2007 MASTER PLAN/PROGRESS REPORT - McNeese State University Music [2012].pdf · Concentration...

2012 MASTER PLAN/PROGRESS REPORT

Academic Program: Bachelor of Music in Music Performance Band or Orchestral Instrument Concentration

Jazz/Commercial Music Concentration

Piano Concentration

Piano Pedagogy Concentration

Voice Concentration

Person Responsible: Dr. Christy Vogt, Dr. Michael Buckles, Dr. Carol Lines

Date Submitted: July 12, 2012

Mission: The Music Performance Program provides the major initial professional competence in the chosen area of performance specialization that leads to advanced graduate

studies with application to a career in university and/or private studio teaching and/or a professional career. Program graduates demonstrate 1) significant technical mastery, 2) a

broad knowledge of music and music literature, 3) the capability to produce work and solve problems independently, 4) the ability to integrate musical knowledge and skills and

communicate musical ideas and concepts, and 5) a coherent set of artistic/intellectual goals which are evident in their work. Five performance concentrations are provided for:

Orchestral/Band Instrument, Music Theatre, Piano, Piano Pedagogy and Voice.

Institutional Mission Reference: The Music Performance Program supports the university’s mission by 1) providing a baccalaureate curriculum with numerous concentrations

distinguished by academic excellence and reflective of the best current professional practices in design and pedagogy; 2) promoting major success through excellence in teaching,

effective integration of current technology into its curse work, continuous program assessment, effective academic advising, and individual student mentoring; 3) establishing and

maintaining university-community collaboration through the program’s cultural and educational objectives and projects; 4) maintaining a sense of community that encourages

intellectual-creative endeavor, ethical and civic responsibility, and respect for cultural diversity; 5) cultivating the skills necessary for critical and effective expression through

general studies course work and varied performance and teaching experiences; and 6) promoting an understanding of the global multicultural community through course work and

performance projects.

Assessment Methods Utilized: Data Repository Location:

Standardized Exam (nationally normed)

____ Standardized Exam (state-normed)

____ Major Field Examination

X Internally-developed Examination - Performance Rubric for: SFA 203 –Department of Performing Arts Office

Major Performance Area Entrance Diagnostic SFA 203 –Department of Performing Arts Office

MUSC 200-Admission to Upper Division SFA 203 –Department of Performing Arts Office

MUSC 399-Junior Recital SFA 203 –Department of Performing Arts Office

____ Student Opinion Survey (SOS)

____ National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)

X Employer Survey SFA 203 – Department of Performing Arts Office

X Graduate Survey SFA 203 – Department of Performing Arts Office

____ Alumni Survey

X Exit Survey/Interview/Exam SFA 203 – Department of Performing Arts Office

X Scoring of Essay: FFND 101-Initial Program Philosophy Essay Rubric SFA 203 – Department of Performing Arts Office

MUSC 200-Developed Program Philosophy Essay Rubric SFA 203 – Department of Performing Arts Office

MUSC 485-Refined Program Philosophy Essay Rubric SFA 203 – Department of Performing Arts Office

MUSC 261-aural analysis essay rubric SFA 203 – Department of Performing Arts Office

MUSC 445- pre-post essay rubric SFA 203 – Department of Performing Arts Office

X Portfolio Evaluation – MUSC 485-Professional Portfolio rubric SFA 203 – Department of Performing Arts Office

X Capstone Project: MUSC 492-Senior Recital Performance rubric SFA 203 – Department of Performing Arts Office

MUSC 492-Program Notes:/Research Analysis Project Rubric SFA 203 – Department of Performing Arts Office

X Presentation : MUSC 261-final research project/presentation rubric SFA 203 – Department of Performing Arts Office

MUSC 363-final research project/presentation rubric SFA 203 – Department of Performing Arts Office

X Research Paper: MUSC 447-Research Project Rubric SFA 203 – Department of Performing Arts Office

X Research Project: MUSC 201-final composition project rubric SFA 203 – Department of Performing Arts Office

MUSC 202-final research project rubric SFA 203 – Department of Performing Arts Office

MUSC 399-Program Notes/Research Project SFA 203 – Department of Performing Arts Office

Excel Spreadsheet

____ Access Database

____ Other - Please describe: Entrance Theory Diagnostic Rubric SFA 203 –Department of Performing Arts Office

MUSC 202L-final proficiency rubric SFA 203 – Department of Performing Arts Office

PIAN 216-barrier/proficiency rubric SFA 203 – Department of Performing Arts Office

Student Learning Outcome 1: Graduates apply critical thinking in academic and professional environments.

