Art Department School of Fine Arts University of Rio Grande

Spring 2008 AQIP BFA Program Assessment

Art Department | School of Fine Arts | University of Rio Grande.

Spring 2008 AQIP BFA Program Assessment

Data Collection

Each faculty member created a list of Core Competencies for each course taught. Students were also provided with a list of required images/documents that must be submitted at the end of the semester (in digital form) to their instructor. These images/documents were designed to prove that the students had learned the course material, and achieved competence in each listed Core Competency/Learning Objective.

These files were submitted to the instructor in the last week of class, as digital images on a CD, or in the case of the courses taught in the computer lab, submitted electronically. All images were copied, sorted and labeled by course.

Review

A master DVD with all of the collected data (approximately 2,500 files) was created and distributed to each of the full time faculty in the BFA program. Each faculty member reviewed the information independently, then met to discuss their findings. For each course reviewed, the instructor had prepared a form that listed core competencies and specified how student learning would be assessed. Each course was reviewed individually. Overall program assessment was a result of discussion of the interaction of the individual courses.

Assessment Objectives

1. Determine if students are achieving learning objectives for each course (listed on our form as core competencies)

2. Determine if learning objectives/core competencies for each course are appropriate.

3. Determine if collection and review processes are effective.

4. Assess overall program effectiveness.

Assessment Results

Objective 1. Determine if students are achieving learning objectives for each course (also referred to as “core competencies”)

Assessment

Significant progress has occurred since the last assessment (Fall 2007-2008), with over half the courses reviewed having at least some usable competencies. Deficiencies were discussed at length, and suggestions for improving were debated.

For most courses reviewed, it was possible to assess whether students had met at least some of the learning objectives, and in some of the courses, most of the learning objectives were achieved. Progress in this area exists in the following areas:

1. Learning objectives were defined for most classes, although they were not submitted for the following courses:

ART 13203 Portfolio and Exhibits

ART 36503 Non Western Art History

(Competencies were developed for ART 13203 Portfolio and Exhibits, but were not submitted prior to review)

2. Learning objectives submitted were clear more often than in previous assessments, but are still vague in some cases.

3. Learning objectives submitted were often linked to class activities, again with some exceptions.

5. Students submitted the required data for most classes.

4. Image quality was spotty, but generally better than previous efforts.

In general, although there was vast improvement over the previous semester’s efforts, there is still a lot of room for improvement.

Recommendations

Core Competencies were written for each course using a standard model for the BFA program, and relate to the mission and goals of the program. Course activities are identified that address each item, and a documentation method for measuring student learning has been identified and listed.

All courses had some failure to achieve optimal competence, as is detailed below. The most significant trend throughout the curriculum were the following:

Problem: Missing or incoherent artist statements throughout, a lack of attention to the conceptual aspects of the work.

Proposed solution: Require students to submit an artist statement for at least one piece in each class. Save the statement as a variation of the project name, so it is easily found. Example: student is required to do an abstract painting. They take a picture of the finished painting, and name the image abstract_astudent.jpg. The statement about the work should be titled.

Problem: Sketches that related to various projects are not cataloged with the image, making it difficult to see the development of the ideas.

Proposed solution: Require students to submit sketches that show development process for at least one piece in each class. Save the sketches as a variation of the project name, so it is easily found. Example: student is required to do an allegorical self portrait in printmaking class. They take a picture of the finished print, and name the image selfport_astudent.jpg. The statement about the work should be titled selfportSK_astudent.doc.

Problem: Poor photography of work, poor editing of the images, poor labeling or sizing of the images. Incomplete documentation throughout.

Proposed solution: Restructuring Art Portfolio course should help with this, as will increased student experience. Additionally, faculty to limit maximum number of images submitted per class to twenty in most cases, and to combine some of the images to make the assessment simpler. Additionally, faculty to standardize and publicize naming conventions, and to show students this semester’s submissions to point out problems. Faculty to create one perfect digital portfolio to be published online for students to review. These last activities will occur at the beginning of the semester and as a review prior to the final weeks of class.

Problem: Art historical references were difficult to assess without seeing the artist referenced.

Proposed solution: Standardize naming for Art History projects as follows: Each studio course shall include one project in which students make work that mimics or references a contemporary or historical artist. Each student must submit both their own work and an image of the artist(s) they have referenced. The student’s work must be titled AHmine_astudent.jpg. The image of the referenced artist must be titled AHsource_astudent.jpg. If there are multiple images, the images should have a number included AFTER the student’s name, like this: AHmine_astudent2.jpg.

