Download Submitted By

STUDENT LEARNING ASSESSMENT PROGRAM
SUMMARY FORM AY 2011-2012
Degree and
Program Name:
BA, Theatre Arts (Dept. of Theatre Arts)
Submitted By:
Jean K. Wolski, Interim Chair
Please complete a separate worksheet for each academic program
(major, minor) at each level (undergraduate, graduate) in your
department. Worksheets are due to CASA this year by June
15, 2012. Worksheets should be sent electronically to
[email protected] and should also be submitted to your college
dean. For information about assessment or help with your
assessment plans, visit the Assessment webpage at
http://www.eiu.edu/~assess/ or contact Karla Sanders in CASA at
581-6056.
Please use size 10 font or larger.
PART ONE
What are the learning
objectives?
How, where, and when are they
assessed?
What are the expectations?
What are the results?
1. In the area of technical
theatre:
a. Students will be able to
read, draft, and understand
basic theatre drawings.
b. Students will be able to
construct the basic
elements used in
contemporary stage design.
c. Students will develop a
working knowledge of the
tools used in contemporary
theatre
d. Students will have an
understanding of the basic
principles of light.
e. Students will have an
understanding of how to
hang, focus, and maintain
lighting instruments
commonly used in the
theatre
1. In the area of technical
theatre, direct assessment
measures include:
 Review of a portfolio of the
student’s technical work
(scenic, lighting, costuming,
sound, stage management)
Portfolios are composed by
technical theatre
concentrators, and are
collected and assessed as
per the area professors’
rubrics at multiple points in
the curriculum, beginning in
the student’s freshman year.
Collection occurs in courses
such as THA 2220: Theatre
Seminar I, THA 3220:
Theatre Seminar II, THA
3257: Graphics II/CAD,
THA 3434: Basic Theatrical
Design, THA 3357: Scenic
1. In the area of technical
theatre, the expectations of the
direct assessment measures as
outlined in column two are:
 Portfolios: By the end of
their senior year,
technical/design
concentrators are expected
to have composed a
portfolio of their technical
and design work that is
concise, clear, and
descriptive, as appropriate
to the professional
standards of the field.
 HOT (practicum)
evaluations: All THA
majors are expected to
meet or surpass the rubric
expectations for the
technical work in the areas
of scenic/lighting and
1. In the area of technical
theatre, the results of the
direct assessment measures
as outlined in column two
are:
 Portfolios: In order to
graduate with an
emphasis in technical
theatre/design, students
must develop a portfolio
that meets or exceeds
the expectations.
 HOT (practicum)
evaluations: In order to
successfully complete
the curriculum, it is
required to meet or
exceed rubric
expectations. If a
student fails to meet
said expectations in a
given HOT course, s/he
Committee/ person
responsible? How are
results shared?
1. In the area of
technical theatre, Prof.
David Wolski and Prof.
Nicholas Shaw are
primarily responsible for
assessing technical work
in the areas of scenic,
lighting, sound design,
and stage management.
Prof. Karen Eisenhour is
primarily responsible for
assessing technical work
in the costuming area.
Results are communicated
to Prof. Jean Wolski,
Interim Chair, and are
disseminated to the
faculty as appropriate to
the needs of the program.
Selection of students for
Advanced Design
assignments are made by
f. Students will have an
understanding of the
control of light in the
theatre.
g. Students will have an
understanding of the
collaborative relationship
between designers and
directors
h. Students will have a basic 
understanding of how
garments are constructed.
i. Students will have an
understanding of fashion as
it relates to theatrical
performance.
j. Students will be able to
do the necessary the
necessary research for the
preparation and execution
of a concept for a scenic or
costume design. They will
be able to effectively
communicate – both orally
and in writing – the results
of that research and the
development of said
concept.
Design, THA 3360: Stage
Lighting, and THA 3358:
Design and History of
Costume. In addition,
courses in the Theatre
Production Topics series
and in Advanced Design
implement this type of
review.
Review of a student’s work
in the “Hands-On Theatre”
(practicum) courses, THA
2001: HOT Costuming I,
THA 2002: HOT
Scenic/Lighting I, THA
30011/30012/30013/30014:
HOT Advanced Costuming
I-IV, and THA
30021/30022/30023/30024:
HOT Advanced Scenic
Lighting I-IV. Work in these
courses involves serving as
a crewmember on a show
and/or working a defined
number of shop hours. In
the Advanced courses,
students are expected to take
on more responsibility (i.e.,
serving as crew head,
working independently on a
construction project, etc.)
The work is typically
assessed orally as per the
rubrics determined by the
design area professors.
Students may take these
courses at any point during
their curriculum, but must
successfully complete the
lower level courses before
they can advance to the
upper level. At minimum, a
THA major, regardless of


