June 1998

Name: R. Damian Nance, Chair

Address: 316 Clippinger Laboratories

Phone: 740-593-1107

E-mail: nance@oak.cats.ohiou.edu

The Department of Geological Sciences offers a Bachelor of Science degree, which may be earned in one of three options: Geology, Environmental Geology and Water Resources, and a Master of Science degree, which may be earned in one of five options: Geology, Hydrogeology, Environmental Geology, Environmental Geo-chemistry and Geophysics. The broad objectives of the undergraduate major are for the students to: (1) learn and understand the facts and concepts central to the science of geology and the physical and mathematical sciences pertinent to the discipline, (2) acquire a working knowledge of the skills and methods necessary to collect, analyze and report data relevant to the discipline, and (3) develop the ability to conceptualize, abstract and solve problems in the discipline. To these goals are added at the graduate level, broad objectives for the students to: (1) develop the ability to work independently on a research project appropriate to a potential career option, (2) acquire the skills necessary to identify and solve scientific and societal problems through the application of fundamental geologic principles, and (3) effectively communicate their summaries and findings to an educated audience.

By offering instruction leading to baccalaureate (B.S.) and masters (M.S.) degrees in Geology, and by additionally providing courses for non-majors seeking to complete the requirements of a liberal arts degree, the Department of Geological Sciences has traditionally served three groups of students: (1) undergraduate students seeking an academic major by way of a baccalaureate program that prepares them for admission to graduate school, (2) graduate students seeking a masters degree that provides the necessary skills for a professional career in the Earth Sciences and/or admission to a doctoral program, and (3) undergraduates who select from among the departments various Tier II natural and applied science offerings at the introductory level to fulfill university and/or college requirements in their respective fields of concentration. This document addresses the assessment of the baccalaureate and masters degree programs in the department.

In recognizing that undergraduate students: (1) merit a quality education that is nationally competitive, (2) that employment in the discipline usually requires further study at the graduate level, and (3) that employment opportunities are strongly project-driven and require numeracy, computer literacy and skills in oral and written communication in addition to a current and relevant knowledge of their discipline, the Department of Geological Sciences has developed the following goals for its baccalaureate program:

Assessment of the goals and objectives of the undergraduate baccalaureate program takes the form of performance evaluation, and survey data collection and analysis during a student's course of study. (1) The academic background of entering students is evaluated on the basis of ranked ACT/SAT scores plus available grades from first year course work. While these data do not necessarily predict future academic achievement, they do serve to inform the faculty about the backgrounds and existing academic skills of entering students, and thus help provide a basis for ensuring the development of a well-focused curriculum. (2) Majors are routinely asked to provide written course evaluations designed to address specific program goals embodied in each course. The results of student examinations and, more especially, the results of classroom and laboratory exercises designed to determine the extent of student learning, are also used to evaluate program effectiveness. (3) During their junior and senior years, students are asked to undertake each of the following in order to assess further the quality of the undergraduate curriculum: (a) participate in one or more capstone experiences in the form of coursework, debate and written deliberation designed to bring together various branches of the discipline and allow students to evaluate recent developments in the field, (b) if appropriate, engage in elective senior thesis research, and (c) submit an externally evaluated final report of a field investigation that describes and interprets an original piece of geologic mapping. Distribution of assessment measures across a broad spectrum of learning activities ensures that all faculty are involved in the assessment process.

Program analysis and the implementation of improvements are a vital part of the assessment process. To this end, the Assessment Committee of the Department of Geological Sciences meets annually to review and discuss all assessment data, and to identify actions for program improvement. Such actions and the method of their implementation are then discussed and resolved at one or more meetings of the entire faculty. In addition, the department routinely collects numerical student course evaluations and written student responses to course questionnaires designed to assess student perceptions of course strengths and weaknesses. Compilations of these data are kept in the department office and are routinely reviewed and, where appropriate, acted upon by the faculty instructors of record. The department also maintains close contacts with academia, industry and its alumni to ensure that the structure and content of its undergraduate program are current and appropriate for a rapidly evolving discipline and the technological developments of a fast-changing marketplace. Assessment information gathered from all sources forms the basis of a continuous process of programmatic and curricular review by all members of the faculty. Curricular reforms prompted by the assessment process are also reviewed on a regular basis with respect to their impact on program goals.

