Music Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course-Level Assessment
Reflections.
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop”
discussion
MUSL 1
Spring 2015
6
6
100
Spring 2015
T. Harris, W. Shannon
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported
in this Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student
Learning Outcomes Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in
aggregate for all sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the
individual CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on
the course as a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY
(THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1:
Write about music analytically and affectively using
language and style appropriate to the discipline while
expressing ideas clearly using good grammar, syntax, and
organization.
(CLO) 2:
Synthesize factual information and historical
evidence through informed listening, analysis,
evaluation and discernment of musical
elements, forms and repertoire
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
80% score a 3
or 4.
80% score a 3
or 4.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
72 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
85 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
80% score a 3 80 % of the
or 4.
course scored a
Articulate an understanding of non-western
3 or 4.
music and its musicology performance.
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate
success for this CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
(CLO) 3:
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
A. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
This really depended on the background of the student and where they were in the
sequence of their English courses. We offer two sections of MUSL 1 at the high school
and middle school level. The writing at the middle school level was well below what
we would expect from students in the typical college section.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
The continued need to have students write. We have found that in the online courses
where students are regularly asked to write the quality was much better. This is an
area that many of our students continue to need help with, especially our non-native
speakers.
B. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
This was a strength for many of our students. Students achieved above the target set.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
Attending live concerts and applying the materials learned in the classroom has helped
in this area. We have also seen greater success in this area with students purchasing
the required course materials and the use to streaming audio technologies to facilitate
student access.
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
3. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
Yes, the hit the target.
4. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
Students are generally succeeding in this course. The students that tend to struggle are
those that are English language learners, are not writing at a collegiate level or are not
regularly attending class. These are area we will continue to evaluate.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
1. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment
cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
Since the previous assessment cycle, we have made the following changes:
1) SARS tracking for open lab and concert attendance.
2) Switching from CD’s the students were required to purchase to streaming
audio
2. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and
programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What
actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your
reflections, discussions, and insights?
The streaming audio technology has greatly aided our students. We would like
to continue to incorporate technology into our classes with particular emphasis
on Web 2.0 tools and classroom clickers.
3. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical X
 Resource based X
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop”
discussion
MUSL 2A-D
Spring 2015
4
4
100
Spring 2015
T. Harris, R. Flores, E. Schultz,
W. Shannon
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported
in this Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student
Learning Outcomes Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in
aggregate for all sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the
individual CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on
the course as a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY
(THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1:
Understand and use the modern, Western system on
notating music.
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
80% score a 3
or 4.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
85 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
(CLO) 2:
80% score a 3
or 4.
70 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
(CLO) 3:
80% score a 3
or 4.
80 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
70 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
Demonstrate basic musicianship skills including
sight singing, rhythm reading, aural
recognition, diction, and keyboard realization.
Understand historical aspects of the
development of the concepts
80% score a 3
or 4.
Compose music using fundamental Western
theoretical concepts
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
(CLO) 3:

Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate
success for this CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
3. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
Yes, they are 5% above our goal.
4. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
Success in this area really depended on the background of the student and if the play
an instrument or can read music. Students are generally succeeding identifying
elements but can struggle a bit with musical structure.
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
5. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
No. Students were 10% below the target set.
6. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
Applying the materials learned in the classroom will help in this area. Use of
technology from training such as Aurelia will help in this area.
F. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
7. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
Yes, they are on target.
8. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
They are succeeding as the students own the text and materials and are doing the
readings. It is the application of these concepts which can be an issue for 2A students
in particicular.
G. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
9. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
No, they are 10% below our target goal.
10. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
This is the most difficult area for most students. Students who are the most
comfortable with technology and have basic piano skills tend to succeed at a higher
rate than others. Also students you are in the C and D section succeed at a much high
rate with greater skills having been developed.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
4. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment
cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
We have changes the structure of the course curriculum wise and they way in
which we teach the concepts.
5. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and
programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What
actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your
reflections, discussions, and insights?
The continued need to have students apply the concepts learned in this course
in ensembles. We are also looking into increasing the use of technology in our
MUSL courses as well.
6. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular X
 Pedagogical X
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods

Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop”
discussion
MUSL 3
Spring 2015
2
2
100
Spring 2015
T. Harris, V. Lington
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported
in this Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student
Learning Outcomes Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in
aggregate for all sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the
individual CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on
the course as a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY
(THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1:
Learn to think critically about the role of the arts within
selected, varied world cultures and practices: differentiating
and comparing musical construction, performance, and
reception
(CLO) 2:
Write about music analytically and affectively using
language and style appropriate to the discipline while
expressing ideas clearly using good grammar, syntax, and
organization.
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
80% score a 3
or 4.
70% score a 3
or 4.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
87 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
73 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
80% score a 3 81 % of the
or 4.
course scored a
Recognize and articulate about material and functions of
3 or 4.
music in selected cultures and cultural settings, based on
ethnomusicological practices
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
(CLO) 3:

Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate
success for this CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
H. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
5. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
This was a strength for many of our students. Students achieved above the target set.
6. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
Attending live concerts and applying the materials learned in the classroom has helped
in this area. We have also seen greater success in this area with students purchasing
the required course materials and the use to streaming audio technologies to facilitate
student access. We also believe this area was a bit higher due to music majors taking
this course in addition to GE students.
I. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
11. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
Yes, 3% above the target.
12. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
The continued need to have students write. We have found that in the online courses
where students are regularly asked to write the quality was much better. This is an
area that many of our students continue to need help with, especially our non-native
speakers. Students in the MUSL 3 courses did better in this area compared to other
MUSL courses.
J. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
13. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
Yes, the hit the target.
14. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
Students are generally succeeding in this course. The students that tend to struggle are
those that are English language learners, are not writing at a collegiate level or are not
regularly attending class. These are area we will continue to evaluate.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
7. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment
cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
Since the previous assessment cycle, we have made the following changes:
1) SARS tracking for open lab and concert attendance.
2) Switching from CD’s the students were required to purchase to streaming
audio
8. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and
programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What
actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your
reflections, discussions, and insights?
The streaming audio technology has greatly aided our students. We would like
to continue to incorporate technology into our classes with particular emphasis
on Web 2.0 tools.
9. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical X
 Resource based X
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop”
discussion
MUSL 4
Spring 2015
2
2
100
Spring 2015
T. Harris, J. Palacio
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported
in this Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student
Learning Outcomes Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in
aggregate for all sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the
individual CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on
the course as a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY
(THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1:
Write about music analytically and affectively using
language and style appropriate to the discipline while
expressing ideas clearly using good grammar, syntax, and
organization.
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
80% score a 3
or 4.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
70 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
(CLO) 2:
80% score a 3
or 4.
90 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
(CLO) 3:
80% score a 3
or 4.
70 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
Synthesize factual information and historical
evidence through informed listening, analysis,
evaluation and discernment of musical
elements, forms and repertoire
Communicate an understanding of jazz and its
role in the American musical landscape.
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.


Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate
success for this CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
K. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
7. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
No, they are 10% below our goal.
8. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
The continued need to have students write. Success really depended on the
background of the student and where they were in the sequence of their English
courses. This is an area that many of our students continue to need help with,
especially our non-native speakers.
L. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
15. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
Yes. This was a strength for many of our students. Students achieved above the target
set. 10% above our target.
16. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
Attending live concerts and applying the materials learned in the classroom has helped
in this area. We have also seen greater success in this area with students purchasing
the required course materials and the use to streaming audio technologies to facilitate
student access.
M. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
17. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
No, they are 10% below our goal.
18. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
Students are generally succeeding in this course. The students that tend to struggle are
those that are English language learners, are not writing at a collegiate level or are not
regularly attending class. These are area we will continue to evaluate.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
10. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment
cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
No significant changes have been made other than updating the course outline
of records and moving away from students purchasing CDs. We are now using
streaming audio technology.
11. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and
programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What
actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your
reflections, discussions, and insights?
The continued need to improve writing in our classroom and to get students to
class when they start to struggle with the materials. We are also looking into
increasing the use of technology in our MUSL courses with Web 2.0 tools and we
will be requesting classroom clickers in your next program review.
12. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical X
 Resource based X
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop”
discussion
MUSL 5
Spring 2014
1
1
100
Spring 2015
T. Harris, W. Shannon
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported
in this Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student
Learning Outcomes Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in
aggregate for all sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the
individual CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on
the course as a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY
(THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1:
Learn about and appreciate the contributions of the diverse
ethnic cultures to twentieth-century music in the United
States.
(CLO) 2:
Write about music analytically and affectively using
language and style appropriate to the discipline while
expressing ideas clearly using good grammar, syntax, and
organization.
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
80% score a 3
or 4.
70% score a 3
or 4.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
84 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
66 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
80% score a 3 84 % of the
or 4.
course scored a
Recognize and articulate about material, styles and
3 or 4.
functions of music in selected cultures and cultural settings
in the twentieth-century United States.
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
(CLO) 3:

Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate
success for this CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
N. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
9. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
4% above target
10. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
Students who attended class regularly were more engaged and had a good grasp of the
course material.
O. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
19. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
4% below the target.
20. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
Students who completed and turned in written assignments were engaged and did well in
this outcome.
P. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
21. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
4% above the target.
22. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
Students are generally succeeding in this course. The students that tend to struggle are
those that are English language learners, are not writing at a collegiate level or are not
regularly attending class. These are area we will continue to evaluate.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
13. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment
cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
Since the previous assessment cycle, we have made the following changes:
1) SARS tracking for open lab and practice.
2) Greater student access to practice room
3) Purchase of professional quality instruments to aid student success
14. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and
programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What
actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your
reflections, discussions, and insights?
The need to develop non credit ensembles, offer the song writing course,
develop applied pedagogy course for students not prepared to take MUSA 40
and the dire need for a coordinator to track and implement these needs.
We continue to have the need for equipment for our students as the cost of
professional quality instruments is a major barrier for many of them and limits
their growth using a beginning quality instrument.
15. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical X
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop”
discussion
MUSL 6
Spring 2015
2
2
100
Spring 2015
T. Harris, J. Palacio
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported
in this Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student
Learning Outcomes Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in
aggregate for all sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the
individual CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on
the course as a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY
(THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1:
Identify the elements of music and its structure
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
80% score a 3
or 4.
(CLO) 2:
80% score a 3
or 4.
(CLO) 3:
80% score a 3
or 4.
Communicate the value of music as a means of
self-expression
Develop a comprehension of music notation
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
85 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
70 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
90 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate
success for this CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
Q. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
11. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
Yes, they are 5% above our goal.
12. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
Success in this area really depended on the background of the student and if the play
an instrument or can read music. Students are generally succeeding identifying
elements but can struggle a bit with musical structure.
R. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
23. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
No. Students were 10% below the target set.
24. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
Applying the materials learned in the classroom will help in this area. Attendance at
concerts and for students that do not currently play an instrument or sing to learn to
do so any apply the concepts would greatly aid in this area.
S. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
25. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
Yes, they are 10% above our goal.
26. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
Students are generally succeeding in this area. The use of current technologies has
greatly aided students.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
16. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment
cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
We have changes the structure of the course curriculum wise and they way in
which we teach the concepts.
17. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and
programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What
actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your
reflections, discussions, and insights?
The continued need to have students apply the concepts learned in this course
in ensembles. We are also looking into increasing the use of technology in our
MUSL courses as well.
18. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular X
 Pedagogical X
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop”
discussion
MUSL 8
Spring 2015
2
2
100
Spring 2015
T. Harris, E. Schultz
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported
in this Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student
Learning Outcomes Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in
aggregate for all sections assessed in eLumen.


Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the
individual CLO.
Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on
the course as a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY
(THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1:
Identify major rock and roll artists and trends.
(CLO) 2:
Describe the social and political events that have influenced
rock and roll musical styles
(CLO) 3:
Differentiate between various styles of rock and popular music
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
80% score a 3
or 4.
80% score a 3
or 4.
80% score a 3
or 4.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
79 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
85 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
77 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate
success for this CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
T. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
13. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
The target was almost exactly met. This was true of both in person and online delivery.
14. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
The target was met almost exactly for both online and in-person delivery, which led us
to believe that multi-media examples (photos, videos, audio) were being used
effectively in both courses, though they were slightly different. We are committed to a
continuing use of multi-media to establish visual and aural connections from students
to major artists.
U. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
27. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
This was a strength for many of our students. Students achieved above the target set.
28. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
Much of the instructor’s focus in these classes is the interrelationship between social
events and rock music, even though the text is not always as deliberate here. The high
results indicate that the instructor is doing good work in making those connections
through in-person delivery, as well as through the online recorded lectures. This
commitment will maintain.
V. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
29. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
Slightly below the target.
30. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
The below-target results (though slight) indicate that there could be improvement
made in comparing musical styles across chapters/units. Instructor will adjust and
incorporate more review of previous materials/music.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
19. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment
cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
The development of an online section.
20. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and
programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What
actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your
reflections, discussions, and insights?
The results are positive, and indicate an overall successful teaching strategy by
the instructor. The fact that the online success rates are fairly consistent with inperson is encouraging and indicative a solid transplant of course content. The
next challenges will be taking the strengths of the online delivery and
transmuting them to the in-person.
It is worth saying here that one of the weaknesses of the course, though not
directly addressed through this assessment, is the lack of time in the course to
get through the full timeline of rock history. As the success numbers are high,
this would indicate that the course pacing is good. We are looking into the
possibility of adding an additional rock history class to cover essentially from
1970 forward.
21. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular X
 Pedagogical X
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop”
discussion
MUSP 12
Spring 2014
1
1
100
Spring 2015
T. Harris, J. Palacio, A. Storch,
W. Sauerland. D. Zinn
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported
in this Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student
Learning Outcomes Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in
aggregate for all sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the
individual CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on
the course as a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY
(THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1:
Students will be able to publicly perform
ensemble literature demonstrating appropriate
musical skills/ability in accordance with the
assessed skill level
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
80% score a 3
or 4.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
80 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
(CLO) 2:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate
success for this CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
W. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
15. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
This really depended on the background of the student as MUSP courses can be
repeated. We also saw a higher success rate with students concurrently enrolled in a
MUSA 40 course.
16. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
The need for fundamental courses in woodwind, brass, percussion, keyboard,
and voice pedagogy. We will work on this for next year’s program review. Many
of our students are not prepared to enter a collegiate ensemble course and need
to be able to take 1-2 semesters of a basic skills music course. We also need an
increase in the music budget to maintain instruments. Most of our students do
no own their own instrument and use Chabot equipment. We need to continue to
maintain our currently inventory and buy new instruments to replace outdated
equipment.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
22. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment
cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
Since the previous assessment cycle, we have made the following changes:
1) SARS tracking for open lab and practice.
2) Greater student access to practice room
3) Purchase of professional quality instruments for student success and
ensemble instrumentation needs.
23. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and
programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What
actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your
reflections, discussions, and insights?
The need to develop non credit ensembles, offer the song writing course,
develop applied pedagogy course for students not prepared to take college level
courses and the dire need for a coordinator to track and implement these needs.
We continue to have the need for equipment for our students as the cost of
professional quality instruments is a major barrier for many of them and limits
their growth using a beginning quality instrument.
24. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular X
 Pedagogical
 Resource based X
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop”
discussion
MUSP 13
Spring 2015
1
1
100
Spring 2015
T. Harris, J. Palacio, A. Storch,
W. Sauerland. D. Zinn
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported
in this Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student
Learning Outcomes Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in
aggregate for all sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the
individual CLO.

Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on
the course as a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY
(THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1:
Students will be able to publicly perform
ensemble literature demonstrating appropriate
musical skills/ability in accordance with the
assessed skill level
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
80% score a 3
or 4.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
95 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate
success for this CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
X. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
17. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
Students succeed at a much high rate in the course.
18. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
Students succeeded at a higher rate in this course as all have previously enrolled an
succeed in an introductory level collegiate ensemble course and taken applied lessons.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
25. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment
cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
Since the previous assessment cycle, we have made the following changes:
1) SARS tracking for open lab and practice.
2) Greater student access to practice room
3) Students enrolling in an MUSA and MUSP courses previously
26. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and
programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What
actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your
reflections, discussions, and insights?
Our students continue to need repeatability in performance courses to develop,
refine and apply their skills. We saw tremendous amounts of success in the
advanced courses when student took a year of college level courses prior to
enrollment with success in them. We continue to need multiple levels of
ensembles to meet varying student ability levels while offering them
opportunities for growth in more advances ensembles.
27. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular X
 Pedagogical
 Resource based X
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop”
discussion
MUSP 14
Spring 2015
1
1
100
Spring 2015
T. Harris, J. Palacio, A. Storch,
W. Sauerland. D. Zinn
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported
in this Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student
Learning Outcomes Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in
aggregate for all sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the
individual CLO.

Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on
the course as a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY
(THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1:
Students will be able to publicly perform
ensemble literature demonstrating appropriate
musical skills/ability in accordance with the
assessed skill level
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
90% score a 3
or 4.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
95 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate
success for this CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
Y. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
19. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
This really depended on the background of the student as MUSP courses can be
repeated. We also saw a higher success rate with students concurrently enrolled in a
MUSA 40 course.
20. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
Students come into college having various musical skills. There should be pre-college
ensemble(s) that can help develop students and address their playing deficiencies.
Ensembles should have more playing opportunities to develop their skills.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
28. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment
cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
Since the previous assessment cycle, we have made the following changes:
1) In the fall, a percentage of this class will be online. This will give us the
ability to assess students as well as track their progress.
2) Purchase of professional quality instruments for student success
and ensemble instrumentation needs.
29. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and
programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What
actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your
reflections, discussions, and insights?
Students achieve success at a faster rate with the combination of concert pieces
at various levels. This ensures success that students are challenged with
difficult levels and using slightly easier literature to be used to further teaching
concepts.
The current of the jazz library is above average. It needs new literature with
various skills and style at a beginning/intermediate level.
30. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
Curricular
Pedagogical
Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop”
discussion
Form Instructions:
MUSP 15
Spring 2013
1
1
100
Spring 2015
T. Harris, J. Palacio, A. Storch,
W. Sauerland. D. Zinn




Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported
in this Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student
Learning Outcomes Assessment Reporting Schedule.
Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in
aggregate for all sections assessed in eLumen.
Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the
individual CLO.
Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on
the course as a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY
(THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1:
Students will be able to publicly perform
ensemble literature demonstrating appropriate
musical skills/ability in accordance with the
assessed skill level
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
90% score a 3
or 4.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
95 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate
success for this CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
Z. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
21. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
Students coming from course that prepare them achieve higher success in the
ensemble.
22. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
We continue to need multiple levels of ensembles to meet varying student ability levels
while offering them opportunities for growth in more advances ensembles. Students
coming at below college level needs to have courses that can help develop their skills.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
31. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment
cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
Since the previous assessment cycle, we have made the following changes:
1) In the fall, a percentage of this class will be online. This will give us the
ability to assess students as well as track their progress.
