of Program Assessment & Criteria for Success:
Subscales on the comprehensive examination will be scored to determine
the outcomes relative to particular areas of History. The average scores
on the subscales will not fall below 3 (good) on any subscale.
1b. Summary of Assessment Data Collected:
Two Master’s candidates took comprehensive examinations and answered
two History questions each. The average score on all four subscales
exceeded 3 on both students’ examinations.
1b. Use of Results to Improve Instructional Program:
Though scores were satisfactory in all areas, results were slightly
lower on issues of historiographical knowledge and writing skills, and
stronger in factual knowledge and analytical skills. History faculty
have begun work on a reading list for entering Master’s candidates that
will address historiography, and will discuss changes to the sorts of
questions asked on exams. History faculty are also working on improving
writing skills and will investigate adding ready-writing elements to
History Master’s classes.
ASSESSMENT REPORT
FOR
Master of Arts in History (MA) (Thesis and Non-Thesis)
Instructional Degree Program
Fall 2003
Assessment Period Covered
February 13, 2004
Date Submitted
Intended Educational (Student) Outcome:
NOTE: There should be one form for each intended outcome listed. Intended
outcome should be restated in the box immediately below and the intended outcome
number entered in the blank spaces.
2. Students completing the Master’s program will be able to locate,
interpret, and use appropriate available resources for research in History.
First Means of Assessment for Outcome Identified Above:
2a. Means of Program Assessment & Criteria for Success:
Students in HIST 5380/Historiography will complete a required library
research project, to be prepared and graded by a committee of History
faculty, that will test their ability to locate, interpret, and use appropriate
available sources for research in History. The project will be team
graded by History faculty, using a rubric ranging from 1 (poor) to 4
(excellent). The average score on the project will not fall below 3
on the rubric.
2a. Summary of Assessment Data Collected:
Four students completed the research paper assignment. Two students
scored 4 on the rubric, and two scored a 3.
2a. Use of Results to Improve Instructional Program:
Numbers are too small to generate definitive answers, and History
faculty will continue to gather data on this assignment.
Second Means of Assessment for Outcome Identified Above:
2b. Means of Program Assessment & Criteria for Success:
Subscales will be developed for the Historiography class project
that will identify areas of strength and weakness in historical research. The
average scores on the subscales will not fall below 3 (good) on any subscale.
2b. Summary of Assessment Data Collected:
Of the four students who completed the assignment, two students’ scores
averaged above 3 on all four subscales; one student averaged below 3
on writing skills subscale and above 3 on three others; one student averaged
below 3 on three subscales and above 3 on factual knowledge.
2b. Use of Results to Improve Instructional Program:
Small numbers and substantial variation between students makes conclusions
difficult, but History faculty will give further attention to developing
writing skills.
ASSESSMENT REPORT
FOR
Master of Arts in History (MA) (Thesis and Non-Thesis)
Instructional Degree Program
Fall 2003
Assessment Period Covered
February 13, 2004
Date Submitted
Intended Educational (Student) Outcome:
NOTE: There should be one form for each intended outcome listed. Intended
outcome should be restated in the box immediately below and the intended
outcome number entered in the blank spaces.
3. Students completing the Master’s in History degree will be
prepared for further graduate study.
First Means of Assessment for Outcome Identified Above:
3a. Means of Program Assessment & Criteria for Success:
Acceptance rates of TAMIU History Master’s graduates into Ph.D. or
other further graduate study will be gathered. The acceptance rates
of these students will be at least 50% of those applying.
3a. Summary of Assessment Data Collected:
Based on student self-reporting, no History graduates applied
for Ph.D. programs in the Fall 2003 semester.
3a. Use of Results to Improve Instructional Program:
History faculty will review self-reporting rates to determine
their efficacy and whether or not another mechanism must be used.
Second Means of Assessment for Outcome Identified Above:
3b. Means of Program Assessment & Criteria for Success:
Rates of successful completion of TAMIU students who enter higher
graduate programs will be gathered. At least 50% of those students who
enter further graduate study programs will successfully complete those
programs.
3b. Summary of Assessment Data Collected:
Based on student self-reporting, no History graduates completed Ph.D.
programs during the Fall 2003 semester.
3b. Use of Results to Improve Instructional Program:
History faculty will review self-reporting rates to determine their
efficacy and whether or not another mechanism must be used.
|