The department of sociology prepares students to understand society and social phenomena. Through the application of conceptual and analytic tools unique to our discipline, students learn to investigate society as a concrete, social world of diverse populations, groups and institutions, and help to understand the relationship among the cultural and historical foundations of society, its social systems, social and technological change and the individual. Students are challenged to recognize that social phenomena are not necessarily unalterable facts of life. They develop the ability to observe and critically analyze social issues and to examine strategies for implementing social change and/or constructing a satisfying social world for their own future. The sociology program provides the resources to link the broad perspectives of liberal education with an awareness of employment areas where these perspectives may be applied. It blends career education and the liberal arts. Our program provides to the entering student a foundation in general education, it enables one to make wise choices when choosing a career path that demands a foundation in society’s social structure and processes and opens the opportunity for juniors and seniors to enroll in particular courses within sociology to broaden their knowledge about contemporary social issues.
The Department of Sociology and its curriculum are guided by college's and university's missions. Department faculty regularly evaluate and assess departmental goals as they pertain to the overarching college and university strategic plans and goals. As the department is undergoing transition and change, the missions of the university and college guide us in our new faculty recruitment efforts and curriculum assessment and revision activities.
Goal 1. Offer a superior sociology program which emphasizes critical thinking and guides students toward personal development, civic engagement, and professional objectives. A. Better communicate to students how the specializations of the faculty directly relate to the mission of the sociology program. B. Offer opportunities for students to judge and evaluate their professional goals through individual study and research projects C. Build interest in improving the social policies and practices responsible for the creating and maintaining a civil society among non-majors who enroll in sociology class. D. Regularly evaluate the sociology programs through assessment practices to maintain a strong and timely curriculum for all students of the university. Goal 2. Enhance and improve our social services program. A. Maintain a social service program with a continuous structure of internships, field activities, and voluntary work along identified social service program goals that can be completed within four years of study. B. Create service area internships and service area programs in partnership with providers to function as investment strategies for grant-assisted activities. C. Extend student involvement with community service organizations through more demanding field experience placements and more field experience options. This will allow students to gain agency/field experience that meets most employers’ expectation of prior experience and extend employment opportunities upon graduation. Goal 3. Provide knowledge and skills needed to use current computer-based research and teaching applications. A. Faculty members introduce computer laboratory exercises in their courses wherever appropriate B. Encourage students to conduct computer-driven research studies to help them accomplish their field experience objectives and job ambitions. Goal 4. Expand and emphasize the ethnic studies program as a campus-wide diversity educational opportunity focusing on the social, political, economic and cultural experiences and aspirations of ethnic minorities in our service region, nationally and globally. A. Increase the breadth and effectiveness of multi-cultural and diversity education. B. Provide assistance and consultation to university efforts to infuse multiculturalism into the curriculum. C. Encourage linked classes and learning community concepts in combination with other disciplines, including English, history, business, art, and education to further the diversity goals of the university. D. Increase mentoring and other related services to minority students. Goal 5. Expand sociology offerings at the CWU Centers. Sociology offers a small number of courses at the Yakima, Lynnwood, Pierce, and Des Moines facilities. Enrollment suggests more courses could be offered. A. Hire a full-time sociology faculty member with a generalist background capable of offering courses in the fields of criminology and deviance, social psychology, organizations, and disenfranchised groups. B. Work more closely with YVCC and CWU’s departments offering degrees at the Yakima Center to determine what other role our department might play at this Center.
The Department of Sociology conducts peer review of instruction on two levels. First, both qualitative and quantitative SEOI survey results and course syllabi are reviewed by the chair of the personnel committee and department chair as one means of assessing instructional performance. Second, department faculty members are encouraged to pair up into dyads composed of members who offer similar courses to review syllabi. With the exception of non-tenured tenure-stream faculty who must allow annual direct observation of their instructional performance, this dyad also has the option of conducting direct observations on classroom performance. It is expected that the parties will engage in a dialog consisting of constructive feedback on instructional style and course logistics. Through this exchange of information it is anticipated that the faculty will enhance their classroom performance.
The department is overall effective in reaching its goals. The major has both sociology and social service options and has strong requirements. A good variety of courses are offered. The department makes important contributions to general education and a number of other programs on campus (such as Law and Justice, Gerontology, Education, and Family Studies. The department is also a key player in the General Studies (formerly Individual Studies) program, which has been replaced with Interdisciplinery Studies in Social Science program. Faculty members engage in scholarship and professional development. They also provide a variety of professional service on campus and beyand. For example, sociology faculty routinely make presentations at forums organized on campus on issues related to immigration, fair trade, social welfare service, gender, and race and ethnic relations. They serve on Asian/Pacific Studies program, Latino/Latin American Studies program, International Studies and Programs, Women Studies program, and American Indian Studies program. Beyound CWU campus, they provide professional service as consultants to public school districts and community service programs. They also serve on committees of professional organizations such as Pacific Sociological Association and National Social Science Association.
