Lander University

Institutional Effectiveness Summary 2003

 

According to Section 59-101-350 of the SC Code of Laws, 1976, as amended, each public institution in the state of South Carolina must submit an Institutional Effectiveness Report annually to the South Carolina Legislature and to the people of the state of South Carolina.  Lander University’s assessment procedures are very much a part of our mission.  Lander University has been an institution dedicated to providing higher education to the people of South Carolina, particularly in the upstate region, from its inception, and we want to show the taxpayers of South Carolina, to whom we are accountable, that our institution is both extremely effective and cost-efficient.  At Lander University, each unit establishes its program goals and assessment measures to be consistent with both the university’s mission statement and each unit’s unique area of expertise.  Lander University assesses its effectiveness continually, and we strive to maintain educational excellence while working to improve in any area that demonstrates a need for improvement.

 

The 2003 Institutional Effectiveness Report for Lander University reports on the assessment of educational effectiveness for the following areas, following the Commission on Higher Education’s established uniform schedule for reporting:

 

Majors Under Review

Full Reports

·         Mass Communication and Theater

·         Interdisciplinary Studies (IDS)

 

Interim Reports

·         Teacher Education Programs

 

Other Areas Under Review

·         Student Development

·         Policies and Procedures for Preparing a Technologically Skilled Workforce:  Pursuant to the 2001 legislative amendment to SC 59-101, we include a statement on Lander University’s policies and procedures for preparing a technologically skilled workforce.

·         Survey of 1999-2000 Alumni:  State law requires that every two years institutions survey the alumni of the class that graduated three years prior to the survey.  Therefore, Lander will report the survey data for 1999-2000 graduates.

 

 

Majors Under Review

 

The various academic units employ a broad array of assessment techniques in their program evaluation, each using multiple measures tailored for the specific qualities of the discipline.  During the 2002-2003 academic year, majors in Mass Communication and Theater and Interdisciplinary Studies reported assessment findings through the CHE Program Reviews, and an interim report was submitted for majors in Teacher Education.  The table below summarizes the assessment measures used by the majors under review.

 

Assessment Measures of Majors under Review

 

Assessment Measure	Full Reports		Interim Report
	Mass Comm	IDS	Education
Alumni Surveys	X	X
Employer Surveys			X
Questionnaires
ADEPT evaluations			X
Content area exams			X
Exit interviews	X	X
Capstone projects	X
External adjudication	X		X
Auditions	X
Portfolios			X
Pre-registration meetings	X

 

 

Major Program Assessment Summary for Mass Communication and Theater

 

The BA degree in Mass Communication and Theatre has two emphases: the Mass Communication Emphasis and the Theatre Emphasis.  The program goals for each emphasis are the same and are as follows:

 

Students graduating from Lander University with a degree in mass communication and theatre should:

1.   possess the skills necessary for successful careers in theatre and related professions including educational, community, or professional organizations.

2.   possess the skills necessary for successful careers in electronic or print media and related professions including educational, industrial, or professional organizations.

3.   have sufficient preparation for the pursuing of further specialized training in theatre, journalism, electronic media, and related professions.

4.   possess the skills necessary to become critical and informed supporters of mass communication, theatre, and related art forms with an awareness of how these reflect, affect, and enrich human life.

 

The assessment measures for both emphases are tied to these goals and are common except in the capstone projects and courses, and production evaluations usually are of most interest to Theatre Emphasis students and faculty.  Over the period of the review the faculty and chair have not changed, and the assessment of these students and programs has been consistent each year.  The data gleaned from the measures has caused a number of curricular changes for the better and even the replacement of one full-time faculty member.  An additional full-time faculty member and several part-time faculty have been added to meet student needs.