2) Purchase of professional quality instruments for student success
and ensemble instrumentation needs.
32. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and
programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What
actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your
reflections, discussions, and insights?
Performing intermediate/advance material becomes an integral part of student
growth in this class. This should provide our students to challenge their skills at
a college.
The current of the jazz library is above average. The library needs new
literature in various styles in a more advanced level.
33. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
Curricular
Pedagogical
Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
MUSP 16
Spring 2015
1
1
100
Spring 2015
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop”
discussion
T. Harris, J. Palacio, A. Storch,
W. Sauerland. D. Zinn
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported
in this Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student
Learning Outcomes Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in
aggregate for all sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the
individual CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on
the course as a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY
(THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1:
Students will be able to publicly perform
ensemble literature demonstrating appropriate
musical skills/ability in accordance with the
assessed skill level
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
90% score a 3
or 4.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
88 % of the
course scored a 3
or 4.
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate
success for this CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
AA.
COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
23. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
Students succeed at a much high rate in the course.
24. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
Providing students the opportunity to perform with some of the top jazz musicians in
the world gives them the chance to improve and showcase their skills. The Jazz Guest
Artist series that we provide to our students provides us the ability to assess how
students react at a professional level and challenges them at the highest level.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
34. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment
cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
Since the previous assessment cycle, we have made the following changes:
1) In the fall, a percentage of this class will be online. This will give us the ability
to assess students as well as track their progress.
2) Purchase of professional quality instruments for student success and
ensemble instrumentation needs.
35. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and
programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What
actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your
reflections, discussions, and insights?
Offering challenging music as well as contemporary literature is essential to the
growth of the class. This should provide our students to challenge their skills at
an advance level.
The current of the jazz library is above average. The library needs new
literature with various skills and styles in a more contemporary styles.
36. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
Curricular
Pedagogical
Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop”
discussion
MUSP 18
Spring 2015
1
1
100
Spring 2015
T. Harris, J. Palacio, A. Storch,
W. Sauerland. D. Zinn
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported
in this Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student
Learning Outcomes Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in
aggregate for all sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the
individual CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on
the course as a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY
(THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1:
Students will be able to publicly perform
ensemble literature demonstrating appropriate
musical skills/ability in accordance with the
assessed skill level
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
80% score a 3
or 4.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
90 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
(CLO) 2:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate
success for this CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
BB.
COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
25. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
This really depended on the background of the student as MUSP courses can be
repeated. We also saw a higher success rate with students concurrently enrolled in a
MUSA 40 course.
26. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
The need for fundamental courses in woodwind, brass, percussion, keyboard,
and voice pedagogy. We will work on this for next year’s program review. Many
of our students are not prepared to enter a collegiate ensemble course and need
to be able to take 1-2 semesters of a basic skills music course. We also need an
increase in the music budget to maintain instruments. Most of our students do
no own their own instrument and use Chabot equipment. We need to continue to
maintain our currently inventory and buy new instruments to replace outdated
equipment.
CC.
COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
31. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
32. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
37. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment
cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
Since the previous assessment cycle, we have made the following changes:
1) SARS tracking for open lab and practice.
2) Greater student access to practice room
3) Purchase of professional quality instruments for student success and
ensemble instrumentation needs.
38. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and
programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What
actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your
reflections, discussions, and insights?
The need to develop non credit ensembles, offer the song writing course,
develop applied pedagogy course for students not prepared to take college level
courses and the dire need for a coordinator to track and implement these needs.
We continue to have the need for equipment for our students as the cost of
professional quality instruments is a major barrier for many of them and limits
their growth using a beginning quality instrument.
39. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular X
 Pedagogical
 Resource based X
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop”
discussion
MUSP 41
Spring 2015
1
1
100
Spring 2015
T. Harris, J. Palacio, A. Storch,
W. Sauerland. D. Zinn
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported
in this Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student
Learning Outcomes Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in
aggregate for all sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the
individual CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on
the course as a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY
(THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1:
Students will be able to publicly perform
ensemble literature demonstrating appropriate
musical skills/ability in accordance with the
assessed skill level
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
80% score a 3
or 4.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
90 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
(CLO) 2:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate
success for this CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
DD.
COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
27. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
Students succeed at a much high rate in the course.
28. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
Students succeeded at a higher rate in this course as all have previously enrolled an
succeed in an introductory level collegiate ensemble course and taken applied lessons.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
40. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment
cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
Since the previous assessment cycle, we have made the following changes:
1) SARS tracking for open lab and practice.
2) Greater student access to practice room
3) Students enrolling in an MUSA and MUSP courses previously
41. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and
programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What
actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your
reflections, discussions, and insights?
Our students continue to need repeatability in performance courses to develop,
refine and apply their skills. We saw tremendous amounts of success in the
advanced courses when student took a year of college level courses prior to
enrollment with success in them. We continue to need multiple levels of
ensembles to meet varying student ability levels while offering them
opportunities for growth in more advances ensembles.
42. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular X
 Pedagogical
 Resource based X
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop”
discussion
MUSP 44
Spring 2015
1
1
100
Spring 2015
T. Harris, J. Palacio, A. Storch,
W. Sauerland. D. Zinn
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported
in this Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student
Learning Outcomes Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in
aggregate for all sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the
individual CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on
the course as a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY
(THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1:
Students will be able to publicly perform
ensemble literature demonstrating appropriate
musical skills/ability in accordance with the
assessed skill level
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
80% score a 3
or 4.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
90 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
EE.
COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
29. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
Students succeed at a much high rate in the course.
30. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
Students succeeded at a higher rate in this course as all have previously enrolled and
succeeded in an introductory level collegiate ensemble course and taken applied
lessons.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
43. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment
cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
Since the previous assessment cycle, we have made the following changes:
1) SARS tracking for open lab and practice.
2) Greater student access to practice room
3) Students enrolling in an MUSA and MUSP courses previously
44. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and
programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What
actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your
reflections, discussions, and insights?
Our students continue to need repeatability in performance courses to develop,
refine and apply their skills. We saw tremendous amounts of success in the
advanced courses when student took a year of college level courses prior to
enrollment with success in them. We continue to need multiple levels of
ensembles to meet varying student ability levels while offering them
opportunities for growth in more advances ensembles.
45. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular X
 Pedagogical
 Resource based X
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop”
discussion
MUSP 45
Spring 2015
1
1
100
Spring 2015
T. Harris, J. Palacio, A. Storch,
W. Sauerland. D. Zinn
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported
in this Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student
Learning Outcomes Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in
aggregate for all sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the
individual CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on
the course as a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY
(THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1:
Students will be able to publicly perform
ensemble literature demonstrating appropriate
musical skills/ability in accordance with the
assessed skill level
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
80% score a 3
or 4.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
75 % of the
course scored a
3 or 4.
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
FF.
COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
31. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in
this course level outcome?
This really depended on the background of the student as MUSP courses can be
repeated. We also saw a higher success rate with students concurrently enrolled in a
MUSA 40 course.
32. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and
insights do you have?
The need for fundamental courses in keyboard, ear training, sight-singing, and voice
pedagogy. Many of our students are not musically prepared to enter a collegiate
ensemble course and need to be able to take 1-2 semesters of a basic skills music
course. We also need an increase in the music budget for a course pianist, which is a
basic need of any choral course.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
46. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment
cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
Since the previous assessment cycle, we have made the following changes:
1) SARS tracking for open lab and practice.
2) Greater student access to practice room
47. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and
programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What
actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your
reflections, discussions, and insights?
The need to develop non credit ensembles, offer the song writing course,
develop applied pedagogy course for students not prepared to take college level
courses and the dire need for a coordinator to track and implement these needs.
48. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular X
 Pedagogical
 Resource based X
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________