Course Level Criteria
List Form of Course Level Criteria
100 Level: introduce all skills except oral presentation and research
200-349 Level: students should be introduced to research and should be developing all other skills, except oral presentation,
which is not required
350-399 Level: students should be introduced to presentation, should be developing research skills, and should be developing to
mastering the remaining argumentative skills
400-449 Level: students should be mastering all argumentative skills and research skills, and developing presentation skills
450+ Level (seminar & thesis): mastery of ALL skills
Note: PHIL 211 Logic and PHIL 361 Philosophical Logic are excepted from these criteria given their nature as courses focused on symbolic reasoning.
Spreadsheet Form of Course Level Criteria
PRESENTATION | RESEARCH | ABSTRACT/ CONSTRUCT | RESEARCH/ CONSTRUCT | ABSTRACT/RESEARCH | ||
Oral Presentation | Research (conducting outside reading--of sources discovered and located on one's own, or not otherwise covered in class--and employing that literature in writing assignments) | Precise/Charitable Explication of Arguments (both those extracted from readings and opposing views) | Developing One's Own Philosophical Questions, Topics, Objections, and/or Lines of Argument in Writing Assignments | Reading Level/Understanding of Text | ||
100 Level | ||||||
Introducing | x | x | x | |||
| Developing | |||||
Mastering | ||||||
200-350 Level | ||||||
Introducing | x | |||||
Developing | x | x | x | |||
Mastering | ||||||
350-399 Level | ||||||
Introducing | x | |||||
Developing | x | x | x | |||
Mastering | x | |||||
400-499 Level | ||||||
Introducing | ||||||
Developing | x | |||||
Mastering | x | x | x | x | ||
450+ Level | ||||||
Introducing | ||||||
Developing | ||||||
Mastering | x | x | x | x | x | |
What Does Introducing/Developing/Mastering Mean for Each Objective?
- Oral Presentation:
- Introducing: ability to pull out and orally present another philosopher’s view (e.g. a short minute of the main argument of today’s reading)
- Developing: ability to orally present some of one’s own ideas in response to another philosopher’s view (e.g. a short recap of the day’s reading and some commentary on the main argument)
- Mastery: ability to present philosophical material of one’s own (whether one’s own writing or one’s critical response to another philosopher) and to facilitate dialogue with peers and/or faculty about the material (e.g. an oral presentation of one’s thesis to the department or a class facilitation in seminar)
- Research:
- Introducing: become familiar with discipline specific databases, ways of searching, citation formats, etc. (e.g. a universal Basic Research in Philosophy module to be created through the library and that can be completed by students outside of class time; and/or a “library report” type assignment, which requires locating, reading, citing, and summarizing an outside source)
- Developing: further engagement with outside sources (e.g. a menu of options from which faculty may choose: Complete Basic Research in Philosophy module if that has not been completed; write an abstract of one’s own final paper; locate and read a source and respond critically to it; incorporate one source not assigned for class--but perhaps from the main textbook/anthology into one’s paper; and so on)
- Mastery: full research-based paper, which includes stages such as producing a research question and tentative thesis, an abstract, and an annotated bibliography
- Explication of Arguments:
- Introducing: ability to pull out arguments (correctly identifying premises and conclusions and producing appropriate argumentative structure) in select introductory level assigned material with explicit instruction in these skills
- Developing: ability to pull out arguments (correctly identifying premises and conclusions and producing appropriate argumentative structure) in a wider variety of philosophical contexts and possibly without explicit instruction in the skill
- Mastery: ability to take any assigned reading and accurately and fairly represent the author’s main argument (and its relation to any subarguments and/or broader contexts) in proper deductive or inductive logical structure
- Developing One’s Own Questions/Arguments (this LO is modeled on CDWG I&PS Creativity/Creative Thinking)
- Introducing: ability to raise objections to philosophical ideas one is exposed to in readings and lecture and to develop them in writing in response to explicit prompts from an instructor; this allows for mere reformulation/repackaging of material already introduced; it also allows for rote application of prescribed essay structure
- Developing: ability to write sustained philosophical papers (at least 5+ pages) which increasingly involve arguments, ideas, objections, responses, etc. that were not presented in assigned reading or in lecture/discussion; encourages independent application of overall dialectical structure of argumentative essay writing
- Mastery: ability to develop one’s own research question and to write a full philosophical paper (of at least 10+ pages), in which one makes and defends a sustained and clearly stated argument of one’s own; demands independent application (and articulation) of overall dialectical structure of essay
- Understanding of Text:
- Introducing: ability to make sense of an assigned philosophical text with the guidance of an instructor and to clearly and accurately explain the ideas/arguments in one’s own writing
- Developing: ability to pull out some main ideas, questions, arguments, etc. from moderate level texts without explicit instructor guidance, to begin to formulate responses to the readings prior to class, and to clearly and accurately express those understandings in one’s writing
- Mastery: ability to make sense of a contemporary philosophical text largely on one's own, to be prepared to discuss and evaluate it with little instructor guidance or explanation, and to be able to incorporate one’s independent understandings and responses to such texts in one’s writing
Assessment Rubrics
Content Assessment Rubric
Accuracy | Context | Analysis | |
BASIC | Student demonstrates an understanding of some positions, arguments, and/or concepts in the (sub-)field; presentation of positions, arguments, and/or concepts includes some errors | Student attempts to situate some positions, arguments, and/or concepts in the (sub-)field into a broader context within that (sub-)field | Student attempts to analyze some positions, arguments, and/or concepts in the (sub-)field; analysis lacks depth or nuance and/or is hindered by errors |
INTERMEDIATE | Student demonstrates an accurate understanding of some key positions, arguments, and/or concepts in the (sub-)field; student offers some insight into at least one significant topic in the (sub-)field | Student demonstrates an accurate understanding of the relation between some key positions, arguments, and/or concepts in the (sub-)field and a broader context within that (sub-)field | Student analyzes some key positions, arguments, and/or concepts in the (sub-)field |