costuming.
Advanced Design:
Students with a
Tech/Design emphasis
who are selected to design
one of the Departmental
productions are expected
to complete and submit
working drawings,
renderings, etc. and
oversee the realization of
the design work.
Appropriate
documentation of the work
is also included in the
student’s final portfolio.
ACTF Participation:
Students who participate
in either the realized
production competition or
the project competition are
expected to develop a
poster presentation of their
work which includes:
1. A written
discussion of the
concept of the
play
2. Evidence of
research
3. Preliminary
sketches
4. Finalized design
Students are expected to
give an oral presentation
and defense of their work
to a panel of judges at the
Regional ACTF Festival.
In addition, all students
who participate in ACTF
are asked to submit
reflective journal of their


must repeat that course.
Advanced Design:
Students in Advanced
Design must meet or
exceed all expectations,
or they will be removed
from the project.
ACTF Participation:
This is currently a nongraded project, but for
the past two years,
participation has been
supported through
departmental funding,
as well as a grant from
the Honors College.
Students selected to
present, but do not do so
due to lack of
preparation and/or
commitment, and/or
students who fail to
submit the reflective
journal are not eligible
for funding for future
events.
the relevant design
faculty, as is student
participation in the design
competitions at ACTF.
ACTF participants are
also evaluated by outside
adjudicators.

concentration, must take the
lower division HOT courses
in Scenic/Lighting and in
Costuming. Narrative
evaluations are archived by
the design area professors
(David Wolski, Karen
Eisenhour, and Nick Shaw).
The Assessment Committee
plans to analyze trends
yearly.
Advanced Design. Students
who have completed the
basic technical courses, plus
a minimum of one design
course, may apply to design
set, lights, costumes, and/or
sound for one of the Theatre
Arts productions. Students
submit a resume and
portfolio, and are selected
by the design area faculty.
Students in this stage of the
design curriculum are
expected to work with the
director and other designers
in production meetings to
develop a concept based on
a thorough analysis of the
play, prepare and present a
research based on that
concept for production,
prepare working
drawings/renderings as
needed per design area, and
successfully complete the
execution of the design.
Evaluation of the student’s
work is done throughout the
process both as oral critique
and written narrative, and is
archived by the design area
professors.
experiences at the festival,
with particular attention
paid to the design
response. These are
archived in the Theatre
Arts office.

ACTF Participation. In the
technical area, students are
encouraged to participate in
the American College
Theatre Festival on two
levels: in the realized design
category, and in the project
category. Whenever
possible, productions with
student designers are
entered in the American
College Theatre Festival.
An outside adjudicator does
an oral and written response
to the production work after
attending a performance of
the play. The student
designer is then invited to
present the work at the
Regional Festival held in
January. Students put
together a poster
presentation of the design
work, and are given a time
to explain and defend their
choices to a panel of judges.
The student receives both
oral critiques and written
responses to their work. In
the project category,
students in a design course
who are deemed sufficiently
skilled are encouraged to
enter their work in the
ACTF Regional festival.
Again, the students prepare
a poster presentation of
design work based off of
one of six approved plays,
give an oral defense of the
work to a panel of judges
and receive oral and written
feedback to the work.
2.In the area of
performance/directing:
a. Students will understand
basic acting technique.
b. Students will understand
the importance of
movement in
performance.
c. Students will understand
period style and
movement as it relates to
performance.
d. Students will have a
knowledge of the history
of acting and the
development of
contemporary acting
techniques.
e. Students will understand
the workings of the
human voice.
f. Students will understand
the role of director in the
contemporary theatre.
g. Students will be able to
analyze play scripts for
production.
h. Students will develop the
ability to communicate
with other artists in the
field.
i. Students will be able to
do the necessary research
for the preparation and
execution of a role or for
the direction of a script.
They will be able to
effectively communicate
– both orally and in
Written responses from
ACTF respondents are
archived in the Theatre Arts
office.
2.In the area of
performance/directing, direct
assessment measures include:
 Performance Journals:
Students are introduced to
the performance journal in
the Basic Acting Class, and
are encouraged to keep
journals as they progress
through the Advanced
Acting courses, and for each
production in which they are
cast.
 Evaluation of auditions: All
performance concentrators
are required to audition for
the production season, and
all other concentrators are
strongly encouraged to
audition. Auditions are
required in THA 2220:
Theatre Seminar I, THA
2244: Basic Acting, and
THA 3348: Auditioning
(which is taught on a
rotating basis). In the past, a
rubric was developed and
implemented during the
unified audition process. A
reduction in faculty has not
allowed for that for the past
three years. The rubric is
used by Instructors in the
courses listed as a means of
providing feedback to the
students. In Fall 2010, the
Dept. began the practice of
recording student auditions
2.In the area of
performance/directing, the
expectations of the direct
assessment measures as
outlined in column two are:

Performance Journals:
Students’ performance
journals are expected to
document fundamental
acting principles in early
course/production work,
with the focus on such
items as memorization,
character development,
blocking issues, etc. and
progress as the students
take on more complex and
detailed roles.

Evaluation of auditions:
The expectation is that a
comparison of auditions
from first semester
freshman year to second
semester junior year will
show a maturation in the
choice of material, the
understanding of audience,
and the use of voice and
movement in the audition.

HOT (practicum)
evaluations: All THA
majors are expected to
meet or surpass the rubric
expectations for
performance work.

ACTF Participation:
Students are expected to
develop two contrasting
2.In the area of
performance/directing, the
results of the direct
assessment measures as
outlined in column two are:
 Performance Journals:
The performance
journal is in the early
stages of
implementation.
Students were
introduced to the
concept in Spring 2010
under Prof. Jean Wolski
in the Beginning Acting
class, but recent changes
in faculty have made the
practice inconsistent.
Informal assessments of
the journals from the
2010 class have
indicated a greater
awareness of process
and product on the part
of the student actors.
The plan is to reemphasize the
importance of the
journal in the next AY.
 Evaluation of auditions:
Comparisons of
evaluations is in the
early stages. Spring
2013 will provide us
with the first
comparison group.
 HOT (practicum)
evaluations: In order to
2.In the area of
performance/directing,
there is a division
according to assessment
measure:
 Performance Journals:
The performance
journal is initially
assessed by the
faculty member
teaching Basic
Acting, and may be
evaluated by
production directors
throughout the
student’s tenure.
 Evaluation of
auditions: In AY
2011-2012, auditions
were assessed by
Prof. David Wolski
in THA 2220 and
THA 3220, by Prof.
Jenni Passig in THA
2244, and by Prof.
Jeffrey Tangeman in
THA 3348. Auditions
are assessed through
casting by directors
of productions.
 HOT (practicum)
evaluations:
Evaluations are
submitted by the
faculty director of the
relevant show.
Results are
communicated to the
writing – the results of
that research and the
progress of the role’s
development.

in THA 2220 during the first
semester of the freshman
year, and recorded once
more for performance
concentrators in THA 3220:
Theatre Seminar II, at the
end of the junior year. These
are used for comparison and
are archived in the Theatre
Arts office.
Review of work in the
“Hands-On Theatre
(practicum) course: THA
2000 (HOT Performance I)
is required of all THA
majors, regardless of
concentration. THA
30001/30002/ 30003/30004
(HOT Advanced
Performance I-IV) can be
used to fulfill the Advanced
practicum requirement, and
are generally taken by all
performance concentrators.
Students my take these at
any point in the curriculum.
Work in these courses
involves development and
completion of a role(s) in
the Departmental
Production Program. As
with the Technical
practicums, students must
successfully complete each
course before they are
allowed to move on to the
next level. Written and/or
oral assessments of
performance are given
throughout the rehearsal
process by the director of
each production. When
requested, a post mortem
scenes plus a monologue,
following the regulations
outlined by KC/ACTF for
the Irene Ryan
competition. Students are
expected to work with a
faculty mentor, who
provides feedback and
coaching throughout the
process. Students are
expected to attend the
feedback sessions
following each round of
the competition, and, if
not selected, to attend the
performance of the
Finalists at the festival. In
addition, all students
who participate in ACTF
are asked to submit
reflective journal of their
experiences at the festival,
with particular attention
paid to the acting
responses, performances,
and workshops. These
journals are archived in
the Theatre Arts office.

