Download Student Learning Assessment Program

STUDENT LEARNING ASSESSMENT PROGRAM
SUMMARY FORM AY 2013-2014
Degree and
Program Name:
BA, Theatre Arts (Dept. of Theatre Arts)
Submitted By:
J. Kevin Doolen, Chair
Please use size 10 font or larger.
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
13, 2014. 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.
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
f. Students will have an
understanding of the
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 Design, THA
3360: Stage Lighting, and
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. Following our NAST
visit, we implemented a new
format during 2013-2014 that
is explained below.
 HOT (practicum)
evaluations: All THA majors
are expected to meet or
surpass the rubric
expectations for the technical
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?
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.
Selection of students for
Advanced Design
assignments are made by
the relevant design
faculty, as is student
participation in the design
competitions at ACTF.
ACTF participants are
also evaluated by outside
adjudicators.
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.
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
concentration, must take


work in the areas of
scenic/lighting and
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
experiences at the festival,
with particular attention
paid to the design
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 non-graded
project, but for the past
several years, participation
has been supported through
departmental funding, as
well as a grant from the
Honors College and/or
Dean of the College of Arts
and Humanities. 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 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, as well as Professor
Christopher Gadomski).
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
response. These are
archived in the Theatre
Arts office.
narrative, and is archived
by the design area
professors.
ACTF Participation. In the
technical area, students are
encouraged to participate in the
American College Theater
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 Theater
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.
Written responses from ACTF
respondents are archived in the
Theatre Arts office.
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.
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 writing –
the results of that research
and the progress of the role’s
development.
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). The rubric
used by Instructors in the
courses listed are means of
providing feedback to the
students
 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
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 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
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. With
additional performance
faculty (Doolen) and
the hire of a new
Acting Professor to join
us in the Fall ’14
semester, the use of
journals and
performance rubrics
will be considered.
 Evaluation of auditions:
This area is being
redone, following our
NAST visit and
response. The new
format, outlined below,
was to be implemented
2013-2014. Given
faculty changes, this
will be considered in
2014-15.
 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
must repeat that course.
 ACTF Participation:
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
2013-14,
assessments were
conducted by Jenni
Passig in THA 2244
and by Chair Doolen
in the Auditions class
and Directing class
juried finals.
 HOT (practicum)
evaluations:
Evaluations are
submitted by the
faculty director of
the relevant show.
Results are
communicated to the
Chair.
 ACTF Participation:
Students are
evaluated by outside
adjudicators, as well
as their faculty
mentors.
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
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
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.
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
and/or Dean of the
College of Arts and
Humanities. 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. This year, none
of our eligible Irene
Ryan
candidates/partners
were able to attend due
to a snow storm. One
group who would have
attended later presented
during the Honors
College Research
Showcase.
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
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. Since
directing is also part of our
performance area, we routinely
enter any student-directed
production in ACTF. The
student directors receive both
oral feedback from the outside
respondent.
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
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 1020% 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
In the area of history and
literature, the results of the
direct assessment measures
as outlined in column two
are:
 Research Papers: For
AY 2012-2013, of the
students that completed
the assignment, 93%
achieved “minimally
competent” level. This
included, for the first
time, students enrolled
in required and elective
history courses, so it
cannot be compared to
previous years. No
results were
communicated to the
Chair AY 2013-14.
 Symposium: The 1020% figure cited in
column three has held
for the first six years of
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.
Summary results
were not
communicated to the
Chair this year.
 Symposium: The
Symposium is
organized by Prof.
Christopher J.
Mitchell and Prof.
Christopher Wixson
(English), and the
theatre history and
literature appropriate to
the undergraduate level
and communicate the
results effectively orally
and in writing.
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, and apply those ideas
to the contemporary theatre
world.

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
& 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
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 total score of 70
out of 100 on the rubric scoring.)
the Symposium’s
existence. The
acceptance rate has
likewise matched
expectations. For the
past three years, the
submissions have been
rather low, and only
from students enrolled
in English courses
rather than the Theatre
History sequence.
Students from the
Theatre History
sequence, however,
have been visible in
their attendance at the
Symposium. We will
continue to strive to
encourage students in
THA to submit, so that
we can continue to
gather data.
Discussion Evaluation: For
AY 2012-2013, 100% of
students in the sequence
achieved “minimally
competent” level. This is
the first year data from both
required and elective
courses is included.
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. Both
Doolen and J.
Wolski attended the
event this year.
Discussion Evaluation:
Assessment is conducted
by faculty teaching the
individual courses, as
listed above. Summary
results are communicated
to the Chair as
appropriate.
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 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 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.
Since the Theatre Arts Chair began this year as a result of a national search, there were no activities replacing current assessment functions, approaches, or
designated learning outcomes needing assessment. This coming academic year, the department will be conducting significant curriculum revision, following a
faculty retreat where Mission Statement/Core Values/Vision Statement for the department will be considered and likely revised. In addition, we will reconsider
learning outcomes for our degrees, allowing the Curriculum Committee more formal structure of how to conduct its business of curriculum review. Therefore,
over the next two years, considerable changes are expected to occur in curriculum and in subsequent assessment activities. Please see below the new assessment
initiatives implemented this year.
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?
As referenced in Part Two, there will be considerable changes in assessment over the next few years as the department reconsiders mission,
curriculum and strategic planning activities. Since the Chair will work closely with the new Assessment Coordinator in designing and
implementing these plans, initial discussions have just begun. The Assessment Coordinator (Jean Wolski) will be receiving CU assignment in
support of this important endeavor and will be working closely with the Chair (Doolen.) It has not been determined if this Assessment Committee
(Doolen, J. Wolski) will be expanded or if this will indeed be the total committee membership. This activity goes hand-in-hand with Curriculum
Committee efforts so once that leadership is confirmed, it will be determined the impact on appropriate membership of the Assessment
Committee.
Given my history of assessment at various research universities, I plan on bringing some of those approaches to the committee for consideration.
For example, I believe we need to reduce the learning outcomes objectives to a few more general, measurable goals for the core and for the
individual tracks. Further, since production is the lab for our curriculum, I have already initiated utilizing outside expert testimony evaluating the
work as evidenced by the productions in line with our mission and outcomes. This year, Macbeth was assessed. Next year, Carnival will be
assessed. Dr. Judith Pender, Professor and Director of Performance at University of Oklahoma, wrote a thorough critical response to the
production.
In addition to our new assessment tool of expert outside testimony relative to theatre productions, this year I focused on the area of performance in
the BA degree. As such, I devised a tool for outside expert testimony to focus on our acting majors. Dr. Pender and Professor Will Kilroy, Chair
at University of Southern Maine, worked with our students via providing master classes. Kilroy served as an assessor for the Directing class final
and the Auditions class jury. Each completed the assessment tool for performance.
I created an extensive senior survey questionnaire with both quantitative and qualitative elements. This was distributed to all recent graduates
(past two years) and I am in the process of collecting these completed surveys. The quantitative data will be averaged; qualitative will be
confidentially composed in a report for the faculty to consider with the Chair at the upcoming Faculty Retreat.
All these new assessment activities (senior surveys, production assessment, and performance area assessment) were initiated this year following
faculty endorsement. They will be used and shared at the Faculty Retreat this coming August, and referenced in mission and curriculum review
efforts. There will be new faculty joining us in the Fall and their integration is an important dimension of assessment and curriculum revision.