MASTERY | Student demonstrates a complex and nuanced understanding of some key positions, arguments, and/or concepts in the (sub-)field; student offers a genuine insight into at least one significant topic in the (sub-)field | Student successfully situates some key positions, arguments, and/or concepts in the (sub-)field within an appropriate broader context within that (sub-)field; contextualizing of the position, argument, and/or concept is complex and nuanced | Student analyzes some key positions, arguments, and/or concepts in the (sub-)field in a way that demonstrates sophisticated grasp of overall content |
Critical Thinking/Reading Rubric
Argument Identification | Argument Analysis | Argument Construction | |
BASIC | Identifies an argument in a text, clearly distinguishing premises from conclusion | Presents an objection to an argument, and offers a reply to that objection; attempts to determine validity, soundness, and/or cogency of argument | Constructs an argument in premise-conclusion form |
INTERMEDIATE | Identifies the main line of argument in a text, clearly distinguishing premises from conclusion | Offers fair and charitable statements of objections and replies; correctly determines validity, soundness, and/or cogency of argument | Constructs an argument in premise-conclusion form in one’s own words |
MASTERY | Identifies the main line of argument in a text and relates it to appropriate philosophical context | Offers a sustained discussion of objections and replies; objections and replies are stated fairly and charitably; correctly determines validity, soundness, and/or cogency of argument | Constructs an argument in premise-conclusion form in one’s own words; discusses argument in relation to other concepts or contexts |
Oral Presentation Rubric
Understanding of Material | Leading of Discussion | Speaking/Presentation | |
BASIC | Accurately reports concepts and arguments contained in readings | Responds to questions or other contributions introduced by peers | Presentation is clear; language is appropriate |
INTERMEDIATE | Accurately reports concepts and arguments contained in readings; relates material to additional topics and contexts that are relevant to the course | Makes an effort to involve peers in discussion by asking questions and/or inviting questions/contributions | Presentation is clear and well organized; language is appropriate |
MASTERY | Accurately reports concepts and arguments contained in readings or in one’s own work; material is related to additional topics and contexts in ways that promote the course learning outcomes | Manages discussion to promote active participation; incorporates peer questions/contributions in an effort to provide a persistent focus to the discussion | Presentation is clear and well organized; supplemental materials enhance the presentation; language is appropriate |
Reflection Rubric
Personal Reflection | Application to Issues | Reflection Upon the Discipline | Life-Goals | |
BASIC | Identifies connections between course content and skills and life experiences | Attempts to apply knowledge and skills to issues of concerns to citizens, but the attempt is muddled and/or lacks nuance | Attempts to articulate the nature and value of distinctively philosophical knowledge and skills | Attempts to articulate ways in which knowledge and/or skills can be presented as strengths in the pursuit of goals |
INTERMEDIATE | Compares life experiences and academic knowledge/skills to infer differences, as well as similarities, and acknowledge perspectives other than own; selects and develops examples of life experiences to illuminate course content | Applies knowledge and skills to issues of concern to citizens, and the result is a genuine understanding of the issues | Articulates the nature and value of distinctively philosophical knowledge and skills by relating it to specific examples | Articulates ways in which knowledge and/or skills can be presented as strengths in the pursuit of goals |
MASTERY | Meaningfully synthesizes connections among experiences outside of the formal classroom to deepen understanding of course content and to broaden one’s own point of view; articulates specific ways in which one’s ability to make these connections has become more nuanced | Applies knowledge and skills to issues of concern to citizens, and the result is a sophisticated and insightful understanding of the issues, including acknowledgement of the potential limits or pitfalls of applying philosophical skills and knowledge to real world issues | Considers metadisciplinary questions about the nature and limits of philosophy as a discipline or intellectual undertaking; articulates both the value of and potential limits and gaps in philosophical approaches and ways of thinking | Identifies and articulates specific connections between experiences, knowledge, and skills and the ways in which they can be marshaled in the pursuit of goals |
Research/Writing Rubric
Locating Sources | Evaluating Sources | Ethical Use of Sources | Use of Disciplinary Norms for Writing | |
BASIC | Identifies at least one relevant source by following a prescribed method; stays strictly within the guidelines for the assignment | Evaluates sources by applying simplistic criteria by rote | Correctly uses some appropriate citation strategy; demonstrates an understanding of the ethical and legal restrictions on information use | Essay expresses a thesis; essay includes at least one argument, objection, and reply |
INTERMEDIATE | Identifies more than one relevant source by selecting from among various methods; effort to locate sources is guided by an understanding of how the topic relates to other topics | Evaluates sources by applying appropriate criteria; evaluation of sources is guided by an understanding of relevance to the area or topic | Correctly uses a citation or attribution strategy that is appropriate to the task; demonstrates an understanding of the ethical and legal restrictions on information use | Essay presents a sustained, coherent argument that develops through consideration of several dialectical maneuvers; essay incorporates direct discussion of sources |
MASTERY | Identifies sources using well-designed strategies, and explains why those strategies were selected; effort to locate sources is guided by an understanding of how the topic relates to other topics, and these relations are explicated | Evaluates sources by applying appropriate criteria; evaluation of sources is guided by an understanding of relevance to the topic or area, which itself is explicated in the student’s writing | Correctly uses a variety of appropriate citation or attribution strategies; demonstrates an understanding of the ethical and legal restrictions on information use | Essay presents a sustained, coherent argument that develops through consideration of several dialectical maneuvers; essay incorporates direct and indirect discussion of sources (e.g., via discursive notes) |