 

Capstone Projects

 

In the Mass Communication Emphasis, students take MCOM 400, Critical Issues in Mass Communication, in their senior year.  This course involves exploration of careers in the field, graduate schools, professional ethics, and analysis of ethical and legal issues.  This course has been taught each spring during the review period, as well as in the fall of 2001 and several other times by independent study.  The independent studies have been necessary when transfer majors are out of sequence and would otherwise be unable to graduate.  Eighty students took the course over 5 years, and 80 graduated.  The success rate of 100% in this course suggests majors are meeting the goals of the major.

 

In the Theatre Emphasis, students direct one-act plays, and are creatively involved in all aspects of their productions.  Theatre 415 and 416 are the capstone courses.  Success in these courses is documented through concept statements and directing prompt books, as well as the programs, posters, and post-production evaluations done by faculty.  These courses have been offered once a year in the period with the exception of 2001-02.  Between 1998-99 and 2002-03 seventeen students took 415 and 10 took 416.  Thirteen students graduated during the period with nothing less than a B in these courses.  Although this measure has been most satisfactory, a new curricular change has made it possible to take an additional course (as an elective) to receive credit for directing a second play.

 

Pre-registration Meetings

 

Students are given an opportunity to express their concerns with and evaluations of the program during pre-registration; this information helps us to focus our attention on creating a priority list of areas that need to be adjusted, updated, or restructured, in order meet the growing needs of our students.  The Department of Mass Communication and Theatre provide email announcements of important production information, changes in requirements, and pre-registration reminders for one-on-one meetings with students and advisors.  Although the practice has been consistent, some students miss email notices and various faculty members independently send notices of events as needed.  In the spring of 2003, a new quarterly newsletter for students in mass communication and theatre was developed to keep students informed of workshops, speakers, productions, and registration information.

 

Auditions

 

Open auditions are promoted on campus and in the community before each of the four theatre productions of the academic year.  The directors of the productions choose the appropriate actor for each role and a casting list is posted.  Students not selected for major roles are given the opportunity to be understudies or work in any of the backstage roles.  Students are cast each year for at least three to four productions, selected by various faculty and guest directors, affirming the student’s talents and range of characters appropriate to the parts.  The honor of being selected is greater since the auditions are always open, and many compete to be in the plays.  As this is a traditional theatrical process of assessment and casting has been successful, there is no need to change.

 

External Adjudication of Performance

 

All students involved in theatrical productions, whether technical or performance, have the opportunity to evaluate the production.  This can include their personal involvement and the overall organization of the production.  These forms can be anonymous and shared with the director and other faculty in the department.  In addition, critical evaluation of faculty and student production work is made by outside professional adjudicators working for the Kennedy Center/American College Theatre Festival.  This takes place every other year in the fall.  The adjudicators supply the production personnel with a written and oral critique.

 

Each production on campus has undergone the scrutiny of post-production evaluations of every aspect of the show.  Since these can be done early in the run of a show (typically 4 nights) the feedback has been used to adjust timing, sound, effects, make-up, lighting, etc. Twice in the period of review, productions have been submitted for adjudication at regional KC/ACTF competitions.  Although neither production progressed to the national level of judging, we did garner many highly complimentary comments on various important parts of the production effort.

 

Adjustments have been made as a result of these evaluative assessments.  Next fall we will submit our production of Canterbury Tales to KC/ACTF with our new Technical Director in charge of scenic and lighting design.

 

Alumni Survey

 

Each year the Career Services office sends out an alumni survey of the past year’s graduates.  The survey gives the alumni the opportunity to give each department feedback on how well the programs prepared students for their careers.  Each fall the responses to the survey are compiled in a report and shared with the entire faculty.  Responses from each of the years under review (except the last, 2002, which will not be ready for distribution until September) were available.  In general, although the sample participating may be of some value to the University with return rates of 28% to 37%, the Mass Communication and Theatre students responded at such a low rate most years we cannot call the sample significant.  In 1999 9%, in 2000 9%, and in 2001 31% Mass Communication and Theatre students participated.  Nonetheless, the survey is studied each fall by the faculty and taken into consideration with much better and comprehensive feedback that comes from exit interviews with seniors.  Seniors are told now to expect the survey and to please participate in their first year out in the world of work, hoping that our alumni will yield a better sample in the future.

