wtf copyVisual Arts Department

Student Learning Annual
Assessment Report

 

Winter 2009

 

 

I. Executive Summary

 

The Visual Arts department’s report reflects an ongoing effort to raise awareness of the necessity for assessment as a tool for self-evaluation and improvement. While the art history section of this report is perhaps more  “complete,” this report and updated plan reflects a new interest among the studio arts faculty and reflects their buy-in and learning about assessment procedures and language.

 

The art history portion is based on data shown in section V of this report and are condensed to the following considerations:

 

The success criteria stated below are met as far as numbers and percentages are concerned, however, the numbers may reflect distributions of grades that tend to be too favorable and may lead to grade inflation. It does not seem that the problem lies in the numbers themselves, but with the assessment, (especially scoring) practices. While other factors, such as attendance penalties and participation evaluations bring overall final grading criteria closer to a standard distribution, a standard distribution should occur across assignments and grading criteria.

 

Such standard distributions are easily attained on tests and quizzes by adding more challenging questions and ensuring a range of question difficulties. The way papers are currently graded leads to grade inflation as students are given chances to rewrite their papers after an initial assessment. While it is important that students learn to pursue writing as an iterative process, clearly the assessment of rewrites should be rethought. Next semester, Professor Ganis will break down the paper into two grades—an initial paper score and an assessment of a rewrite. This double assessment should eliminate grade inflation while still encouraging students to improve their writing skills and work in a process.

 

 

Some success criteria will have to be revisited for their reporting viability. Either more specific data will have to be collected (e.g. results of sections of exams) or the criteria will have to be thoughtfully modified.

 

 

 

II. MeetingsSummary

 

The Visual Arts departmentfaculty, William Ganis, Ted Lossowski, and William Roberts, formally met on November 25 to discuss the existing plan and upcoming report. The sum of the meeting was that the report authored by William Ganis was written to the point that he could state broad goals for Visual Arts, and specific goals for the art history program, but could not reliably comment of the assessment goals of studio arts colleagues This meeting allowed an opportunity to work by those examples of assessment strategies and rubrics  laid out for art history.Through the Fall ’08 semester, there have been several informal and information meetings between Professors Lossowski and Ganis. In December professors Lossowki and Roberts met in order to work on the studio arts program part of this report.

 

 

III. Focus for Upcoming Year

 

As a group, The Visual Arts department’s goal is to bring the studio arts program into compliance with the reporting model. The studio arts faculty plan to present an interim update well before the next program reporting cycle. All faculty members agreed that the broader goals were sound and needed only minor reworking. Art history will rethink it’s reporting based on feedback from the assessment committee and with broaden the reach and depth of its reporting. Of course, the art history program will rethink the assessment levels, especially “success criteria” based on the past round of recording and reflection.

 

 

IV. Updated Assessment Plan

 

An updated assessment planis included as a separate document. Please see “Visual Arts Department Student Learning Assessment Plan (updated)Winter 2009”

 

 

V. Summary of Data

 

As stated above, the data reflects information collected for art history exams, quizzes and papers; studio arts should come into reporting compliance within the next cycle. The only external validations come from the successes of the single art history major last year. This student won the Koch Prize for Excellence in Writing and was accepted into excellent programs for graduate study including the one she chose at New York University’s Department of Art and Art Professions.


Art History Concentration
Alignment of Goals, Objectives, Outcomes and Assessment Methods
All data from the 2007-2008 academic year.

 

Goal

Objective

Outcome

How Measured

Measurement Tool

Success Criteria

Data Location

Data Results

1

Articulate how and why art and architectural expressions have developed within specific historic contexts.

#1 Identify broad historical styles, monu­ments, and art­ists of historical importance.

#1 All students in art history classes will have basic knowledge of visual expres­sions appropri­ate to each pe­riod survey.

Objective portions (identifica­tions, mul­tiple choice) of quizzes and exams administer­ed in survey classes.

Locally Devel­oped Rubric

 

95% of students to score at or above D level; 65% at or above B level; 20% at or above A level

Faculty files

Of 123 exams administered, 97% of students scored at or above D level; 60% at or above B level; and 29% at or above A level.

 

Of 131 quizzes administered, 99% of students scored at or above D level; 72% at or above B level; and 46% at or above A level.

#2 Art History Majors will have in-depth knowl­edge of many kinds of visual expressions.

Identifica­tion por­tion of compre­hensive exam cov­ering all areas taught in surveys.

Locally Devel­oped Rubric

 

95% pass the exam, 20% pass with dis­tinction

Faculty files

Of 1 student taking the comprehensive exam, 100% passed the exam, 0% passed with distinction.

#2 Develop in students an un­derstanding of social conditions begetting spe­cific styles and movements.

#1 All students will have basic knowledge of visual expressions within the con­texts of history, religion and aes­thetics.

Subjective portions (essay, short an­swer) of quizzes and exams administer­ed in survey classes.

Locally Devel­oped Rubric

 

95% of students to score at or above D level; 65% at or above B level; 20% at or above A level

Faculty files

Of 123 exams administered, 97% of students scored at or above D level; 60% at or above B level; and 29% at or above A level.

