Department of Art and Design – Departmental Assessment … · 2013. 7. 29. · 1 Department of Art and Design – Departmental Assessment Update June 2013 . Table of contents p.2

1

Department of Art and Design – Departmental Assessment Update

June 2013

Table of contents

p.2. List of current program learning outcomes.

p.5. Summary of assessment methods.

p.8. Summary of the assessment timeline, i.e., when data gets collected, when is it analyzed, when is it fed back to the department.

p.10. Summary of what has been learned/any actions you have taken as a result of assessment data gathered so far.

Appendix A

Assessment Summary charts for each degree program

Appendix B

Rubrics for data collection points for each degree program (available upon request)

Appendix C

Art and Design General Education Courses and the Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes

2

List of current Program Learning Outcomes Statements for Art and Design 6/4//2013

Department-Wide Learning Outcomes Statements

1. Students will be able to demonstrate fluency with formal vocabulary, artistic techniques and procedures of art practice.

2. Students will be able to communicate a critical understanding of past and present works of art and visual objects from a diversity of cultures.

3. As members of a broader community, students will be able to exhibit ethical leadership, community engagement and cultural competence.

Program Learning Outcomes Statements Learning outcomes for BA Art

1. Students will be able to communicate their ideas effectively in visual, verbal, and written form.

2. Students will be able to critique and analyze works of art. 3. Students will demonstrate a well-rounded liberal arts education including historical and

philosophical awareness as this applies to their own major and minor fields of study as well as to the humanities in general.

4. Students will demonstrate proficiency in at least one foreign language. 5. Students will demonstrate familiarity with selected media within the field of studio art.

Learning outcomes for BA Art History

1. Students will demonstrate an awareness of the diversity of form, content, and aims of art over time and between cultures.

2. Students will be able to perform competent visual analyses of art, being able to describe art while employing Art Historical terminology.

3. Students will be able to effectively research art and be able to synthesize and express the resulting knowledge coherently.

4. Students will recognize the value of a range of current and past art historical methodologies.

5. Students will be able to discuss ethics in art, being able to explain both sides of controversial issues.

Learning outcomes for BFA Art

1. Students will demonstrate a general knowledge of technical issues in their discipline and other art areas.

2. Students will demonstrate in-depth knowledge of conceptual and aesthetic issues in their discipline and other art areas.

3

3. Students will demonstrate in their creative work visual problem solving through an understanding of the elements and principles of visual organization.

4. Students will demonstrate an understanding of historical and contemporary issues within their discipline and other art areas.

5. Students will demonstrate an ability to critically assess works of art both verbally and through written form in regard to form, content and technical concerns.

Learning outcomes for BFA Design

1. Students will be able to demonstrate ability in drawing: perception, translation of 3-D into 2-D space, composition, and expression.

2. Students will be able to demonstrate computer skills: Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign. 3. Students will be able to demonstrate typographic knowledge: Rules, Hierarchy,

Organization, Expression. 4. Students will be able to demonstrate problem solving abilities: Systematic, Conceptual

and Expressive 5. Students will be able to demonstrate Innovation, Imagination, and Creative Thinking 6. Students will be able to demonstrate writing ability: Organization, Communication, and

Clarity of Expression

Learning outcomes for BS in Electronic Arts, Animation track

1. Students will be able to provide evidence of effective communication skills through work (written and artistic) included in their electronic portfolios. Characteristics of Effective Communication: clarity, efficiency, well-organization, informed, intentional, articulate, strategic, responsive, conveys a vision, and provides evidence of good listening.

2. Students will be able to demonstrate effective collaboration skill through work (creative projects, written assignments, production planning documents, etc.) included in their electronic portfolios. Characteristics of Effective Collaboration: adaptability, cooperative, responsive (timely action), honesty, efficiently utilizes the skills and strengths of each team members, fosters understanding of the common goal, aspires to excellence, members act responsibly toward the group, effective leadership is established by the group, environment is conducive to artistic risk.

3. Students will be able to demonstrate artistic growth and technical mastery within their disciplinary area (animation, audio, multimedia, or video) through creative work included in their electronic portfolios.

4

Learning outcomes for BSEd Art Education

1. Students in Art Education will demonstrate proficiencies and fluency in their area of specialty by meeting or exceeding state teaching certification requirements.

2. Students in Art Education will critically analyze content in their specialty area, to include curriculum development, classroom management strategies, and pedagogical knowledge.

3. Students will demonstrate knowledge of global, historic, and cultural perspectives as influences in contemporary art education practices.

5

Summary of Assessment methods

Following the (COAL designated) Stanford University model, departmental program assessment will be based on the identification, articulation and assessment of Student Learning Outcomes for each degree program. Student Learning Outcomes focus on what the students should be able to do upon graduation with the degree (completion of the program) rather than what they do in the individual classes. Learning outcomes are about the product (what the students can do) not the process (what the instructor teaches in class or how they teach it). Beginning in 2010, each degree program has generated 3-5 program-specific Student Learning Outcomes for assessment, in addition to the 3 universal Missouri State University Public Affairs Learning Outcomes. These Student Learning Outcomes are reconsidered each year by those teaching within each degree program to determine if they are still the best reflections of what we want our students to learn. In most cases, the Student Learning Outcomes have remained the same for each degree over the years, although Design simplified and modified their Student Learning Outcomes considerably in academic year 2011/2012.

