Annual Progress Report
on Assessment of Student Learning for Undergraduate Programs (Rev 09/09)
Academic year: 2008-2009
Department/Program: Music
Degree program(s): Bachelor of Music Education (CIP Code 13.1312)
Person(s) preparing report: Dr. Frederick Burrack, Director of Graduate Studies
Date submitted:
In one paragraph, summarize your 2008-2009 Annual Progress Report
Provide the web link to department web site where degree program SLOs, Alignment Matrix, and 20082009 APR Summary are posted http://www.k-state.edu/music/
1) List the complete set of Student Learning Outcomes for your Program (all SLOs identified for your
program)
Outcome #1
Outcome #2
The teacher of music has skills in teaching and evaluation techniques.
The teacher of music has skills in improvising melodies, variations, and
accompaniments.
The teacher of music has skills in composing and arranging music.
The teacher of music has skills in reading and performing music.
The teacher of music has skills in listening to, analyzing, and describing music.
The teacher of music has skills in evaluating music and music performances.
The teacher of music has an understanding of music in relation to various
historical periods and cultures.
The teacher of music has skills in establishing effective music-learning
environments.
The teacher of music advocates for the school music program in the community
at-large.
Outcome #3
Outcome #4
Outcome #5
Outcome #6
Outcome #7
Outcome #8
Outcome #9
2) Identify the Student Learning Outcomes (from the full list above) that were assessed for this Annual
Progress Report.
All outcomes.
3) What assessments were used for each learning outcome? Please include results of the assessments and
the sample of students from whom data were collected.
Outcome #1 The teacher of music has skills in teaching and evaluation techniques.
INSTRUCTIONAL UNIT PLAN: assessed during student teaching
Percent of Candidates at Each Score Value
Year
N
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
13
9
13
14
0-42
43
44-49
50
15%
11%
8%
7%
7%
51-55
56
15%
11%
23%
22%
7%
57-61
62
22%
70%
56%
69%
57%
DATA SUMMARY AND REFLECTION
Scores for outcome #1 illustrate that all 12 of the 14 candidates achieved at or above the highest category of
Mastery (56). One student achieved in the level of proficient, and one student achieved below the basic level.
This student demonstrated competence but did not submit a completed assessment so the low score does not
actually reflect competence or learning, but possibly attitude. Students overall are achieving well within this
outcome area. It is worth noting that those who scores in the mastery level were truly outstanding in all ways.
Outcome #2 The teacher of music has skills in improvising melodies, variations, and
accompaniments.
IMPROVISATION PROJECT: assessed during MUSIC 511
Percent of Candidates at Each Score Value
Academic
Number of Students
Year
12
6
23
10
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
Unsatisfactory
< 70%
17%
------9%
0%
Developing
(basic)
70%-79%
25%
34%
0%
0%
Acceptable
(proficient)
80%-89%
25%
44%
0%
30%
Mastery
(exemplary)
90% <
33%
34%
91%
70%
DATA SUMMARY AND REFLECTION
Scores for candidates on the improvisation project illustrate that all of the candidates achieved above the
acceptable level level. Improvemet has been made to bring a greater number of students into the proficient to
examplary range but this is acceptable performance.
IMPROVISATION ON PIANO: assessed during Piano Proficiencies
Percent of Candidates at Each Score Value
Academic
Number of Students
Year
13
2008-2009
Unsatisfactory
< 70%
0%
Developing
(basic)
70%-79%
8%
Acceptable
(proficient)
80%-89%
38%
Mastery
(exemplary)
90% <
54%
DATA SUMMARY AND REFLECTION
This assessment has been an intergral part of the achievement expectations of the music education program for
as long is it has been in existence, but the scores have not been associated with the SLO process prior to 2008.
The scores indicate that candidates are demonstrating successful improvisation of piano accompaniment of
melodies as illustrated by 92% receiving at the acceptable level or above.
Outcome #3 The teacher of music has skills in composing and arranging music.