Expected Level of Achievement

Critical Thinking Achievement Defined in Music

Performance Program

Program Completers possess

1. the ability to form and defend value judgments

about music;

2. the ability to produce musical work and solve

professional problems independently;

3. an understanding of procedures for realizing a

variety of musical styles; and

4. a developed set of artistic/intellectual goals which

are evident in their own work.

Major Performance Area Entrance Diagnostic

Critical Thinking Indicators Score Expectations

7-9 Exceeds

6 Meets

3-5 Marginally Meets

0-2 Does Not Meet

• 70% of entering program candidates earn a score of 6

(scale of 0-9) or above on the Major Performance Area

Entrance Diagnostic rubric measuring three indicators

related to critical thinking:

musicianship

expression/musicality

sight-reading

Actual Data From Assessment

2011-2012 cohort. Fifteen new candidates declared a

performance major; 47% earned a score of 6 or above.

Expected Level of Achievement was not met

Critical Thinking Indicators Concentration Number of

Candidates

Number

Earning 6

or above

Mean

Score

Instrumental 8 5 6.05

Jazz/Commercial 0 N/A N/A

Piano/Piano Pedagogy 2 1 5.17

Voice 5 1 5.79

Program Total 15 7/15 5.67

Actions/Decisions

A/D Revised performance evaluation rubric works well

across concentrations. No further changes to this rubric

will be made at this time.

D As an entry-level diagnostic, lower Entrance

Diagnostic indicator to 40%. The department divides it’s

musicianship classes into those that have ability and

those that have less ability, and we are able to equalize

the knowledge base by the end of the sophomore year.

Performance Evaluation: a performance presentation

before the appropriate instrument/keyboard/vocal

performance board that provides a formal review of

the program candidate’s acquired technical and

musical skills, stylistic and repertoire knowledge, and

ability to interpret and communicate through their

medium.

Major Performance Area MUSC 200


7-9 Exceeds

6 Meets


0-2 Does Not Meet

Sophomore Performance Evaluation - MUSC 200

• 75% of program candidates earn a 6 (scale of 0-9) or

above on the three indicators related to critical thinking

included in the MUSC 200 (Admission to Upper-

Division Performance Study) rubric:

musicianship


sight-reading

• 75% of program candidates complete MUSC 200

requirement on first attempt.

2011-12: 50% of program candidates completing the

course earned a score of 6 or above; of the four program

candidates enrolled in the course, four (100%) completed

MUSC 200 requirement on the first attempt. In two

cases, the critical thinking indicators were met.


Candidates

Number Earning 6

or above

Mean

Score


Jazz/Commercial 0 NA NA

Piano/Piano Pedagogy 0 N/A N/A

Voice 1 0 4

Program Total 4 2 5.1

2011-2012: 100% of program candidates completed the

MUSC 200 requirement on the first attempt.




Recital Evaluation: an advertised public presentation,

evaluated by the appropriate performance board, that

provides a formal review of the program candidate’s

acquired technical and musical skills, repertoire,

musical styles and performance practices knowledge,

and ability to interpret and communicate through their

medium.

Major Performance Area 300-Level or MUSC 399


5-6 Exceeds

4 Meets


0-1 Does Not Meet

Junior Recital Evaluation – 300-level Performance Study

or MUSC 399

• 80% of program candidates earn a score of 4 (0-6 scale)

or above on the two indicators related to critical thinking

included in the MUSC 399 (Junior Recital) rubric:

musicianship


• 80% of program candidates complete this requirement

on first attempt.

MUSC 261/MUSC 363 Rubric Scale


8-9 Exceeds

5-7 Meets

2-4 Needs improvement

0-1 Does Not Meet

•75% of program candidates earn a score of 6 (scale of 0-

9) or above on the critical thinking indicators of the

MUSC 261 (Introduction to Music History and

Literature) final verbal presentation/research project

rubric.

