Program: Theatre (PhD)
Degree: Doctorate
Date: Tue Oct 09, 2012 - 3:13:50 pm
1) Below are your program's student learning outcomes (SLOs). Please update as needed.
1. Student is capable of researching and writing a major book-length original contribution to Western, Asian or Comparative Theatre scholarship
2. Student demonstrates in-depth comprehensive knowledge of chosen area of specialization of Theatre scholarship
3. Student displays broad expertise in Theatre history, theory, and performance practices
4. Student demonstrates teaching competence at the university level.
5. Student demonstrates reading knowledge of, and some spoken fluency in, the foreign language(s) relevant to the area of the dissertation.
2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.







3) Select one option:
- 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 assessment activities between June 1, 2011 and September 30, 2012? (e.g., establishing/revising outcomes, aligning the curriculum to outcomes, collecting evidence, interpreting evidence, using results, revising the assessment plan, creating surveys or tests, etc.)


6) For the period June 1, 2011 to September 30, 2012: State the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goals. Include the SLOs that were targeted, if applicable.
Targeted SLOs
2. Student demonstrates in-depth comprehensive knowledge of chosen area of specialization of Theatre scholarship
3. Student displays broad expertise in Theatre history, theory, and performance practices
Written proposals and oral defenses of these proposals were reviewed by faculty advisory committees to assess how well students demonstrated #2. Through the proposals, combined with students' comprehensive exams (and defenses thereof), faculty assessed how well they demonstrated the achievement of the targeted SLO #3.7) State the type(s) of evidence gathered to answer the assessment question and/or meet the assessment goals that were given in Question #6.
NOTE: the process below describes the ongoing assessment of PhD candidates; no doctoral student graduated in 2011-2012.
1. The student presented a Dissertation Proposal, 10-15 double spaced pages with substantial Bibliography at a Proposal Defense Meeting with 5-member dissertation committee (minimum one outside member). At this meeting, the committee members assessed the student’s proposed methodology, access to sources, organization plan for both writing and research, and proposed scope of the project.
2. No students took Comprehensive Exams during this period.
As there were no graduating doctoral students, no exit surveys were available.
8) State how many persons submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
One PhD student defended a dissertation proposal during this period.
No PhD students took comprehensive exams during this period.
No doctoral dissertations were completed and defended during this period.
9) Who interpreted or analyzed the evidence that was collected? (Check all that apply.)










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







11) For the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goal(s) stated in Question #6:
Summarize the actual results.
The students in question were assessed to be progressing well toward their dissertation goals.