COMPOSITION PROJECT (MUSIC PreK-12): assessed in MUSIC 360
Percent of Candidates at Each Score Value
Academic
Number of Students
Year
32
6
11
21
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
Unsatisfactory
< 70%
4%
16%
0%
9%
Developing
(basic)
70%-79%
4%
17%
0%
5%
Acceptable
(proficient)
80%-89%
18%
50%
0%
38%
Mastery
(exemplary)
90% <
74%
17%
100%
48%
DATA SUMMARY AND REFLECTION
Scores for candidates on the composition project illustrate that 86% of the candidates have achieved at
the level of Proficient or above.
PRAXIS THEORY SCORE (MUSIC PreK-12): assessed on the nationally normed PLT exam
Percent of Candidates at Each Score Value
Academic
Number of Students
Year
16
11
14
22
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
Unsatisfactory
1st quartile
Developing
(basic)
2nd quartile
Acceptable
(proficient)
3rd quartile
Mastery
(exemplary)
4th quartile
13%
8%
14%
5%
63%
58%
36%
73%
25%
25%
21%
9%
0%
8%
29%
14%
DATA SUMMARY AND REFLECTION
Scores for candidates on the music theory portion of the PRAXIS exam required of all students in
music teacher education. This exam is taken during their student teaching, at least one or more years
following their last theory course. The scores are calculated using all examinees taking this test in the
United States during the testing period. Scores indicate that students have improved over the past years
with 50% scoring higher than the national mean.
Outcome #4 The teacher of music has skills in reading and performing music.
JURIED PERFORMANCE (MUSIC PreK-12): assessed in the Fall semester juries
Percent of Candidates at Each Score Value
Academic
Number of Students
Year
(all music education students)
Unsatisfactory
< 70%
Developing
(basic)
70%-79%
Acceptable
(proficient)
80%-89%
Mastery
(exemplary)
90% <
DATA SUMMARY AND REFLECTION
Scores for candidates on the juried performance in the fall semester have not been maintained prior to
2009 but will be included from this point on to provide more data on student achievement.
JURIED PERFORMANCE (MUSIC PreK-12): assessed in the Spring semester juries
Percent of Candidates at Each Score Value
Academic
Number of Students
Year
(all music education students)
84
84
89
74
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
Unsatisfactory
< 70%
4%
------2%
0
Developing
(basic)
70%-79%
4%
6%
4%
2%
Acceptable
(proficient)
80%-89%
18%
33%
21%
22%
Mastery
(exemplary)
90% <
74%
61%
73%
76%
DATA SUMMARY AND REFLECTION
Scores for candidates on the juried performance illustrate that all but one student achieved at least a
passing score (70%) with 98% achieving in the Proficient and Exemplary levels, which is the a slight
improvement over the former year. The scores at the Mastery level did increase by 3% over the former
year and has remained in the same are for 3 out of the past 4 years. It is unknown why the number of
students has decreased in this area. We must look in the future to see if there is a trend because the
numbers in the other assessments associated with senior level courses do not seem to change radically.
Division by Studio 2008-2009
Number of
Studio
String
Piano
Wind
Percussion
Voice
Students
3
8
33
5
26
Unsatisfactory
< 70%
--------Incomplete 5%
Developing
70%-79%
----3%
-----
Acceptable
80%-89%
--25%
27%
--18%
Mastery
90% <
100%
75%
70%
100%
77%
Outcome #5 The teacher of music has skills in listening to, analyzing, and describing music.
