Anthropology Committee Assessment Report

1996-1997

I. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Goals and objectives for the Anthropology Program were reevaluated in the fall of 1996 and rewritten. The following goals and objectives were adopted by the Anthropology Committee.

The goals and objectives for the Department of Sociology and Anthropology were developed by its faculty committees and reflect the three distinct elements of the department's mission. These elements are manifested in the Department's three individual programs: Anthropology, liberal arts Sociology, and preprofessional Criminology. Each program has a different set of goals and objectives with each emphasizing appropriate configurations of learning experiences for their own students. This report reflects the diverse interests of the various programs.

A. The goal of the Anthropology Program:

(1) students will be expected to learn a variety of ways that human beings organize and conceptualize their lives, preparing them for life experiences in an increasingly diverse and multicultural environment.

B. The objectives of the Anthropology Program:

(1) students will be expected to learn both qualitative and quantitative methods of analyzing anthropological material;

(2) students will be expected to learn a breadth of anthropological knowledge by taking courses in all three subfields: sociocultural anthropology, biological anthropology, and archaeology;

(3) students will be expected to acquire in-depth, substantive knowledge and critical thinking skills through upperlevel courses which include seminars and laboratory courses;

(4) students will be expected to acquire practical skills necessary for careers in anthropology;

(5) students will be expected to improve their communication skills through written work and oral presentations;

(6) students will be expected to meet their own diverse objectives through conscientious advising and thoughtful tier and College of Arts and Sciences required course selections.

This year the Anthropology program did not have alumni questionnaires because they are given only once every five years. The main assessment mechanism for the current review is the exit questionnaire, with the addition of one alumnus telephone interview conducted by Arts and Sciences.

A. Changes in the Administration of the Student Exit Questionnaire

This year was the third year that the Anthropology Committee has been conducting yearly student exit questionnaires. This year the Anthropology Committee decided to change some aspects of the way it administers the yearly student exit questionnaire in an effort to obtain a higher rate of compliance. The Committee changed the timing of the questionnaire, provided a larger gift voucher, and announced the questionnaire in classrooms. In place of the previous system of sending out exit questionnaires near the end of Spring Quarter, the Anthropology Committee decided to send them out in early April in order to give students more time to return questionnaires before the end of the school year and more time to be able to send reminders. In addition to the follow-up reminder, sent to the student by the administrative assistant, in spring classrooms all anthropology faculty explained the purpose of the questionnaire to students and asked for their participation. The value of gift vouchers was increased this year from $10 to $15.

The rate of return for the student exist questionnaire was far better this year than in 1996, when only two people responded, and in 1994-95 when we received six responses. The increase in responses received this year seems at least in part due to changes made this spring in the way the questionnaire was administered and indicate that the same procedure should be followed next year.

B. Results from Student Exit Questionnaire in 1996-97

One hundred per cent of the respondents (eight out of eight) gave an overall positive evaluation of the anthropology faculty and teaching and indicated that they were pleased with the education they received. When evaluating faculty, six of these students gave superlative statements such as "the best faculty on campus."

Seven out of eight students made comments about the need for an expansion of the anthropology program by hiring more faculty, offering more courses and teaching courses on the books more regularly. Three out of eight students commented negatively about class size, stating that there were too many students in their upper division classes.

When asked to suggest improvements in the program's ability to prepare students for the future, three students discussed the importance of lab and field school courses in their curriculum and advocated adding more such courses to give students "hands on" experience that can be useful for employment opportunities.

One response from a telephone solicitation of an Anthropology alumnus was received from the College of Arts and Sciences. This former student stated that he/she was extremely pleased with the Anthropology program but that it needed to have more subdisciplines represented in it and it needed more faculty. The respondent also thought that area studies should be developed even more in the Anthropology Program.

The concerns of this respondent are similar to the results of the exit questionnaire and clearly indicate that Anthropology majors view positively all aspects of their Anthropology education but wish that the program could go a few steps farther to provide them with some more course choices and more faculty.

Results from the 1994-95 student exit questionnaire, when there was sufficient response, and those from 1996-97 show that Anthropology graduates are very satisfied with their education as anthropology majors and rate the Anthropology Program and its faculty very high.

From 1994-95 to 1996-97 there is a clear and consistent concern among students that the

Anthropology Program should have more faculty and offer more course diversity for its majors.

Results from the exit questionnaire also illustrate significant student interest in lab and field

courses that provide them with practical experience and technical skills.

In response to the specific demands for more courses and more course diversity, the

Anthropology Program added five new courses to the curriculum over the past two years.

Because two of these are lab courses they are considered to be in the "applied" category, which

also meets student interest in having more of these courses available in anthropology.

In an effort to diversify course offerings, provide greater options within the subdiscipline of cultural anthropology, and have more faculty to free up faculty to teach upper division courses, the Anthropology Committee requested a line in Cultural Anthropology this fall and it was granted. A new cultural anthropologist was hired this year, Steve Rubenstein, who will relieve some of the current pressures faculty face and address some of the student concerns.

The Anthropology Committee is putting forward a proposal to hire a second biological anthropologist in 1997-98. The hire of a second biological anthropologist would help to meet a variety of objectives that the Anthropology Committee and students have identified over the past years: more lab courses, diversification of course offerings, greater options within the subdiscipline of biological anthropology, and more faculty time free to teach upper division courses.

The anthropology faculty continue to gather information on employment opportunities to assist students in planning their courses and making career choices. Overall, anthropology faculty work hard to plan a pedagogically sound and rich curriculum that prepares students for future career goals and personal fulfillment using anthropological perspectives.