2011-2012. Four program candidate was enrolled in the

Junior Recital as a 300-level performance study course

or MUSC 399; four of program candidates earned a score

of 4 or above.

Critical Thinking Indicators were met.


Candidates

Number Earning 4

or above

Mean

Score



Piano/Piano Pedagogy 1 1 6

Voice 1 1 4.6


2011-2012: 100% of program candidates completed this

requirement on the first attempt.

2011-2012: 2 out of 4 program candidates (50%) earn a

score of 6 or above on the critical thinking indicators.

Expected level of achievement was not met.




R New instructor for the course. Will recommend that

instructor work toward meeting objectives

• 80% of program candidates earn a score of 6 (scale of

0-9) or above on the critical thinking indicators of the

MUSC 363 (Music History II) final research project

rubric.



5-6 Exceeds

4 Meets


0-1 Does Not Meet

Senior Recital Evaluation – MUSC 492

• 85% of program completers earn a score of 6 (scale of

0-9) or above on the three indicators related to critical

thinking included in the MUSC 492 (Senior Recital for

Music Performance) rubric:

musicianship


sight reading

• 90% of program completers pass the MUSC 492


400-Level Major Performance Area

Written Research Project

Critical Thinking Indicators (3 indicators/5-point scale) Score Expectations

14-15 Exemplary

11-13 Exceeds

8-10 Meets


0-4 Does Not Meet

• 85% of program candidates earn a score of 10 or

above on the Major Performance Area Research Project

(400-level) assessment rubric which measures the

program candidate’s ability to synthesize their

knowledge of theoretical analysis techniques,

historic/style elements, and research skills into a written

2011-2012: 5 candidates completed the final research

project. 80% (4 of 5) students scored 66% (18/27) or

above on the Assessment Rubric. 20% (1 of 5) students

scored 59% (16/27).

6 out of 9 = 66% (numbers from far left column)

18 out of 27 = 66% (numbers on actual rubric)

2011-2012: 100% (3/3) program completers earned a

score of 6 or above.

100% (3/3) passed MUSC 492 on their first attempt.

2011-2012: 3 program candidates completed the Written

Research Project. Using the University-wide QEP

rubric, 100% (3/3) of the candidates scored 25/25.

2012: R Numbers on Final Project Rubric do not

match those in the far left hand column/Expected Level

of Achievement column.

M 2012-2013. The MPPC will continue to analyze and

monitor these outcomes.

R: Change Expected Level of Achievement numbers to

match QEP rubric rather than departmental rubric

M 2012-2013. The MPPC will continue to analyze and

monitor these outcomes.

project.

•4.00/5.00 average response on the Graduating Student

Exit Survey (GSES) questions relating to the program

completer’s perception of the success of the curriculum

in developing their ability to use critical thinking as a

professional musician. •4.00/5.00 average response on the Graduate Survey

(GS) and Employer Survey (ES) on questions relating to

critical thinking skills outcomes and their long term

impact on the graduates’ effectiveness as professional

musicians.

2011-2012: There were no program completers.

D Discontinue use of the GS and the ES for lack of data.

Data collection is difficult year to year.

Student Learning Outcome 2: Graduates formulate and express ideas effectively through oral, written, and/or technological communications in academic and professional

environments.


Communication and Technology Achievements

Defined within Music Performance Program

Program completers possess

1. the technical and musical skills requisite for artistic

self-expression in the concentration area;

2. the ability to communicate musical ideas, concepts,

and requirements to music professionals and lay

persons related to the practice of the major field;

3. the ability to defend musical judgments through

oral and written communication; and

4. the ability to use technologies current to

concentration area.

FFND 101

Written Communication Rubric (5 indicators/5-point scale)

Score Expectations

23-25 Exemplary

18-22 Exceeds

13-17 Meets


0-7 Does Not Meet

• 70% of first-time freshmen program candidates earn a

score of 15 (scale of 0-25) or above on the FFND 101

Statement of Intent Writing Project Assessment Rubric.

MUSC 200: Program Philosophy Statement

• 75% of program candidates earn a score of 15 or above

on MUSC 200 philosophy statement rubric.


