Background

For 2021-22 we planned to assess the following LOs: 

3. Engage in interdisciplinary research

c. conduct primary and secondary source research, incorporate others’ work into original arguments, and properly credit sources
d. design and implement a project, creatively employing interdisciplinary research towards an original analytical, creative or activist problem

1. Demonstrate understanding of concepts central to Women’s and Gender Studies, including

f. major feminist issues, in historical contexts and in contemporary US and global contexts. Examples of such issues include domestic violence, pornography, job equity, issues of representation, and reproductive rights.

We selected the courses:

3c & d: WGST 490 Senior Capstone Seminar (for the first time crosslisted as a BLKS and AMST Capstone course as well) 

1f: WGST 203 Topics-Gender in the Social World: Gender and Language, WGST 232 Safe Zone Train-the-Trainer, and WGST 100 Introduction to Women's & Gender Studies

as courses in which to conduct this assessment. 

Here is some information about these courses: 

WGST 490 Senior Capstone Seminar is one of three options WGST students have for completing their capstone requirement. About half of students choose to take this seminar to complete a major research project; the rest complete internships. (Rarely does anyone complete an Honors Thesis, which is the third option. For the first time this year, WGST 490 was crosslisted as a BLKS and AMST Capstone course as well.

WGST 203 Topics-Gender in the Social World: Gender and Language is a topics/slot course that is taught annually and cross-listed with ANTH 231. It is a common course that majors, minors, and concentrators take as an elective or distribution requirement given that it is offered every year.

WGST 232 Safe Zone Train-the-Trainer is a unique 2 credit course that requires an application process and is aimed at training students in the course to be Safe Zone facilitators. 

WGST 100 Introduction to Women's & Gender Studies is our introductory course. It is required for majors, minors, concentrators. Though it is meant to be a lower level course aimed at introducing students, it typically attracts more juniors and seniors than newer students. 

One change occurred in the completion of assessment this year. In WGST 100 LO #1c (intersectionality and difference) was substituted for LO #1f. The reason for this was that the assignment used for direct assessment–the final paper–asked students to write a paper analyzing a recent feminist novel in relation to course material. But no clear "issue" like pornography or domestic violence was involved in the paper topics. Most papers did have to engage with intersectional theory, however. (Note that while we are characterizing this assessment as involving LO#1f, one could alternatively maintain that the original LO, LO #1f, was employe after all, but the "major feminist issue" was intersectionality. This raises the question of whether the way we lay out our LOs in LO #1 is appropriate/helpful for assessment purposes.)

Methods

WGST 203 Topics-Gender in the Social World: Gender and Language (LO #1f)

Measure 1

Performance on theory-focused exam

Measure 2

“Integration of theory” criteria on rubric for final presentations. Student final presentations shared findings from the students’ independent research projects, which they had worked on over the course of the semester.

Definition of the “integration of theory” criteria was: “Presentation cites relevant academic research on language and gender and explains theoretical concepts that are pertinent to the project.” 

The rubric applied was: 

WGST 232 Safe Zone Train-the-Trainer (LO #1f)

Rubric applied: 

WGST 100 Introduction to Women's & Gender Studies (LO #1c)

• Regarding WGST 100, I had originally planned to assess LO 1f (issues), but this was difficult to apply to the final paper project and perhaps is more appropriate to a topics based course.
• LO 1c had its own difficulties as not all of the paper prompts required students to deal in depth with the concepts of intersectionality and/or difference.

Direct method: Final paper assignment assessed using the following rubric:

Mastery: Student demonstrates a complex and nuanced understanding of the notion of a particular issue  intersectionality and its importance within women’s and gender studies, and is able to appropriately apply to new topics/considerations in a sophisticated way

Sufficient: Student demonstrates an accurate understanding of the concept of intersectionality and acknowledges its importance within women’s and gender studies, and applies the concept in an appropriate way to new topics/considerations in a sophisticated way

Developing: Student demonstrates a generally accurate understanding of the concept of intersectionality and acknowledges its importance within women’s and gender studies; however, successful application of the concept is lacking

Insufficient: Student does not display an understanding of the concept of intersectionality or its importance in women’s and gender studies

The indirect method asked students to fill out a likert scale for four statements about their understanding of intersectionality and difference and their ability to apply that understanding. An optional comments area then asked students to expand on any of those statements if they so chose. (See appendix for full survey.)

