Unit: Academy for Creative Media
Program: Creative Media (BA)
Degree: Bachelor's
Date: Mon Oct 19, 2015 - 7:06:57 am

1) Institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs) and Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs)

1. Critical Thinking: Constructively critique their own and other’s intellectual and creative work.

(2a. Think critically and creatively)

2. Writing: Write a creative work that tells a story.

(2a. Think critically and creatively, 2c. Communicate and report)

3. Writing: Write a critical piece that applies theoretical principles.

(2b. Conduct research, 2c. Communicate and report)

4. History and Aesthetics: Know the intellectual history of cinema and place their work within that history.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field)

5. Professional Skills & Creativity: Create a visual narrative through application of appropriate principles and production skills [production & animation]

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 2c. Communicate and report)

6. Professional Skills & Creativity: Conduct and communicate original research findings [critical studies]

(2b. Conduct research)

7. Professional Skills & Creativity: Understand the essential collaborative nature of creative productions by working as a team member.

(3a. Continuous learning and personal growth)

8. Ethics and Responsibility: Understand and articulate the role and rights of a responsible artist.

2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.

Department Website URL: www.hawaii.edu/acm
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) Please review, add, replace, or delete the existing curriculum map.

Curriculum Map File(s) from 2015:

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.)

Create/modify/discuss program learning assessment procedures (e.g., SLOs, curriculum map, mechanism to collect student work, rubric, survey)
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.

Academic year 2014-2015 was the beginning of implementation for rubrics developed in 2013-2014. Two faculty were on sabbatical from the Digital Cinema Track so implementation focused on ACM 420, the capstone course for the Animation Track in the ACM.

The assessment product, in this case an animated film approximately 7 minutes in length was evaluated against the rubric scoring criteria developed and tested in the 2013-14 academic year.

From the implementation of the ACM 420 rubric a basis was formed to examine the Animation Track curriculum map. Departmental discussions began on the possible modification of ACM major requirements, new courses and lengthening the duration of the major.

The attending Digital Cinema faculty reviewed and made recommendations for revising the curriculum map for Digital Cinema students, with plans for further discussion upon the return of the full faculty cohort in AY ‘15/16.

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)

Artistic exhibition/performance
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
Other 1:
Other 2:

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:
Other 2:

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.)
Other 1:
Other 2:

9) State the number of students (or persons) who submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.

Thirteen students comprised the ACM 420 Fall 2014 course. Their group film project was examined, which was the collective efforts of all 13 students.

10) Who interpreted or analyzed the evidence that was collected? (Check all that apply.)

Course instructor(s)
Faculty committee
Ad hoc faculty group
Department chairperson
Persons or organization outside the university
Faculty advisor
Advisors (in student support services)
Students (graduate or undergraduate)

11) How did they evaluate, analyze, or interpret the evidence? (Check all that apply.)

Used a rubric or scoring guide
Scored exams/tests/quizzes
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.

The capstone work of the 13 students of ACM 420 was examined with the developed rubric. The results are found below in Table 1. The capstone project is a group effort so Writing, Design and Ethics achievements were a shared score, Animation was an individual assessment based on individual scene-work.



Table 1: ACM 420 Rubric Results Fall 2014 Cohort

13) What best describes how the program used the results? (Check all that apply.)

Assessment procedure changes (SLOs, curriculum map, rubrics, evidence collected, sampling, communications with faculty, etc.)
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.

The animation faculty presented the results making the case that in order for learning outcomes to be mastered the Animation Track requires changes to its curriculum map, including courses offered, adding additional courses to the track focus and increasing the duration of the total course sequence in the track.

The following two figures represent the Animation Track requirements and sequence flow as it exists now (Fig. 1), and proposed changes that would address learning outcome needs as informed by the rubric data analysis results. (Fig. 2)


Figure 1: ACM Animation Track Course Requirements and Sequence


Figure 2: Proposed Changes to Animation Track Course Requirements and Sequence


The discussions are continuing at this time and further information to inform the talks is being sought from the College of Arts and Humanities and the UHM academic advising office.

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 concluded that more information regarding programmatic requirements at the college and campus level was needed to inform continued exploration of the proposed changes to the ACM Animation Track. The department expressed satisfaction that the assessment tools developed were providing programmatic feedback so quickly.

16) If the program did not engage in assessment activities, please explain.