Global Security and Intelligence Studies Volume 4, Number 1, Spring/Summer 2019 | Page 25

Global Security and Intelligence Studies
gram should largely be the same as being enrolled in another. However, what the
intelligence studies literature has not addressed, until now, was whether the actual
assessment methods had that same degree of consistency. When the “rubber meets
the road,” do intelligence studies programs actually strive for similar outcomes in
student learning?
Table 1. Intelligence Studies Program Outcomes
Institution
Degree
Level
Procedural
Knowledge
Core
Knowledge
Domain
Knowledge
Ethical
Awareness
Angelo State University Masters X X X X
The Citadel Masters X X X X
University of Texas at El Paso Masters X X X —
Angelo State University Bachelors X X X X
Coastal Carolina University Bachelors X X X —
Notre Dame College Bachelors X X X —
The Citadel Bachelors X X X X
University of Arizona South Bachelors X X X —
Direct Assessment Measures
The most intuitive approach to measuring student performance is via direct
means—that is, measuring the program’s progress towards SLOs by allowing students
to demonstrate their level of competency. However, how students demonstrate
that competency can be done in a variety of ways. The most common categorization
of assessment methods in this area is to distinguish between qualitative
and quantitative approaches. Both of these approaches have a unique collection of
strengths and weaknesses.
Quantitative approaches to assessment are the most efficient way to assess
SLOs across a larger population. This is particularly true in programs where the
student-to-faculty ratios are very high—such as intelligence studies. Quantitative
approaches often include more abstract or indirect measures of student performance
such as graduation rates, course grades, and placement data. The ability to
monitor these basic criteria can sometime serve as a “tripwire” for programmatic
issues (Larry Valero, Telephone interview with author, November 6, 2017).
As an example of a direct, quantitative assessment method, Coastal Carolina
University utilizes an internal multiple-choice test as one of its assessment measures
of core knowledge competency. This test is administered to students twice:
once when they enter the program in the INTEL 200 Introduction to Intelligence
and National Security course; and again at the end, during the INTEL 494 Intel-
14