Assessment Details
Academic Year: 2021-2022 Level: Undergraduate
Campus Department: Morrissey College of Arts & Sciences [UG and Grad]
Program Type: Core [UG]
Program Name: Art History Core (Link)
Description of Data Collection:
In past years, the Core assessment is based on the examination of direct evidence, which is a sampling of the required term papers in ARTH1101 and ARTH1102. The evaluation is based on the following rubrics for the written work rated on a scale of 1-5, with 1 being the lowest and 5 the highest:
1) Has the student employed discipline specific terminology correctly?
2) Has student addressed issues of formal analysis, and how these issues pertain to the meaning of the objects under discussion?
3) Has the student demonstrated an awareness of the historical context and meanings of the work of art?
4) Has the student constructed a persuasive argument?
5) Has the student properly documented the paper where needed? (notes, bibliography, etc.)
In 2021-22, we did not evaluate the term papers from ARTH1101 and ARTH1102 because during a Board of Chairs meeting in April, I (Stephanie Leone, Chair) asked Jess Greene if we could choose what to assess each year, such as Core or Major, and she said yes. Based on her response, we decided to assess the Art History Major this year and Art History Core next year. When the DUSs and I met with Dean Kalscheur on 11 May, he said that we have to assess both. Unfortunately, it was too late to gather the evidence in ARTH1102. We will do an assessment in 2022-23.
Review Process:
Art History faculty read a selection of the papers. The collected data is submitted the DUS or Chair, who compiles averages of the data. The art history faculty meet to discuss the results.
Resulting Program Changes:
The art history faculty last met in fall 2020 to discuss the averaged assessment data:
AVERAGE Rating
1) Has the student employed discipline specific terminology correctly? 4.67
2) Has student addressed issues of formal analysis, and how these issues pertain to the meaning of the objects under discussion? 4.67
3) Has the student demonstrated an awareness of the Historical context and meanings of the work of art? 4.5
4) Has the student constructed a persuasive argument? 3.67
5) Has the student properly documented the paper where needed? (notes, bibliography, etc.) 3.0
Based on these results, the faculty felt that no changes were necessary. We will meet again in fall 2022 to discuss our assessment evidence and process and, after the assessment is completed, to interpret the results.
Date of Most Recent Program Review:
The art history faculty last met in fall 2020 to discuss the averaged assessment data:
AVERAGE Rating
1) Has the student employed discipline specific terminology correctly? 4.67
2) Has student addressed issues of formal analysis, and how these issues pertain to the meaning of the objects under discussion? 4.67
3) Has the student demonstrated an awareness of the Historical context and meanings of the work of art? 4.5
4) Has the student constructed a persuasive argument? 3.67
5) Has the student properly documented the paper where needed? (notes, bibliography, etc.) 3.0
Based on these results, the faculty felt that no changes were necessary. We will meet again in fall 2022 to discuss our assessment evidence and process and, after the assessment is completed, to interpret the results.
Attachments (if available)