Fall 2011: Five freshmen BM program candidates

enrolled in FFND 101. 4/5 completed the Statement of

Intent Writing Project. 4/4 (100%) earned a score of 15

points or higher.

Expected level of achievement was met.

2010-2011: No candidates were assessed on the MUSC

200 philosophy statement rubric due to mis-

communication.

Expected level of achievement was met.

Actions/Decisions

M will continue to monitor, assess, and evaluate

A/D: 2011-2012: This writing requirement will no

longer be required. New Writing Enriched classes will

function in this capacity.

MUSC 485: Statement of Intent

• 85% of program completers earn of score of 15 or

above on MUSC 485 philosophy statement evaluation


Communication Indicators Score Expectations

3 Exceeds

2 Meets

1 Marginally Meets

0 Does Not Meet


or MUSC 399 (Performance)


(0-3 scale) on the expression/musicality indicator on the

MUSC 399 performance assessment rubric.


or MUSC 399 (Program Notes)

• 80% of program candidates earn a score of 75% or

above on the written program notes assessment rubric.

Program Philosophy Statement Indicator Concentration Number of

Candidates

Number

Earning 15 or

above

Mean

Score

Instrumental NA NA NA

Jazz/Commercial NA NA NA


Voice 1 0 14

Program Total 5 4/5 17

2011-2012: This course is no longer taught.

2011-2012: Three program candidates were enrolled in

the Junior Recital as a 300-level performance study

course or MUSC 399; 100% of program candidates

earned a score of 2 or above (2 mean score).

Communication Indicators were met.

Communication Indicator Concentration Number of

Candidates

Number

Earning 2 or above

Mean

Score




Voice 1 1 2.3


2011-2012: No rubrics available for program notes.

A/D: Delete MUSC 485 from this Master Plan since it is

no longer taught.




R: Review requirement of Performance Notes for MUSC

399. Consider deleting requirement; there are other

writing requirements (WE) in the major. If required,

improve communication with area coordinators so

Senior Recital Evaluation–MUSC 492 (Performance)


on the indicators related to communication:


stage presence

on the MUSC 492 performance assessment rubric.

Senior Seminar: Issues of the Profession MUSC 485


on the resume and writing projects’ assessment rubric.

MUSC 201

Technology Indicators Rubric Scale Score Expectations

10-12 Exceeds

6-9 Meets


0-1 Does Not Meet

•75% of program candidates earn a score of 8 or above

on the four technology indicators of the MUSC 201

(Advanced Theory I) final composition/analysis project

rubric.

MUSC 202/MUSC 261/MUSC 363

Communication Indicators Rubric Scale Score Expectations

10-12 Exceeds

6-9 Meets


0-1 Does Not Meet

2011-2012: 100% of program candidates (3/3) earned a

score of 4 or above on Expression/Musicality and Stage

Presence.

2011-2012: This course is no longer offered due to

degree re-design.

Fall 2011. Rubrics for this course are missing.

requirement is fulfilled by students.

R 2011-2012: Because MUSC 485 is no longer offered,

delete from Master Plan.

M 2011-2012. will continue to analyze, assess and

monitor.


9) or above on the written communication indicators

of the MUSC 202 (Advanced Theory II) final research

project rubric.


9) or above on the oral communication indicators of

the MUSC 261 (Introduction to Music History and

Literature) final verbal presentation/ research project

rubric.


9) or above on the written communication indicators

of the MUSC 363 (Music History II) final written

research project rubric.


Exit Survey (GSES) on questions relating to the program

completer’s ability to communicate and use technology

as a professional musician


Exit Survey (GSES) on questions relating to

communication and technology outcomes and their long

term impact on the graduates’ effectiveness as a

musician and teacher

2010-2011: Due to degree re-design, MUSC 202 is no

longer offered.


score of 6 or above on the analyses of global perspective

indicator.





scored 59% (16/27).




R: 2011-2012: Due to degree re-design, MUSC 202 is no

longer offered. Delete from Master Plan.

R New instructor for the course. Instructor will work to

see that objectives are met

R 2011-2012. Because of low enrollment in MUSC 363,

the MPPC will analyze and monitor this data over a

three-year cycle [spring 2009-spring 2012] before

recommending major change.


match those in the far left hand column.