Program review took place in 2005-2006. Primary recommendations from the external reviewer and COTS Dean are: 1. Establishing a set of comprehensive programmatic goals to support all aspects of the curriculum. 2. Focusing of the Sociology major program into a single degree option that adequately addresses the desired skill sets and retains the opportunities currently embedded in the B.S. degree. 3. Enhancing the reputation and visibility of the department. Department Response: 1. We began the discussion of the program goals and learner outcomes in the spring of 2007 and worked intensively on expanding them in the fall of 2007. A revised set of program goals and learner outcomes was submitted to the Office of Associate Vice President for Undergraduate Studies in December, 2007. Faculty members also updated learner outcomes for the courses they teach regularly. 2. Curriculum revision is incremental. We made several changes to the curriculum. First we strengthened the 45-credit sociology major by adding a statistics requirement to the coursework. As a result, theory, research methods, and statistics are required core courses for all department majors. Second, we revised the sociology honors program requirements to promote the visibility of the program and provide greater opportunities for students wishing to pursue a more rigorous course of study and in-depth experience for our students. Third, we added GPA requirement for department majors. Both sociology and social services majors must have a GPA of 2.3 in the major coursework to graduate. Finally, we designed and added a capstone course for all majors. The recommendation of a single degree option for the sociology major was not adopted by the department because the current three sociology major options (45 credits, 60 credits, and 75 credits) enable the department to serve diverse student populations. 3. Faculty members will continue working on finding ways to increase the visibility of the sociology program on campus through university service and scholarship activities.
1. The sociology curriculum was substantially revised. a. We strengthened the core requirements for the 45 and 60 hour B.A. degrees in sociology making these two programs more rigorous and competitive in the marketplace. b. We revamped the four key content areas and reorganized them into three new subcategories to reflect the strengths of our faculty and changes in the discipline. c. The faculty have resurrected past courses which were not being taught (Organizations, Sociology of Education, Demography, Comparative Sociology, Sociology of Conflict, Sociology of Sport, Urban Sociology) and created new courses (Sociology of the Future, Colloquy). 2. The Ethnic Studies curriculum was substantially revised and expanded under Dr. Cleary’s direction. a. New core requirements were set, the content areas were systematized or institutionalized, and new courses were introduced. This has resulted in a program that is more comprehensive in scope. b. The explicit requirements have also added an element of “quality control” which was lacking in prior iterations of the program. Restructuring ensures that students may pursue this major in a predictable manner. c. The addition of four new faculty members to our department since 1999 has allowed new courses, and more sections of the introductory course to be offered. This has allowed the department to better meet student demand. 3. The department has maintained diversity among its faculty. 4. A supportive work environment at the department level took root. This synergy has provided us with the foundation for a culture of teaching and collegiality. 5. The department has reversed the downsizing trend that occurred in the early years of this decade. We have recruited three new faculty in the past three years, two tenure track positions and one full-time non-tenure track position. We are in the process of hiring another tenure track faculty this year. 6. During a period of decreased instructional resources and enrollment growth, we were actually willing and able to accommodate more students. We increased the diversity of our offerings by shifting resources and faculty agreed to accept larger class sizes to meet student demand. In both upper- and lower-division courses we adopted a strategy of using room capacity to determine enrollment ceilings; in practice this amounted to shifting from a ceiling of 30 students to 45 students in many upper-division classes (an increased workload of 33% per class). 7. Our attrition rates have gone down. Though some of the improvement is certainly unrelated to our actions, our emphasis on student advisement and curricular planning has contributed to student success and retention. 8. We have been able to utilize summer profits to help meet critical needs. a. Summer profits generated by our department have allowed us to purchase laptop and desktop computers for department members making up some of the deficit in university-supplied computer technology. These funds have also allowed us to purchase books, computer programs, instructional videos, etc. that are not supported through other means. b. This revenue stream has also allowed us to (minimally) support faculty in professional travel and research. 9. Two faculty have been able to go on professional (sabbatical) leaves and one on a faculty exchange. 10. Three faculty members use regularly blackboard technology in teaching their courses.
1. We are facing challenges in meeting organizational and professional expectations when it comes to conducting research. a. We lack a graduate program and dedicated social scientific survey research facility which are necessities when competing for external research grants. The department has made requests to college and administrative officials for such a facility. Although we would like to offer a graduate program, we lack the instructional resources to field one. b. We have attempted to fund scholarship through our summer profits. However, this source of funding is inadequate and we have experienced challenges when attempting to locate other internal funding mechanisms. Currently one must apply for internal funds at multiple locations (the college, the Faculty Senate, and multiple university levels) in order to maximize opportunities for CWU support. Presuming a coordinated procedure and clearinghouse for internal support for research could be developed (we do not know whether it is possible to cultivate the interest or funding to take on such a Herculean task), a streamlined process would no doubt prove beneficial to all faculty and departments. 2. We would like to put more energy into sustaining a student community (e.g. an active and engaging student club) in the department. 3. Electronic facilities are needed in all classrooms. a. Drs. Dugan and Johnson applied for a grant but did not receive the resources. 4. Create a physical environment that supports teaching, research and thinking by reducing noise and temperature fluctuations in the classrooms and offices. Most faculty members are forced to use supplemental heaters in their office in order to feel comfortable. a. These changes have been repeatedly requested but they have been ignored/denied. 5. The Ethnic Studies Program will require further expansion in order to meet the needs of our students, region and state. When Dr. Pichardo was hired half of his instructional load was expected to be in Ethnic Studies. He has moved away from that overtime due to needs/opportunities to teach other courses such as Political Sociology, Social Movement, and Sociology of Education. Dr. Cleary is the other faculty member with half of her instructional load in Ethnic Studies. Her participation in the new American Indian Studies program has reduced the number of courses she teaches in ETS. a. We plan to request additional faculty (with appropriate specializations) in subsequent years. 6. Employ and retain qualified adjunct faculty on the Ellensburg and extension campuses. 7. Oversight of adjunct faculty at remote sites is problematic. Perhaps our department is unique in that our current adjunct faculty at the centers are funded by the Provost’s Office to provide service courses for other majors; we do not have our own programs at the centers. In any case, oversight for adjunct faculty is not funded in our budget.