successfully complete
the curriculum, it is
required to meet or
exceed rubric
expectations. If a
student fails to meet
said expectations in a
given HOT course, s/he
must repeat that course.
ACTF Participation:
This is currently a nongraded project, but for
the past two years,
participation has been
supported through
departmental funding,
as well as a grant from
the Honors College.
Students selected to
present, but do not do so
due to lack of
preparation and/or
commitment, and/or
students who fail to
submit the reflective
journal are not eligible
for funding for future
events.

Interim chair.
ACTF Participation:
Students are
evaluated by outside
adjudicators, as well
as their faculty
mentors.

review is also given.
ACTF Participation:
Approximately 50% of the
production season is entered
in the American College
Theatre Festival. For each
entered production, an
outside respondent attends a
performance and conducts a
talkback with the students
involved. Student actors are
encouraged to ask for
feedback both during and
immediately following the
talkback. A written response
is also submitted and is
archived in the Theatre Arts
office. In addition to the
onsite response, 1-2 actors
are chosen to participate in
the Regional Festival’s Irene
Ryan Acting competition.
These students work with
partners, and present scenes
and monologues at the
yearly conference. Students
are evaluated by a panel of
judges, with approximately
10% of all competitors
moving on to the semi-final
round. Each round is judged
by a different set of judges,
and an oral response is
provided following each
round of the competition. In
AY 2011-2012, we had
eligible show entered in the
competition, and had eight
actors compete. Since
directing is also part of our
performance area, we
routinely enter any studentdirected production in
3. In the area of history and
literature:
a. Students will have an
understanding of the
major periods of drama
and their relationship to
the contemporary theatre.
b. Students will have an
understanding of the
principal writers and
critics of a given period
and contemporary view
of their works.
c. Students will be able to
read, understand, and
analyze play scripts.
d. Students will have an
awareness of the
significant plays,
criticism, and theories of
the major periods in
theatre history.
e. Students will be able to
conduct research in
theatre history and
literature appropriate to
the undergraduate level
and communicate the
results effectively orally
and in writing.
f. Students will be able to
draw correlation between
the developments and
trends in theatre
throughout various
historical periods and the
world view which
influenced such
developments and trends,
ACTF. The student directors
receive both oral and written
feedback from the outside
respondent.
3. In the area of history and
literature, direct assessment
measures include:
 Research Papers: Under the
current curriculum, all THA
majors are required to
complete THA 3751G:
Theatre History I, THA
3752G: Theatre History II,
and THA 3756: 20th Century
Theatre History. This range
of courses provides the
students with a
comprehensive study of
theatrical history and
literature from antiquity
through the close of the 20th
century. In each course,
students generate research
papers of varying lengths
that are assessed via a rubric
adapted from the Electronic
Writing Portfolio’s rubric.
The rubric scores, along
with growth summaries per
student over the course of
their completion of the
sequence are stored
electronically by the
instructor(s) of the courses
and are available for
inspection by the
Assessment/Curriculum
committee upon request. In
addition, students may also
elect to take additional
topic-specific courses in
Theatre History (THA
3753G: American Theatre &
3. In the area of history and
literature, the expectations of
the direct assessment measures
as outlined in column two are:
 Research Papers: Upon
completion of each course
in the sequence, each THA
major is expected to
achieve “Minimally
competent” level for each
research paper exercise.
This translates to “C”
grading level, or a total of
70 out of 100 on the rubric
scoring.
 Symposium: Of all
students writing papers for
the THA History
Sequence, it is expected
that between 10-20% will
be qualified to submit to
the Symposium. Of papers
submitted for
consideration, the
acceptance rate is
expected to be high at
present (over 85%) due to
the initial vetting through
the curriculum.
 Discussion Evaluation:
Upon completion of each
course of the sequence, it
is expected that all
students will achieve
“minimally competent”
level of discussion
participation. (This
translates to “C” level or a
3. In the area of history
and literature, the results of
the direct assessment
measures as outlined in
column two are:
 Research Papers: For
AY 2011-2012, of the
students that completed
the assignment, 94.89%
achieved “minimally
competent” level. This
includes, for the first
time, students enrolled
in required and elective
history courses, so it
cannot be compared to
previous years.
 Symposium: The 1020% figure cited in
column three has held
for the first five years of
the Symposium’s
existence. The
acceptance rate has
likewise matched
expectations. For the
past two years, the
submissions have been
rather low, and only
from students enrolled
in English courses
rather than the Theatre
History sequence. We
will continue to strive to
encourage students in
THA to submit, so that
we can continue to
gather data.
3. In the area of history
and literature, there is a
division according to
assessment measure:
 Research Papers:
Assessment is done
by faculty teaching in
the History sequence.
Prof. Christopher J.
Mitchell is the
primary instructor in
these areas, but Prof.
Mary Yarbrough and
Prof. Jenni Passig
also submit data.
Summary results are
communicated to the
Interim Chair, Prof.
Jean K. Wolski, as
appropriate.
 Symposium: The
Symposium is
organized by Prof.
Christopher J.
Mitchell and Prof.
Christopher Wixson
(English), and the
faculty panel has
typically consisted of
two THA and two
ENG faculty. Since
the Symposium is a
public event, a
general audience
hears the results and
responds to the
presentations.
 Discussion
and apply those ideas to
the contemporary theatre
world.