The Art and Design departmental assessment report considers two kinds of learning outcomes: Department-wide learning outcomes (which are common to all programs) and program learning outcomes statements (which are specific to the individual degrees offered by this department.) Since the Learning Outcomes Statements for each degree program incorporate (in more program-specific detail) the essential skills outlined broadly in the Department-wide Learning Outcomes Statements the Art and Design has opted not to assess Department-wide Learning Outcomes as separate from Program Learning Outcomes. The degree programs offered in the Department of Art and Design are: BFA Art, BA Art and Design, BSEd Art and Design, BA Art History, BFA Design, and BS Electronic Arts. The assessment report for the BS Electronic Arts is being coordinated by the Department of Media Journalism and Film. The departmental assessment committee has decided not to collect data for the non-comprehensive BA Art and Design degree. As discussed under the 2012 Program Review, this degree is without a designated coordinator and is currently undergoing revision by the Curriculum Committee. The Assessment Plan Summary Charts (see Appendix A) identify the direct and indirect ways that Student Learning Outcomes may be assessed within each program (BFA Art, BSEd Art and Design, BA Art History, and BFA Design.) On these summary charts data collection plans identify the most strategic moments within a program for the collection of data via these assessment measures.

In most cases pre-existing rubrics already used within each program (BFA candidacy review, ART499 evaluations, individual class assignments and exams) may be used as-is or modified to

6

report how students are meeting the declared learning outcomes for that program. These can be found in Appendix B (available upon request.) For a limited number of Student Learning Outcomes brand new rubrics had to be designed. The intention of the departmental assessment committee was that departmental assessment reporting should not be burdensome for the instructors involved but should be designed by the reporting faculty members and fit naturally with the assessment modalities that they already employ at the class level.

In fall 2012 courses ART 200, ART 271, ART 272, ART 273 and ART 274 were proposed by the department for inclusion in the newly revamped General Education program. These courses were approved by the University in spring 2013. Over academic year 2013/2014, new assessment means will be devised for these courses to reflect the new University-wide General Education student learning outcomes. (See Appendix C: Art and Design proposed General Education Courses and the Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes.) The data collection points for these assessment means have been identified; the next task, for academic year 2013/2014, is to devise the rubrics.

A sample of current data collection points and assessment methods for the various Art and Design degrees is given below:

Degree Program Disciplinary Learning Outcome

Data Collection Point Assessment Method

BFA Art 1. Student demonstrates knowledge of concepts and techniques in their discipline and/or other art areas.

This learning outcome will be assessed by ART 499 instructors (Capstone Senior Exhibition.)

Evaluation Sheet that includes this learning outcome and rated using a 1-5 scale for assessment.

BA Art History 3.Students will be able to effectively research art and be able to synthesize and express the resulting knowledge coherently.

Research paper/project grades from all upper-level classes. In Fall 12 this was assessed in ART484 (Contemporary), ART378 (Women and Art), in ART 382 (Islamic Art) and in ART488 (Conservation). In Spring 2013 this was assessed in ART 386 (Art of Africa), ART484

Mode selected by instructor. Assessment = scored on 1-5 scale according to instructor’s rubric.

7

(Contemporary), and ART 475 (Renaissance)

BFA Design 1.Ability in drawing BFA Design Candidacy Review (Admission to degree program)

Evaluation Sheet that includes this learning outcome and reported using a 1-5 scale for assessment.

Although the different data collection methods might generate results in a variety of different formats such as scores within a test, percentages, or letter grades – according to the individual instructor’s rubric – it was agreed that, at the departmental level, these should be reported on a 1-5 scale (as indicated below.) 5 = Outstanding 4= Very Good 3= Satisfactory 2=Minimum Passing 1= Fail In reporting the results in terms of the percentage of students reaching each level at each specific data collection point, it becomes easy to see how many students are meeting the Student Learning Outcomes across each program (and, at a glance, department-wide.)

8

Summary of the Assessment Timeline

(i.e., when data gets collected, when it is analyzed, and when it is fed back to the department.

Summary of Activities in academic year 2012/2013

Our committee charge for academic year 2012/2013 was to continue to collect the assessment data for each degree program, analyze the data, and assess the results to determine if the stated learning outcomes were achieved.

By spring 2013, the BFA Art, BA Art History, and BFA Design degrees had new data from fall 2012 and Spring 2013 to add to that collected from academic year 2011/2012 and was able to evaluate both sets together.

With Steve Willis back from sabbatical, the BSEd Art and Design Student Learning Outcomes and data collection plans were revised according to the Stanford Model to parallel the other degrees.

Degree program representatives then worked with faculty within their respective programs to articulate the results in short written narrative form to include in the departmental report.

Reflecting on data from the whole academic year, by Spring 2013 each program responded to the results, and began to discuss any necessary changes to pedagogy or curriculum.

Next steps for Fall 2013/Spring 2014

Reflecting on the assessment process itself, representatives from the degree programs may choose to work with the assessment committee and/or the Department Head to discuss changes to data collection plans or rubrics for academic year 13/14.

At this point, the BFA Art, BA Art History, and BFA Design degrees have agreed to continue to collect data in the same manner as in academic year 2012/2013. Data collection will proceed in the Fall and Spring semesters, with a review and analysis again in Spring 2014.

Art and Design faculty representatives for the BS Electronic Arts degree may be consulted by the assessment committee and/or the Department Head in Fall 2013 to discuss the results generated by that program and any implications for pedagogy or curriculum within Art and Design.

In most cases, the program assessment reports will be discussed primarily amongst the faculty members who teach courses within that degree in consultation with the Department Head. The assessment committee is simply there to help with the process, and not in and of itself an authority to which results are reported. The purpose of assessment is not to generate a report, but to assist the faculty teaching within each degree program in determining if and how well students are learning what we want them to know. However, as indicated by the 2012 Departmental Program Review, two major considerations that are currently being discussed at the full departmental level include the Foundations program and the non-comprehensive BA Art and Design degree. Since the response to the external reviewer’s comments for the Program Review indicated that the assessment of Foundations was a topic to be discussed, the assessment committee recommends that the current Foundations Committee be charged with this revision, alongside their recommendations for re-structuring the Foundations curriculum.