Results

WGST 203 Topics-Gender in the Social World: Gender and Language (LO #1f)

Measure 1

Measure 2

WGST 232 Safe Zone Train-the-Trainer (LO #1f)

Undeveloped: None

Developing: 7

Sufficient: 3

Expert: 1

Commentary: Applied strictly, most of the papers in my class did not meet the “sufficient” description on the rubric. That said, the scores based on the rubric do not correlate to the letter grades given to the papers (which were all As and Bs). My assignment did not require students to describe their path to becoming workshop facilitators in the context of “specific texts, concepts, paradigms and approaches.” In other words, my main conclusion is that this assessment task was not well-suited for WGST classes that are primarily practical skills classes. It’s possible I could have assessed a different assignment: there is a required paper that asks students to attend a Safe Zone workshop and compare what they see to concepts they encountered in the reading. But again, that analysis is supposed to be much more practical than theoretical. 

WGST 100 Introduction to Women's & Gender Studies (LO #1c)

Direct Method: 

10 students achieved mastery

5 students were sufficient

2 students were developing

2 students were insufficient

In addition, 10 students were N/A (two of the paper topic options did not require that students took up did not prioritize the topic of intersectionality, so these papers could not fairly be assessed for this LO)

19 students total were assessed. 15 of them achieved mastery or were sufficient. Only 2 produced insufficient work.

Indirect Method: 23 students completed the survey.

Q1 I better understand what intersectionality is and why it matters in WGST because of this course.  

21 students chose agree or strongly agree

Q2 I better understand what difference is and how it is not the same as intersectionality because of this course. 

17 students chose agree or strongly agree.

Q3 As a result of this course, I feel confident applying the conception of intersectionality n my academic 

work and/or in feminist activism. 

20 students chose agree or strongly agree

Q4 I have a broader and better informed conception of what feminism is because of the exposure to the concept of intersectionality in this course.

21 students chose agree or strongly agree

Discussion

The WGST Advisory Committee discussed the outcomes from this year's assessment at our second meeting of the year:

• One question raised is about WGST 232 as a course to assess. Since this course does not aim at content knowledge, but at skills around facilitation, it might not be an appropriate course to assess. (Also while the course is an option for completing an elective for the WGST programs, it is not required.) Moreover, the outcomes of the SZ course are not captured in the LOs of the program. Though we might discuss whether the program outcomes ought to be revised to be broader and aim to capture the learning that WGST 232 and 233 aim at.
  • Reflecting on this case of assessment–along with the fact that the assessment in WGST 100 focused on intersectionality as a concept, which could fit under either LOs 1c or 1f–has led us to notice that our LOs (or at least LO #1a-f) are not particularly skills-based, and it is unclear how best to assess content-based knowledge in such diverse courses.
• The WGST Advisory Committee is hopeful to hold the first of an annual retreat (to be repeated every year going forward) this summer for the faculty to be able to gather and commit substantial discussion time to this and other issues raised by our 5 year review.

APPENDIX--Further Course, Method, and Assignment Information for each Course

WGST 201 Fall–Complete Narrative

Assessment Results - WGST 203: Topics Gender Social World: Gender and Language

Jennifer Guzmán

Taught Fall 2021

LO #1 f: 

1. Demonstrate understanding of concepts central to Women’s and Gender Studies, including
2. major feminist issues, in historical contexts and in contemporary US and global contexts. Examples of such issues include domestic violence, pornography, job equity, issues of representation, and reproductive rights.

Measure 1

Performance on theory-focused exam

Breakdown of grades on Exam 1, which focused on how feminist theories have informed research on language and gender and how research in this subdisciplinary area (language and gender) has contributed to feminist theories.

Measure 2

“Integration of theory” criteria on rubric for final presentations. Student final presentations shared findings from the students’ independent research projects, which they had worked on over the course of the semester.