All assessment activities are coordinated by an Assessment Committee nominated by the Department Chair at the beginning of each academic year. This committee performs an evaluation of the assessment criteria, and then brings their results and recommendations to the entire faculty for discussion and review. Those faculty responsible for capstone courses, senior thesis research and field school are also asked to provide an evaluation of the capstone experience. Collection of the data needed for the assessment criteria is the responsibility of the Undergraduate Coordinator. Completion of an annual departmental assessment report that documents: (1) the results of the assessment for the current academic year, (2) the improvements implemented as a result of recommendations from the previous years assessment, and (3) the recommendations for the forthcoming year, is the responsibility of the Department Chair.

Most of the outcomes that the department has identified as being important are addressed within the existing curriculum or are in the process of being addressed through curricular revision. While the department recognizes its limitations in managing concerns regarding ethics and, to a lesser degree, interpersonal skills, it continues to make persistent efforts to address concerns in connection with issues of critical thinking, problem solving, written and oral communication, computer literacy and quantitative skills.

Many of our existing courses foster critical thinking as an approach to science, others deal with global issues within a global context, and still others promote computer literacy and quantitative skills. Ongoing curricular revision designed to address departmental outcomes for our students has, over the past two years, included: (1) for oral and written communication, the introduction of an undergraduate thesis, the addition of critiqued term papers and oral presentations in all capstone courses, and the expanded use of term papers and oral presentations in all upper level, non-laboratory courses; (2) for computer literacy and quantitative skills, an upgrade of the departments computer labs, enhancement of the undergraduate math and chemistry requirements, revision of the quantitative subsurface methods course, and the introduction of courses on the application of geo-statistics and the use of modeling and computational methods in geology; (3) for global issues, the introduction of student exchange programs with Mexico and Canada, an international field geology program, a required core course on the evolution of Earth Systems, a Tier III course on global resources, and the preparation of a Tier III course on natural hazards, and (4) for all areas, the continuation of a systematic syllabus review.

Ongoing curricular revisions stem from a systematic course syllabus review initiated in response to the recommendations of the departments Assessment Report for AY 1995-96 and continued in response to those for AY 1996-97. Designed to enhance the integrity of the undergraduate program, these revisions include: (1) internationalization of the undergraduate program through the development of a FIPSE-funded geology field school and student exchange program in collaboration with five universities in Canada and Mexico, (2) revision of the undergraduate option in Environmental Geology, (3) renumbering of courses to better reflect sequence and subdisciplines, (4) introduction of fourteen new courses over the past three years (Geology of National Parks, Historical Geology, Statistical Methods in Geology, Earth Materials and Resources, Petroleum Geology, Water Geochemistry, Physical Geochemistry, Advanced Environmental Geology, Sequence Stratigraphy, Limnogeology, Field Hydrology, Modeling and Computational Methods in Geology, Senior Thesis, and Geology Colloquium), (5) revision of four courses over the past two years (Subsurface Geology, Hydrogeology I, Hydrogeology II, and Theory of Groundwater Motion), (6) preparation of new Tier III course (Society and Natural Disasters), (7) modification of undergraduate course prerequisites to better control the course sequence selected by our majors, and (8) preparation of a core curriculum in Petroleum Geology.

To further address the need for computer literacy and to facilitate the teaching of new courses and the increased use of computers in laboratory exercises, the department has added zip drives and a screen projection system to the computer teaching laboratory established in AY 1995-96 and now equipped with 10 IBM Pentium PCs. It has also added zip drives and two new computers to the student computer laboratory, now equipped with 6 IBM PCs and 3 MACs.