9

Equally, with the non-comprehensive BA Art and Design degree currently under curricular revision and review, the assessment committee recommends that this degree be brought properly under the umbrella of assessment. Conversations about a coordinator for this degree should be raised with the Department Head in conjunction with a broader conversation with the whole faculty to determine the student learning outcomes for this degree.

10

Summary of what has been learned/any actions taken as a result of assessment data gathered so far.

BFA Art

During the 2012-2013 school year, BFA Studio faculty assessed for the first time all five program specific Student Learning Outcomes, which were designated such in 2010. The assessment data was collected by faculty serving on student BFA in Art candidacy review and BFA in Art graduating senior review committees based upon rubrics created by BFA studio faculty on the Art Department Assessment Committee (see appendix.) Because this was the first year that the department has utilized these tools fully for assessment, no modifications are recommended at this time. The assessment committee achieved the goals set by last year's committee: to add more data collection points (BFA in Art Candidacy Review) and include more faculty in the review process than the year before (all faculty committee members sitting on student reviews, rather than just the instructor of the Senior Exhibition class).

BA Art History

The Art History faculty were able to assess all of their disciplinary Student Learning Outcomes across courses taught in 2012/2013.

The assessment tools seem to be working fine, following a couple of minor adjustments to a couple of data collection points. The data derived from the advanced classes pretty closely reflects the overall performance of the students, while the data derived from the exam questions of the survey-level students indicates that the students absorbed the most important concepts of the courses at a rate better than expected. Overall, the results are satisfactory, as in each case, the majority of the students appear to be achieving the desired goals.

Minor adjustments were made to the assessment plan for Fall 12/Spring 2013 regarding the data collection points for our Public Affair Goal #3 (As members of a broader community, students will be able to exhibit cultural competence) and Disciplinary Goal 1 (Students will demonstrate an awareness of the diversity of form, content, and aims of art over time and between cultures). Previously, we had used a post-test administered at the end of the term that some students have a hard time investing in, resulting in potentially skewed data; for more accurate and meaningful data more tightly bound to course material, the assessment report now draws from specifically designed segments of the regular course exams for this data.

11

BFA Design

No 2012/2013 narrative statement or 2012/2013 Assessment summary chart was received from Design. Data from the 2013 Spring Candidacy Reviews was furnished, but no data from previous semesters.

BSEd Art

During the 2012-2013 school year, the Art Education faculty revised their assessment procedures to be more in parallel with the Stanford Model that the Art and Design Department is using. Given the existing assessment procedures and data collection by the PEC, student outcomes were simply transferred to the department's matrix. Given the certification requirements of the state and that PEC assessment is based on those, students admitted into the program will always be at the 100% ranking. Art Education faculty have expressed interest in developing more specific rubrics that would be meaningful to individual classes in the area.

Conclusion The assessment methods previously in place were adjusted in 2012/2013 to better track the performance of our students. Reports demonstrate that Student Learning Outcomes are being attained at a rate that, overall, meets or exceeds expectations, however gathering data and compiling the area reports appears to have been viewed as a burdensome or daunting task within some degrees. Much as it might seem desirable to devise a concise shared set of procedures for the entire department, the differing degrees are so various and the assessment means diverse that there is no one-size-fits-all timeline or set of checkpoints. The last time that the committee discussed the matter it was felt that the different degrees knew best how to determine their own assessment measures, data collection points, timeline and procedures since the practice of assessment data gathering is most effective where faculty have devised their own meaningful rubrics and collection. Some areas that have chosen a data collection point late in the academic year have found it problematic to collect data from finals week in time for a review in the summer. Although this is likely to be an issue every semester and many areas have data collection points throughout the year, alternatively, a thorough review might be undertaken at the end of a calendar year rather than academic year with the Department Head reporting that information annually to the Dean in the summer. According to the COAL assessment report, published through the Office of Assessment: ‘In general, assessment data is collected throughout the academic year, compiled following the spring semester, then analyzed and discussed by the department in the next fall semester.’ Assessment needs to be an ongoing conversation within the department, but over the past three years it has been a slow process to try to create a culture where assessment is seen as a useful and valued activity that goes hand-in-hand with existing teaching practices when, given all of the

12

other demands placed upon us, few faculty members want to/have time to talk. This is not so much a committee charge as a discussion that should be sustained within the degree areas themselves. This year, especially with the whole department moving to Brick City, the revision of the General Education program, and with the departmental development of a proposal for the MFA in Visual Studies, even the assessment committee has had little time to discuss the philosophy or practice of assessment. This year we have had no significant College-wide feedback or inter-departmental conversations about assessment, nor has there been any new direction from the University regarding departmental assessment practices (this was previously coordinated by the Faculty Center for Teaching and Learning.) Apart from conversations about General Education, the Quality Initiative Project (QIP) Public Affairs Assessment Process, and the very broad COAL discussions at the Assessment Showcase, there has been little of the College or University outreach and support regarding this process that we had in previous years. Perhaps that is because the process is expected to be ‘running itself’ at this point. However, in Art and Design assessment of Student Learning Outcomes is still not an entirely smooth and naturally integrated part of how we evaluate our students’ success, nonetheless faculty in the respective degree areas continue to try to improve their assessment measures in order to generate the most meaningful information.

Appendix A

Assessment Summary charts for each degree program in the following order:

BA Art History BFA in Art BFA in Design (candidacy review for 2013 only) BS in Education, Art Education

ASSESSMENT PLAN SUMMARY CHART FCTL – ASSESSMENT DIVISION 09-14-2010

PUBLIC AFFAIRS LEARNING OUTCOMES

BA in Art and Design*†

List the program learning outcomes in the first column and then complete the table cells with the information relevant to each learning outcome listed. Attach additional documentation as necessary.

