The literature concentration

BA with a major in English, Literature Concentration   School: College of Art & Sciences Department: English & Rhetoric Degree Coordinator: Elaine Whitaker   Degree Mission: The primary purpose of the major in English is to introduce students to their own literary and linguistic heritage and to acquaint them with representative works of major world

writers, and, in the case of the Creative Writing concentration, to foster students* creative skills to enable them to participate as practitioners in that heritage. Such an introduction is made possible by offering them a wide range of courses in English and American literature, including survey, genre, and major-figure courses, as well as survey courses in world literature. Courses in creative and expository writing, the history and structure of the language, critical theory, and composition theory help students sharpen their critical awareness, encourage clarity of thought and expression, and stimulate and develop the creative imagination. In short, the degree in English develops critical thinkers and effective communicators, people whose skills are applicable in a wide range of careers. The major was internationalized in 2008.

Degree Goals & Outcome: Courses in the English major, literature concentration, are designed to fulfill the liberal-

arts mission of developing students with inquisitive and analytical minds, a respect for human diversity and individuality, a sense of civic and global responsibility, and sound ethical judgment, as well as preparing students for a wide range of careers. These mission goals are addressed in the following student-learning outcomes for courses taken in pursuit of a degree in English:

*Students can apply understanding of the literary traditions in the English language to the interpretation of text;

*Students can apply understanding of the English linguistic tradition in analysis of text;While every course in the English major may not address all of these outcomes, every course does address one or more. And all of the above outcomes are addressed in full program of study.

 

*Students can demonstrate that knowledge of other world literary traditions has enriched understand of their own;

*Students can apply concepts related to aesthetics, language, and literature in appropriate literary discourse;

*Students can demonstrate an appreciation for creative imagination in literary discourse; *Students can apply informed critical awareness in the

generation of argument; Students can demonstrate clarity of thought; *Students can express themselves in standard academic

modes of writing and speech.

ENGLISH 4900 SYLLABUS Fall Semester 2010   Course: English 4900: Seminar in Language & Literature Instructor: Peter M. Carriere, Ph.D. email: pete.carriere@gcsu.edu Office: Arts & Sciences 3-13 Hours: T/Th 11:00-12:00/ W 11:00-12:00/ & by appointment Telephone: 445-5571 Required Texts: See attached list   COURSE DESCRIPTION ENGL 4900 replaces the traditional exit exam at GCSU and is required for the Bachelor’s Degree in English. The focus of the course is on the department’s program goals for

students majoring in English with a literature concentration. Assignments are designed to reflect these goals and to require students to demonstrate proficiency in applying them. The goals reflect the department’s focus on helping students acquire tools, strategies, sensitivities, and abilities for applying critical thinking to problems of analysis, interpretation, and the understanding of literary language. The foundation of ENGL 4900 and the focus of the course is on the program goals listed below:

 

1. Students can apply concepts related to aesthetics, language, and literature in appropriate literary discourse.

2. Students can apply informed critical awareness in the generation of argument.

3. Students can demonstrate clarity of thought. 4. Students can express themselves in standard academic modes of

writing and speech. 5. Students can demonstrate an appreciation for the creative

imagination in literary discourse. 6. Students can apply understanding of the literary traditions in the

English language to the interpretation of texts. 7. Students can apply the understanding of the English linguistic

tradition in the analysis of texts. 8. Students can demonstrate that knowledge of other world literary

traditions has enriched understanding of their own.      

#1: Formalist analysis of British poem #2: Formalist analysis of American poem #3: Bahktin, Blake, or Modernism applied to

Big Sur #4: Allusions in Big Sur #5: Popular vs. Serious Fiction “The Swimmer”

short story vs. Hollywood version #6: 2nd compare/contrast using short stories #7: Linguistics (etymological history of a

word) #8: Myth & culture Kawabata’s Snow Country #9: Expanded research paper

3 Raters were used for assessment of how well our students met our performance standards for each of the 8 department goals.

Raters were chosen who had never taught the course in order to eliminate prejudice for or against the course.

Raters all had PhD’s in Anglo-American literature. All came from the Department of English & Rhetoric.

 

The assessment of student assignments is on a 1-4 scale. A 4 is the highest level of performance; a 1 is the lowest. Criteria for each level is listed below.

 The 4 evaluation indicates the highest level of achievement for the assignment. An assignment receiving this evaluation will be identified by work that clearly shows superior analysis, superior ability to synthesize material from critical and/or literary sources, and superior written presentation.

The 3 evaluation indicates high achievement, but not overall superior achievement. An assignment receiving this evaluation will be identified by work that clearly shows good analysis, good synthesis of material from critical and literary sources, and good presentation.

The 2 evaluation indicates achievement that is either only adequate or is so

inconsistent in quality that it cannot be seen as superior or high level work. An assignment receiving this evaluaiton will be identified by work that shows only adequate analysis, adequate synthesis of material from critical and/or literary sources, and adequate presentation. Or the assignment may be inconsistent: of high quality in one area but low quality in another.