 

Exit Interviews

 

Exit interviews are conducted in the last semester of each senior in both Mass Communication and Theatre.  One is conducted by the faculty of the department as a group, and another by the Chair of the Division, one-on-one.  Both interviews give valuable insight into the program’s strengths and weaknesses.  Curricular, equipment, and personnel changes have been implemented as a result of this feedback.  The departmental interview is also used as an opportunity to evaluate each student’s oral and writing skills.  Forms have been developed to assess these critical skills, and are kept on record.  Writing samples are evaluated independently by Faculty and kept on file in the Humanities Division.  Writing samples were obtained from 8 Mass Communication and Theater students in fall 2002 (the latest period for which data were gathered).  These writing samples are evaluated on a 1-4 scale.  The average score for the 8 students was 2.5.  Pre-test scores from students’ first-year writing samples were available for 2 of the 8 students (first-year samples were not available for 3 students because they were transfer students and the remaining 3 never completed the first-year sample).  Both students showed improvement in their writing, one improving from a 2.5 to a 3.0 and the other improving from a 1.0 to a 2.5.

 

All seniors are requested to make appointments for both the exit interviews with the faculty of the department and with the Division Chair.  The faculty gain first-hand feedback from the students about suggestions for improvements in curriculum, extracurricular experiences, equipment needs, etc.  The Chair in one-on-one confidential interviews can get additional information about faculty performance, classes, as well as the other suggestions.  The average numbers of students to participate in both surveys is about 50% over the 5-year period.

 

A great many changes have been precipitated by the feedback derived from these interviews:

1. The technical director has been replaced.

2. An additional full-time Mass Communication Instructor was added.

3. 3 more editing workstations have been added for TV/Radio.

4. The Media Center wing of the Carnell Building is now our space.

5. 2 work-study positions have been added to assist with technical help.

6. A 4-hr. Drafting course has been replaced with a 1-hr course, Thtr. 101.

7. Meda. 341, Advertising and Public Relations, now a requirement.

8. More sections of Scriptwriting class have been added.

9. BA 205, Management Information Systems, added as requirement.

10. Journalism requirement reduced to 2 from 3, more electives possible.

11. Adjunct Costumer added to faculty.

12. Additional adjunct faculty are now used for Theatre History, Speech, Theatre and Film Appreciation, and Scriptwriting.

13. New course added in Desktop Publishing, Jour. 302.

 

 

Major Program Assessment Summary for IDS

 

The Interdisciplinary Studies program provides students with very specialized interests the opportunity to work with faculty sponsors in designing their own major programs of study from courses drawn from at least two disciplines.  Each student's program must be approved by faculty sponsors from the two curricular areas and by the Interdisciplinary Studies Advisory committee in order for the student to be accepted as an Interdisciplinary Studies major.  The director of the Interdisciplinary Studies program is responsible for the administration of the program as well as program assessment; turnover in the position three times in the last four years has brought new perspectives to that endeavor.   Prior to 1996, assessment of the program focused on the students’ total university experience and gave more attention to general education than to the major.  Since the major program was distinct for each student, that approach was understandable; nevertheless, in 1996, the plan of assessment was redesigned to focus on the major program itself.  The present interim director, who assumed responsibility for the program in Spring 2002, has approached assessment of the program from the standpoint of what things need to be done now in order to make the program fit more compatibly with other majors within Lander University.  In keeping with that consideration, assessment this year has focused more on what the Interdisciplinary Studies Committee, the faculty in general, the Vice President of Academic Affairs, and the Registrar have identified as specific problems with the program.