To ensure: (1) that the department continues to meet its goals in regard to student outcomes and institutional effectiveness, (2) that assessment instruments are monitored and recorded, and (3) that the process of assessment is established as a continuous activity that fosters continuous improvement, a departmental Assessment Committee was established for AY 1996-97. Nominated by the Department Chair at the start of each academic year, this committee meets annually to review and evaluate all assessment data and make appropriate recommendations for program improvement. Where possible, graduates are now contacted within a year of their graduation and asked to furnish their present address, the name of their current employer and/or the name of the graduate school they are attending and their level of financial support. This has been done in response to the recommendation of the Assessment Report for AY 1997-98 in order to obtain more complete information on each graduating class. In this way, the degree to which baccalaureate students who graduate with appropriate grades are able to compete successfully for positions at graduate schools nationwide, or are prepared for entry-level positions in the field can be better evaluated.

The graduate program in the Department of Geological Sciences leads to the M.S. degree in Geology. It is expected that students will have met the goals of the undergraduate program at the time of their admission or will remedy any deficiencies in their first year of study. The goal of the graduate program is to maintain a balance between generating new knowledge in the discipline and addressing some of the more pressing problems to which the discipline can be applied. Student involvement in basic and applied research in geology and the provision of a quality education in these two broad areas are critical to the vitality of our graduate options.

In recognizing that graduate students (1) merit a quality program that is nationally competitive, (2) that the ability to compete successfully either for employment in the discipline or for positions in doctoral programs is an expectation upon its completion, (3) that both opportunities are strengthened by a broad background in the discipline and a demonstrated ability to conduct research, and (4) that employment opportunities are strongly project-driven and require numeracy, computer literacy and skills in oral and written communication in addition to a current and relevant knowledge of their discipline, the Department of Geological Sciences has developed the following goals for its graduate masters program:

Assessment of the goals and objectives of the graduate program is based on the performance, success and evaluation of the graduate student body. Formal assessment of graduate students occurs at several points in their careers and consists of both their performance levels and the analysis of survey data collected during and after a students course of study. (1) The academic background of entering graduates is evaluated on the basis of their GRE or overall GPA scores and/or GPA scores within their major, and their letters of recommendation. These data serve to inform the faculty about the potential of incoming graduates and, by identifying deficiencies in their backgrounds, provide a basis for ensuring the maintenance of a well-focused curriculum. (2) Entrance interviews conducted with the Graduate Chair also assess deficiencies in undergraduate preparation and resolve the appropriate remedies, ensuring the development of individual curricula appropriate to each incoming student. (3) Graduates are routinely asked to provide written course evaluations designed to address specific program goals embodied in each course. The results of graduate student examinations and, more especially, the results of classroom and laboratory exercises designed to determine the extent of student learning and/or their mastery of applied training are also used to evaluate program effectiveness. (4) To further assess program quality, all graduates are required to write and publicly defend a thesis proposal and written thesis, and are encouraged to apply for research funding and present their research at professional society meetings. (5) Evaluation of alumni responses to the programs success in light of their subsequent professional experience ensures that the program continues to provide a current and relevant knowledge of the discipline. Distribution of assessment measures across a broad spectrum of learning activities ensures that all faculty are involved in the assessment process.

In addition, regular assessment of individual graduate students is carried out by the students thesis advisor and by other members of the students advisory committee. These include: (1) regular meetings of the student with his advisor to assess course selection and progress on the thesis project, (2) review of a thesis proposal by the advisory committee and evaluation of its oral defense, and (3) review of a written thesis by the advisory committee and evaluation of its oral defense.

Program analysis and the implementation of improvements are a vital part of assessment. The Assessment Committee of the Department of Geological Sciences meets annually to review and discuss all assessment data, and to identify actions for program improvement. Such actions and the method of their implementation are then discussed and resolved at one or more meetings of the entire faculty. In addition, the department routinely collects numerical student course evaluations and written student responses to course questionnaires designed to assess student perceptions of course strengths and weaknesses. Compilations of these data are kept in the department office and are routinely reviewed and, where appropriate, acted upon by the faculty instructors of record. The department also maintains close contacts with academia, industry and its alumni to ensure that the structure and content of its graduate program are current and appropriate for a rapidly evolving discipline and increasingly technological marketplace. Assessment information gathered from all sources forms the basis of a continuous process of program review by all members of the faculty. Program reforms prompted by the assessment process are also reviewed on a regular basis with respect to their impact on program goals.