Student Learning Outcome 3: Graduates analyze the global community to make sound judgments in academic and professional environments.


Global Perspective Defined in Music Performance

Program


1. an understanding of current musical thought and

practice as it relates to the professional musician and

the evolution of contemporary world music and

culture;

2. an understanding of music and music literature

within its global cultural and historic contexts;

3. an ability to evaluate, understand, and respect a

variety of musical repertoires.

4. an understanding of significant ethical and

professional issues related to a career of performance

and music teaching within a global arena.

•75% of program candidates will correctly answer 6 or

more out of 8 analyses of global perspective questions

on the MUSC 261 (Introduction to Music History and

Literature) post test.

MUSC 261/MUSC 363/MUSC 447

Global Perspective Indicators Rubric Scale Score Expectations

8-9 Exceeds

5-7 Meets


0-1 Does Not Meet

•75% of program candidates will earn a score of 6 (0-9)

or above on the analysis of global perspective

indicators of the MUSC 261 (Introduction to Music

History and Literature) final verbal presentation/research

project rubric.


9) or above on the analyses of global perspective

indicators of the MUSC 363 (Music History II) final


2011-12: 2 out of 4 program candidates () earn a score

of 6 or above on the analyses of global perspective

indicator.

Expected level of achievement was met


score of 6 or above on the analyses of global perspective

indicator.





Actions/Decisions

M 2011-2012: Will continue to analyze, assess and

monitor.


see that objectives are met


match those in the far left hand column.

A Lower benchmark to 70%

written research project rubric.


0-9) or above on the analyses of the global perspective

indicators of the MUSC 447 (Literature of the

Performance Major) final written research project.

Senior Seminar: Issues of the Profession MUSC 485


0-25) or above on the project assessment rubrics

pertaining to global perspective written projects.

•4.00/5.00 average response on the GSES on question

relating to tolerance and diversity and questions on the

quality of instruction in music history and literature

courses.

4.00/5.00 average response on the GS and ES on

questions relating to global perspective outcomes and

their impact on the graduates’ effectiveness as a

musician and teacher.

scored 59% (16/27).



2011-2012: 5 out of 7 (71%) earned a score of 6 or

above on the analyses of the global perspective

indicators.

2010-2011. No data available. Course will first be

offered in spring 2012. However, MUSC 485 has

been deleted from the degree plan

2011-2012: There were no program completers

A due to BOR mandated redesign of degrees, MUSC

485 is no longer offered.



Student Learning Outcome 4: Graduates possess 1) a conceptual understanding of music theory, musical forms and processes; 2) aural and analytical comprehension as applied

to performance and repertory study; and 3) composition and improvisation abilities appropriate to the concentration major, as these areas of music study form a basis for listening,

composing, and performing.



Objective Four Indicators Score Expectations

5-6 Exceeds

4 Meets


0-1 Does Not Meet


or MUSC 399 (Performance)

• 80% of program candidates earn a score of 4 (0-6 scale)

or above on the two indicators related to Objective Four

included in the MUSC 399 (Junior Recital) rubric:

musicianship


• 80% of program candidates complete this requirement

on first attempt.

Senior Recital Evaluation –MUSC 492 (Performance)

• 85% of program completers earn a score of 6 (0-9

scale) or above on the three indicators related to

Objective Four included in MUSC 492 (Performance)

rubric:

musicianship


sight singing/sight reading

• 90% of program completers pass the MUSC 492




Objective Four Indicators


2011-2012: Three program candidates were enrolled in

the Junior Recital as a 300-level performance study

course or MUSC 399; 100% of program candidates

earned a score of 4 or above; 100% of program

candidates completed this requirement on the first

attempt.

Objective Four Indicators Concentration Number of

Candidates

Number

Earning 4

or above

Mean

Score

Instrumental 1 1 6



Voice 1 1 4.7


2011-2012: 100% of program completers earned a score

of 6 or above on Musicianship, Expression/Musicality

and Sight Reading.

100% passed on their first attempt.

Actions/Decisions





monitor.

