1
Theatre Arts Department 2010-2011 Annual Assessment Update
I.Mission Statement, Program Goals, Student Learning Outcomes, Curriculum Map, and Multi-Year Assessment Plan
- (Please see same URL as above for department Student Learning Outcomes.)
The Theatre Arts Department adopted new Student Learning Outcomes at the end of the 2010-2011 school year, and implemented them in the fall of 2011. Please find the discussion of this in C and I.5 below (Assessment), which discusses the various assessment related activities the department undertook in 2010-2011. The department’s previous mission and outcomes are attached as Appendix 1.
- The department’s Curriculum Map has changed substantively from our 2010-2011 reports, since the department’s Student Learning Outcomes underwent a significant transformation in 2010-2011. The department’s efforts in this area accomplished the following things: 1) streamlined the department’s efforts in assessment; 2) created clear outcomes that can be more readily assessed; 3) mapped Student Learning Outcomes more clearly to Institutional Learning Outcomes, especially related to those related to effective written communication. Please find the Curriculum Map attached as Appendix 2.
- Please find the department’s Multi-year Assessment Plan attached as Appendix 3.
II.Follow up on Action Items identified in previous reports.
- Replenish Globe Series funds: have significant conversation with Provost and President by Spring 2011 on future of Globe Series. Oversight by whole department with lead by John Blondell.
Beginning in the early 2000’s, and through a generous donation by a local benefactor, the department instituted its “Globe Series” of international and inter-cultural short-term disciplinary residencies. The purpose of the series is to create opportunities for Westmont Theatre Arts students to engage with international figures of significant artistic and/or scholarly reputation, on the Westmont campus. Though the department remains committed to this goal, especially since the global plank of the college has been recently re-energized, issues around the Globe Series remain ambiguous. The department had planned to begin serious conversations with a new provost, set to begin in the fall of 2011. Though plans for further discussion regarding this item remain important to the department, it is now apparent that this item fits more clearly into program review issues for the department, as the item does not relate to directly to the teaching effectiveness of the department, and the success and achievement of our students. Hence, we have removed this action item from the department’s assessment plans, and have relocated it in the department’s programmatic goals and projects.
- Diversify: aim to add additional faculty person of color by 2014 and continue practice of highly considering minority candidates for all adjunct positions. Oversight by Chair.
This item remains of vital interest to the department. In his response to the 2010-2011 Theatre Arts report, Professor Alister Chapman asked the following questions. What percentage of your adjuncts is female, and what percentage of your courses do they teach? This would be useful information for your six-year program review report. It is advisable to have this data gathered into the appropriate tables and graphs in the Records folder in your archive so you can have meaningful conversations about the issues and develop effective strategies to address them prior to writing the six year program review report. What strategies have you identified for hiring a female faculty or a faculty person of colour?
At this writing, the department faculty demographic is as follows: three Caucasian males in full-time appointments; one Caucasian male in an adjunct appointment; two Caucasian females in adjunct appointments (both in dance); and one woman of color in an adjunct appointment (also in dance). Many issues and questions emerge from this demographic. First of all, women teach a proportionally low percentage of the department’s courses (15%). At the present time, however, the department’s full-time and adjunct positions are maxed out – the department has no open positions, and there are no plans to expand the faculty in the near future. In addition, with the coming retirement of Erlyne Whiteman, there is a significant question about the future of dance in the department. This becomes increasingly problematic, considering the department’s high number of female students and a full-time faculty that is largely white and male.
Though this will be a significant issue as the department moves forward, this item – as in number 1 above – relates more to program review than assessment, and will be moved out of the purview of this report in future years.
Professor Chapman touched on further Diversity issues when he made this comment in his response to our 2010-11 report: “How much have you considered reducing some of the Western focus of courses such as Theatre History and Great Literature of the Stage in order to increase diversity? Are there examples from other theatre departments that are instructive here?” Prompted by his questions, and in consultation with Tatiana Nazarenko, the department considered the adoption of two different courses to its curriculum – a world theater course, with Asia, Africa, and Latin America as a focus; or a dramatic literature course, with gender and ethnicity as a focus. Following lengthy conversation, the department opted to create a new dramatic literature course entitled “Gender and Ethnicity on the American Stage,” to be taught by Professor John Blondell. This course will an important elective course for Theatre Arts majors, satisfy General Education requirements, and perhaps become part of the college’s Gender Studies minor.
- Re-hiring of Arts Coordinator by 2011-2012. Oversight by Chair.
As in numbers 1 and 2 above, this item remains critical to the department. The Art, Music, and Theatre Departments suffered a major blow when the college terminated the Arts Coordinator position. This has led to increased workload for department faculty, especially the directors, and has resulted in a general lack of cohesion, efficiency, and communication between the departments. In addition, it has deleteriously impacted the systematic marketing and public relations side of our departmental performance program. Again, though it is important to regain this position, this action item is related more to the programmatic work of the department, and will not be considered in future annual assessment reports.