Central Washington University and the Department of Sociology are committed to producing high quality graduates for entry into service-related and other forms of employment. One way to accomplish this goal is to insure that our graduates are able to communicate various aspects of the Sociological Imagination effectively. We have identified several assessment outcomes to accomplish these tasks. Briefly, we want to know how well our students can: 1. demonstrate critical thinking skills a. identify underlying assumptions in theoretical models and arguments b. distinguish between arguments based on empirical evidence and those based on opinion c. recognize alternative viewpoints on social issues 2. communicate effectively a. express sociological ideas in a clear and coherent manner b. make oral presentations focused on course content in group settings c. read professional-level sociological reports with understanding 3. apply sociological perspective a. describe similarities and differences between sociology and the other social sciences b. explain the contributes of sociology to understanding social reality c. define and apply key concepts such as: culture, status, roles, norms, socialization, deviance, conformity, self, social structure, social institution, social inequality, stratification, race, gender, social change, and cultural diversity 4. demonstrate competence in sociological theory a. describe the role of theory in building sociological knowledge b. compare and contrast major theoretical orientations c. explain how theories reflect the historical and cultural context of the times and cultures in which they were developed 5. Recognize and use different methods of sociological inquiry and data analysis a. identify, compare, and contrast the major methodological approaches and techniques for analyzing data b. design and carry out a social research project c. be aware of ethical issues in research d. demonstrate basic computer skills necessary to find, create, apply, and communicate sociological information 6. Show knowledge in substantive areas within sociology a. summarize existing knowledge, current questions, and important issues in one substantive area within sociology b. suggest specific policy implications of research and theories in one area 7. Integrate the knowledge and skills learned in the sociology program with life goals and career interests a. Participate in extra curriculum and service activities that elicit positive social change b. Apply sociological perspective in real world, professional experience
Through its curriculum, the Department of Sociology provides opportunities for students to understand the major conceptual and methodological tools used by sociologists and others to understand society. Students will be encouraged to: - see society as a social construct—the result of day-to-day behavior of human beings - grasp the relationship between history, society and the individuals own life - realize that social patterns are tools for the accomplishment of human ends and are not necessarily unalterable facts of life - develop the ability to observe critically and analyze social phenomena In providing these intellectual skills, the Sociology major is relevant to a wide variety of academic and occupational pursuits. Majors will develop skills of analytic thought and practice which will provide a foundation for personal growth, post-graduate education, and entrance into many public and private sector occupations. For sociology majors, the departments requires introductory sociology and a capstone course in sociology as well as coursework in sociological theory, research methods, and statistics. Our program infuses the empirical base of sociology throughout the curriculum, giving students exposure to research opportunities across several methodological traditions, providing repeated experiences in posing sociological questions, developing theoretical explanations, and bringing data to bear on them. For social services majors, the department requires introductory social services and a capstone course as well as coursework in sociological theory, research methods, and statistics. In addition, the program structures the curriculum of required major courses and substantive elective courses to provide focused training for careers in social services related profession. The department also structure the curriculum to include three content areas that provide broad knowledge base and develop students’ sociological literacy by ensuring that they take substantive courses at the heart of the discipline as well as across the breadth of the field. Our curriculum underscores the centrality of race, class, and gender in society and in sociological analysis. Instructional materials and activities are constructed to increase students’ exposure to multicultural, cross-cultural, and cross-national content relevant to sociology. The department encourages diverse pedagogies, including active learning experiences, to increase student engagement in the discipline. Our curriculum offers regularly community and classroom-based learning experiences that develop students’ critical thinking skills and prepare them for lives of civic engagement. A good number of sociology students involve in out-of-class (co- and extra-curricular) learning opportunities.
When the department revised the sociology curriculum we analyzed faculty expertise and instructional preferences, current teaching loads and the consequences the proposed changes would have on the division of labor, and the likely impact the changes would have on student learning and progress toward graduation. A number of data sources were consulted (e.g., on-line catalogs and web pages from other undergraduate sociology departments, publications issued by the American Sociological Association, student performance scores on content areas included on the MFAT exam, historical department data from Institutional Research) in this process before finally settling on the actual changes reflected in the current catalog.
