STUDENT LEARNING ASSESSMENT PROGRAM
SUMMARY FORM AY 2012-2013
Degree and
Program Name:
MA in Art
Submitted By:
Glenn Hild, 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
14, 2013. Worksheets should be sent electronically to
kjsanders@eiu.edu 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. Expand and enhance the
level of research/creative
skills in graduate student’s
selected media.
Fall Semester Review; graduate
exhibition portfolio; Alumni
survey of MA grads.
A portfolio of quality graduate
level artworks that could be
used in seeking exhibitions/
grants in professional venues
or admission to Master of Fine
Arts degree programs
including
assistantships/fellowships/
grants.
Fall review: 9 out of 9 met
expectation.
Graduate exhibit/portfolio: 9
out of 9 met expectation.
Alumni survey question #2
item a: Overall quality of Art
Department, and item
b:Quality of your specific
focus of studies in the Art
Department, question #6
Quality of instruction in Major
studio area, Minor studio area
(with rating of 1=Low Quality
to 5=High Quality),
2. Expand and enhance ability
to form and defend judgments
of quality and effectiveness of
Fall semester review; oral
comprehensive examination of
ideas, techniques, and formal
Successfully complete fall
review; pass oral examination
for MA degree program.
No alumni data/responses
have been collected since the
survey of 1999-2007 BA &
MA in Art alumni. The
IBHE Program Review of
BA in Art is 2015 and MA
in Art is 2016, so the Art
Department will conduct an
alumni survey sometime
before Spring 2015.
Fall review: 9 out of 9 met
expectation.
Oral comprehensive exam
Committee/ person
responsible? How are
results shared?
Masters Committee
provides results of Fall
review and Graduate
Exhibit/portfolio to
Graduate Coordinator.
Results shared with
departmental Graduate
Committee. Results of
MA in Art alumni survey
shared with Graduate
Faculty.
Masters Committee
provides results of Fall
review and oral
creative work.
3. Expand and enhance
teaching skills in the visual
arts.
solutions involved in the art
works displayed for graduate
exhibition; Alumni survey of
MA grads.
MA in Art with Option in Art
Education oral comprehensive
examination of research paper.
COEPS Advanced Candidate
Assessment of MA in Art with
option in Art Ed graduate
students at entry, mid-point, and
completion of program.
Student and supervisor
evaluations of GA teaching.
Alumni survey of MA grads.
Alumni survey question #6
Quality of (a) instruction in
Critical Analysis and (b)
Art/Design History (with
rating of 1=Low Quality to
5=High Quality).
Pass oral examination for MA
in Art with Option in Art Ed
degree program.
From COEPS Advanced
Candidate Assessments (ACA)
of #1 – Entry (assessed after
student completes Current
Trends in Art Education), #2 –
Mid-point (assessed after
student completes Research
Methods in Art Education), &
#3 – Completion (assessed
after student’s oral
examination of research),
COEPS ACA #1 & #2 having
ratings of Proficient or
Developing or Unacceptable
and #3 having ratings of Does
not Meet Standards or Meets
Standards or Exceeds
Standards.
Student evaluation of TA
teaching a average mean score
between 4.0 and 5.0 to exceed
expectation, between 3.0 and
4.0 to met expectation, and
between 1.0 and 3.0 is below
expectations.
for MA: 9 out of 9 met
expectation.
No alumni data/responses
have been collected since the
survey of 1999-2007 BA &
MA in Art alumni. The
IBHE Program Review of
BA in Art is 2015 and MA
in Art is 2016, so the Art
Department will conduct an
alumni survey sometime
before Spring 2015.
Oral comprehensive exam
for MA in Art Ed: 2 out of 2
met expectation.
COEPS Advanced
Candidate Assessment #3:
two grads exceed standards;
Assessment #2: two grads
exceed standards;
Assessment #1: no grads
evaluated.
Student evaluation of TA
teaching: Fall 2012 - 3 TAs
exceeded expectations and 2
TAs met expectations and 1
TA below expectations.
Spring 2013 - 3 TAs
exceeded expectations and 2
TAs met expectations and 1
TA below expectations.
No alumni data/responses
have been collected since the
survey of 1999-2007 BA &
MA in Art alumni. The
IBHE Program Review of
BA in Art is 2015 and MA
in Art is 2016, so the Art
Department will conduct an
examination to Graduate
Coordinator. Results
shared with departmental
Graduate Committee.
Results of MA in Art
alumni survey shared
with Graduate Faculty.
Masters Committee
provides results of oral
examination to Graduate
Coordinator. TA
supervisor provides
teaching evaluations to
Graduate Coordinator and
Student evaluations are
tabulated by Art Office.
Results shared with
departmental Graduate
Committee; results of
COEPS Advanced
Candidate Assessment
shared with graduate
faculty in Art Education;
results of MA in Art
alumni survey shared
with Graduate Faculty.