Definition of the “integration of theory” criteria was: “Presentation cites relevant academic research on language and gender and explains theoretical concepts that are pertinent to the project.” The rubric ratings were:

Interpretation/Closing the loop

In the first measure, the theory focused exam for this course, results suggest that most students did well, demonstrating understanding of concepts central to Women’s and Gender Studies. A smaller number of students did less well, with two students performing poorly on the exam. These were students who had multiple absences from class and were missing homework assignments leading up to the exam. My effort in upcoming courses will be to emphasize the importance of attendance and of completing low-stakes homework assignments as two critical elements for success in learning the course material. The results from the second measure, the “integration of theory” criteria on the rubric for grading students research project presentations varied fairly widely but were generally acceptable. Most of the students whose integration of theory was “excellent” (11) or “good” (8) had come to office hours for one-on-one consultations about their projects prior to writing their presentations. Students whose integration of theory was inadequate (1) or minimally adequate (6) had a record of poor attendance in the course, late-submitted work, and or missing benchmark assignments related to the project, prior to the presentation. These findings also suggest the importance of course attendance, on-time submission of benchmark assignments, and one-on-one consultations with the instructor. I will emphasize the importance of these things in the present and future courses.

WGST 232 Spring–Complete Narrative 

Alice Rutkowski

Assessment narrative for WGST 232: Safe Zone Train-the-Trainer

Spring 2022

This course is fairly unique in the WGST program’s offerings in two ways: first, enrollment is by application only. The campus Safe Zone program, which I coordinate, offers 3-hour workshops that teach participants the basics of LGBTQ+ identities along with strategies to be a better ally. While teaching this course is part of my regular teaching obligation and I have a paid student assistant coordinator, otherwise the facilitators are all volunteers (and facilitators can be students, faculty and staff in our program). This course is how we train new student facilitators. Because the course is meant to result in students becoming trainers in the program, we require that students apply and be interviewed for a spot in the course. 

The second way the course is unique is that although it begins with traditional WGST readings that are meant to shore up knowledge in LGBTQ+ topics and history - it teaches primarily practical skills in facilitation and most of the major assignments are not traditional papers but practical tasks: facilitate discussion of readings, practice answering difficult questions, facilitate a piece of the Safe Zone workshop. 

This spring the course had eleven students. The assignment that I assessed was the final end-of-the-semester reflective essay, which asked students to reflect on their intellectual development and progress towards becoming a facilitator over the course of the semester.

I assessed the first learning outcome for the WGST program:

I used the following rubric:

The results of this assessment are here. Applied strictly, most of the papers in my class did not meet the “sufficient” description on the rubric. That said, the scores based on the rubric do not correlate to the letter grades given to the papers (which were all As and Bs). My assignment did not require students to describe their path to becoming workshop facilitators in the context of “specific texts, concepts, paradigms and approaches.” In other words, my main conclusion is that this assessment task was not well-suited for WGST classes that are primarily practical skills classes. It’s possible I could have assessed a different assignment: there is a required paper that asks students to attend a Safe Zone workshop and compare what they see to concepts they encountered in the reading. But again, that analysis is supposed to be much more practical than theoretical. 

It is also the case that the workshop these students are learning to teach is very basic and is pointedly NOT about content - it’s about modeling respectful conversations about LGBTQ+ identities. With only three hours, that modest learning outcome has worked really well for our program. For this reason, even though I teach some more advanced concepts in WGST 232 (like distinguishing sex/gender/expression/orientation) and topics in queer history, students are not expected to demonstrate mastery of content in the final paper but rather talk about their own challenges and successes in becoming comfortable in the facilitator role.

WGST 100 Fall

Course Information: WGST 100 is our introductory course in women’s and gender studies. However, the course often fills before first year and sophomore students are able to register. This course had a disproportionate number of juniors and seniors, most of whom were not women’s and gender studies minors or majors, but who were looking for an interesting course (and had not been able to get into WGST 100 previously or were not aware of women’s and gender studies as an area of study).

Assignment: Student work on the final paper was assessed. This assignment focused on Naomi Alderman’s The Power, which we read toward the end of the semester. This assignment was worth 22% of the final grade for the course. 

