Part 1: Assessment Statistical Report

The following chart shows where we began in the spring semester 2004, where we are currently, having completed the spring 2006 semester, and where we see ourselves at the end of the next academic year.

	Spring 2004	Spring 2006	By Spring 2007
Participating Faculty	3	13	15
Disciplines	3 English Literature Psychology	10 English Literature Psychology Humanities Biology Economics Geography History Math Philosophy	11 (Political Science will offer a section)
Sections Taught	4	20	23
Courses	English Comp I English Comp II Intro to Literature	English Comp I English Comp II Intro to Literature General Biology II Macroeconomics Human Ecology Western Civilization Survey of Humanities Masterpieces of Lit I Masterpieces of Lit II American Literature II Shakespeare Bible as Literature C.S. Lewis College Algebra Ethics General Psychology I General Psychology II	English Comp I English Comp II Intro to Literature General Biology II Macroeconomics Human Ecology Western Civilization II Survey of Humanities Masterpieces of Lit I Masterpieces of Lit II American Literature II Shakespeare Bible as Literature C.S. Lewis College Algebra Ethics General Psychology I General Psychology II American Literature I Intro Political Science
Number of Students	71	311	355 (expected)
Meetings per Semester	1-2	1-2	1-2

Additional Components of Great Books Curriculum

• We are still in the development phase of our website, http://greatbooks.arapahoe.edu. We need to upload more information on course content, faculty, Great Books authors, and the Great Books Foundation.
• The Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences Division at Arapahoe Community College (ACC) hosts an awards ceremony at the end of every academic year recognizing outstanding students. This year, those who earned the Great Books Certificate were recognized for their outstanding work (earning a "B" or better in at least four Great Books courses).
• We are in the initial stages of developing a symposium of sorts in which Great Books students would read and discuss their work.
• The program has been well covered in the Littleton, Colorado, newspapers, and posters and brochures distributed on campus have brought many interested students into the program.

Part 2: Tracking Students

Working with our registrar, Arapahoe’s Great Books classes are tracked via the assigned section number. Traditional class sections at ACC are listed as L01, L02, etc. Online classes are noted as E01, E02, etc., and hybrid classes (half online-half traditional) are given F01, F02, and so on.

Great Books sections are given section numbers that begin with "GB." So a Great Books section of English Composition would appear as "ENG 121 GB1" in the schedule and on the student’s transcript. Because of this section numbering system, we are easily able to identify students who have taken Great Books classes.

This spring and summer, the entire Colorado Community College System, of which Arapahoe is a part, is transferring to a new SIS computer system (Banner) in the coming year. As a result, we are currently uncertain how we can use the system to track students. Therefore, we are currently tracking students through Lucy Graca of the English Department. She is doing this manually, which is time-consuming but accurate, given the fluid state of our technology.

Part 3: Assessment

At the end of the year, we handed out a short survey in all Great Books sections (see attached). We’re trying to determine whether our promotion of the program was effective, whether students felt they had benefited from the classes, what suggestions they had for future Great Books courses, and (perhaps most importantly) whether they would take another Great Books course again.

• 42 percent of respondents said they signed up for the specific class because it was a Great Books section. Fifty-eight percent either did not know about the program and/or were in the course because it fit their schedule.
• When asked what they liked most and what they liked least about the course, the answer was the same - the in-depth reading. Those in the Great Books sections of Math and Biology seemed more inclined to claim that the in-depth readings were what they liked least because it was not what they were expecting from these types of courses.
• However, 78 percent felt that the Great Books class was going to help in other courses in terms of reading skills and seeing the interconnectedness between disciplines.
• Recommended changes ranged from "less reading" to "more reading" to "Nothing. This was a great class. Don’t change a thing!"
• Encouragingly, 82 percent said they would take another Great Books class, though about half put in the disclaimer, "if it fits my schedule."