ASSESSMENT MEASURES DATA COLLECTION PLANS RESULTS PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS

1.As members of a broader community, students will be able to exhibit ethical leadership.

1.Direct Measure: Capstone Projects – Upper-level CASL courses (integrative papers, exhibitions, projects, oral reports)

End of program “exit exam/questionnaire” given to graduating seniors.* Questionnaire would combine objective direct assessment (multiple choice questions) and places for self-reflection narratives relating to ethical situations that could then be scored against a very simple checklist rubric.

2. Direct Measure: Performance Assessments: Essays, projects, oral presentations

2. As members of a broader community, students will be able to exhibit community engagement.

1. Direct Measure:, exhibitions, projects)

Selected students enrolled as BA Art majors have work included in the Foundations exhibit. Rubric may be as simple as student was/was not included in the show . †

3. As members of a broader community, students will be able to exhibit cultural competence.

1. Direct Measure: Course Embedded and Performance Assessments: tests, projects

Essay test questions from ART273 and ART 274 (required surveys for Art History majors). Assessment = scored on 1-5 scale according to instructor’s rubric. Completion of required

2. Direct Measure: Performance Assessments: Essays,


foreign language studies.

DISCIPLINARY LEARNING OUTCOMES:

BA in Art and Design

1.Students will be able to communicate their ideas effectively in visual, verbal, and written form.

1. Course embedded assessments: portfolio reviews and critiques, tests

Student successes will be indicated by successful completion of courses required for the degree. Reporting might come from % grade for each course or Art and Design GPA – or from Foundations grades.

2.Students will be able to critique and analyze works of art.

1. Course embedded assessments: portfolio reviews and critiques, tests

Measured in course content and GPA.

2. Performance Assessments: essays, projects, oral presentations

3.Students will demonstrate a well-rounded liberal arts education including historical and philosophical awareness as this applies to their own major and minor fields of study as well as to the humanities in general.


Measured in course content and GPA.

2. Direct Measure: Course embedded assessments: tests

4.Students will demonstrate proficiency in at least one foreign language.


Grades for required foreign language courses.



5.Students will demonstrate familiarity with selected media within the field of studio art.

1. Direct Measures: Portfolio Assessment, critiques

Successful completion of studio courses (% grade).

2. Performance Assessments:, projects

*One issue with this degree is that no capstone course was designated for this program in 2010/2011 by the Advisory Committee.

The Art and Design faculty as a whole may need to reconsider assessment for this degree program.

A small percentage of Art and Design students take this degree. The Program might be able to account for student successes on an individual basis.

† BA Art and Design students are included with BFA Art students in foundations courses and with BFA, BSEd, BS Art students and BA Art History students in art

History classes.



BA in Art History




1. Direct Measure: Course Embedded and Performance Assessments

Essay or exam question from all capstone classes

(ART 374: Art of India, ART 378: Women and Art , ART 382: Islamic Art , ART 385: Art of the Americas, ART 386: Art of Africa, ART 484: Contemporary Art, ART 485: Art of Mesoamerica)

Assessment = scored on 1-5 scale according to instructor’s rubric.

ART 378 FA 12 0% =1 0%=2 0%=3 52%=4 48%=5 ART 484 FA 12 0% =1 4%=2 8%=3 50%=4 38%=5 ART 488 FA 12 0% =1 13%=2 25%=3 31%=4 31%=5 ART 386 SP13 6% =1 35%=2 47%=3 6%=4 6%=5

None indicated

2. Direct Measure: Course Embedded and Performance Assessments: tests


ART 484 SP13 0% =1 0%=2 3%=3 34%=4 63%=5


1. Direct Measure: Capstone Projects – Upper-level CASL courses (integrative papers, exhibitions, projects, oral reports)

Successful completion of one or more Upper-level CASL course. Assessment = final project grade, scored on 1-5 scale according to instructor’s rubric.

ART 488 FA 12 0% =1 0%=2 13%=3 50%=4 37%=5 ART 386 SP13 6% =1 35%=2 47%=3 6%=4 6%=5

None indicated



Essay test questions from ART273 and ART 274 (required surveys for Art History majors). Assessment = scored on 1-5 scale according to instructor’s rubric.

ART 273 FA 12 10% =1 5%=2 15%=3 50%=4 20%=5 ART 274 FA 12 3% =1 6%=2 18%=3 31%=4 43%=5

Previously, we had used a post-test administered at the end of the term that some students have a hard time investing in, resulting in potentially skewed data; for more accurate and meaningful data more tightly bound to course material, the assessment report now draws from specifically designed segments of the regular course exams for this data.


ART 273 SP13 18% =1 15%=2 34%=3 25%=4 8%=5


BA in Art History

1.Students will demonstrate an awareness of the diversity of form, content, and aims of art over time and between cultures.


Essay test questions, or quizzes, from ART273 and ART 274 (required surveys for Art History majors). Assessment = scored on 1-5 scale according to instructor’s rubric.

ART 273 FA 12 9% =1 10%=2 32%=3 27%=4 22%=5 ART 274 FA 12 1% =1 1%=2 13%=3 54%=4 31%=5 ART 273 SP13 9% =1 14%=2 31%=3 31%=4 15%=5

Previously, we had used a post-test administered at the end of the term that some students have a hard time investing in, resulting in potentially skewed data; for more accurate and meaningful data more tightly bound to course material, the assessment report now draws from specifically designed segments of the regular course exams for this data.

2.Students will be able to perform

competent visual analyses of art, being

able to describe art while employing Art

1. Direct Measure: Performance Assessments: Essays, Written assignments

Visual analysis exercise in ART 271. Assessment = scored on 1-5 scale according to instructor’s

ART 271 SP13 0% =1 0%=2 9%=3

None indicated


Historical terminology.

rubric. 55%=4 36%=5

3.Students will be able to effectively

research art and be able to synthesize

and express the resulting knowledge

coherently.