- Revise curriculum: with the new faculty member, revise both major curriculum and particular courses in design and production by 2011-2012 academic year. Oversight by entire department, with significant input from Robert Hamel, and coordinated by Chair.
I am happy to report that the department has enjoyed success in this area. In the fall of 2010, Mitchell Thomas and Robert Hamel fine-tuned the department’s offerings in Stagecraft: courses were re-named so students now obtain a clear sense of each semester’s focus, and a three semester rotation was implemented so students can plan their schedules more effectively. In the short term, this has resulted in higher enrollment for the last two stagecraft courses. In the long term, stricter sequencing and greater oversight will result in high student achievement and satisfaction. In addition, the department is deep in discussions regarding changes in the Design for Theatre courses that Professor Hamel teaches. At this time, the department plans to create a lower division Stage Design course (eliminating one of the present upper division design courses), which will satisfy both major and PIA General Education requirements. The course will bring more students into the department’s design offerings at an earlier stage, diversify lower division Theatre Arts offerings, increase PIA opportunities, and cross-pollinate Art and Theatre Arts students.
- Assessment: Continue assessment activities of outcome 2. Oversight by John Blondell, with significant input from Elizabeth Hess, and coordinated by Chair.
The department engaged in a tremendous amount of assessment activity during 2010-2011. This is especially significant, since John Blondell was gone for much of the fall, and Chair Mitchell Thomas was on sabbatical in the spring. Nevertheless, the department enjoyed considerable success in this area, and is happy with the newfound focus and clarity related to assessment and student achievement in the Theatre Arts Department. The department is extremely grateful to Elizabeth Hess for the amount and quality of assessment work that she under took during her time with us in 2010-2011.
Following an important and useful conversation with Tatiana Nazarenko in the fall of 2010, John Blondell undertook the job of providing oversight for transforming the departmental Mission Statement and Student Learning Outcomes. Previous Outcomes were too numerous, in some cases too vague, and in most cases too difficult to assess. Consequently, the department narrowed its focus in three specific outcomes, which involve Creative and Effective work on the stage (to be assessed in the department’s Senior Projects Capstone Course), Disciplinary Literacy (assessed in upper division Theatre History courses), and Effective Written Communication (assessed in upper division Theatre History and Dramatic Theory courses.) The department is pleased that its assessment efforts are streamlined, clear, and concise. We look forward to collecting data over the next several years, in order to track student success and achievement in our program more clearly.
Please see the data and narrative related to this outcome in number III below. In addition, the department accomplished the following tasks: 1) discussed, created, and approved a new departmental mission statement; 2) discussed, created, and approved new Student Learning Outcomes (heretofore SLO’s); 3) discussed, created, and approved new Student Learning Goals; 4) discussed, created, and approved a rubric for the department’s Student Learning Outcome related to effective written communication, which it will assess in 2011-2012. Please see Appendix 1 for the previous mission statement and SLO’s, and Appendix 4 for narrative information regarding the development of the writing rubric and different iterations of the rubric that will be used for student research papers.
The work of the previous year has clarified departmental assessment focus, streamlined its efforts, and revealed the department’s next steps in terms of departmental success and student achievement.
III.Focus
Outcome: Demonstrate core knowledge in major literature, history, and theory of western theatre practice.
During the 2009-2010 school year, the Theatre Arts Department commenced work on its second outcome, related to core knowledge and disciplinary literacy in theatre and drama. During 2010-2011, the department continued work on this area, and accomplished the following tasks: 1) rewrote the outcome, reflected in the words above; 2) finished the instruments to assess this area; and 3) implemented the instruments, and collected data from them, to assess student success and pedagogical effectiveness. In addition, the department streamlined its efforts in obtaining this data. Previously, the department intended to assess Core Knowledge in three courses – TA 1, Great Literature of the Stage, TA 120, The Greeks to the Renaissance, and Theatre History II, The Rise of the Professional Theatre to the Modern Stage. Following input from Tatiana Nazarenko, and in consultation with members of the department, it was decided to eliminate TA 1 from the courses that would pursue this data, since TA 1 is an introductory level course, used to introduce and develop student achievement in this area, not necessarily develop mastery of it. Consequently, TA 120 and 121 are now the courses used to assess disciplinary literacy in Theatre Arts and Drama at Westmont.
The Core Knowledge outcome includes 100 terms, theatrical figures, and aesthetic movements integral to a deep and broad understanding of the western theatre tradition. Please see Appendix 5 for the curriculum that constitutes “Core Knowledge” for Westmont Theatre Arts majors, and Appendix 6 for the instrument used to assess core knowledge in Theatre Arts 120, taught by Elizabeth Hess during the spring of 2011.
The department established the following benchmark for disciplinary literacy and knowledge:
85% of Theatre Arts majors will score 90% or higher on the core knowledge component of Theatre Arts coursework.