We are currently considering more objective means of determining whether reading and critical thinking skills are demonstrably stronger in students who have taken Great Books classes, but we are working with logistical issues. We are trying to compare the skills of the Great Books students with the rest of the student body. Some of the challenges facing a meaningful assessment include:

• Student willingness to take a "post-class" standardized test
• The fact that if only the Great Books students are taking the "post-class" test, and other students in traditional classes are not taking any sort of exit exam, are we really comparing apples to apples?
• A transient student population
• Many of the courses (especially the literature classes) only offer the one Great Books section per semester and, therefore, there is nothing against which to compare students

The solution to these problems can be addressed if we only assess those Great Books courses that also have traditional (non-Great Books) sections. Great Books professors teaching multiple sections of English Composition, College Algebra, Macroeconomics, and Survey of Humanities, for example, can give the same final exam or project and then compare the results from the Great Books sections with the non-Great Books sections. This will leave out certain classes, such as Shakespeare, C.S. Lewis, and Masterpieces of Literature. We will be discussing this in our meeting at the beginning of the fall semester.

Case History

Arapahoe Community College in Littleton, Colorado, began its Great Books program in the spring of 2004. It was initiated by two English faculty, Lucy Graca and Patrick Dolan, who felt that ACC students would benefit from such a program. In addition, other faculty thought it would enhance the college’s already excellent academic reputation. We started small, as most faculty and administrators were focused on how to maintain our educational mission and priorities in a time of declining funds for higher education in Colorado, with the community colleges being hit especially hard.

Initial classes included English Composition and Introduction to Literature, with Psychology working on modifying the curriculum to include more of the Great Books authors/readings. Other faculty were either not interested or were not initially willing to modify their courses (ACC faculty have a 5-5 course load).

The ACC administration was also cautious in its acceptance of the program, with some administrators not certain that the Great Books program would appeal to our student population. Eventually, with some gentle persuasion, (and realizing that it would not cost the college money if students did not buy into the program), they gave their consent.

We also had meetings with the registrar, who was uncertain as to the ability of ACC to modify transcripts, as we are part of a statewide community college system. As mentioned above, we were able to modify Great Books section numbers and print the required Great Books accolade on the transcript.

There were similar issues with the contract for the grant, with our accounting officer noticing some conditions which ACC, again, as part of a statewide system, could not comply with. After various communications with the partners in Chicago, we were able to resolve these issues and proceed with pedagogical issues.

By the fall of 2004, word had spread and faculty had the summer to rework their syllabi (which, in the case of many Literature and Survey of Humanities classes, did not require much tweaking, as over 50 percent of the primary reading was already from Great Books authors). Lucy Graca met face-to-face with other faculty members in their offices, explaining the program and its benefits, and then held a meeting for those who expressed interest. Most ended up seeing the value of the class and/or saw this as an opportunity to approach their classes from a different perspective, particularly Erica Johnson in College Algebra, Joan Anderssen in Macroeconomics, and Celia Norman in Biology.

We chose our theme - "the pursuit of happiness" - with a strong consensus, and discussed the criteria for the Great Books Certificate. Most of the other partner institutions believe that passing any Great Books class should count toward a Great Books achievement award. However, ACC faculty believed that this was, perhaps, not a high enough standard, as many of our classes had been teaching these readings already, prior to winning the Great Books grant, and were uncomfortable with a straight-C student being singled out for accomplishing something significant. We decided that four [Great Books] classes with a "B" or better would qualify a student to earn the certificate and acknowledgement on their transcript.

The program subsequently attracted more faculty and students each semester. Our strength, we think, is the fact that we do include classes outside of the humanities - psychology, math, economics, biology - in the program, which benefits our students who are, more often than not, looking for core transfer classes.

However, challenges still exist. According to our advisors - as well as anecdotal evidence from our students - there is the perception that these courses are more difficult, and therefore, students are avoiding them. And indeed, the enrollment for certain Great Books classes seemed lower than in the past (or compared to other non-Great Books sections of the same course), although they did fill up as other classes became full and closed.

The fact is, some of these classes are more difficult. Reading Pythagoras and Einstein in College Algebra, or Marx and Keynes in Macroeconomics, is not easy. And when students hear that other classmates are not required to read these texts, there is the perception among some that the Great Books class is harder. While some students appreciate the challenge and feel better for having taken the class, some do not. This is something we must be aware of in an era of fiscal restraint. We do not want enrollments to suffer or to have students scared away from taking classes.

Still, we are growing, with other disciplines like Political Science adding a Great Books section next semester, and others still seriously thinking about it, like Sociology and French. We are confident that the program will succeed and continue to be a benefit to our students and their educational development.

We would be happy to answer questions and to help anyone starting this process. Please feel free to contact Professor Lucy Graca (lucy.graca@arapahoe.edu) or Dr. Lance Rubin (lance.rubin@arapahoe.edu).