(3 indicators/5-point scale) Score Expectations

14-15 Exemplary

11-13 Exceeds

8-10 Meets


0-4 Does Not Meet


on the 400-Level Major Performance Area Written

Research Project/ assessment rubric which measures the



historic/style elements, and research skills in producing

advanced program notes.

•70% of program candidates earn a score of 75% or

above on the Theory Entrance Diagnostic Examination.


above on the MUSC 201 (Advanced Theory I) final

project rubric.


above on the MUSC 202 (Advanced Theory II-

Contemporary Music Practice) final research project

assessment rubric which measures the program

candidate’s ability to synthesize their knowledge of

theoretical analysis techniques, historic/style elements,

technology, and research skills into a project focusing on

contemporary repertoire and practice.


above on the MUSC 202L (sight-reading/ear training)

proficiency examination rubric; 75% of program

candidates complete proficiency requirement on first

attempt.

MUSC 261 Rubric Scale

Objective Four Indicators

2011-2012: 100% (3/3) candidates earned a score of 25

or above on the Written Research Project, using the

University QEP rubric.

Fall 2011. 10 new program candidates completed the

theory examination. Four (40%) earned a score of 70%

or above.

Expected Level of Achievement was not met.

Fall 2011. Rubrics for this course are missing.

Expected Level of Achievement was met.

2010-2011. Due to degree re-design, MUSC 202 is no

longer offered.

Spring 2011. 4 of 5 (80%) of program candidates

enrolled in MUSC 202L earned a score of 70% or

higher on the MUSC 202L proficiency examination

rubric. 100% completed this requirement on the first

attempt.

Expected Level of Achievement was met


monitor.

R As an entry-level diagnostic, lower Entrance

Diagnostic indicator to 40%. The department divides it’s

musicianship classes into those that have ability and

those that have less ability, and we are able to equalize

the knowledge base by the end of the sophomore year.


monitor.

A Due to degree re-design, MUSC 202 is no longer

offered. Delete from Master Plan


monitor.

Score Expectations

8-9 Exceeds

5-7 Meets


0-1 Does Not Meet

• 75% of program candidates earn a score of

6 (scale of 0-9) or above on the Objective Four indicators

of the MUSC 261 (Introduction to Music History and

Literature) final research project rubric.

•4.00/5.00 mean response on the GSES on questions

relating to the program completer’s opinion concerning

the quality of instruction in music theory, analysis and

composition courses.

•4.00/5.00 mean response on the GS and ES on questions

relating to the quality of instruction in music theory,

analysis and composition courses and their long term

impact on the effectiveness of graduates’ effectiveness as

a musician and teacher.

2011-2012: 2 out of 4 program candidates (50%) earned

a score of 6 or above on the final research project rubric.




see that objectives are met.



Student Learning Outcome 5: Graduates possess professional entry-level competence in the major performance area, including significant technical mastery, knowledge of

applicable repertory, capability to produce work and solve professional problems independently, a coherent set of artistic/intellectual goals which are evident in their work, and

orientation to and experience in the fundamentals of pedagogy.


Performance Competencies


1. Technical skills requisite for artistic self-

expression in the concentration;

2. An overview understanding of the repertory in the

major concentration and the ability to perform from a

cross-section of that repertory;

3. The ability to read at sight at a level relevant to

professional standards appropriate for the particular

concentration;

4. Knowledge and skills to work as a leader and in

collaborations on matters of musical interpretation;

and

5. Keyboard competency.


Instrumental Rubric Score Expectations

13-15 Exceeds

8-12 Meets


0-2 Does Not Meet

Vocal Rubric Score Expectations

15-18 Exceeds

9-14 Meets


0-2 Does Not Meet

Senior Recital Evaluation – MUSC 492

• 85% of instrumental and keyboard program completers

earn a score of 10 or above and 85% of the vocal

program completers earn a score of 12 or above on the

MUSC 492 (Senior Recital for Music Performance)

assessment rubric; 90% of program completers pass the

MUSC 492 requirement on first attempt.


2011-2012: 100% of instrumental program completers

earned a score of 10 or above on the assessment rubric.

100% passed on the first attempt

Actions/Decisions


monitor.