All assessment activities are coordinated by an Assessment Committee nominated by the Department Chair at the beginning of each academic year. This committee performs an evaluation of the assessment criteria, and then brings their results and recommendations to the entire faculty for discussion and review. Collection of the data needed for assessment criteria is the responsibility of the Graduate Chair. Completion of an annual departmental assessment report that documents: (1) the results of the assessment for the current academic year, (2) the improvements implemented as a result of recommendations from the previous years assessment, and (3) the recommendations for the forthcoming year, is the responsibility of the Department Chair.

At the graduate level, the departments undergraduate concerns with issues of communication, critical thinking, problem solving, and quantitative/computational skills are more than adequately addressed by required course work, by the requirements of a written thesis proposal and an oral proposal defense and a written thesis and an oral thesis defense, and by the nature of the thesis itself. Efforts to insure that the program is current and relevant have been made through curricular revisions stemming from a systematic course syllabus review initiated in response to the recommendations of the departments Assessment Report for AY 1995-96 and continued in response to those of AY 1996-97. Over the past two years, these revisions have includes: (1) the creation of a new graduate option in Environmental Geochemistry, (2) the revision of the graduate option in Environmental Geology, (3) extensive revision of the course requirements for all graduate options, (4) the introduction of new courses in Sequence Stratigraphy, Limnogeology, Petroleum Geology, Modeling and Computational Methods, Geostatistics, Field Hydrogeology, Water Geochemistry, Physical Geochemistry, and Advanced Environmental Geology, (5) the revision of courses in Subsurface Geology, Hydrogeology, Groundwater Motion, and Basin Tectonics and Hydrocarbon Exploration, (6) the introduction of a required course in the use of modeling and computer methods in geology to the graduate curriculum, and (7) in response to the recommendations of the departments Assessment Report for AY 1996-97, the preparation of a core curriculum for a graduate option in Petroleum Geology.

To maintain the competitiveness of our graduates, the department has also moved forward with the hiring of quality faculty in areas of greatest need. Three new faculty members have been hired in the past three years. Dr. Mary Stoertz (University of Wisconsin-Madison) and Dr. Dina López (Louisiana State University) bring to the department expertise in the fields of hydrogeology and environmental geochemistry, respectively, that are vital for the competitiveness of students in todays marketplace. Dr. Greg Nadon (University of Toronto) was hired in response to the recommendations of the departments Assessment Report for AY 1996-97 and brings expertise in subsurface methods, sequence stratigraphy and petroleum geology that are essential to students wishing to take advantage of growing employment opportunities in the oil industry.

To bring the expertise of these three faculty to the classroom, the department has established three new laboratories for geochemical and environmental analysis, and the preparation of earth materials. The department also created a new computer teaching laboratory in AY 1995-96 equipped with 10 IBM Pentium PCS, which it this year upgraded by adding zip drives and a computer screen projector system to further address the need for computer literacy and the increased use of computational methods in the workplace. This need is also being addressed with the addition of two computers to the student computer laboratory and the acquisition of two high-speed processors for computational modeling.

The introduction of two new modes of evaluating graduate student research have significantly improved the timeliness with which students fulfill the requirements for graduation; a concern expressed in the Assessment Report for AY 1996-97. While the fact that many of our graduate students gain employment before completing their degrees is a credit to the quality of the program, it has been a cause for concern in that those with unfinished degrees may not be as competitive in the future, particularly if the employment market tightens and new graduates enter the work force with completed degrees. The department has successfully addressed this issue by (1) setting aside a pool of funds to encourage students to generate short research proposals during their first year that are competitively ranked by a faculty committee and awarded a modest level of funding on the basis of their ranking, and (2) introducing a new requirement whereby all students must orally defend their thesis proposal. The thesis proposal and the newly required oral defense are evaluated by members of the students advisory committee. The goal of both the research proposal and the thesis proposal defense is to encourage graduate students to start their thesis research as early as possible so that more students will complete their theses before accepting employment. These innovations appear to be having the desired effect with a significant increase in the number of graduating students successfully defending their theses prior to taking employment in both AY 1996-97 and 1997-98.

