The Department of Political Science will provide and maintain high quality academic programs at the undergraduate and graduate levels.
Objective
High Quality Curriculum
The department will maintain high quality curriculum at the undergraduate and graduate levels.
Indicator
Curriculum Committee Review
Curriculum will be reviewed annually by the department's curriculum committee, a committee consisting of 5 members appointed by the department chair. Committee members represent the following areas: international relations, comparative politics, American politics, political theory, and public administration.
Criterion
High Quality Curriculum
The political science courses curriculum will be comparable to curriculum found at universities and colleges ranked by US News and World Report as the top 10% universities and colleges for the study of political science and government. The basis of comparison will be in terms of hours required for the degree, the types of courses offered, and the objectives of the courses. By the end of the 2009-2010 academic year, adjustments to the course offerings based on the department's evaluation of the lower division courses will be made, specifically the American Foreign Policy and the World Politics courses.
Finding
High Quality Curriculum
For the academic year 2010-2011, the political science department's curriculum continues to be comparable to other colleges and universities ranked by US News and World Report as the top 10% in the discipline. The American Foreign Policy and World Politics courses were moved to the 3000 level to make them upper-division course offerings. One trend in the comparable colleges and universities was a movement toward thematic rather than regional and/or area studies courses.
Action
High Quality Curriculum
The department will investigate the feasibility of introducing thematic courses (such as democracy and democratization; revolutions; identity politics). The curriculum will also be evaluated in order to cut courses (Politics for the Former Soviet Union) which are outdated. The department will also re-assess the merging of the state politics and local politics course as part of the overhaul of the core curriculum.
Objective
Faculty Teaching
The Department will provide high quality teaching.
Indicator
The Individual Development And Educational Assessment System
Faculty will be evaluated using the data collected through the Individual Development and Educational Assessment system currently used by Sam Houston State University as a tool for evaluating faculty teaching.
Criterion
Faculty Teaching
In the 2009-2010 academic year, 70% of the political science courses will continue to be scored at or above the national average as indentified by the Individual Development and Educational Assessment program. Those faculty members who score below or near the national average on the Individual Development and Educational Assessment program for three consecutive semesters will meet with the department chair to discuss and implement an improvement plan that includes mentoring and use of the Sam Houston State University Professional and Academic Center for Excellence (PACE). The expectation is that scores will improve by .5 on the IDEA scoring scale for the 2009-2010 academic year for those who are identified as under performing.
Finding
Faculty Teaching
We find that 89% (84% adjusted) of the courses in the political science department scored at or above the national average as reported by the Individual Development and Educational Assessment (IDEA) system (see Part 3 of attachment). This was well above the 70% target. In addition, it was an improvement over the previous year's finding of 82% (79% adjusted) of the courses.
The percentage of courses that rated in the higher or much higher categories exceeded the expected distribution (20% and 52%, respectively, compared to the expected distribution of 10% and 20%, respectively). This was also an improvement over the previous year (11% and 47%).
The average course score, 4.5, also exceeded the 3.9 national average and was an improvement over the previous year's 4.3.
Action
Faculty Teaching
The department goal will be raised to 75% of the courses will be scored at or above the national average. With the fall 2009, spring 2010, and the fall 2010 performance scores, the department will identify faculty that fall below the department average. These individuals will meet with the faculty in the fall of 2011 to discuss a teaching improvement plan and use of the Sam Houston State University's Professional and Academic Center for Excellence (PACE). The department will also utilize the newly adopted annual review of faculty as well as the peer review of teaching to assess teaching performance
Goal
Research Track Faculty
The Department of Political Science will hire and maintain high quality research track faculty.
Objective
Research Track Faculty
Research faculty will engage in scholarly activities.
Indicator
Number Of Publications
Research faculty's progress will be measured by the number of publications.
Criterion
Faculty Research
Over a rolling 3-year period research track faculty will produce an average of 1 peer reviewed article per year or 1 book during the 3 year period. The AY 2010-2011 will also include book chapters, substantial book reviews, and grants per year.
Finding
Research Track Faculty
In the political science department, seven of the ten tenured or tenure-track research faculty had publications. Five of the ten published articles (one with two and another faculty member published three), one faculty member published a chapter in a book, one had a substantial book review, and two faculty members received grants.
Six of the ten faculty members completed the objective of either one peer reviewed article, book chapter, substantial article review, or grant per year on a three year rolling average or a book in the three-year period. One faculty member who started at SHSU in 2010 does not have three years in which to average, but already has two publications in each of the first two years at Sam. Two other faculty members are new faculty beginning in the fall of 2010. Only one faculty member does not have a publication within the three year period, however, this faculty member has an accepted publication which will be published in the fall of 2011.
However, several faculty members did present at the CHSS Colloquium. The assessment did find that the teaching schedule preference given to tenure-track and research faculty was fruitful and this priority will continue in the AY 2011-2012.