Objective Four Indicators (5 indicators/5-point scale)

Score Expectations

23-25 Exemplary

18-22 Exceeds

13-17 Meets


0-7 Does Not Meet


on the 400-Level Major Performance Area Written

Research Project/ assessment rubric which measures the



historic/style elements, and research skills in producing

advanced program notes.

• 80% of program candidates earn a score of 70% or

above on the PIAN 216 proficiency examination rubric;

80% of program candidates complete proficiency


• 85% of program completers earn a score of 80% or above on the MUSC 445 (Pedagogy for Performance

Majors) or MUSC 455-456 (Piano Pedagogy Senior-

Level Teaching Practicum) evaluation indicators which

measures the program candidate’s ability to

1) synthesize fundamental knowledge of pedagogical

methods and repertoire and

2) successfully teach in a supervised environment.

2011-2012: 100% (3/3) candidates scored 25/25 on the

Written Research Project using the University QEP

rubric.

2011-2012: A total of 16/18 or 88% program candidates

earn a score of 70% or better.

88% or 16/18 students completed the proficiency on first

attempt.

2011-12: No program completer enrolled in MUSC 445.


monitor.

A: Revised percentage of program candidates

completing proficiency requirement on first attempt from

75% to 80%.


monitor

Post-Graduation Professional Activity

• 4.00/5.00 mean response on the GSES on questions

relating to the program completer’s opinion concerning

1) overall quality of performance area;

2) quality of instruction in performance study and

pedagogy; and

3) quality of instruction in performance ensemble

experiences.

• 4.00/5.00 mean response on the GS and ES on

questions relating to the quality of instruction in

performance and repertoire and their long term impact on

the effectiveness of graduates’ effectiveness as a

musician and teacher.



Resources Allocated: None.

Professional and Workforce Development Initiatives and Progress: Provide program internship data/information here. This may include student and/or employer survey

satisfaction results, data related to growth of internship program, job-placement after internship program, or other data/information. Please also indicate any actions or decisions

the program has made or intends to make either to the internship program or to its curriculum based on internship data. If you wish to use subsequent pages/sections to display this

information or to specify individual goals of the program, please feel free to do so.

Identify Internship Program (name), Assessment

Tool (e.g. survey), and Expected Level of

Achievement (benchmark)

An internship is not currently a requirement of the

Bachelor of Music in Performance.


2010-2011. PART Music Program faculty has

determined that an internship is not necessary, in that

much of the degree candidate’s training mimic’s real-

world conditions, in particular, performing in

ensembles. Also, 6 students participated in

performances with the Lake Charles Symphony, a

professional symphony orchestra.

Actions/Decisions

D 2012-2013. PART Music Program faculty will

continue to assess if internship opportunities are

necessary for development and growth of the pre-

professional musician.

Master Plan Self-Assessment

Master plans are the evidence that a unit is performing assessment and an index to how that assessment is undertaken. Effective assessment plans establish clear goals, set high

levels of achievement, and include meaningful measurements for gauging progress toward goals. As a progress report, these plans show that the unit evaluates its annual

information and makes decisions based upon evidence. These changes are then followed up on (assessed) in subsequent plans.

In this section, please self-evaluate this process by indicating as follows:

1 – I need a lot of help in this area;

2 – I am making progress, but need help;

3 – I do not need help in this area

Area 1: Mission/Institutional Mission Reference

(I am confident my unit’s mission statement communicates clearly to a broad audience

and shows its unique and obvious place within the institutional framework.)

3

Area 2: Objectives/Outcomes

(Mostly for Admin Units: I am satisfied that the objectives I have listed support the unit

mission, are clear and measurable, and adequate in number.)

3

Area 3: Assessments/Expectations

(I am satisfied that my assessments accurately measure my objectives, that there are

enough assessments to get a meaningful picture, and that my unit’s expectations are

rigorous but attainable.)

3

Area 4: Data/Collection

(I am satisfied with the amount and quality of data I receive.) 2

Area 5: Data Analysis/Application

(I am satisfied with the unit’s process for analyzing data and making improvements.) 3

Comments:

2007 MASTER PLAN/PROGRESS REPORT - McNeese State University Music [2012].pdf · Concentration...

Documents

Transcript of 2007 MASTER PLAN/PROGRESS REPORT - McNeese State University Music [2012].pdf · Concentration...