Prompt: The assignment instructions and prompts given to students were as follows: 

TASK: Write a paper of about 4-6 pages analyzing some aspect of the novel The Power from a (broadly) feminist perspective, using the tools, ideas, and/or readings of the course. No matter what topic you write on, you MUST incorporate specific ideas, concepts, readings, etc. That is, do not vaguely refer to "equality"--reference specific course content such as a particular author or a particular debate, distinction, etc.

Choose one of the prompts below, or run your own topic by me:

(1) One overarching question about the point of the novel and what Alderman meant to be saying through it (if there can be an answer to that question at all) is: is the novel a feminist novel, and if so in what sense? Approach this question by evaluating and critiquing the novel from an intersectional perspective, by focusing not just on gender (and particularly a binary understanding of gender), but by considering ONE or TWO other axes of structural inequality (e.g. race, sexuality, disability, class, etc.) in relation to gender. How does explicitly taking up an intersectional perspective support, challenge, undermine, complicate, simplify etc. Alderman’s point of view about the nature of power, oppression, and gender? Make clear your answer to the question of whether the novel is feminist and why or why not.

(2) What is Alderman’s ultimate answer to the paired questions:

• “what would happen if it was women who had power over men rather than the other way around?”

And

• “why do those with power use it to oppress others?”

Explain what you take her answers to these questions to be by pointing to specific aspects of the narrative to support your view. Then relate her perspective on this issue to power as systemic and cyclical as many of the readings and concepts of the course have taken it to be. Be sure to overtly discuss at least two readings from the course that speak to the idea of power (along with inequality, violence, etc.) as structural. How do these readings relate, support, challenge, complicate, etc. Alderman’s take on the nature of power and oppression?

(3) Draw out and analyze the way that power and aspects of femininity vs. masculinity are related within the novel. That is, how does Alderman subtly (or not so subtly) depict the way that the flipping of gendered power quickly leads to changes in typical patterns of gendered relating between men and women and/or in mannerisms, actions, ways of speaking, etc. that we can recognize as masculine or feminine within our current gender system? Then offer your own perspective on Alderman’s narrative. Are these sorts of change—and the speed with which they occur—plausible? Can the fundamental explanation of masculinity and femininity being what they are boil down to little more than the fact of men’s physical power over women?

Sources:

• There is no expectation that you will do outside research for the paper, but if you do so and use any outside sources in writing, then you must cite them properly (using whatever legitimate citation format you prefer.)
• If you only use sources from the course you needn’t include a full bibliography/works cited, and can use in-text citation—e.g. “Frye (2) talks about oppression as a birdcage.”

GOALS OF ASSIGNMENT:

• Course Learning Objectives (1)-(4)
• synthesize what you have learned in the course
• take concepts, ideas, and such from the course and apply them to a novel (and the novel's underlying approach to feminism)
• recognize potential differences among feminists and feminist views
• put forth your own point of view--supported by evidence/reasons gleaned from the course material--about major questions of feminism in relation to the novel

GRADING CRITERIA

I will use the following rubric in grading these papers:

Indirect Method Survey: 

​​Anonymous Survey for Assessment

NOTE: This short survey will NOT be graded, but rather is an informal instrument for assessment tasks within the WGST program. (“Assessment” refers not to evaluating your work for grading purposes, but to trying to get a sense of whether the curriculum is achieving the program’s learning objectives.)

1) Please rate each of the following statements on a 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) scale (circle the relevant number for each):

1..2..3..4..5  a. I better understand what intersectionality is and why it matters in WGST because of this course.

1..2..3..4..5  b. I better understand what difference is and how it is not the same as intersectionality because of this course.

1..2..3..4..5  c. As a result of this course, I feel confident applying the conception of intersectionality in my academic work and/or in feminist activism

1..2..3..4..5  d. I have a broader and better-informed conception of what feminism is because of the exposure to the concept of intersectionality in this course.

2) Optional: Feel free to expand on something from 1a-1c if you like or offer any other comments.

Raw Data:

Mastery: 10

Sufficient: 5

Developing: 2

Insufficient: 2

N/A: 10