Teaching effectiveness will be assessed through quantitative and qualitative indicators generated from CWU’s (SEOI) Student Evaluation of Instruction survey …and through peer evaluation of instruction based on syllabus review and direct observation in the classroom setting. The Department of Sociology conducts peer review of instruction on two levels. First, both qualitative and quantitative SEOI survey results and course syllabi are reviewed by the chair of the personnel committee and department chair as one means of assessing instructional performance. Second, department faculty members are encouraged to pair up into dyads composed of members who offer similar courses to review syllabi. With the exception of non-tenured tenure-stream faculty who must allow annual direct observation of their instructional performance, this dyad also has the option of conducting direct observations on classroom performance. It is expected that the parties will engage in a dialog consisting of constructive feedback on instructional style and course logistics. Through this exchange of information it is anticipated that the faculty will enhance their classroom performance.
Faculty must administer SEOI surveys in all classes with at least five students, and engage in the department’s (voluntary and mandatory) peer review of instruction processes. Department faculty discuss periodically the assessment results of the courses they teach. The department weekly meetings are sometimes venues for such discussion. Student learning is assessed by faculty through course grading as described in course syllabi. All graduating majors much take MFAT test and faculty members receive the MFAT scores.
The Sociology Department is actively involved in General Education and takes great pride in introducing our discipline to almost 800 students per year. As previously mentioned (see page 6, IC.1.2), we consider our discipline and course offerings to be firmly rooted at the core of a traditional liberal arts education. Our participation in the General Education program is not simply a mechanism from which to recruit potential majors or to inflate our total enrollment statistics (although our participation in the General Education program certainly does fulfill these latent functions). Rather, we consider this to be our best opportunity to create better citizens by sharing our knowledge about life in industrial societies; only a small number of students who take introductory-level sociology and ethnic studies courses will take additional classes. It is within our (entry-level) general education courses that most students will learn about the social structure of society (social groups, institutions, norms, values), the reasons for (and problems inherent in) social stratification and social inequality, how social diversity and social differentiation may both complicate and yet enrich our lives, how and why social problems emerge and what can be done to minimize their impact upon individuals and society, what forces generate social change and stability in society and what impact do these forces have on our lives, and what is the difference between common-sense understanding regarding social life and knowledge based upon sound social scientific research and statistical analysis? Sociology offers the following general education courses: SOC 107 Principles of Sociology, SOC 101 Social Problems, SOC 205 American Society, and ETS 101 Ethnic Awareness. Enrollment in these courses averages 45 students per section and average 18 sections per academic year.
A majority of our majors come from two populations: transfer students from community colleges, who have A.A. degrees already; and, students at CWU who have first encountered sociology, and become enamored of the field, fairly late in their college careers. Thus, a majority of our students decide one of our programs is their ideal match as juniors and even seniors. Requiring any additional 100 and 200 level courses would actually impede progress towards graduation. for most of our students since such course credits would not be counted in the total hours required for graduation. Graduation requires a minimum of 60 upper-division credit hours and a total of 120 lower-division hours of which 60-80 hours are consumed by general educational requirements. Therefore it would be a waste of our faculty resources to offer a wide array of 100 and 200 level courses.
Not Applicable—we have not been allowed to have a graduate program. However, some faculty members actively participate on thesis and doctoral committees located in programs on the CWU campus or at other universities, and some have offered graduate courses for other programs.
The department offers several web-based courses to students at four university centers. About a half of the summer courses on Ellensburg campus were taught on line last summer.
Courses that used Blackboard technology: soc 101, soc 107, soc 301, soc 305, soc 320, soc 325, soc 346, soc 348, soc 350, soc 351, soc 352, soc 354, soc 356, soc 357, soc 365, soc 366, soc 442, soc 460, soc 557 Courses that used internet support other than Blackboard: email communication and distribution of course materials on internet has become norm for most faculty members
The department has little data on the effectiveness of distance education due to lack of official SEOI instrument. However, instructors of blackboard courses have the following reflections. There are both limitations and benefits to internet instruction. Internet instruction provides students with flexibility, they are able to access the information and participate in discussion at times that better able to fit into their schedules. It is apparent that internet instruction allows student to learn in a non-linear fashion because they are able to progress through the material in terms of their own personal needs. In terms of discussion, students are able to think about their responses and able to construct better arguments. Because the internet is able to reach those who are place-bound, I found that students were more diverse and offered a range of opinions and ideas in discussion opportunities. IN addition, those students who are often too shy in class to participate are less reluctant to participate on blackboard. I also found some problems. Some students are not suited for this type of instruction and drop out when they fall too far behind. This may be because they are not computer savvy and find the internet uncomfortable to use. Internet based communication is also sometimes a problem because it is sometimes difficult to get across what you mean in the written word and need face to face interaction. I also found that the workload involved in a Blackboard course is astounding. Responding to discussions, interaction with students on an individual level, the grading, monitoring of discussion boards, and the technical aspect takes at minimum twice what a traditional face-to-face course takes.