TEACHING UNIT PROJECT (MUSIC PreK-12): assessed in Music 670
Percent of Candidates at Each Score Value
Academic
Number of Students
Year
5
18
13
6
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
Unsatisfactory
< 70%
-------------------
Developing
(basic)
70%-79%
20%
11%
8%
17%
Acceptable
(proficient)
80%-89%
20%
28%
15%
33%
Mastery
(exemplary)
90% <
60%
61%
77%
50%
DATA SUMMARY AND REFLECTION
Scores for candidates on the teaching unit project illustrate that 100% of the candidates have achieved
at least a passing score (70%) with 83% achieving in the Proficient and Examplary levels. This
assignment acts as a cumulative transfer of all areas of their university training to classroom
instruction. It is encouraging to see that a consistent 50% are attaining in the Mastery (examplary)
level functioning up to and beyond our expectations for student teachers, although this percentage is
lower than in former years. The assessment was made more rigorous which may account for this
difference, but a more likely reason is the small number of student in this particular year.
SCORE ANALYSIS PROJECT (MUSIC PreK-12): assessed in Music 517 & 518
Percent of Candidates at Each Score Value
Academic
Number of Students
Year
Unsatisfactory
< 70%
17
2008-2009
-------
Developing
(basic)
70%-79%
0%
Acceptable
(proficient)
80%-89%
0%
Mastery
(exemplary)
90% <
100%
DATA SUMMARY AND REFLECTION
Scores for candidates on the teaching unit project illustrate that 100% of the candidates have achieved
in the Examplary level. This assignment acts as a cumulative transfer of music theory and historical
style into instructional preparation.
Outcome #6 The teacher of music has skills in evaluating music and music performances.
CURRICULUM/REPERTOIRE SELECTION PROJECT: assessed in MUSIC 670
Percent of Candidates at Each Score Value
Academic
Number of Students
Year
5
13
13
9
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
Unsatisfactory
< 70%
----------8%
11%
Developing
(basic)
70%-79%
-----15%
8%
-----
Acceptable
(proficient)
80%-89%
-----15%
15%
-----
Mastery
(exemplary)
90% <
100%
62%
77%
89%
DATA SUMMARY AND REFLECTION
Scores for candidates on the curriculum/repertoire selection project illustrate that all but one of the
candidates have achieved at master level (89%). What is not indicated is that half of the master level
were near the proficient level. This is an improvement from former years. The range of the scores thus
far demonstrate stability in student proficiency.
Outcome #7 The teacher of music has an understanding of music in relation to various
historical periods and cultures.
HISTORY RESEARCH ESSAY: assessed in MUSIC 532
Percent of Candidates at Each Score Value
Academic
Number of Students
Year
10
19
24
24
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
Unsatisfactory
< 70%
10%
26%
12.5%
8%
Developing
(basic)
70%-79%
10%
11%
21%
21%
Acceptable
(proficient)
80%-89%
60%
21%
29%
25%
Mastery
(exemplary)
90% <
20%
42%
37.5%
46%
DATA SUMMARY AND REFLECTION
Scores for candidates on the historical research essay shows an improvement from the former year.
The data illustrates that 92% of the candidates have achieved at least a minimum passing score of 70%
(compared to 87.5% the year prior) with 71% achieving in the Proficient and Examplary levels (as
compared to 66.5% the year prior).
PRAXIS HISTORY SCORE: nationally normed assessment
Percent of Candidates at Each Score Value
Academic
Number of Students
Year
12
16
14
22
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
Unsatisfactory
1st quartile
25%
31%
21%
18%
Developing
(basic)
2nd quartile
50%
31%
36%
32%
Acceptable
(proficient)
3rd quartile
25%
25%
21%
27%
Mastery
(exemplary)
4th quartile
0%
13%
21%
23%
DATA SUMMARY AND REFLECTION
Scores for candidates on the music history portion of the PRAXIS exam required of all students in
music teacher education. This exam is taken during their student teaching, at least one or more years
following their last theory course. The scores are calculated using all examinees taking this test in the
United States during the testing period. Scores indicate that students have improved over the past years
with 42% scoring higher than the national mean.
Outcome #8 The teacher of music has skills in establishing effective music-learning
environments.
CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT PLAN Percent of Candidates at Each Score Value
Developing
Acceptable
Mastery
Academic Unsatisfactory
Number of Students
Year
< 70%
(basic)
70%-79%
(proficient)
80%-89%
(exemplary)
90% <
DATA SUMMARY AND REFLECTION
Scores from this assignment has not been collected for SLOs prior to 2009 but will be added as an
additional view of student understanding and proficiency.
CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT ON PORTFOLIO Percent of Candidates at Each Score Value
Developing
Acceptable
Mastery
Academic Unsatisfactory
Number of Students
Year
10
15
13
14
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
< 70%
10%
20%
8%
7%
(basic)
70%-79%
10%
----------------
(proficient)
80%-89%
60%
7%
8%
------
(exemplary)
90% <
20%
67%
84%
93%
DATA SUMMARY AND REFLECTION
Scores for candidates on the classroom management section of the portfolio illustrate that students
demonstrated an understanding elements of classroom management as associated with the specific
classrooms in the student teaching experience.
Outcome #9 The teacher of music advocates for the school music program in the community atlarge.
STUDENT HANDBOOK PROJECT Percent of Candidates at Each Score Value
Developing
Acceptable
Mastery
Academic Unsatisfactory
Number of Students
Year
5
13
20
11
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
< 70%
----------5%
9%
(basic)
70%-79%
20%
----------9%
(proficient)
80%-89%
20%
----------18%
(exemplary)
90% <
60%
100%
95%
64%
DATA SUMMARY AND REFLECTION
Scores for candidates on the student handbook project illustrate that there has been a decrease in the
Exemplary level of achievement but when looking at proficient and above, the percentages remain
relatively similar. The student that did not achieve above the 70% did not submit the assignment on
time which was a pattern. He did not pass the course.
ADVOCACY BROCHURE Percent of Candidates at Each Score Value
Developing
Academic Unsatisfactory
Number of Students
Year
Did not use this assessment
16
23
9
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
< 70%
-----6%
12%
------
(basic)
70%-79%
-----6%
-----------
Acceptable
(proficient)
80%-89%
----------10%
------
Mastery
(exemplary)
90% <
-----88%
78%
100%
DATA SUMMARY AND REFLECTION
Scores for candidates on the advocacy brochure project illustrate that there has been an increase in the
Exemplary level of achievement but when looking at the scores at a microscopic level, 50% were at the
pivot point between Acceptable and Exemplary. Either way you look at the data, students are
achieving at acceptable levels.
4) What was learned from the assessment results? (What do they tell you about student learning? What did you
learn about strengths and weaknesses of your program?)
An acceptable number of students are meeting the expectations of the program. Although we
would like all of our student to reach the Proficient achievement level or higher, which as been
reached in some assessment categories, the levels achieved document program rigor and
student achievement.
5) What actions and/or revisions were implemented in response to the assessment results and the effects
on student learning observed on this year’s SLOs.
Actions/Revisions to be implemented as a result of the assessments
1. Skills in teaching &
evaluation techniques
2. Skills in improvising
3. Skills in composing and
arranging
4. Skills in reading and
performing
5. Skills in listening to,
analyzing, and describing
6. Skills in evaluating
7.Understands music in
relation to various historical
periods and cultures
8. Skills in establishing
effective music-learning
environments
9.Advocates for the school
music program
Scoring procedures were reviewed and will be made
more rigorous.
The assessment tool is under review for the following
year and will be standardized to better meet the
requirement of the expectation of the teaching
standard.
An additional assessment has been added.
No changes in the present assessment.
No changes in the present assessment.
An additional assessment has been added
documenting both semesters of juries.
No changes in the present assessment.
An additional assessment has been added.
No changes in the present assessment.
No changes in the present assessment.
No changes in the present assessment.
An additional assessment has been added.
No changes in the present assessment.
6) Describe the process by which faculty reviewed the results of this year’s SLOs.
The results were presented in advance of a faculty meeting and the following issues were discussed:
The division faculty reviewed the data in January and the entire faculty reviewed the data in
February of 2010.