Program: Theatre (BA)
Date: Fri Oct 09, 2015 - 10:51:31 am
1) Institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs) and Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs)
1. Students can recognize and distinguish between various styles and forms of World Theatre (i.e., Asian, Western, Pacific, Hawaiian, Theatre for Young Audiences).
(1a. General education, 1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 1c. Understand Hawaiian culture and history, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture)
2. Students can create and demonstrate informed and personal artistic choices in coursework and productions (i.e., design, directing, acting).
(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2b. Conduct research)
3. Students can effectively communicate creative ideas and critical judgments through appropriate means (oral, written, practical).
(1a. General education, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 2c. Communicate and report)
4. Students can demonstrate ethical and self-disciplined behaviors appropriate to the field of theatre.
2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.
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:
3) Please review, add, replace, or delete the existing curriculum map.
- File (03/16/2020)
4) For your program, the percentage of courses that have course SLOs explicitly stated on the syllabus, a website, or other publicly available document is as follows. Please update as needed.
5) Did your program engage in any program learning assessment activities between June 1, 2014 and September 30, 2015?
No (skip to question 16)
6) What best describes the program-level learning assessment activities that took place for the period June 1, 2014 to September 30, 2015? (Check all that apply.)
Collect/evaluate student work/performance to determine SLO achievement
Collect/analyze student self-reports of SLO achievement via surveys, interviews, or focus groups
Use assessment results to make programmatic decisions (e.g., change course content or pedagogy, design new course, hiring)
Investigate curriculum coherence. This includes investigating how well courses address the SLOs, course sequencing and adequacy, the effect of pre-requisites on learning achievement.
Investigate other pressing issue related to student learning achievement for the program (explain in question 7)
7) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place in the last 18 months.
For the BA in Theatre degree all students are required to complete a final portfolio that demonstrates their learning outcomes. This portfolio is then evaluated by our entire faculty through a SurveyMonkey process. In additional, exit interviews are held for each graduating student where students are asked about their experiences in the program, what they would like to see improved, their future plans, etc. Faculty mentors attend this event and then the results are shared with the entire faculty.
8) What types of evidence did the program use as part of the assessment activities checked in question 6? (Check all that apply.)
Direct evidence of student learning (student work products)
Assignment/exam/paper completed as part of regular coursework and used for program-level assessment
Capstone work product (e.g., written project or non-thesis paper)
Exam created by an external organization (e.g., professional association for licensure)
Exit exam created by the program
IRB approval of research
Oral performance (oral defense, oral presentation, conference presentation)
Portfolio of student work
Publication or grant proposal
Qualifying exam or comprehensive exam for program-level assessment in addition to individual student evaluation (graduate level only)
Supervisor or employer evaluation of student performance outside the classroom (internship, clinical, practicum)
Thesis or dissertation used for program-level assessment in addition to individual student evaluation
Indirect evidence of student learning
Alumni survey that contains self-reports of SLO achievement
Employer meetings/discussions/survey/interview of student SLO achievement
Interviews or focus groups that contain self-reports of SLO achievement
Student reflective writing assignment (essay, journal entry, self-assessment) on their SLO achievement.
Student surveys that contain self-reports of SLO achievement
Other 1: Exit Interviews.
Program evidence related to learning and assessment
(more applicable when the program focused on the use of results or assessment procedure/tools in this reporting period instead of data collection)
Assessment-related such as assessment plan, SLOs, curriculum map, etc.
Program or course materials (syllabi, assignments, requirements, etc.)
9) State the number of students (or persons) who submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
4 students graduated with a B.A. in Fall 2014 and 8 students in Spring 2015.
10) Who interpreted or analyzed the evidence that was collected? (Check all that apply.)
Ad hoc faculty group
Persons or organization outside the university
Advisors (in student support services)
Students (graduate or undergraduate)
11) How did they evaluate, analyze, or interpret the evidence? (Check all that apply.)
Used professional judgment (no rubric or scoring guide used)
Compiled survey results
Used qualitative methods on interview, focus group, open-ended response data
External organization/person analyzed data (e.g., external organization administered and scored the nursing licensing exam)
12) Summarize the results of the assessment activities checked in question 6. For example, report the percent of students who achieved each SLO.
Faculty Exit Rubrics: (on a scale from 1-4, 4 being highest)
#1: 12.5% at 4, 75% at 3, 12.5% at 2; average 3
#2: 37.5% at 4, 50% at 3, 12.5% at 2; average 3.25
#3: 31.25% at 4, 68.75% at 3, 0% at 2; average 3.31
#4 43.75% at 4, 43.75% at 3, 12.5% at 2 average 3.31
Student Exit Surveys:
These surveys ask students to rate their abilities in 19 different questions treating five main curricular areas: Acting, History/Theory, Directing, Design, and Stagecraft. The responses, on a 1-5 scale, are varied and more difficult to summarize, but are used by faculty to make some of the changes detailed below.
Changes suggested by the interviews are discussed among the faculty. Many of these suggestions are noted in Question #12.
13) What best describes how the program used the results? (Check all that apply.)
Course changes (course content, pedagogy, courses offered, new course, pre-requisites, requirements)
Personnel or resource allocation changes
Program policy changes (e.g., admissions requirements, student probation policies, common course evaluation form)
Students' out-of-course experience changes (advising, co-curricular experiences, program website, program handbook, brown-bag lunches, workshops)
Celebration of student success!
Results indicated no action needed because students met expectations
Use is pending (typical reasons: insufficient number of students in population, evidence not evaluated or interpreted yet, faculty discussions continue)
14) Please briefly describe how the program used the results.
Discussions are still taking place. There is a need for greater faculty understanding of assessment and using data to drive decisions.
15) Beyond the results, were there additional conclusions or discoveries? This can include insights about assessment procedures, teaching and learning, and great achievements regarding program assessment in this reporting period.
The department replaced (added) a new facutly with a background in acting and directing. This will allow us to offer more acting and directing courses, as well as more sections more often to give students the foundations for the upper level classes.
The Department also also added the 1 credit Improv class (THEA 205) and last year cross-listed an Alexander Technique class under THEA 433/DNCE 433.
16) If the program did not engage in assessment activities, please explain.
The Department did engage in assessment activities.