Prior to the budget cuts that occurred in the period between 2000 and 2002 the department offered courses at the Lynnwood, Fort Steilacoom, and Sea-Tac Centers. Although the courses were primarily offered as service courses for the Law and Justice program at these centers, the number and range of courses was sufficient enough for some students to earn a minor in sociology as well. The budget cutting process ended support for this effort and no sociology courses were taught at the centers until 2004 when Dr. Beath, Associate Vice President for Undergraduate Studies began to fund one to two sociology courses per quarter at the Yakima, Pierce, Des Moines, and Lynnwood Centers primarily in support of the Individual Studies program. The funding was secondarily intended to offer service coursework useful to other academic programs. We experienced some difficulty getting the Westside centers to appreciate that the funding for these positions was first and foremost intended to encourage enrollment growth in the Individual Studies program, and we experienced difficulty locating adjunct faculty for these positions. During the first year or so, center staff repeatedly attempted to schedule courses which directly benefited students enrolled in the Law and Justice program rather than those involved in the Individual Studies program, and found fault with adjunct faculty hired for the positions. These conflicts appear to have settled down the last few quarters. Distance and a lack of funding has created oversight difficulties suggesting that a full-time faculty member in sociology split between the three Westside centers should be considered. Other advantages: students could have consistent access to a sociology faculty advisor who is current on department curriculum and policy, and who could oversee internships, co-op ed., and field experiences. Given that we have generated viable enrollment numbers in these courses, it is presumed offerings at these centers are likely to continue to expand over time in any case. Presuming qualified faculty can be located, such growth would enhance the ability of students to pursue majors in Individual Studies and Law and Justice.
We have a sound record of academic advising in the department. Many students who decide to drop their original course of studies by switching to a program with our department have indicated our reputation for advising was a key consideration in their decision. While all faculty members are required to take on advisees, we do not assign students to faculty members. Rather students are expected to seek out the faculty member with whom they have the best rapport. This means some faculty carry disproportionately greater numbers of advisees, and students may begin their advisement under the tutelage of one faculty member and move on to a second or a third as their needs and interests change. The role of the faculty in advising is two-fold. First to ensure that the student’s interests are best served through the pursuit of one of our programs as opposed to other academic units, and second, to guide the student through their chosen major or minor. Advisement does not stop at the office door; faculty members also announce changes in course availability and make recommendations about other related courses with each class they offer throughout the year.
Department chair reviews information (such as course syllabi and assignments)provided by the student. If necessary, other department faculty members may be consulted.
Students enrolled in sociology and ethnic studies courses have come from throughout Washington State, the Pacific Northwest, from outside the region, and from other nations (particularly Japan). We believe our graduates are our best ambassadors when it comes to student recruitment. Sociology participates in the Cornerstone Program in two high schools (Chelan and Shelton). This program allows introductory sociology courses carrying CWU credits to be offered by approved instructors in high schools located in areas where participation in the state-wide Running Start program is impractical (schools situated in locations too remote from universities and community colleges). Data suggests these students are more likely to attend college upon graduation, and CWU’s name recognition among Cornerstone participants may increase CWU’s ability to recruit these students.
The faculty have responded to the needs of students with differing learning styles and special needs; often assisting students experiencing performance difficulties on a one-on-one basis or through the use of university programs such as the Math Center, Writing Center, and Test Anxiety workshops offered by the Counseling Center as tools to increase a students’ opportunities for success. Instructional materials and pedagogy have been adjusted in order to meet differences in learning styles while at the same time demanding high standards of performance. Our student organization has taken an active role in this process by offering student mentoring and tutorial assistance.
The department routinely posts fliers and faculty routinely announce to their classes salient on-campus events, workshops and speakers that might afford extra-curricular learning opportunities to students. A few allow extra-credit for participation or require participation in these activities as a part of their overall course grade. Our department’s faculty also sponsor a number of undergraduate research activities each year which constitute out-of-class learning opportunities.
Sociology Student Club (has sponsored brown bag seminars and a peer advisement program) Alpha Kappa Delta (sociology honors society) The following undergraduates were accepted for graduate school admission during the period under review: University of Alaska-Anchorage Social Services Masters Program: Desiree McGill Arizona State University Sociology Masters/Doctoral program: Jeanne Blackburn Central Washington University Masters Programs: Teacher Education--Linda Bautista, Emily Ward, Jennifer King, Individual Studies--Michelle Cyrus Experimental Psychology--Arthur Manjarrez Resource Management--Tim Plourd Eastern Washington University Masters of Social Work Program: Eamon Morgan, Holly Tingey, Toni Razote, Roy Berry, Pamela Olson Portland State University Masters of Social Work Program: Tifny Stuart University of Washington School of Law Juris Doctor Program: Teresa Miller Washington State University Sociology Masters/Doctoral Program: Keri Bailey-Gregerich, Athena Griffith, Jessica Throop
The department places students in cooperative field internship programs in social service agencies throughout the community, region and state. Similarly, graduates are employed in community service private and public sector positions statewide
Department faculty members are involved in research activities that extend well beyond our locale. Dr. Appleton’s multi-year voting survey, Dr. Dugan’s multi-year study of inmates in the Thurston county jail, Dr. Cleary’s policy research with Native American Indian tribes concerning issues such as education, gaming and federal grants, Dr. Xiao’s comprehensive study of Chinese family structure, values and child-rearing practices, Dr. Wessel’s research on undergraduate study abroad experiences and programs, Dr. Pichardo’s studies of social movements and political activism, Dr. Hennessy’s analysis of women on welfare, and Dr. Johnson’s longitudinal study of agricultural and industrial water metering across the state, are all examples of department activities which raise awareness of the role of CWU plays in our state and region.