1. Direct Measure: Course Embedded and Performance Assessments

Research paper/project grades from all upper-level classes. Mode selected by instructor. Assessment = scored on 1-5 scale according to instructor’s rubric.

ART 378 FA 12 0% =1 7%=2 3%=3 24%=4 66%=5 ART 382 FA 12 0% =1 3%=2 15%=3 55%=4 27%=5 ART 484 FA 12 15% =1 0%=2 20%=3 34%=4 31%=5 ART 488 FA 12 6% =1 0%=2 0%=3 63%=4 31%=5 ART 386 SP13 10% =1 0%=2 15%=3 70%=4 6%=5

None indicated

2. Capstone Projects – (papers, oral reports)


ART 475 SP13 0% =1 3%=2 15%=3 55%=4 27%=5 ART 484 SP13 3% =1 6%=2 3%=3 66%=4 22%=5

4.Students will recognize the value of a range of current and past art historical methodologies.

1. Direct Measure: Capstone Projects – especially Art 492 Methodology Class -(exams, papers, oral reports)

Essay grade or exam results from ART 492 Methodology class. Assessment = scored on 1-5 scale according to instructor’s rubric.

ART 492 not offered in A/Y 12/13

None indicated

2. Course embedded assessments: tests

5.Students will be able to discuss ethics in art, being able to explain both sides of controversial issues.


Essay or exam question from all capstone classes

(ART 374: Art of India, ART 378: Women and Art , ART 382: Islamic Art , ART 385: Art of the Americas, ART 386: Art of Africa, ART 484: Contemporary Art, ART 485: Art of Mesoamerica)

ART 378 FA 12 0% =1 0%=2 0%=3 52%=4 48%=5 ART 484 FA 12 0% =1 4%=2 8%=3 50%=4 38%=5

None indicated

2. Direct Measure: Performance Assessments: Essays, oral presentations


Assessment = scored on 1-5 scale according to instructor’s rubric.

ART 488 FA 12 0% =1 13%=2 25%=3 31%=4 31%=5 ART 386 SP13 6% =1 35%=2 47%=3 6%=4 6%=5 ART 484 SP13 0% =1 0%=2 3%=3 34%=4 63%=5



BFA in Art




1.Direct Measure: Capstone Senior Exhibition

Questionnaire to be completed by 499 instructors utilizing a 1-5 scale.

Public Affairs Outcomes not assessed this year










BFA in Art

1 Student’s creative work demonstrates visual problem solving through an understanding of the elements and principles of visual organization.

1. BFA Review Evaluation Sheet that includes this learning

outcome completed by faculty serving on student BFA in Art candidacy review committee (rated using a 1-5 scale for assessment.) Evaluation Sheet that includes this learning

Candidacy Review FA12 Avg. Score: 3 5: 0% 4: 39% 3: 50% 2: 11% 1: 0% 499 Review FA12 Avg. Score: 4.3

Because this was the first year that the department has utilized these tools fully for assessment, no modifications are recommended at this time.

2. Capstone Senior Exhibition


outcome completed by faculty serving on student 499 graduating senior review committee (rated using a 1-5 scale for assessment.)

5: 50% 4: 40% 3: 0% 2: 10% 1: 0% Candidacy Review SP13 Avg. Score: 4 5: 12% 4: 70% 3: 5% 2: 13% 1: 0% Animation Candidacy Review SP13 5: 6% 4: 31% 3: 38% 2: 19% 1: 6%

2. Student demonstrates knowledge of

technical and aesthetic issues in their discipline. 1. BFA Review Evaluation Sheet that

includes this learning


outcome completed by

Candidacy Review FA12 Avg. Score: 3 5: 6% 4: 28% 3: 56% 2: 10% 1: 0% 499 Review FA12 Avg. Score: 4.3 5: 50%




faculty serving on student 499 graduating senior review committee (rated using a 1-5 scale for assessment.) .

4: 40% 3: 0% 2: 10% 1: 0% Candidacy Review SP13 Avg. Score: 4 5: 19% 4: 73% 3: 15% 2: 13% 1: 0% Animation Candidacy Review SP13 5: 6% 4: 31% 3: 44% 2: 13% 1: 6%

3. Student demonstrates an ability to critically

assess works of art in regard to form, content and technical concerns.



outcome completed by faculty serving on student 499 graduating

Candidacy Review FA12 Avg. Score: 3 5: 0% 4: 17% 3: 66% 2: 17% 1: 0% 499 Review FA12 Avg. Score: 4 5: 30% 4: 50% 3: 10%




senior review committee (rated using a 1-5 scale for assessment.)

2: 10% 1: 0% Candidacy Review SP13 Avg. Score: 4 5: 8% 4: 42% 3: 35% 2: 15% 1: 0% Animation Candidacy Review SP13 5: 19% 4: 19% 3: 19% 2: 31% 1: 12%

4. Student demonstrates an understanding of

historical and contemporary issues within their discipline

1. Art History/Elective Course GPA

Evaluation Sheet that includes this learning


outcome completed by faculty serving on student 499 graduating senior review committee (rated using a 1-5 scale for

Candidacy Review FA12 Avg. Score: 3 5: 0% 4: 22% 3: 39% 2: 33% 1: 6% 499 Review FA12 Avg. Score: 3.9 5: 30% 4: 40% 3: 20% 2: 10% 1: 0%


2. BFA Review


assessment.) Candidacy Review SP13 Avg. Score: 3 5: 4% 4: 35% 3: 42% 2: 15% 1: 4%

5. Student demonstrates a willingness to

explore and innovate personal solutions within their creative work.



outcome completed by faculty serving on student 499 graduating senior review committee (rated using a 1-5 scale for assessment.)

