Visual
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. |
|||