Unit: Art & Art History
Program: Art History (MA), Art (MFA)
Degree: Master's
Date: Tue Oct 13, 2009 - 4:09:40 pm

1) List your program's student learning outcomes (SLOs).

Our department has five degree programs: the BA in studio art, the BA in art history, the BFA (a pre-professional studio art degree), the MFA (a terminal degree for studio artists) and the MA in art history.  Each of these programs has developed five SLOs organized around five themes which are shared across programs.  The result is a matrix of 25 program-level SLOs, which is downloadable in PDF format on our departmental website at http://www.hawaii.edu/art/forms/assessment/assessment.html.

2) Where are your program's SLOs published?

Department Website URL: http://www.hawaii.edu/art/forms/assessment/assessment.html
Student Handbook. URL, if available online:
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online:
UHM Catalog. Page Number:
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online: NA

3) Upload your program's current curriculum map(s) as a PDF.

Curriculum Map File(s) from 2009:

4) What percentage of courses have the course SLOs explicitly stated on the course syllabus, department website, or other publicly available document? (Check one)


5) State the SLO(s) that was Assessed, Targeted, or Studied

None (Please note that, since we are just now completing our curriculum map, we intend to begin collecting assessment data this year for the first time.)

6) State the Assessment Question(s) and/or Goal(s) of Assessment Activity

Our goals for 2008-09 were to establish program SLOs for the five degree programs within the department, to support a proposed five-year cycle of assessment.  These were approved by department faculty in Spring 2009.

7) State the Type(s) of Evidence Gathered

The assessment committee drafted a proposed set of program SLOs based on our perception of the department’s goals and ambitions.  We then submitted the draft to all departmental faculty and collected comments and revisions. 

8) State How the Evidence was Interpreted, Evaluated, or Analyzed

The members of the assessment committee (three faculty members) reviewed the comments and incorporated them into the draft proposal.

9) State How Many Pieces of Evidence Were Collected

The proposal was sent to faculty members by e-mail and comments were solicited in the same way.  The committee received relatively few comments, suggesting that our initial proposal was more or less in line with previously unarticulated departmental consensus.

10) Summarize the Actual Results

The revised proposal was approved by a unanimous vote of the faculty in Spring 2009.

11) Briefly Describe the Distribution and Discussion of Results

All faculty received a copy of the program SLOs and an explanation of the proposed five-year cycle of assessment. 

12) Describe Conclusions and Discoveries

We concluded that the next step was to complete a curriculum map in fall 2009 and use it to begin a cycle of assessment in spring 2010.

13) Use of Results/Program Modifications: State How the Program Used the Results --or-- Explain Planned Use of Results

Once the curriculum map is complete, we will identify the points of data collection for assessment of graduating students in our program and conduct the first round of collection and analysis in the spring semester. 

14) Reflect on the Assessment Process

We feel there is still room to increase faculty involvement and interest in (and support for) the assessment process.  The process of approving program SLOs went smoothly and there was no particular resistance from the faculty, but few of them chose to comment on the document.  The committee feels it is crucial to design a system of evaluation which makes use of assessment opportunities already in place in our programs, to minimize the added workload for faculty, but ideally we would hope that faculty would be interested in the results as well. 

15) Other Important Information

A) Since our program SLOs were only approved at the end of spring semester 2009, our next step is to produce a curriculum map, which is currently in process.  We offer over 130 different courses and several types of graded curricular activities (student exhibitions, thesis defenses, etc.), and each has to be evaluated over 25 program-level SLOs.  We attach here the curriculum map in progress.

B) Re: responses to questions 5-17, please note that, since we are just now completing our curriculum map, we intend to begin collecting assessment data this year for the first time.

16) FOR DISTANCE PROGRAMS ONLY: Explain how your program/department has adapted its assessment of student learning in the on-campus program to assess student learning in the distance education program.

We have no distance education program.

17) FOR DISTANCE PROGRAMS ONLY: Summarize the actual student learning assessment results that compare the achievement of students in the on-campus program to students in the distance education program.

We have no distance education program.