Alumni survey question
#10:What were influence of
opportunities on personal
career development (with
rating of 1=No Influence to
5=Tremendous Influence), and
question #17: Rate
assistantship according to (a)
Contribution to personal and
career development and (b)
Preparation for subsequent
professional responsibilities
(with rating of 1=Terrible to
5=Excellent).
4. Demonstrate effective
written and oral
communication skills
Written communication skills
evaluation for course research
paper by the instructors of ART
4765 (Fall) and 4775 (Spring).
Score on paper of 4 to exceed
expectations; 3 to meet
expectations; 2 or 1 are below
expectations.
Oral communication skills
evaluation for formal
presentations made in class by
the instructors of ART 4765
(Fall) and 4775 (Spring).
Score on presentation of 4 to
exceed expectations; 3 to meet
expectations; 2 or 1 are below
expectations.
alumni survey sometime
before Spring 2015.
For written communications
over the course of the year 4
exceeded expectations, 4
met expectations, and none
were below expectations.
For oral communications
over the course of the year 3
exceeded expectations, 5
met expectations, and none
were below expectations.
Faculty teaching Art 4765
and 4775 provides results
to Graduate Coordinator
and department chair.
Results shared with
departmental Graduate
Committee.
(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.
For AY2012-2013, as in previous years, the faculty of the various studio areas of the department engage in refinements of the
curriculum based on the needs of the individual graduate student; this is usually a mutually agreed upon program of study that will
facilitate the graduate student in meeting his/her education goals. Graduate students met with individual Masters Committee (3
graduate faculty members) during Oct/Nov for the Fall semester review. At these fall reviews the graduate faculty and the student’s
masters committee reviews his/her progress and recommends or suggests a direction of study based on the artwork presented
(portfolio review). This arrangement, with the addition of the group critique (see below), continues to be very effective in helping the
graduate student to realize and develop the potential of his/her creative work for the Graduate Exhibition in the Spring Semester.
During the Spring semester the graduate student’s masters committee will meet with the student to review artwork completed (usually
completed since the fall review) for the graduate exhibition and again the graduate faculty will provide direction and set expectations
for the graduate student. The graduate oral examination takes place while the graduate student’s art is on exhibit at the Tarble Arts
Center; the graduate student is expected to explain, evaluate, and defend his/her artwork in a manner that demonstrates knowledge of
the art process(es) used to create the artwork, use of the principles and elements of design, and how the subject matter/content is
articulated visually. In addition, the graduate students in the MA in Art program had the opportunity to be critiqued by four (4) visiting
art professionals during AY13. The graduate coordinator conferred with each visiting artist after he/she had conducted individual
critiques with graduate students; the general response from these professionals was the graduate program has high standards and the
graduate students are producing artwork that meets those high standards.
Studio faculty continue to conduct ongoing assessment of graduate student artwork and individual critiques/reviews, and the faculty
compare those activities to previous years’ experiences. Based on these assessments faculty can see improvements or deficiencies and
institute changes next time course is offered.
The Fall semester group critique of graduate students by the graduate faculty was conducted November 9, 2012. The critique was
beneficial to graduate students; gave each an opportunity to orally explain process and ideas (mini pre-orals experience). Critique
recommendations from faculty provided feedback to each student that members of Masters Committee subsequently discussed with
student and could be investigate by the student during remainder of Fall semester and if successful developed into finished works in
time for the April graduate exhibition. The group critique required each graduate student briefly explain his/her artwork
(content/direction) and three questions that the graduate student hope to have answered during the portion of the critique allocated to
his/her artwork. This system is effective at guiding the discussion, graduate students appreciated the feedback they received and felt
they were given pertinent information to their specific questions, and the critique avoided conversations that were not productive to
the students’ interests.
In Spring 2012 the faculty initiated a gallery exhibition in a nearby community for several graduate students to show their work. This
exhibition, though initiated and guided by faculty, was in large part the work of the graduate students. This experience allowed
students the opportunity to exhibit their work in a professional manner and location; including planning, publicizing, installing,
organizing the reception, documenting and de-installing. The public response to the exhibition was very positive. This opportunity is
continuing in July 2013, with some outgoing and some incoming graduate students participating in the exhibition. Plans are to
continue this exhibition opportunity.
As part of NCATE Self-Study the Art Department will assess MA in Art with Option in Art Education students at three points in the
program; during AY2012-2013 two students were assessed at the mid-point in the program (completion of Art 5800) and completion
(assessed after student’s oral examination of research). The Art Education option has seen a steady decline in students and continuing
this option as an on-campus summer program is no longer appropriate. During AY13 the department developed new graduate courses
and revised the Art Education option and proposed a Community Arts option, both will be predominately online programs with a oneweek summer studio experience for two summers. The Community Arts option was approved by CGS and the Art Education option
will go to COTE in Fall 2013 for approval. Department hopes to begin accepting students into these options with class offerings to
begin Summer 2014. So, assessment of MA in Art with options in Art Education and Community Arts courses and student outcomes
will begin anew in AY15.