The department completed the political science promotion and tenure manual which will further provide guidance to research faculty.
Action
Research Track Faculty
The political science department will support research track faculty efforts by offering teaching schedules more conducive to research activity. In addition, teaching-track faculty members will be expected to carry more service work in order for research-track faculty to devote more time to publishing activities.
The department will re-institute the departmental brown bag presentations with the goal of one presentation per semester. This will allow research track faculty members to receive feedback, particularly as budget cuts will minimize conference participation.
The department will complete the update of the FES criteria to have it be more compatible with the departmental Promotion and Tenure Manual as well as the department's annual review of teaching guidelines.
Goal
Teaching Track Faculty
The Department of Political Science teaching track faculty will provide high quality instruction and engage in substantive projects designed to promote the department, college, and university.
Objective
Teaching Track Faculty
Teaching track faculty will engage in service work designed to promote the department, college, and university.
Indicator
Number Of Service Projects Completed Per Year
Teaching track faculty's progress will be measured by the number of service projects completed in a year. Service projects include: membership in college and university committees, participation in department recruitment programs, organizer of major campus events, etc.
Criterion
Teaching Track Faculty
We expect our teaching faculty to complete at least 2 service projects per faculty per year. We expect to improve on the 2009-2010 results where only two of the five faculty met the criteria and have all faculty members engage in service projects which will include graduate and undergraduate recruitment projects, alumni development projects, and internship development projects.
Finding
Teaching Track Faculty
The political science department has four faculty members on the teaching track. One of the five was on a Fulbright for the calendar year 2010 and thus there was not service reported on the FES related to SHSU. As reported last year, this faculty member was successful in completing the publication requirement necessary to move to a research track designation. Of the remaining three teaching track faculty, two of the three completed service work in the area of departmental service (personnel committee) and at the college level (CHSS Undergraduate Committee and Dean's Advisory Committee). One of the three participated in a university level committee (Excellence in Teaching Committee). Ultimately, while the remaining three engaged in a variety of service commitments, the teaching track faculty members did not meet the expectations in engaging in two service projects.
Action
Teaching Track Faculty
In order to provide better guidance for teaching track faculty. The department will include in the revision of the FES criteria a list of suitable service projects. This revision, in terms of service, will be utilized when it comes to merit consideration.
In assigning committee chair responsibilities, the chair of the department will ensure that teaching track faculty bear the greater burden.
Goal
Prepare Students For Professional Careers
Upon graduation students will be prepared to enter the professional marketplace.
Objective
Professional Marketplace
Upon graduation students will be prepared to enter the professional marketplace.
Indicator
Professional Market Skills
Prior to graduating graduate and undergraduate students will complete the online exit survey. Data from questions 3c (Have you been accepted into a graduate program?) or 4a (Have you obtained professional employment?) from the undergraduate survey will be used to measure undergraduate student professional skills. Data from questions 6c (Have you been accepted into a doctoral program?) or 7a (Have you obtained professional employment?) from the graduate survey will be used to graduate student professional skills.
Criterion
Professional Market Skills
We will anticipate that at least 70% of our graduating undergraduate students will answer yes to question 3c or question 4a and at least 70% of our graduating graduate students will answer yes to question 6c or 7a on the political science department exit surveys.
By the end of spring 2010, we will have finalized the plans to have the exit surveys be mandatory, which we believe will yield a response rate that will give the department accurate results.
Finding
Professional Marketplace
During the AY 2010-2011, the political science department consulted with computer services and concluded that making the exit survey for graduates and undergraduates mandatory was prohibitive. Thus, the department was unable to collect reliable data, particularly from the undergraduates. Furthermore, with only four graduate students graduating in the AY 2010-2011, there was not enough data to draw conclusions regarding market placement.
Action
Professional Marketplace
Due to the inability to implement a mandatory exit survey for undergraduates, the department will initiate a new process to ascertain the placement of graduating seniors (graduate and undergraduate). Beginning in the fall of 2011, the department will identify graduating seniors and ask faculty to conduct anonymous surveys to students in their courses during the normal course evaluation (IDEA). These surveys will be voluntary. The department believes this will provide a better response rate than a voluntary online survey. The same criterion will be utilized, that is, we expect 70% of undergraduates to either have been accepted into a graduate program or obtained professional employment while 70% of graduate students will either have been accepted into a doctoral program or obtained professional employment.
Goal
Improve Graduate Student Applications
Improve the quantity and quality of graduates student applications.
Objective
Improve Graduate Student Applications
The number of students entering the graduate programs will increase and the average GRE and GPA of incoming students will increase.
Indicator
Number Of Applications And Average GRE And GPA
We will compare enrollment figures from fall 2009 - spring 2010 and fall 2010 - summer 2011. We will compare the average GRE and GPA of students who entered the program during the fall 2009 - spring 2010period to the average GRE and GPA of students who entered the program during the fall 2010 - summer 2011 period.