Specific courses also had deficiencies ranging from severe to mild. The following issues and suggestions for improvement were identified.

ART 16404/36404 Photography (Darkroom)—Multiple deficiencies related to unclear or non-specific competencies, lack of attainment, and some issues with documentation. Many images exhibited poor craft, including spots, scratches or poor tonal range. All of the photos submitted were printed 8x10 inches, and there was a predominance of central compositions leading to a general lack of variety in the course as a whole (this is not necessarily bad, but was noted by the faculty). Some projects seemed more successful, including the line, shape and texture assignments, which most students completed. Other Core Competencies were hard to assess, either because they were too broad to identify easily (competent use of 35 mm, SLR film cameras) or because they had no submitted data (awareness of aesthetic and conceptual issues related to photography). Submitted data indicates that faculty has obviously attempted to address these issues, but it is unclear if students have learned the material.

Suggestions: Faculty should rewrite competencies to create simple and clear goals and ensure that future submissions include data that demonstrates competence. Faculty should link goals to projects that will demonstrate competence in various skills. This might include simple names of assignments like texture, line, contrast, portrait, etc… Include project/activity to address the concept of “Cohesive Body of Work”. Craft and careful printing should be emphasized. Course should include standard Art History and Artist Statement component. Faculty to collect digital portfolios earlier in semester and check to make sure students have completed them correctly. Faculty to show students examples of both good and bad digital portfolios.

ART 18404/38404 Painting—Multiple deficiencies related to unclear or non-specific competencies or lack of attainment, poor photography of work. While students have achieved some of the competencies at least partially (color matching paint samples), others were less successful (creating the illusion of different textures). Some competencies (making a painting with a reference to art history) were unclear, because the reference was not immediately obvious, and could be more evident if the documentation included a second image (the reference). Some of the shorter-length paintings (one hour oil sketches) were more interesting and developed than the longer, more involved works, suggesting that more of these studies might be valuable additions to the course. The largest single issue raised was a concern about the canvas stretching and framing of finished works, which has been somewhat slipshod in both this course and previous offerings in Painting.

Suggestions: Faculty should rewrite competencies to create simple and clear goals and ensure that future submissions include data that demonstrates competence. Faculty should link goals to projects that will demonstrate competence in various skills. Include project/activity to address the concept of “Cohesive Body of Work”. It is suggested that more care be taken with instruction in proper framing techniques, including switching to stapling canvas on the back of stretchers to leave clean sides, making sure canvases have proper bracing and support, and ordering framing stock sooner in the semester to prevent problems with backorders at the end of the term. Course should include standard Art History and Artist Statement component. Faculty to collect digital portfolios earlier in semester and check to make sure students have completed them correctly. Faculty to show students examples of both good and bad digital portfolios.

ART 12303 Portfolio and Exhibits—No usable competencies developed, no data submitted This course to be split into two courses starting fall 2008. These courses are to have separate competencies developed. Issues related to poor student retention of covered material indicate that either the students are not learning the material in class, or are not retaining it. It is unclear which is the case as no documentation of student learning was submitted. This issue is of significant concern to the faculty, as these skills are crucial to the success of any professional artist, for transition and documentation requirements of subsequent courses, and to the smooth functioning of the art department. It may be the case that insufficient time is allowed for the material to be covered and a more involved class should be developed.

Suggestions: Faculty should develop Core Competencies and projects for each of the two courses that are split off, and gather appropriate data. Faculty to collect digital portfolios earlier in semester and check to make sure students have completed them correctly. Faculty to show students examples of both good and bad digital portfolios.

ART 25404/45404 Art History II Competencies seem to have been developed for a studio class, and should probably reworked to reflect course content. Faculty reviewers were unable to determine what the students are learning in the course. Student portfolios have for years been a successful means of engaging students in the subject and creating a great deal of personal connection between the students and the subject, but the reviewers have difficulty in seeing this engagement and student connections in the submitted material. This issue is far-reaching, as there are three other courses in the department that will also need to be assessed in some way that is not clear to us now.

Suggestions: Faculty should develop Core Competencies that more specifically detail course content, and determine method for measuring student achievement. Faculty to collect digital portfolios earlier in semester and check to make sure students have completed them correctly. Faculty to show students examples of both good and bad digital portfolios.

ART 36503 Non-Western Art History—No competencies developed, no data submitted. As no clear solution for documenting student learning in other art history courses has been developed, the faculty has waited to develop this courses competencies as well. This issue to be revisited prior to the commencement of next year’s course.