Drama, THA 3754G:
American Drama on Film,
THA 3755: AfricanAmerican Theatre) where
similar requirements are
made.
Theatre Undergraduate
Research Symposium: An
extension of the previous
bullet point, all students
who write a paper in the
disciplines of theatre history
or literature are welcome to
submit papers for
consideration for this annual
exercise, which allows
students to present their
papers in conference format
and receive feedback from
audience members, as well
as from a faculty panel of
judges. Students who
achieve the highest level of
competency on the research
papers are particularly
invited to submit for
consideration. Faculty both
vet the papers to determine
invitees to the Symposium
and to decide upon the “Best
Paper” of the Symposium,
both according to the rubric
used in the THA History
Sequence. The papers, as
well as the judges’ scoring
and the scoring trends over
the five years of the
Symposium, are archived
electronically by Prof.
Christopher J. Mitchell and
are available for inspection
by the Assessment/
Curriculum committee upon
total score of 70 out of
100 on the rubric scoring.)

Discussion Evaluation:
For AY 2011-2012,
100% of students in the
sequence achieved
“minimally competent”
level. This is the first
year data from both
required and elective
courses is included.
Evaluation:
Assessment is
conducted by faculty
teaching the
individual courses, as
listed above.
Summary results are
communicated to the
Interim Chair as
appropriate.

