From Bylaws & Policies:
XI. Departmental Policy Statements.
Policy #11-95
Policy on Senior Assignment
Revised Effective January 1, 2008
I. In the senior year, each Philosophy major, whether a first or second major, may choose one of two options to fulfill the university graduation requirement of a senior assignment. By the end of the fifth week of the last semester of the senior year the student must either present three papers to be assessed by the Department's Senior Assignment Committee (option A) or have taken an oral examination (option B).
A. Present three papers to be assessed by the Department's Senior Assignment Committee: a Senior Reflective Essay (2-5 page) and two philosophy papers written for SIUE philosophy courses. In their reflective essay, students should discuss what they have learned while studying philosophy at SIUE. Some questions that students may want to address include:
- Where were you (academically or philosophically) prior to attending SIUE?
- Where has the Philosophy program taken you?
- What are your plans for the future?
- How will the education you have received here help you in your future pursuits?
It is our hope that this Senior Assignment option will provide students with a capstone experience enabling them to reflect on what they have learned while studying philosophy at SIUE. It is also our hope that this senior assignment will be useful to the faculty in assessing whether the current program is achieving the goals set forth by the department or whether it needs improvement.
From these papers, faculty will be able to assess the student’s progression in the formulation of cogent arguments, clarity of expression, knowledge of philosophical issues, accuracy of interpretation, and creativity or originality of expression.
B. Take an oral examination. The examination will cover several periods or areas of philosophy, various philosophers, and several philosophical issues. The student will be presented with a list of guidelines and sample questions to study in preparation for this examination. The examination will be structured so that the student and examiners may all engage in questions and answers. The purpose of this second option is to allow the student, in addition to meeting the criteria below (in II.A.2) to demonstrate an ability to think "on his or her feet." The examining committee will be made up of three faculty members (all from Philosophy), one of whom is to be a member of the Department of Philosophy’s Senior Assignment Committee.
II. The assessment of the senior assignment will be based on the following criteria:
A. Three Papers Option:
1. The paper designated for assessment in terms of these criteria must be substantially free of grammatical errors.
2. The criteria for assessment include:
• (a) Cogency of argument
• (b) Clarity of expression
• (c) Knowledge of issues and alternatives
• (d) Accuracy of interpretation
• (e) Creativity and originality of expression
3. Application of Criteria
• Cogency of argument
1. Exceeds expectations: The argument of the paper is well- organized, tightly constructed, philosophically sophisticated, and plausibly valid.
2. Satisfies expectations: The argument is clearly organized, philosophically interesting, and either plausibly valid or interestingly invalid
3. Does not satisfy expectations: The argument is poorly organized, loosely constructed, or uninterestingly invalid.
• Clarity of expression:
1. Exceeds expectations: The paper is so clearly written that the philosophical points are easily grasped, as are the connections between ideas.
2. Satisfies expectations: Meets (1) with only a few lapses.
3. Does not satisfy expectations: The paper is written in such a way that the philosophical points are frequently obscured.
• Knowledge of issues and alternatives:
1. Exceeds expectations: The main argument of the paper is presented in relation to the relevant literature and takes note of the major theses in dispute in the literature that bear directly on the argument The major alternatives in each dispute are clearly and accurately identified and evaluated.
2. Satisfies expectations: The main argument of the paper exhibits sensitivity to the disputes in the relevant literature that bear on it.
3. Does not satisfy expectations: The main argument of the paper assumes without comment or defense a significant position that has been disputed in the relevant literature.
• Accuracy of interpretation:
1. Exceeds expectations: Interpretations of philosophers' positions fit within the standard interpretations (including emerging views that have gained substantial acceptance) or are justified by careful exegesis developed in the paper.
2. Satisfies expectations: Meets (i) with only a few lapses, which don't materially affect the argument of the paper.
3. Does not satisfy expectations: The main argument depends on interpretations that neither fit within the standard range nor are defended by careful exegesis.
• Creativity or originality of expression
1. Exceeds expectations: The paper exhibits philosophical originality.
2. Satisfies expectations: The paper employs original arguments, analogies, metaphors, or examples in the development of the main argument.
3. Does not satisfy expectations: The paper relies on common analogies, metaphors, and examples in the development of the main argument--so much so that the author's own philosophical vision is not manifest.
B. Oral Examination Option:
The oral examination will be evaluated in terms of the criteria (a) through (e) above.
III. Senior Assessment Committee.
The SAC will consist of three members, appointed at the beginning of the Fall term by the Chair of Philosophy with the approval of the Undergraduate Philosophy Committee. The members will serve for the year. SAC will select its own Chair.
The Senior Assignment Committee will have responsibility to review and evaluate the papers submitted. The primary purpose of this review is to assess the quality of the program, and to insure that the objectives are being achieved.
The Chair of the SAC will write a brief report to the Chair of the Department at the end of the academic year, communicating the results of the review, with pertinent comments and recommendations for programmatic changes where deemed necessary. The criteria employed are those approved by the Department, consistent with the objectives of the baccalaureate degree in philosophy.
Each student shall be informed in writing of the results of the review of his/her paper.
For any questions concerning the Senior Assignment please contact the Major Advisor, Judith Crane, or the Senior Assignment Chair, Dr. Ezio Vailati.