Unit: Theatre & Dance
Program: Theatre (BA)
Degree: Bachelor's
Date: Fri Nov 16, 2018 - 1:33:04 pm

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

1. Students can recognize and distinguish between various styles and forms of World Theatre (i.e., Asian, Western, Pacific, Hawaiian, Theatre for Young Audiences).

(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, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 2b. Conduct research, 2c. Communicate and report, 3d. Civic participation)

3. Students can effectively communicate creative ideas and critical judgments through appropriate means (oral, written, practical).

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

4. Students can demonstrate ethical and self-disciplined behaviors appropriate to the field of theatre.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 3a. Continuous learning and personal growth, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture, 3c. Stewardship of the natural environment)

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

Department Website URL: http://manoa.hawaii.edu/liveonstage/theatre/undergraduate-students/
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: Shared deprtment Google file with all course syllabi and course laulima sites

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.


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):

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?

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)

8) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place.

Faculty concentration in mentoring became a primary tool.  As an example, the Professor for Costume Design initiated weekly meetings with student designer to help facilitate planning and preparation for assignments and productions.  The dept continued the pracdtice of exit interviews for all graduating BAs in each semester.  This provides porrfolio submission and review, feedback specific to SLOs, and feedback from the students about dept pros/cons and  changes for improvement.  These interviews are attended by approx 75% of the facutly within the area of focus.  Information is compiled and shared with all faculty for discussion as a whole and within relevant committees (i.e.  Curriculum and Season Planning Committees)

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.

31 graduating BA students submitted portfolios of the work in the department over the years attending UH, self-reflection paper highliting their most significant experiences within the department as they relate to the 4 Theatre BA Learning Outcomes (SLOs). and any supporting material to demonstrate their learning related to each of the 4 Theatre BA SLOs.

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)

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)

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

Based on student feedback, exit interviews, faculty mentoring and professional observation:

SLO 1.  85%

SLO 2.  95%

SLO 3.  90%

SLO 4.  98%

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)

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

Realignment of course offerings, course changes, curriculum changes, resource/policy changes.

a few examples:

Instituded cast representatives, based on student feedback during student/faculyt forums.  Intent:  the students are able to bring concerns form fellow student cast members to the attention of faculty directors. 

Provided more opportunities for students to work outside the department in the Theatre and tv/film community of Hawai'i.

Creation of new courses in Design, Acting, Directing as per students feedback and faculty evaluation.



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 results prompted the faculty to revise our PLOs to better align with the ILOs.

This also prompted the faculty to give greater focus to our contribution to the community, outreach, and civic service as a department and as a training tool for our students in preparation for graduation and the professional environment they will enter into.

Going forward, the department has recognized the value of consistent assessement and will continue to implement tools of assessment throughout the courses and curriculum.

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


adjustment to NOT using Survey Monkey.  Rubric used during exit interviews and faculty assessment forms filled out for each graduating student.