request.
Evaluation of Discussion/
Participation in THA history
sequence: Students in the
sequence communicate their
engagement with the course
material in group
discussion, indicating their
level of commitment of and
comprehension of the
historical documents and
plays assigned. Students are
evaluated at the end of the
semester according to a
rubric, which assesses
objectives “a” through “d,”
which translates directly
into the participation portion
of the grade. The rubric
scores, along with growth
summaries per student over
the course of their
completion of the sequence
and overall rubric trends per
academic year, are stored
electronically by the
instructors of the courses,
currently Prof. Christopher
J. Mitchell and Prof. Jenni
Passig, and are available for
inspection by the
Assessment/Curriculum
committee upon request.
(Continue objectives as needed. Cells will expand to accommodate your text.)
PART TWO
Describe your program’s assessment accomplishments since your last report was submitted. Discuss ways in which you have responded to the
CASA Director’s comments on last year’s report or simply describe what assessment work was initiated, continued, or completed.
This past year, we have been involved in preparing for a reaccreditation visit from NAST, and as a result, have taken a long look at our assessment. The past two
years have been transitional, with retirements and shifts in the faculty ranks. As such, we are still currently reviewing our assessment strategies, and searching for
models that give a clearer view of what we do.
During AY 2011-2012, the Interim Chair attended a Leadership Conference at the Association for Theatre and Higher Education conference in Chicago. While
there, Prof. Jean Wolski was also able to attend several seminars on Assessment in the Arts. In essence, the move in the arts is away from the numeric rubric
model to more digital archiving of performance and narrative assessment techniques. Many of these techniques we already implement in the classroom, and we
are looking in the next few years to expand that assessment to production. Of note:
 In Fall 2010, Prof. David Wolski began teaching the two Theatre Seminar classes and returned to a practice of recording and archiving auditions for
each student in his/her freshman year, and then repeating that process with student in the junior year. We plan to use these for a comparative analysis for
our performance concentrators. Students in the technical area, in lieu of an audition in their junior year, do a presentation of their portfolios, which is
also recorded and archived.
 The use of reflective journals in Performance and for those attending ACTF has been introduced.
 During our NAST review, we began collecting data from graduates of our program, in the form of a satisfaction survey.
 Assessment data in the past had not been shared with the faculty as a whole. Our initial meeting in Fall 2012 is set to correct that, and hopefully engage
our faculty in the assessment process.
One area that has been a bit overlooked has been our Teacher Certification program. This is due, in part, to the lack of Teacher Certification graduates. However,
in the past two years, we have graduated four students from this program. These students are expected to meet or exceed the same standards as the rest of our
majors. In addition, they must take the Illinois Certification Test in the subject area. Our most recent graduate took this test Fall 2011. In the four categories
tested: Basic Vocabulary of Drama/Theatre, Theatrical Performance and Production, History and Literature of Theatre, and Drama/Theatre and Fine Arts
Education, she exceeded all other scores in the state in 3 out of the 4 categories, and had the highest overall rating in the state. This is not an anomaly. All of our
Theatre Arts/Teacher Cert grads have achieved scores on par or above the state averages. We will continue to monitor these students, and work to maintain this
high level of achievement.
A second area where we have placed more emphasis has been on participation in the Kennedy Center/American College Theatre Festival (ACTF). Participation
in this event allows us to bring in outside respondents who provide feedback and critiques of student work. Participation at the regional festival expands this
opportunity, and allows students to see the work of students from across the four-state region. This past year, we had a student selected as a finalist in the
Lighting Design competition and two students in the Semi-Finals of the Irene Ryan Acting competition. No differentiation is made between graduate and
undergraduates in these competitions, so the success of our students speaks to their training in our program. We will continue to seek the means to allow students
to participate at this level.
PART THREE
Summarize changes and improvements in curriculum, instruction, and learning that have resulted from the implementation of your assessment
program. How have you used the data? What have you learned? In light of what you have learned through your assessment efforts this year and
in past years, what are your plans for the future?
The biggest change – and it’s still underway – has to be the approach to the entire assessment process. To be frank, the data that was collected in the past
provided very little information to the faculty in terms of strengths and weaknesses in the curriculum. There are many things that we do – and have done for some
time – but that weren’t included in this report. What we are working on are ways to regularize the assessment so that it’s applied across the curriculum – not just
in select classes. Changes that we are looking at for next year:




A change to the structure of the HOT (practicum) courses. This is due, in part, to the re-numbering of the upper division HOT courses that begins this fall.
The renumbering will allow us to better track a student’s progress through this series of courses, by assigning and assessing learning objectives at each level.
In the past, with the repeatable courses, there was no way to differentiate between sections.
Establishing assessment of critical thinking. Critical thinking is essential to the development of the theatre artist. Students are expected to apply knowledge
acquired in classes to the practical aspects of production. Collaboration between designers and directors requires the ability to see the interconnectedness of
ideas. In our history classes, we routinely examine theatrical movements as a reflection of cultural, political, and social environments. While students often
enter into discussions in class, and include these elements in their writing, we have not, as yet, established a separate assessment of their abilities in critical
thinking. This is on the table for discussion in the fall, and we hope to implement this by the end of 2013.
A mid-career assessment of all majors. As part of our NAST review, we examined how our majors end up in the various concentrations. In the past, this has
been done through informal advising. We are looking at implementing a student review that would take place in the Spring semester of the sophomore year.
Students interested in performance would be asked to present their audition pieces and submit their Performance Journals for review. Tech/design students
would give a portfolio presentation. Those interested in directing would need to have achieved a certain level through stage management and assistant
directing experiences. All students would be expected to submit resumes. This would put another level of assessment of skill sets and allow us to steer
students toward the goals they need to achieve in order to be successful in their chosen field.
Introduction of more concrete objectives in global awareness into the curriculum. Again, this is something that is present, to a certain extent, in our
curriculum, primarily through history and literature, but we would like to be able to expand our students’ world view. This can be achieved through season
selection, the reintroduction of our Non-Western course, and a greater emphasis in the histories of the world culture that influenced the developments in
theatre.