We entered into the period under study as the 6th largest department in the college in terms of both the number of tenure-stream faculty assigned to COTS units and in terms of overall student credit hours generated within COTS’ departments and fell to the 7th largest department in terms of overall faculty resources by the current year (see Appendix I, Tables 1 and 1a). We began the period under review with ten tenure-stream and two (part-time) adjunct faculty members on the main campus and five part-time adjunct faculty at the Westside centers. We ended with a compliment of eight tenure-stream faculty positions (one of which has been occupied for several years by a FTNT faculty member) and two (part-time) adjunct faculty members on the main campus. We also have four part-time adjunct faculty members who offer courses at the Yakima, Lynnwood, Pierce, and Des Moines university centers (funded by Associate Vice President for Undergraduate Studies). The distribution of faculty resources is currently changing for the better. The department was granted permission to replace the FTNT faculty member with a tenure-track faculty member who joined the ranks of the department in fall 2005; at which time the FTNT person will continue employment for at least one additional academic year. This will be funded in part by general college revenues and by funds recovered from one department member’s academic research sabbatical and another tenured faculty member in the department voluntarily reducing her employment status by 20%. In addition, based upon our enrollment performance and our critical role as a service department for Law and Justice and Ethnic Studies programs, we have just received authorization to conduct an additional tenure-track search which will be funded by the university administration. Thus, by fall 2006 the department should have a compliment of nine tenure-stream faculty (although at that time we may lose the services of the FTNT faculty member). The department has one full-time secretary and three part-time student clerical workers. Despite the negative impact of declining faculty strength, over the past five years the department has typically held the sixth highest enrollment statistics of the college and it has consistently graduated the fourth highest number of undergraduate majors in the college (see Appendix II Tables 2 and 3).
Our department faculty are immersed in a culture of teaching; we talk to each other about instructional pedagogy, we share instructional resources (books, manuscripts, websites, films, etc.) and ideas. Summer school profits are distributed to full-time faculty for the purposes of professional development. A majority of these funds have been spent on instructional and scholarly pursuits.
The department’s policy manual stresses the importance of teaching and learning in evaluation of faculty for reappointment, tenure, promotion and merit. The pertinent sections of the policy manual follow. Good teaching is expected of faculty of all ranks. The faculty member is expected to pursue that ideal relationship between the teacher and the student where each learns from each other, where the student is led outward to his highest level of motivation and understanding, and where the teacher is bound by his own growing knowledge to a continuous revision of the content of instruction. When making personnel decisions (annual review, tenure, promotion, and merit), the department personnel committee and the department chair will base their recommendations will draw upon these two sources of information along with any other data the candidate wishes to submit to judge whether he/she has: a) successfully demonstrate one’s ability to be sensitive, motivating and supportive of students in a non-threatening and collaborative manner; b) stimulate student thinking about current issues from a variety of different perspectives in support of the mission and goals of the department and institution by maundering student research, internship supervision, and individual study; and c) contribute to the overall quality and character of the sociology program by proposing new courses and redeveloping current ones. d) Evaluation: the Sociology faculty member shall be evaluated on the basis of presentation of material, guidance and discussion, ability to communicate to students, ability to stimulate their interests, and inspire students to advance their knowledge beyond the requirements of the class. In addition, the faculty member’s effectiveness in advising students on academic matters shall be considered. The ability to communicate knowledge and to stimulate new insights in students should be one of the most important criteria for judging teaching competence.
The Faculty Profile Table provides a summary of faculty involvement in the three main spheres of academic life (teaching, service and scholarship). It should come as no surprise for an undergraduate department that prides itself on its instruction that every faculty member associated with the department was involved in the supervision of undergraduate research projects each year. What may be more surprising is that over half the members of the department participated on graduate committees and a quarter supervised graduate theses or projects during the period. The table also indicates that the department’s faculty have been very active in service activities. Every faculty member reported serving on at least one university committee (or the Faculty Senate) during the period, and clear majorities reported involvement university programs and panels, advisement to student organizations, and service to community/state agencies and organizations. Department faculty were somewhat less likely to be involved in traditional academic and applied research endeavors. However, a majority Department faculty members were involved in research activities that extend well beyond our locale. As previously cited in this report, the following projects are underway within the department: Dr. Appleton’s multi-year voting survey, Dr. Dugan’s multi-year study of inmates in the Thurston county jail, Dr. Cleary’s policy research with Native American Indian tribes concerning issues such as education, gaming and federal grants, Dr. Xiao’s comprehensive study of Chinese family structure, values and child-rearing practices, Dr. Wessel’s research on undergraduate study abroad experiences and programs, Dr. Pichardo’s studies of social movements and political activism, Dr. Hennessy’s analysis of women on welfare, and Dr. Johnson’s longitudinal study of agricultural and industrial water metering across the state. The table exhibits a level of research output appropriate for an undergraduate department with a high instructional demand and a lack of resources; during the past five years, a majority of our faculty have presented papers at professional conferences and have either been published (in on form or another) or been involved in applied sociological research.