Candidacy Review FA12 Avg. Score: 3 5: 11% 4: 33% 3: 44% 2: 6% 1: 6% 499 Review FA12 Avg. Score: 4.1 5: 40% 4: 40% 3: 10% 2: 10% 1: 0% Candidacy Review SP13 Avg. Score: 4 5: 12% 4: 58% 3: 15% 2: 12%




1: 3% Animation Candidacy Review SP13 5: 12.5% 4: 19% 3: 44% 2: 12.5% 1: 12.5%


BFA Studio Rubric

Learning

Outcomes

Outstanding (5)

Translates as an A letter

grade

100-90

Very Good (4)

Translates as a B letter

grade

89-80

Satisfactory (3)

Translates as a C

letter grade

79-70

Minimum Passing (2)

Translates as a D letter

grade

69-60

Fail (1)

Translates as a F letter

grade

59 and below

Student’s creative work

demonstrates visual

problem solving

through an

understanding of the

elements and principles

of visual organization.

Student excels in their ability to

demonstrate visual problem solving

through an understanding of the

elements and principles of visual

organization.

Student consistently

demonstrates visual problem

solving through an

understanding of the elements

and principles of visual

organization.

Student demonstrates visual

problem solving through an



organization.

Student is inconsistent in their

ability to demonstrate visual

problem solving through an



organization.

Student rarely demonstrates

visual problem solving through

an understanding of the

elements and principles of visual

organization.

Student demonstrates

knowledge of technical

and aesthetic issues in

their discipline.


demonstrate knowledge of technical

and aesthetic issues in their

discipline.


demonstrates knowledge of

technical and aesthetic issues in

their discipline.


knowledge of technical and

aesthetic issues in their

discipline.

Student inconsistently

demonstrates knowledge of

technical and aesthetic issues in

their discipline.

Student rarely demonstrates

knowledge of technical and

aesthetic issues in their

discipline.


an ability to critically

assess works of art in

regard to form, content

and technical concerns.

Student is highly engaged in the

process of criticizing artworks;

demonstrating an ability to assess

works through written form and/or

verbally in regards to form, content

and technical concerns.


demonstrates an ability to

assess works through written

form and/or verbally in regards

to form, content and technical

concerns.

Student demonstrates an ability

to assess works through written

form and/or verbally in regards to

form, content and technical

concerns.

Student is inconsistent in

engagement with the process of

criticizing artworks; occasionally

demonstrating an ability to




concerns.

Student rarely, if ever,

demonstrates an ability to




concerns.


an understanding of

historical and

contemporary issues

within their discipline

and other art areas.


demonstrate an understanding of

historical and contemporary issues

within their discipline and other art

areas.


demonstrates an understanding

of historical and contemporary

issues within their discipline and

other art areas.

Student demonstrates an

understanding of historical and

contemporary issues within their

discipline and other art areas.


demonstrates an understanding

of historical and contemporary

issues within their discipline and

other art areas.

Student rarely demonstrates an

understanding of historical and

contemporary issues within their

discipline and other art areas.


a willingness to explore

and innovate personal

solutions within their

creative work.


demonstrate a willingness to explore

and innovate personal solutions

within their creative work.


demonstrates a willingness to

explore and innovate personal

solutions within their creative

work.

Student demonstrates a

willingness to explore and

innovate personal solutions



demonstrates a willingness to

explore and innovate personal

solutions within their creative

work.

Student rarely demonstrates a

willingness to explore and

innovate personal solutions





BFA in Design: Graphic Design, Illustration, Dual List the program learning outcomes in the first column and then complete the table cells with the information relevant to each learning outcome listed. Attach additional documentation as necessary.



1. Professional Design Practicum—Course Embedded and Direct Measure Test.

Test on Design Ethics based on reading from the Graphic Artists Guild Handbook: Pricing and Ethical Guidelines and the

AIGA Professional Practices in Graphic Design Professional Design Practicum Final Project Client Evaluations: new evaluation forms (to be completed by the Final Project client) will be designed to include questions on ethical leadership.

Test given for the first time this year (SP 2012) in two Graphic Design Sections of the Professional Design Practicum class. Numbers yet to be reported. New Client Evaluation Forms will be implemented in Spring 2013.

2. Practicum Final Project and Exhibition and Direct Measure Appraisal by Client


1. Design Curriculum—Course Embedded—many design projects include Community Service

All Community Service Design Projects include community engagement as part of the assignment. Evaluated using the 5–1 Assessment Rubric

We have scores from years of work and can easily provide numbers for the report.

2. Practicum Final Project and Exhibition



1. Design Curriculum—Course Embedded— many design projects include cultural based projects.

All Culturally Based Design Projects require students to exhibit cultural competence as part of the assignment. Projects, tests, papers, evaluated using the 5–1 Assessment Rubric

We have scores from years of work and can easily provide numbers for the report.

2. Tests, Exams and Papers, etc. integrated into all Design courses


BFA in Design: Graphic Design, Illustration, Dual

1. Ability in Drawing: perception, translation of 3-D into 2-D space, composition, and expression.

1. Course Embedded and Performance Assessments: end of semester portfolio reviews and project critiques

Portfolio Review + Project Critiques: When applicable, Drawing Ability is reviewed as part of the class critique. Candidacy Review: Portfolios are evaluated on a 20 pt. scale and make up 70% of the final score. Drawing Ability is 1 of 5 areas evaluated in the portfolio. The 20 pt scale is then divided by 4 to provide Assessment Scores ranging 5–1

We have scores from the Spring 2012 Candidacy Review, though they have not been “crunched” yet. They will be available later this summer.

2. Direct Measures: Candidacy Review Portfolio Assessment

2. Computer Skill: Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign.

1. Course Embedded and Performance Assessments: end of semester portfolio reviews, project critiques, tests, quizzes, and exams.