Criterion
Improve Graduate Student Applications
We expect to continue to see a 10% increase in graduate student enrollment overall. We will expect that the average GRE will be at least 1120 or better (an improvement over fall 2009 - spring 2010 scores of 1104) and that the average GPA will be at least 3.50 (an improvement over fall 2009 - spring 2010 scores of 3.44) or better for both MA and MPA incoming students. Students admitted under a conditional acceptance plan will go through a more rigorous application process (two writing samples, three letters of recommendation, and an interview with the graduate advisor), thus we expect to see the number of conditional acceptance move to permanent acceptance within one semester.
Finding
Improve Graduate Student Applications
Enrollment numbers for fall 2010 - spring 2011 and fall 2011 - summer 2011 are 22 and 31. There was a 40% increase in enrollment across the two periods.
The average GPA for the two periods are 3.41 and 3.40. The average GRE scores for the two periods are 1104 and 1087. There were slight dips in scores across the two periods.
Action
Improve Graduate Student Applications
We were very pleased with the 40% increase in enrollment. The graduate director is currently working with the Graduate Studies Office to develop new avenues of recruitment. We were not pleased with the dip, albeit slight, in scores. The graduate director and faculty will discuss the possibility of raising the bar for GRE and GPA scores.
Goal
Student Satisfaction
We will measure students' overall satisfaction with the deparment.
Objective
Student Satisfaction
We will improve students' overall satisfaction with the department.
Indicator
Student Satisfaction
We will use an anonymous online exit survey to measure students' overall satisfaction with the department. We will use the question "How would you rate your overall satisfaction with the graduate program?" (Question 9 of the undergraduate survey and question 12 of the graduate survey) to measure students' levels of satisfaction.
Criterion
Student Satisfaction
We will expect that at least 70% of our students will provide a positive response to the survey question. Answers will be considered positive if a student rates their experience as satisfactory or better.
By the end of spring 2010, we will have finalized the plans to have the exit surveys be mandatory, which we believe will yield a response rate that will give the department accurate results. We will schedule one event per semester (monthly faculty research forums, welcome back social gathering, current events forum) in order for students to bond more deeply with the department.
Finding
Student Satisfaction
During the AY 2010-2011, the political science department consulted with computer services and concluded that making the exit survey for graduates and undergraduates mandatory was prohibitive. Thus, the department was unable to collect reliable data, particularly from the undergraduates.
Action
Student Satisfaction
Due to the inability to implement a mandatory exit survey for undergraduates, the department will initiate a new process to ascertain the placement of graduating seniors (graduate and undergraduate). Beginning in the fall of 2011, the department will identify graduating seniors and ask faculty to conduct anonymous surveys to students in their courses during the normal course evaluation (IDEA). These surveys will be voluntary. The department believes this will provide a better response rate than a voluntary online survey. This survey will include questions regarding professional market placement as well as student satisfaction.
The department will maintain the same criterion for student satisfaction, that is, at least 70% of both graduates and undergraduates will provide a positive response to the question of overall satisfaction with the department.
Goal
Revise Written Comprehensive Exam Process
Revise the format and content of the written comprehensive exam process.
Objective
Revise The Written Comprehensive Exam Process
The written comprehensive exam process tends to produce exam questions and exam results that address material in specific courses rather than the broader field of political science and its subfields. We will revise the process so that exam questions and results address the broader field of political science and its subfields thus transitioning from a less course-centric measure to a program-centric measure.
Indicator
Comprehensive Exam Reading List And Overview Courses
The department will: (1) Develop reading lists of core literature relevant to the discipline of political science and its subfields. The reading lists addressing the field of political science will be developed and approved by the entire faculty. The subfields reading lists will be developed and approved by faculty with expertise in each specific subfield. (2) Develop overview courses for each subfield of political science.
Criterion
Revise The Written Comprehensive Process
Graduate students entering the program in fall 2009 will receive the reading lists and will enroll in the overview courses relevant to their areas of study. By the end of fall 2010, the graduate faculty will review and update the graduate reading lists.
Finding
Revise Written Comprehensive Exam Process
In fall 2010 the faculty revised and updated the readings lists for the written comprehensive exams. However, faculty were not able to complete the task of writing comprehensive exam questions that were more program based and less course based. During fall 2010 and spring 2011 the department experienced the loss of both MA and MPA faculty and the addition of new MA and MPA faculty. The chair and senior faculty felt that it was not a good time to revise written comprehensive exam questions due to the major changes in faculty positions.
Action
Revise Written Comprehensive Exam Process
MPA faculty met in May to discuss and begin writing new comprehensive exams questions. The first set of revised exam questions will be administered in July, 2011.