Each full or part-time faculty member will administer the SEOI survey in every course taught at the University with an enrollment of at least 5 students (anonymity of response is more likely to be compromised when the enrollment falls below 5). When practical, each faculty member will arrange for a member of the secretarial staff to administer the SEOI survey during the last two weeks of instruction for any academic quarter (or at the time of the final examination). Should a member of the secretarial staff not be available at the desired time, faculty members may arrange to have a student distribute and collect the survey forms. This student must return the completed surveys directly to the department secretary. Faculty members may not be present in the classroom when surveys are being completed, and completed surveys may not be turned over to the faculty member. The department secretarial staff will take responsibility for the verbatim transcription of the qualitative comments section of the SEOI, and ensure that the appropriate university office tabulates the quantitative section. One copy of the qualitative and quantitative results will be returned to the faculty member, another will be retained in the department records. The Department of Sociology conducts peer review of instruction on two levels. First, both qualitative and quantitative SEOI survey results and course syllabi are reviewed by the chair of the personnel committee and department chair as one means of assessing instructional performance. Second, department faculty members are encouraged to pair up into dyads composed of members who offer similar courses to review syllabi. With the exception of non-tenured tenure-stream faculty who must allow annual direct observation of their instructional performance, this dyad also has the option of conducting direct observations on classroom performance. It is expected that the parties will engage in a dialog consisting of constructive feedback on instructional style and course logistics. Through this exchange of information it is anticipated that the faculty will enhance their classroom performance.
The distribution of faculty resources is currently changing for the better for the department after a period of steady decline. At present we have nine tenure-stream faculty (including a full-time associate dean of COTS), one FTNT faculty member, and one part-time adjunct lecturer on Ellensburg campus. The department is conducting a search for a new tenure track faculty who is expected to join us in the fall of 2008. All tenure-stream faculty have doctoral degrees in sociology and expertise in the courses they teach.
Data provided by Instructional Research and other appropriate offices.
Comprehensive library resources are essential to the ability to carry on productive roles as educators and scholars. Academic and applied research is facilitated by having access to archives containing both current and historical social scientific journals, a broad range of government and organizational records and reference materials, academically-oriented books, and media holdings (ranging from microfilm collections to videotapes/disks and data sets). Similarly, a well maintained catalog of holdings is essential to the instructional process in order to prepare students to be more informed and literate citizens. The budget cuts experienced by this institution in general, and the library specifically, have compromised its ability to meet the needs of both faculty and students in the sociology and ethnic studies disciplines. The staff of the library seems sufficient in size to meet our needs and they have clearly been innovative in attempting to adapt to stressful funding circumstances. Perhaps most notably they have opened up the lines of communication between departments and the library. In sum, we appreciate and praise their efforts to meet the needs of the department and overall institution. However, due to the funding constraints placed upon the library we have lost access to a number of journals and continuing reference sets over the period under review (exacerbating prior declines in library holdings), and the acquisition of new books and media has not kept pace with changes in the sociological and ethnic studies’ knowledge base. Early on in the five-year period under review the department did not feel that it was adequately consulted when cuts were made in holdings related to our discipline, this communication gap has been rectified. Prior library staff and managers seldom spoke with departments about their decisions, nor did they seem overly concerned with the impact their actions might have on instruction and scholarship. Journals were discontinued based upon a cost-savings model without regard to department need (without consultation subscriptions to less essential journals were retained while subscriptions to more critical journals were not), and older journals, data sets, and bulletins were discarded in the interests of increasing storage space for more recent materials (thereby losing a wealth of historical information pertinent to our discipline). The expansion of interlibrary loan programs and electronic holdings has been used to fill some of the dearth in local resources. While interlibrary loan programs inarguably provide us with access to materials we might not otherwise have and our faculty have found these resources to be quite useful, these programs are not equivalent to having a comprehensive adequately-funded library on our own campus. Interlibrary loan complicates and lengthens the academic process. One cannot as readily obtain the information in a timely fashion. While we have found the research staff to be highly skilled and we have been quite impressed with the expansion of library search engines, it is more complicated and time consuming to order materials through interlibrary loan than it is to pick them out of one’s own stacks. Moreover, the art of perusing the stacks searching for “just the book or study you were looking for” has been increasingly lost as we have been more and more reliant on interlibrary loan to make up for inadequate up-to-date holdings. Due dates have necessarily needed to be shortened with shared resources, and many documents and media are simply not included among the list of items libraries are willing to share off site. Electronic subscriptions have not replaced many of the lost journals, and electronic journals and photocopies received from interlibrary loan seem cold and impersonal (the computer screen and copy paper are clearly no replacements for the feel of a book or journal and being able to appreciate how many of one’s colleagues and students have pondered the same material as evidenced by the wear on the pages). The loss of paper copies of journals also inhibits our B.S. majors (and others) from browsing the breadth of issues covered under a given area of study (for example, gender studies or organizational analysis) since focusing on specific topics in a computer search doesn’t convey how the field has developed or is organized.