#2 Art History Majors will have specialized knowledge of visual expres­sions within the contexts of his­tory, religion and aesthetics.

Essay por­tion of compre­hensive exam cov­ering all areas taught in surveys.

Locally Devel­oped Rubric

 

95% pass the exam, 20% pass with dis­tinction

Faculty files

Of 1 student taking the comprehensive exam, 100% passed the exam, 0% passed with distinction.

2

Analyze past works and appropriately adapt techniques, forms, methodologies or concepts into contemporary critical practice through writing and/or artistic expression.

#1 Apply exam­ples of past vis­ual styles or con­ceptual strate­gies.

#1 Students in the Art History concentration will be able to identify critical approaches.

Participation in Senior Seminar Discussions

Locally Devel­oped Rubric, Confirmation of Seminar Participants

 

All AH majors articu­late dif­ferences among critical ap­proches

Faculty files

Of 3 students participating in the Senior Seminar, all were able to articulate differences among critical approaches and use them in a term paper.

#2 Students in the Art History concentration will begin to use critical ap­proaches.

Senior Thesis

Locally Devel­oped Rubric, Confirmation of Seminar Participants

 

All AH majors write and ac­ceptable thesis demon­strating under­standing and ap­plication of at least one critical ap­proach

Thesis Archives

Of 1 student writing a thesis, 100% passed the thesis, and won the institution-wide Koch Prize for Senior Essay.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

#2 Articulate critical positions regarding his­torical expres­sions.

 

 

 

 

 

#2 Students in AH concentra­tion will be able to explain ways in which current and historical methodologies are applied to historical expres­sions.

Participation in Senior Seminar Discussions

Locally Devel­oped Rubric, Confirmation of Seminar Participants

 

All AH majors must be able to apply method­ologies to posed exam­ples

Faculty files

Of 3 students participating in the Senior Seminar, all were able to articulate and apply methodologies to posed examples and in a term paper.

3

Instill an aesthetic and/or conceptual awareness within majors that will facilitate advance to graduate study and serve as a foundation for professional work.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

#2 Capstone execution of a thesis-length research project.

#1 Students in AH concentra­tion will write a 40-page thesis.

Senior Thesis

Locally Devel­oped Rubric; Thesis Guide­lines

All AH majors must success­fully pre­sent a com­pleted thesis.

Thesis Archives

Of 1 student writing a thesis, 100% passed the thesis, and won the institution-wide Koch Prize for Senior Essay.

#2 Students in AH concentra­tion will make a public presenta­tion regarding the thesis.

Senior Thesis Presenta­tion

Locally Devel­oped Rubric; Confirmation by presenta­tion audience

All AH majors must success­fully pre­sent and defend their work in a public forum.

Faculty files

Of 1 student presenting her senior thesis, 100% passed the oral thesis presentation to the Wells Community.

4

Develop technical skills in order to achieve effective communication of ideas through visual artworks, written statements and considered research.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

#2 Achieve mas­tery of basic writing styles appropriate to specific investi­gations of art­works and exhi­bitions.

#1 Students demonstrate preliminary vis­ual analysis skills and translate the visual to the verbal.

“Non-re­search” paper re­quiring students to use their own faculties to analyze and de­scribe art­works and exhibitions witnessed in-person

Locally Devel­oped Rubric

 

90% of students to per­form at or above D level; 65% at or above B level; 20% at or above A level

Faculty files

Of 36 non- research papers completed, 83% of students scored at or above D level; 76% at or above B level; and 72% at or above A level.

#2 Students demonstrate more complete analytical skills incorporating research and translating the visual to the verbal with some degree of sophistication.

Paper re­quiring research that com­plements student’s observa­tions and experi­ences

Locally Devel­oped Rubric

 

90% of students to per­form at or above D level; 65% at or above B level; 20% at or above A level

Faculty files

Of 40 research papers completed, 88% of students scored at or above D level; 82% at or above B level; and 47% at or above A level.

5

Encourage students to develop creative visual and/or verbal expressions that are uniquely theirs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

#2 Reach self-awareness of one’s own pow­ers of observa­tion, analysis and style of writing.

#1 Students use basic visual and analytic skills, and are encour­aged to write in their own voices.

“Non-re­search” paper re­quiring students to use their own faculties to analyze and de­scribe art­works and exhibitions experi­enced in-person

Locally Devel­oped Rubric

 

90% of students to per­form at or above D level; 65% at or above B level; 20% at or above A level

Faculty files

Of 36 non- research papers completed, 83% of students scored at or above D level; 76% at or above B level; and 72% at or above A level.

#2 Students are encouraged to maintain their idiomatic sensibilities and styles even while incorporating authoritative writings by others.

Paper re­quiring research that com­plements student’s observa­tions and experi­ences

Locally Devel­oped Rubric

 

90% of students to per­form at or above D level; 65% at or above B level; 20% at or above A level

Faculty files

Of 40 research papers completed, 88% of students scored at or above D level; 82% at or above B level; and 47% at or above A level.

 

VISUAL ARTS UPDATED PLAN

VISUAL ARTS GRADING RUBRIC