1. The 1 evaluation indicates achievement that is mostly inadequate in terms of its analysis, synthesis of material from critical and/or literary sources, and presentation. The evaluator may have to read between the lines to see evidence that analysis and/or synthesis has occurred. Analysis or synthesis may be shallow. The presentation may be unclear and/or weak.

 

ONLY 4 ASSIGNMENTS IN THE PORTFOLIO WERE USED TO ASSESS THE 8 GOALS OF THE LITERATURE CONCENTRATION:

Goal #1 . . . . . . . . . . . Assignment #2 (formalism) Goal #2 . . . . . . . . . . . Assignment #7 (linguistics) Goal #3, #6, #8 . . . . Assignment #8 (Snow

Country) Goal #4, #5, #7 . . . . .Assignment # 3 (Big Sur)

FIRST PORTFOLIO EVALUATION 2003-04

 NOTE: Some of the data is missing from the initial assessment of our students' abilities using ENGL 4900. We do, however, have the averages of the raters' judgements for all goals.

 EVALUATION AVERAGES FOR ENGLISH GOALS 2003-04

Goal 1: Anglo-Ameri- can tra-dition

Goal 2:LinguistIc tradi-tion

Goal 3:Aesthet-ics, lan-guage & Lit

Goal 4:Apprec-iation forcreative imagina-tion

Goal 5:Informed criticalAware-ness

Goal 6:Abilityto thinkclearly

Goal 7:Use of correctEnglish

Goal 8:Other World literarytradition

2.57 2.62 2.81 2.81 2.62 2.57 2.52 2.67

Goal 1: Anglo-Ameri- can tra-dition

Goal 2:Linguist-ic tradi-tion

Goal 3:Aesthet-ics, lan-guage & Lit

Goal 4:Apprec-iation forcreative imagina-tion

Goal 5:Informed criticalAware-ness

Goal 6:Abilityto thinkclearly

Goal 7:Use of correctEnglish

Goal 8:Other World literarytradition

2.70 2.58 2.67 3.07 2.71 2.82 2.85 3.07

SECOND PORTFOLIO EVALUATION 2006

NOTE: Some of the data is missing from the initial assessment of our students' abilities using ENGL 4900. We do, however, have the averages of the raters' judgements for all goals.

EVALUATION AVERAGES FOR ENGLISH GOALS 2006

THIRD PORTFOLIO EVALUATION 2008

NOTE: Some of the data is missing from the initial assessment of our students' abilities using ENGL 4900. We do, however, have the averages of the raters' judgements for all goals.

EVALUATION AVERAGES FOR ENGLISH GOALS 2008Goal 1: Anglo-Ameri- can tra-dition

Goal 2:Linguist-ic tradi-tion

Goal 3:Aesthet-ics, lan-guage & Lit

Goal 4:Apprec-iation forcreative imagina-tion

Goal 5:Informed criticalAware-ness

Goal 6:Abilityto thinkclearly

Goal 7:Use of correctEnglish

Goal 8:Other World literarytradition

2.67 2.41 2.67 3.15 2.85 2.86 2.97 3.15

Course Addressing the Outcome

Core Prefix and Number

Course Addressing the Outcome

Means of Assessing the Outcome

Desired Standard of Achievement

Results of Assessment

Evaluation and Changes Resulting from Assessme

ntCOURSE #1: Seminar of Language & LiteratureAssignment number 1.

NOTE: The other two courses used for this assessment did not use this course outcome. I am including it here because the low average rating of this item suggested that the assignmment needs modification.

ENGL 4900 Program outcomes for the literature concentration in English are the same as the course outcomes for ENGL 4900 because the course was created around the outcomes. This assessment uses Program Outcome #2: Students can apply the understanding of the English linguistic tradition in the analysis of texts.

For this outcome, students were required to trace the etymological history of a word, prepare an oral report on their findings, and submit a short essay describing the history of the word, its changes over time, its origins in the language, the length of time it has been part of English, etc.

On a scale of 1-4, with 4 being the highest, students should perform at a level of 3 or above.

Student performance on this outcome was measured by 3 raters in the department who had not taught the course. Ratings for 2004, 2006, and 2008 were used. Student names were removed from the essays analyzed. The average Ratings, based on a rating scale of 4-1, with 1 being the lowest are as follows:2004: 2.622006: 2.582008: 2.41

The scores for this outcome were the lowest of all the outcomes used as a foundation for ENGL 4900. The low scores became a subject of debate in the department meeting in the fall. While precise reasons for the scores did not emerge from the discussions, one suggestion that everyone seemed to agree to was that the assignment was not challenging enough for our majors. The department is in the process of changing the assignment so that it reflects the complexities of linguistics and requires from students a more challenging response.