 

As a result of this assessment, the Interdisciplinary Studies Committee has implemented several new policies.   One important change is that students who wish to make last-minute changes on their program sheets must now petition for those changes through the Registrar’s Office; petitions must be signed by the major advisor, the IDS Director, and then approved by the Registrar.  Clearer guidelines are currently being written for the IDS 499 class, as students in past exit interviews have indicated that such clarity is lacking and needed.  In addition, the new IDS recipe page (advising sheet) has the requirement of signatures for all advisors, indicating that they have met and have discussed the program with each other and with the student; our assessment this year indicates that there is a lack of communication among advisors, the IDS Committee, and the IDS Director.  The IDS Committee is also revisiting the issue of how students determine whether the degrees they plan are BS degrees or BA degrees.  The interim IDS Director is writing a policies and procedures sheet to address all of these issues clearly, and it will be made available to all IDS Committee members and major advisors via the IDS webpage.  

 

In exit interviews, graduating seniors have been very positive about the program. Placement data for IDS graduates has been very positive.  Since students choose the IDS major because they have very specific educational and career goals, they tend to have specific career plans in place prior to graduation.  Employment in the field of study by graduates is very high.   No students from this assessment period reported being employed in fields unrelated to their IDS programs. 

 

Assessment data for Interdisciplinary Studies has been limited in part by the small number of graduates in the program, so several initiatives have been instituted to give the program a higher profile, particularly among transfer students.  Transfer agreements have been established with several technical colleges allowing smoother transitions for students who wish to pursue a baccalaureate degree focused on fields that are not offered as majors at Lander.  Frameworks have been designed for innovative and unique programs of study that allow students to use their technical college training in interdisciplinary majors.  Information specific to these frameworks has been distributed in the community, and the IDS director has held presentations at technical college campuses, at local industries, and for a regional business / education partnership.  Response to these initiatives has been very positive, with over 100 inquiries regarding the IDS program being made since April 1998.

 

In addition to that, inquiry has begun to establish an exchange agreement with the University of Plymouth in England that will allow our IDS students to work on their degrees there and students from the University of Plymouth to come to Lander to work on their degrees.  The University of Plymouth is the site of the Lander University exchange program in England; it is proving to be a relatively simple matter to work out an IDS exchange agreement with Professor Harry Bennett, the IDS Director there.

 

 

Interim Assessment Summary for Teacher Education

 

Lander University’s School of Education offers baccalaureate programs in Early Childhood Education, Elementary Education and Special Education, and collaborates with other academic units in offering Secondary/K-12 programs.  The M.Ed. in elementary education and MAT in secondary education, with a concentration in art, are offered.  The National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) requires that all teacher education units develop and implement a comprehensive assessment plan.   This plan must include scheduled examination of all teacher education programs, students and faculty.  The plan is broad based and incorporates assessment of knowledge, skills, and dispositions as defined in the unit’s conceptual model.   While various surveys, exams and performance-based observations are used in the evaluation of initial certification and advanced programs, the overall structure of the assessment program is consistent across all teacher education areas.  The disciplinary content for the Secondary/K-12 programs is evaluated chiefly in conjunction with major program assessment, which is reported separately; however, the appropriateness of those programs for teacher education is validated through the PRAXIS II area examinations and student developed portfolios.

 

PRAXIS II

 

The primary means of monitoring the content knowledge of graduates from teacher education programs at Lander is the tracking of scores on professional examinations.  The chart below includes results for the past two years.  Data are collected for each year and reported to the CHE, South Carolina Department of Education and the Federal Government.

 

The following table displays data for the academic years 2000-2001 and 2001-2002.  The statistics displayed in this table are taken from Lander University’s Title II reports for the years indicated.  PRAXIS II reports in the format required by the CHE were submitted and are available at the Commission. 

 

 

 

 

 

	00-01			01-02			Two-year totals
	N of Program Completers Taking Exam	N of Program Completers Passing Exam	% Pass Rate	N of Program Completers Taking Exam	N of Program Completers Passing Exam	% Pass Rate	N of Program Completers Taking Exam	N of Program Completers Passing Exam	% Pass Rate
Type of Assessment