During the spring of 2011, Core Knowledge was assessed in midterm and final examinations in TA 120 Theatre History I. 2 out of 11 majors scored at least 48.5 out of 51 (95% or above). No majors scored between 90% and 95%. 7 out of 11 majors scored at least 43.5 out of 51 (85% or above), and 8 out of 11 majors scored at least 41 out of 51 (80%). Only 18% of majors scored 90% or higher in core knowledge, down significantly from 2009-2010, when 66% of majors scored 90% or higher (sample size of 6). There are several possible reasons for this. In 2010-2011 an adjunct professor (Elizabeth Hess) taught the course and in her words, “graded the terms really, really hard, and took off half-points for fairly minor errors, even when the substance of the answer may well have been pretty much right.” Be that as it may, the department has accomplished some good work with this outcome. We have defined what we mean by “Core Knowledge” for our students, created assessment instruments for the outcome, and discussed student achievement in relation to the outcome. Some important questions remain, including the following: Does the 100-term curriculum adopted by the department convey (and assess) the breadth and depth of knowledge acceptable for undergraduate disciplinary literacy in the field? Is the department’s assessment instrument appropriate to gather and assess this outcome? Is the departmental benchmark appropriate for this outcome?
For the 2011-2012 assessment cycle, the department will gather one more round of data in order to arrive at a clearer picture of student achievement in the Core Knowledge outcome of our program, and attempt to answer these important questions. For this cycle, the department will lower its benchmark to read:
80% of Theatre Arts majors will score 80% or higher on the core knowledge component of Theatre Arts coursework.
IV. Next Steps
The Theatre Arts Department will engage in the following assessment tasks for 2011-2012:
- The department’s assessment focus for 2011-2012 will be: apply discipline-specific research methodologies in crafting effective writing about theatrical practice. This department SLO maps onto the college’s PLO for written effectiveness for the 2011-12 school year.
- Differentiate program goals from assessment ones more clearly, and create at least two specific programmatic objectives, to be completed by spring of 2013. Oversight by Mitchell Thomas, with input from John Blondell and Bob Hamel. Complete by Spring 2012.
- Continue to gather data for the Core Knowledge Outcome, and evaluate the success of the new benchmark. Oversight by John Blondell. Complete by Fall 2012.
- Discuss, and adopt as appropriate, new rubric for Senior Projects that will be used consistently by full-time and adjunct faculty. Since the department’s first SLO is assessed primarily in this course, more conversation and work are needed to create more effective assessment tools in this area. Oversight by Mitchell Thomas and John Blondell. Complete by Spring 2012.
- Fine-tune, if needed, the rubric used for writing research papers, which will be used for the first time to gather data for the departmental and college-wide writing outcome for the 2011-2012 school year. Oversight by John Blondell. Complete by Spring 2012.
- Continue to revise, re-shape, and develop Design and Technology portion of the curriculum. Oversight by Chair, in consultation with Robert Hamel. Complete by Spring 2014.
Appendices
- Previous Mission Statement and Student Learning Outcomes
- Curriculum Map
- Multi-Year Assessment Plan
- Last Year’s Annual Assessment Report Update
- Narrative and iterations of Writing Rubric
- Core Knowledge Curriculum – 100 terms
- Assessment Instruments from TA 120, midterm and final
APPENDICES
2010-2011 THEATRE ARTS ASSESSMENT UPDATE
Appendix 1
Previous Mission Statement and Student Learning Outcomes
Theatre Arts Department
Used until end of 2010 and 2011 School year
Mission
- The mission of the Westmont College Theatre Arts department is to provide a broad and rich education to undergraduate students, training and encouraging engaged, creative, and well-rounded Christian theatre artists committed to the development of an enlightened mind, deep empathy, a curious spirit, and an appreciation for the moral imagination.
Student Learning Outcomes
- Westmont College Theatre Arts students will cultivate their own individual creative spirits, and display the necessary imagination, technical expertise, and courageous self-discipline necessary for effective, dynamic work on the stage.
- Westmont College Theatre Arts students will display a deep and broad understanding of the history, literature, and theory of the European theatre tradition, and contemporary American theatre practice that has derived from it.
- Westmont College Theatre Arts students will cultivate tools for effective written communication, and will display abilities to describe, evaluate, differentiate, synthesize, analyze, and interpret, toward a deep understanding of the received historical, theoretical, and practical development of theatre and drama.
- Westmont College Theatre Arts students cultivate tools for effective oral communication, and display flexibility, nuance, power, clarity, and the thoughtful understanding necessary to communicate fictional characters through language.
- Westmont College Theatre Arts students understand their place in a diverse world, and through the department’s Globe Series and Theatre in London and Europe Mayterms, students display cross-cultural communication skills, flexibility, empathy, and awareness of people from other cultures.
- Westmont College Theatre Arts students will display a deep and integrated understanding of the Christian faith and their artistic work, becoming thoroughly responsible artists and individuals in the world, celebrating the moral imagination.
Appendix 2
Curriculum Map