Gerard Hogan (library liaison to sociology) assists faculty members with library resource utilization on an individual level as well as addressing a department meeting on library resources and the types of assistance he can offer us.
Faculty conduct research and prepare lecture and other course materials utilizing library holdings and interlibrary loan Faculty assign research projects and papers to students that requires the utilization of library resources Students conduct research and write thematic papers based on library holdings and materials received via interlibrary loan Faculty and students use the assistance of computerized library data bases and the library research staff to facilitate the acquisition of the above materials Faculty assign reserve readings for classes which are housed in the library Faculty utilize media resources (videotapes/disks which are purchased by and housed in the library Faculty have occasionally arranged library tours and invited library staff to provide class lectures on library resources and search procedures
Judy Hennessy (our department’s library representative) works closely with library staff to order texts, journals, and media resources within the funding parameters provided by the library
The Department of Sociology has two governing structures whose most important duties are to oversee reappointment, tenure, promotion and merit decisions—the department chair and the department personnel committee. The department chair is appointed by the Dean of the College of the Sciences in consultation with department faculty. The personnel committee is composed of all full-time faculty members assigned to the department. As is the case with the department chair, all full-time faculty members are eligible to vote on who will serve as chair of the personnel committee. The committee’s chair is the second most important organizational position in the department; this individual typically works directly with the department chair in all personnel matters (searches, merit, tenure and promotion processes, etc.). Typically all full-time faculty members sit on this committee and are allowed to participate in discussions and have voting rights. In instances in which the Faculty Code specifically limits voting rights (e.g., tenure decisions) voting rights are restricted to tenured associate and full professors, and the department chair is not permitted to vote in these situations regardless of tenure or faculty rank. The department chair and personnel committee are guided by the procedures and principles outlined in the department’s Personnel Manual, the Faculty Code, and other university policy manuals. They operate independently and make separate recommendations on matters pertaining to the above personnel issues.
The department is rather small, which allows it to use a committee of the whole approach to most other issues. Therefore, when addressing curriculum, programs, and policies, for example, all full-time faculty are allowed to participate in the discussions and have voting rights. Part-time faculty are permitted to take part in such discussions, but are not allowed to vote. Any alteration or change in policy or program requires the support of a plurality of department members. Occasionally the department creates ad hoc committees. These committees may not include all faculty members but instead be composed of interested parties who volunteer to take on a particular task. No formal voting is involved in selecting the membership of an ad hoc committee. The department is occasionally asked to provide a representative to serve as a liaison between the department and another university unit (e.g., the department’s library representative or Faculty Senator). In these instances the chair calls for nominations and volunteers. If multiple parties express interest in the position, a vote by all full-time faculty is held to determine who the representative will be.
Department faculty sit regularly on and the college and university committees. One senior faculty is serving as associate dean (full time) of COTS. One faculty is serving as director of academic coordination (part-time). Three faculty members are chairs of three university or faculty senate committees this year.
During a time in which we took on increasing class loads and advising duties cost of living increases have not been forthcoming. Moreover, the department’s faculty did not benefit from the Plan A salary equity process (in most cycles) due to existing salary levels, which primarily reflect the atypical demographic composition of our faculty ranks (for example, only three full professors, two of whom have 20 years in rank, and one with five years in rank). Therefore we did not receive increased wages during a period of rising expectations and demands upon our time and energy. The university must provide funding for technology in the classroom and in department offices. We need to locate resources to cover the cost of travel, per diem, and honoraria in order to build a functional colloquy program). Summer profits have been critical for the department’s professional development, scholarship and technology. We plan to continue to use summer money to upgrade and increase faculty technology and research with matching university/college funds. Hire a full-time sociology faculty member with a generalist background capable of offering courses in the fields of criminology and deviance, social psychology, organizations, and disenfranchised groups. This would allow us to offer courses at the three Westside Centers in a more predictable pattern (classes would not have to be canceled at the last moment because an adjunct either decided to quit, could not be located, or proved to be ill suited to the job).
The department faculty entertained ideas of reaching out to alumni for fundraising functions. We plan to continue to explore this possibility.
Sociology department is located on the top floor in Farrell Hall. It has adequate office space for its faculty. The two common areas serve as gathering place for students. But there are two main problems with our physical environment. First, the entire floor is not well heated as we have an extremely high vaulted ceiling (more than 30 feet high in the center). Second, all of the cooling and heating pipes are exposed throughout the floor. It is very noisy place all year round. The furnace noise interferes with our daily functions.
There is a small lab on the top floor. The facility has eight PC’s and one printer. In 2004/05 Computer Support Services wanted to close the lab in a centralization effort. We managed to keep it open because it was used by several of our classes (and Anthropology occasionally schedules the lab for its courses), but we no longer have a student assistant assigned to the lab by CSS.
The department has requested a survey/teaching lab for many years. Without it faculty's ability to conduct research and mentor students' research is severely limited.