Unit: Academy for Creative Media
Program: Creative Media (BA)
Degree: Bachelor's
Date: Tue Aug 28, 2018 - 5:04:56 pm

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

1. 1. Critical Thinking: Constructively critique their own and others intellectual and creative work.

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

3. 2b. Writing: Write a critical piece that applies theoretical principles.

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

5. 4a. Professional Skills & Creativity: Create a visual narrative through application of appropriate principles and production skills [production & animation]

6. 4b. Professional Skills & Creativity: Conduct and communicate original research findings [critical studies]

7. 4c. Professional Skills & Creativity: Understand the essential collaborative nature of creative productions by working as a team member.

8. 5. 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 asneeded.

Department Website URL: http://acm.hawaii.edu/academic-program/
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:
Other:
Other:

3) Please review, add, replace, or delete the existing curriculum map.

Curriculum Map File(s) from 2018:

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.

0%
1-50%
51-80%
81-99%
100%

5) Does the program have learning achievement results for its program SLOs? (Example of achievement results: "80% of students met expectations on SLO 1.")(check one):

No
Yes, on some(1-50%) of the program SLOs
Yes, on most(51-99%) of the program SLOs
Yes, on all(100%) of the program SLOs

6) Did your program engage in any program learning assessment activities between June 1, 2015 and October 31, 2018?

Yes
No (skip to question 17)

7) What best describes the program-level learning assessment activities that took place for the period June 1, 2015 to October 31, 2018? (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)
No (skip to question 17)
Investigate other pressing issue related to student learning achievement for the program (explain in question 7)
Other:

8) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place.

Used the Student Showcase event to assess SLO 4: Professional skills.

Used the ACM 420 course to assess SLO 1: Critical thinking, SLO 4: Professional skills, and SLO 5: Ethics

Revised the curriculum map.

9) What types of evidence did the program use as part of the assessment activities checked in question 7? (Check all that apply.)

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
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
Assessment-related such as assessment plan, SLOs, curriculum map, etc.
Program or course materials (syllabi, assignments, requirements, etc.)
Other 1:
Other 2:

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

Used film/animation produced in student showcase event.

Used course assignments/exams in ACM 420.

11) 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)
Dean/Director
Other:

12) 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)
Other:

13) Summarize the results of the assessment activities checked in question 7. For example, report the percentage of students who achieved each SLO.

Introduction

In spring 2018, nine faculty members evaluated 10 capstone productions in the total of 32 films shown at the ACM Student Showcase event. The films were evaluated based on 15 categories. None of the raters scored all categories, due to the excluding nature of the categories (Drama, Comedy, Experimental, Documentary, Animation) and missing scores.

Result Highlights

Animation Films (n=2) received the highest scores (4.4 for Best Animated Film category, 4.3 for Best Animation category and 4.0 for Best Character Animation category).

All 10 films received scores in four capstone evaluation categories (Direction, Editing, Sound and Production Design) and 9 films had Cinematography scores. Editing, Cinematography, Sound and Directions also had the highest number of raters.

The average scores for five capstone categories are 3.8-4.7.



TABLE 1. Average Scores of Capstone Productions in ACM Showcase Evaluation Categories 
(Number of films evaluated = 10)

 

ACM Evaluation Categories

# Films evaluated

Average # of raters

Average scores

Animated Film

2

1.7

4.4

Animation

2

1.2

4.3

Character Animation

2

1.6

4.0

Cinematography

9

4.6

3.6

Comedy

4

0.6

2.8

Direction

10

4.1

3.3

Documentary

3

2.0

3.1

Drama

8

3.1

3.0

Editing

10

4.7

3.2

Experimental

3

0.9

3.9

Grace

7

2.4

4.0

Imagine

9

2.4

3.9

Maka Maoli

3

1.0

3.5

Production Design

10

3.8

3.2

Sound

2

1.7

4.4
 
 

TABLE 2. Average Scores of ACM Capstone Evaluation Categories

ACM Evaluation Categories

# Films evaluated

Average # of raters

Average scores

Best Direction

10

4.1

3.3

Best Cinematography

9

4.6

3.6

Best Editing

10

4.7

3.2

Best Sound

10

4.6

3.3

Best Production Design

10

3.8

3.2
 

 

 

14) 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)
Other:

15) Please briefly describe how the program used the results.

The program revised the rubric to assess student showcase.

ACM 420 instructor will develop rubrics to assess collaboration and rubrics for critical thinking. The instructor will collect colleagues and students' feedback on the rubrics and the assignments.

16) 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 ACM faculty will revise the judging rubrics for the ACM Annual Showcase/Awards screenings.

17) If the program did not engage in assessment activities, please justify.

n/a