To increase the visibility of the department and, in so doing, attract additional graduate students to the program, a department-funded speakers program was implimented in AY 1997-98. A list of topics about which members of the faculty were prepared to give presentations at no cost was mailed to all colleges within a days return drive. Presentations were specifically targeted at undergraduate geology majors and included a sales pitch for graduate studies at Ohio Univeristy. A significant rise in graduate applications has occurred in consequence. Greater departmental visibility, made possible through increased travel support for student presentations at professional meetings, also resulted in a record number of student papers in AY 1997-98.

To ensure: (1) that the department continues to meet its goals in regard to student outcomes and institutional effectiveness, (2) that assessment instruments are monitored and recorded, and (3) that the process of assessment is established as a continuous activity that fosters continuous improvement, a departmental Assessment Committee was established for AY 1996-97. Nominated by the Department Chair at the start of each academic year, this committee meets annually to review and evaluate all assessment data and make appropriate recommendations for program improvement. Where possible, graduates are now contacted within a year of their graduation and asked to furnish their present address, the name of their current employer and/or the name of the graduate school they are attending and their level of financial support. This has been done in response to the recommendation of the Assessment Report for AY 1997-98 in order to obtain more complete information on each graduating class. In this way, the degree to which masters students with appropriate grades are able to compete successfully for positions in doctoral programs, or are prepared to compete successfully in the marketplace, can be better evaluated.

The need for feedback from alumni and their employers as part of a comprehensive assessment process, requires that close contacts be maintained with past students. To this end a request for business cards from all alumni was made in the departmental newsletter for AY 1996-97, and a similar requests from alumni who have recently changed jobs was added to the newsletter for AY 1997-98. But the recommendation that an alumni questionnaire drafted by the department be added to the Career and Further Education Study of the Office of Institutional Research has not been followed since the response rate to these surveys is too low to be statistically meaningful. The practicality of establishing an alumni review board for the purpose of programmatic review and assessment also met with little success in AY 1997-98. However, alumni response to an expanded alumni news section in the departmental newspaper has been excellent and is allowing the department to (1) track alumni employment success and career paths, (2) maintain current alumni contact addresses, and (3) use the alumni as resources to graduate students seeking employment. This is likely to become increasingly important if the job market tightens and, by monitoring employment success, we are able to identify those areas where job prospects are diminishing as well as those where new employment opportunities are emerging.

After a decade of downsizing, new employment opportunities are now emerging in the field of petroleum geology and have resulted in the placement of several graduates in the industry for the first time in many years. All indications are for growth in employment opportunities in this huge and high-paying field. However, because the programmatic requirements of the oil industry differ from those of environmental geology and hydrogeology (the fields in which most of our recent graduates have found employment), curricula review designed to ensure that the graduate program also meets the current needs of the oil industry has been undertaken in response to the recommendation of the Assessment Report for AY 1996-97. Indeed, the appointment of a new faculty member for AY 1998-99 with expertise in applied subsurface methods, seismic stratigraphy and petroleum geology was made with this recommendation in mind.

1. TA Training Course: In order to maintain and improve the high standards expected of our graduate teaching assistants in the classroom, it is recommended that the present system of instruction be replaced with a formal course. Designed to be specific to the delivery of material in the departments intoductory laboratories, such a course would form part of the professional training of the graduate program and would enhance the professional development of the graduate student body.

1. Continuing Opportunities in the Oil Industry: Feedback from alumni and other industry contacts during AY 1997-98 indicate that the renewed growth in employment opportunities in the oil industry is likely to continue. This is an most important development because the vast size and high starting salaries of the oil industry significantly impact graduate student recruitment. Continued curricula review in the light of alumni expertise is therefore recommended for AY 1998-99 so that we can take advantage of these opportunities by ensuring that the graduate program meets the current needs of this industry.

Back to Assessments