Portfolio Review + Project Critiques: When applicable, Computer Skill is reviewed as part of the class critique. Candidacy Review:




Portfolios are evaluated on a 20 pt. scale and make up 70% of the final score. Computer Skill is 1 of 5 areas evaluated in the portfolio. The 20 pt scale is then divided by 4 to provide Assessment Scores ranging 5–1

3. Typographic Knowledge: Rules, Hierarchy, Organization, Expression

1. Course Embedded and Performance Assessments: end of semester portfolio reviews, project critiques, tests, quizzes, exams, and papers.

Portfolio Review + Project Critiques: When applicable, Typographic Knowledge is reviewed as part of the class critique. Candidacy Review: Portfolios are evaluated on a 20 pt. scale and make up 70% of the final score. Typographic Knowledge is 1 of 5 areas evaluated in the portfolio. The 20 pt scale is then divided by 4 to provide Assessment Scores ranging 5–1



4. Problem Solving: Systematic, Conceptual and Expressive


Portfolio Review + Project Critiques: Problem Solving is reviewed as part of the class critique. Candidacy Review: Portfolios are evaluated on a 20 pt. scale and make up 70% of the final score. Problem Solving is 1 of 5 areas evaluated in the portfolio. The 20 pt scale




is then divided by 4 to provide Assessment Scores ranging 5–1

5. Demonstrate: Innovation, Imagination, Creative Thinking


Portfolio Review + Project Critiques: Innovation, Imagination, Creative Thinking is reviewed as part of the class critique. Candidacy Review: Portfolios are evaluated on a 20 pt. scale and make up 70% of the final score. Innovation, Imagination, Creative Thinking is 1 of 5 areas evaluated in the portfolio. The 20 pt scale is then divided by 4 to provide Assessment Scores ranging 5–1



6. Writing: Organization, Communication, and Clarity of Expression

1. Course Embedded and Performance Assessments: written articulations of fulfilling project objectives, resume writing, cover letter writing, self-promotion, extra credit reaction papers, proof reading, essays, research papers, project

Course Projects & Assignments: Writing is an essential part of all Design courses and projects. Candidacy Review: Artist’s Statements are evaluated on a 20 pt. scale and make up 30% of the final score. The 20 pt scale is then divided



proposals, thesis statements. 2. Direct Measures: Candidacy Review Portfolio Assessment

by 4 to provide Assessment Scores ranging 5–1

ASSESSMENT PLAN SUMMARY CHART PROGRAM/DEPARTMENT: __Art Education_ Art and Design_____

For more information about the assessment process, go to http://www.missouristate.edu/assessment/. 2/17/2012

PUBLIC AFFAIRS LEARNING OUTCOMES (For each theme, include an outcome that

also directly applies to your discipline)

ASSESSMENT MEASURES (Try to include at least one

direct and indirect measure)

TARGETS (i.e. level of success or % achievement)

DATA COLLECTION PLANS (Who will collect the data,

when, and how?)

RESULTS (Were targets

reached?)

PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS

(What changes can be made?)

1. Community Engagement As members of a broader community, students will be able to actively engage in the community.

1 Direct: The development of curricular plans and classroom managerial strategies.

100% for Educational Skills and Dispositions leading to certification

The Art Education faculty collects data on student demonstrations of community engagement through curricular and pedagogical strategies as they engage in the community. These skills are required for a Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) teaching certificate. The DESE review (November 11-14, 2011) verified that students demonstrated community engagement.)

100% of candidates understand and demonstrate through coursework and volunteerism an active community engagement as evidenced by licensure.

A continuous review of literature and conference attendance by faculty and students help guide changes in the methodologies pre-service educators should know and demonstrate as they engage in the community. No changes were recommended by the DESE.

2. Indirect: Analytical, reflective narration of students’ observations and interactions in the classroom and various sites in the community through CASL and though course field research placements.


2. Cultural Competence As members of a broader community, students will be able to demonstrate cultural competence.

1. Direct: The development and implementation of curricular plans and classroom managerial strategies.


The Art Education faculty collects data on student demonstrations of culturally sensitive competencies through curricular development including differentiated instruction, classroom management, contemporary pedagogy, and sensitive assessments of student performances. These skills are required for a Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) teaching certificate for content area competencies. The DESE

100% of candidates understand and demonstrate through coursework and community engagement skills and dispositions for cultural competencies.

A continuous review of literature and participation at state and national conferences helps guide changes to support cultural awareness and sensitivities for pre-service educators. No changes were recommended by the DESE.



http://www.missouristate.edu/assessment/



review (November 11-14, 2011) verified that students demonstrated cultural competence.

3. Ethical Leadership As members of a broader community, students will be able to demonstrate ethical leadership.

1. Direct: The development of curricular plans, classroom managerial strategies as evidenced in the course and entries into the ePortfolio.


The Art Education faculty collects data on student demonstrations of ethical leadership through interactions with others on campus and in the community. Should ethical concerns arise, faculty report concerns and/or incidences using a form found at (http:// education.missouristate.edu /services/81132.htm). The DESE review verified that students demonstrated ethical leadership.

100% of candidates understand and demonstrate skills and dispositions for ethical leadership. No student has ever been cited for unethical behavior.

A continuous review of student behaviors involving ethical leadership is monitored by Art Education faculty and other educators. No student has ever been cited for unethical behavior. No changes were recommended by the DESE.



DISCIPLINARY LEARNING OUTCOMES

4. Students will demonstrate teaching proficiencies by meeting state teaching certification requirements.

1. Direct: The development of curricular plans, classroom managerial strategies, assessment of student skills, and various methods of pedagogical deliveries for DESE content area competencies.