ART 10503 Three Dimensional Design, section 01 Generally high achievement of Core Competencies, although description of the Inside/Out project was a bit confusing. Issues with documentation specific to 3D work-insufficient views or still images for kinetic sculpture. Some collaborative work was done on a voluntary basis and the faculty were intrigued and interested in the future possibilities of this endeavor across the curriculum.

Suggestions: Faculty should refine Core Competencies, possibly to include collaborative projects. Faculty to collect digital portfolios earlier in semester and check to make sure students have completed them correctly. Faculty to show students examples of both good and bad digital portfolios.

ART 14404/34404 Sculpture Generally high achievement of Core Competencies, although description of materials use unclear. Issues with documentation specific to 3D work-pictures taken through glass, or with distracting or inappropriate backgrounds.

ART 10503 Three Dimensional Design, section 2 –Competencies provided, no data submitted. Better supervision of adjunct recommended.

ART 20304 Web Graphics-Competencies too technical for most reviewers, too much data to assess. Generally high attainment of some Core Competencies (completion of projects in a variety of techniques, large amount of work produced), poor attainment of others (cohesive attractive design, good proofreading/debugging).

Suggestions: Course projects should be modified to improve these areas-allow more time for debugging and aesthetics, scale back technical requirements. Make explanatory text more complete with more layman’s language. Also suggested that a complete example of a perfect portfolio be developed, so there is no confusion for students about what is expected. Continue archiving websites. Course should include standard Art History and Artist Statement component.

ART 11404/31404 Printmaking—Projects overlap, making assessment of some projects difficult, too many images collected. Generally high attainment of Core Competencies.

Suggestions: Some minor modifications in requirements, more clarity on expectations for digital portfolio. Faculty to collect digital portfolios earlier in semester and check to make sure students have completed them correctly. Faculty to show students examples of both good and bad digital portfolios.

ART 30204 Junior Design Studio 2 and ART 40204 Senior Design Studio 2—Combining courses to one time slot allowed too much overlap of projects, made the distinction between courses unclear. Generally high attainment of Core Competencies.

Suggestions: Many images could have been combined or edited out to make assessment simpler. Courses should be more distinct, with emphasis for Junior course to be advanced web skills, and focus on the students professional website, and emphasis for Senior course to be the completion of a Senior Project.

ART 48501 Senior Exhibition—Very high achievements of Core Competencies, although too much data was collected. No revision of course content necessary at this time.

Suggestions: Many images could have been combined or edited out to make assessment simpler. At this level, no further instruction in digital portfolios should be necessary.

Objective 2. Determine if learning objectives/core competencies for each course are appropriate.

Assessment

It was agreed that each faculty member would complete a list of course competencies for each class that they taught prior to the first day of class. A standard form was developed that sorted the competencies into categories based on whether the course was part of Foundations, Art History Studio Core, or Studio Concentration. Each section would have a list of skills according to the following list:

Studio Foundations Courses:

Technical Skills

Formal Skills

Documentation of Work

Gallery Ready Work

Art History Courses:

Documentation of Work

Art History

Studio Core Courses:

Technical Skills

Formal Skills

Conceptual Skills

Documentation of Work

Gallery Ready Work

Artist Statement

Art History

Cohesive Body of Work

Studio Concentration Courses:

Technical Skills

Formal Skills

Conceptual Skills

Documentation of Work

Gallery Ready Work

Artist Statement

Art History

Cohesive Body of Work

As noted above, these lists were incomplete or poorly constructed for a number of courses. Additionally, through initial review of collected student work and through classroom observation, it is becoming increasingly clear that the skills introduced in the Foundations sequence are not thoroughly absorbed by the students, and need to be revisited throughout the Studio Core courses, and possibly even in the Studio Concentration Courses.

Recommendations

Include course activities in Studio Core and Concentration courses that reinforce Foundations concepts.

Objective 3. Determine if collection and review processes are effective.

Procedure:

The previous collection method was to collect the following from each student:

1. Digital images of five exemplary pieces of finished artwork (Studio courses only)

2. Digital images of five sketchbook/journal pages that demonstrate reflective thinking. (Studio Courses and Art History Courses)

This semester’s method was more involved and comprehensive. Each faculty member agreed to create a list of Core Competencies/Learning Objectives. This list was paired with a list of course activities and projects that would demonstrate student learning. Each student was instructed to photograph each project they completed, size, and name their images according to a master list provided by the faculty, and burn a disc of their digital image for submission to the instructor for their course.

These discs were then collected and sorted by Benjy Davies with the help of student labor. Approximately 2,500 images were collected.