The instructor of Art 4765, taught Fall semester, continues to use & refine a 3-step process to assist and provide feedback to students
writing the research paper. The steps are reviewing and providing feedback for improvement after submission of the (1) abstract with
attached bibliography of 10 sources with two being journal articles, (2) rough draft – one copy is reviewed by instructor and another
copy is read and evaluated by an assigned peer reviewer using a rubric, (3) finished paper responding to comments from instructor and
peer reviewer. This process continues to result in satisfactory or superior research papers from 100% of graduate students (8 out of 8
students) in the course. In addition, all Art 4765 all students provided a peer evaluation of each graduate student oral presentation; this
peer review process resulted in better audience attention and awareness of various topics presented. Outcomes for research paper in
Art 4775, taught Spring semester, were equally successful with 100% of graduate students (9 out of 9 students) earning scores that
meet or exceed expectations.
Graduate students with Teaching Assistantships take Art 5850 – Teaching Practicum in the Fall semester. Students completed a
“Developing a Philosophy of Teaching” questionnaire (short written responses to 5 questions: Identify a great teacher & what made
that teacher great; beliefs about teaching and learning; goals for students; a metaphor that would describe them as teacher; and
connections between metaphor and teaching and learning environment) at the start of the semester and again at the end of the semester
with the questionnaire slightly change for more reflective responses (have beliefs about teaching changed, goals for next semester).
Responses indicated TAs’ beliefs change, especially regarding communication with students (e.g., understand the importance of
motivation, the constant challenge teachers face with communication with students, must think about multiple way to explain things)
and TAs’ plan to have more focused teaching goals for the next semester (e.g., produce higher quality work, emphasize more strongly
the logic of images to get (students) to think more critically about their work, make my expectations very clear in the beginning, create
effective compositions, can competently drawing from observation, see where need to fix things).
PART THREE
Summarize changes and improvements in curriculum, instruction, and learning that have resulted from the implementation of your assessment
program. How have you used the data? What have you learned? In light of what you have learned through your assessment efforts this year and
in past years, what are your plans for the future?
The graduate faculty are closely involved with the assessment of MA students through direct instruction and masters’ committee
reviews (fall review, review of artwork and artist statement for graduate exhibition, and review of comprehension (oral examination)).
These assessment processes have continued to be effective in raising and maintaining the academic performance of the students.
After the Fall semester group critique the Graduate Committee has decided to move the date of the critique to early October for
coming year, which will allow more time for student to respond to feedback from faculty prior to Masters Committee reviews that
normally take place in early/mid-November. The form used for the three questions includes a rubric questionnaire for student
evaluation and this questionnaire is being re-designed as it does not work as a tool for comments; the plan is to change structure to
questions with a rating scale to provide feedback regarding artwork, research, and ability to speak about artwork.
All graduate students in Art 5910 – Graduate Exhibition Practice and Procedure made several recommendations to improve the
experience of the future students in the program. One suggestion - to create opportunities for undergraduates to interact with grads –
was partially implemented with “Meet the Graduate Students” mini-exhibitions/receptions in the Student Gallery at Doudna on
Thursday afternoons. Other suggestions were (1) have visiting artist do grad critiques when graduate exhibition is on display at Tarble
as this was a very positive experience and (2) grads who participated in gallery talk to docents and undergraduate Arts Omnibus class
appreciated this opportunity and helped prepare for oral reviews. The department will look to see if a visiting artist can be scheduled
during April, but this is often dependent upon visiting artists schedule and available funding. Providing opportunity for all graduate
students participate in the gallery talk is possible and course instructor will look into scheduling such an event.
For the MA in Art with option in Art Education the instructor uses formative assessments (on-going) and summative assessments
(project-based assignments) to monitor student success in the course and student indicators of interest, value, and rigor. When
assessments, formative and/or summative, indicate, the instructor makes the necessary curricular change. For Art 5800 offered SU12
the instructor modified the reading assignments to include current content and student interest.
As stated by the NASAD Evaluation Team in the 2009 Visitor’s Report, “A review of transcripts and viewing of original student
artwork indicated that results are excellent to superior in this program. The visitors commend the graduate faculty on the numerous
strengths of its M.A. Graduate programs, with creative results probably among some of the best in the nation.” Graduates of the MA in
Art program over the past five years (SP09 to SP13) have been admitted to the following MFA programs: University of Chicago,
Indiana University (2), University of Wisconsin-Madison (2), University of Notre Dame, Cranbrook Academy of Art (2), University
of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Washington University (St. Louis) (5), Northwestern University, University of Cincinnati, and the Royal
College of Art (London UK).