100% for Missouri’s Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Teaching certification

Program faculty collect, analyze and store data for verification of student competencies required by DESE. These data are stored in the College of Education (COE) collection mechanisms including the ePortfolio, eStars, STEPS, MoSTEP, and ShowMe standards for DESE content area competencies. The DESE review (November 11-14, 2011) evaluated the assessment of student skills and dispositions and

100% of graduating students receive state teaching licensure.

An on-going DESE review of contemporary pedagogy, and skills and dispositions of pre-service art educators are maintained to determine program modifications such as the state required transition from Grade Level Expectations (GLEs) to Common Core Standards (CCS). A continuous review of literature and conference attendance by faculty and students help guide

2. Indirect: Analytical, reflective narration of students’ observations and interactions through coursework in the

100% for Missouri’s Department of Elementary and Secondary Education




classrooms and various sites in the community.

Teaching certification

content area. The Art Education Program continues to maintain the rigorous DESE certification by meeting state teaching certification requirements.

changes in the methodologies pre-service educators should know and demonstrate including classroom management strategies, differentiated instruction, contemporary pedagogy, and comprehensive assessments of student performances. No changes were recommended by the DESE.

5. Students will critically analyze content in their specialty area.

1. Direct: The development and analysis of curricular plans, classroom managerial strategies, assessment of student skills, and various methods of pedagogical delivery.

100% for Missouri’s Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Teaching certification

Program faculty collect, analyze and store data for verification of student competencies required by DESE. These data are stored in the College of Education (COE) collection mechanisms including the ePortfolio, eStars, STEPS, MoSTEP, and ShowMe standards for DESE content area competencies. The DESE review (November 11-14, 2011) evaluated the assessment of student skills and dispositions and content area. The Art Education Program continues to maintain the rigorous DESE certification by meeting state teaching certification requirements.

100% of graduating students receive state teaching licensure.

A continuous review of literature and conference attendance help guide changes in the methodologies pre-service educators should know and demonstrate including classroom management strategies, differentiated instruction, contemporary pedagogy, and comprehensive assessments of student performances. No changes were recommended by the DESE.

2. Indirect: Analytical, reflective narration of students’ observations and interactions in the classroom and various sites in the community

100% for Missouri’s Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE)Teaching certification

6. Students will demonstrate knowledge of global, historic, and cultural perspectives in contemporary

1. Direct: The development of curriculum and research

100% for Missouri’s Department of

Program faculty collect, analyze and store data for verification of student

100% of graduating students

A review of literature and interactions through Skype Scholars develop a Depth




art education practices. emphasizing global, historic, and cultural perspectives in contemporary art education.

Elementary and Secondary Education Teaching certification

competencies required by DESE content area competencies. The DESE review (November 11-14, 2011) evaluated the assessment of student skills and dispositions and content area. The Art Education Program continues to maintain the rigorous DESE certification by meeting state teaching certification requirements.

receive state teaching licensure.

of Knowledge (DOK) to guide changes for pre-service educators as they demonstrate skills and dispositions reflecting contemporary art education practices. No changes were recommended by the DESE.

2. Indirect: Analytical, reflective narration of students‘ observations and interactions in the classroom and various sites in the community

100% for Missouri’s Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE)Teaching certification


Appendix B

Rubrics for data collection points for each degree program (available upon request)

Appendix C: Art and Design General Education Courses and the Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes

ART 200

Curricular Area, General Learning Goals, and Specific Learning Outcomes:

Course Area:

Breadth of Knowledge

Course Type:

Knowledge of Human Cultures - Arts

General Goal (9): Students will cultivate their intellect, imagination, and creativity as they develop an understanding of how social, cultural, linguistic, artistic, religious, philosophical, and historical contexts have shaped the thoughts and actions of people worldwide.

SLO9.1 - Understand how various forms of written, oral, musical, visual, and bodily expression contribute to human knowledge and experience. Tool(s) used to assess this specific learning outcome:

- Essay - Specific item on an exam - Other: small-group and class discussions

Assessment data instructors will track and report:

- Score on common rubric

SLO9.4 - Interpret texts and other cultural products in ways that reflect informed understanding of relevant contextual factors, including socio-cultural influence and cultural traditions, perspectives, and behavioral patterns. Tool(s) used to assess this specific learning outcome:




SLO9.5 - Analytically compare the influences of community, institutions, and other constructions such as class, gender, and race on the ways of thinking, believing, and

acting in cultural and historical settings other than one’s own. Tool(s) used to assess this specific learning outcome:




General Goal (7): Students will be able to understand the collaborative process and work collaboratively with others to solve problems and make informed decisions.

SLO7.1 - Demonstrate understanding of the roles, skills, and behaviors required for effective teamwork and goal attainment. Tool(s) used to assess this specific learning outcome:




SLO7.2 - Demonstrate values, knowledge, and skills, such as building upon the ideas of others and treating team members with respect, which support a collaborative culture. Tool(s) used to assess this specific learning outcome:




ART 271


Course Area:


Course Type:

Knowledge of Human Cultures - Humanities



- Essay - Quiz - Specific item on an exam







SLO9.5 - Analytically compare the influences of community, institutions, and other constructions such as class, gender, and race on the ways of thinking, believing, and acting in cultural and historical settings other than one’s own. Tool(s) used to assess this specific learning outcome:




ART 272


Course Area:


Course Type:




- Essay - Specific item on an exam - Other: Brief in-class writing assignment




- Essay - Specific item on an exam - Other: Brief in-class writing assignment




- Essay

- Specific item on an exam - Other: Brief in-class writing assignment



ART 273

Course Area:


Course Type:




- Quiz - Specific item on an exam - Other: Essay Test











ART 274


Course Area:


Course Type:








- Essay

- Quiz - Specific item on an exam







Documents

Department of Art and Design – Departmental Assessment … · 2013. 7. 29. · 1 Department of Art and Design – Departmental Assessment Update June 2013 . Table of contents p.2