Assessment Report Standard Format
July 1, 2009 - June 30, 2010
PROGRAM(S) ASSESSED __Theatre Design/Technology/Stage Management__
ASSESSMENT COORDINATOR _
Pam Knauert Lavarnway______
YEAR __________ of a __________YEAR CYCLE
1. ASSESSMENT MEASURES EMPLOYED
Briefly describe the assessment measures employed during the year.
 What was done?
Assessment measures as stated in the “Program Assessment Plans” for
Design/Technology/Stage Management, such as yearly portfolio reviews, evaluation of
student work on departmental or outside productions/ internships, and communication
with alumni, were employed.
In addition, the area held an ongoing discussion about and evaluation of our curriculum
in preparation for the conversion to semesters. Based on our discussions and informal
conversations with students, we were able to make changes that we believe will
strengthen the Design/Technology/ Stage Management program in the future.
 Who participated in the process?
Faculty and staff of the Design/Technology area.

What challenges (if any) were encountered?
2. ASSESSMENT FINDINGS
List the objectives and outcomes assessed during the year, and briefly describe
the findings for each.
Objectives: “Graduates will achieve:
a. Employment as designers and/or theatre technicians, in the areas of scenery, costumes,
lighting, sound, stage management, scenic art, or properties.
b. Admission to graduate school in theatre design and/or technology.
c. Successful pursuit of related field work, such as work in music industry, interior
design, computer graphics, etc.”
Outcomes: “Students in Design/Technology/Stage Management (BFA) will
demonstrate:
a. High level of competency and responsibility in one or more areas of theatre design
and/or technology and stage management
b. Competency in key leadership role, such as stage management, designing, or
supervising building of mainstage productions.
c. Proficiency in theatre design, theatre technology, or stage management.
d. Knowledge of technical theory, application and craft in their area of focus.
e. Critical thinking and problem solving areas.
f. Knowledge of theatre history and dramatic literature.
g. Skills in integrated drawing, drafting, painting, presentation and
construction skills, as well as knowledge of computer-aided design.
h. Pragmatic understanding of the business side of the design/technology profession.”
Findings:
As a result of our examination of the Design/Technology/Stage Management curriculum,
and comparison with similar programs nationwide, we have been able to create a semestersbased curriculum that preserves the best of our current curriculum while streamlining and
increasing consistency across the 10 concentrations within our program.
Through communication with many of our graduates, it is clear that the vast majority are
pursuing successful careers in theatre design and/or technology with nationally recognized
companies such as Cirque du Soleil, Blue Man Group, La Jolla Playhouse, the Goodman
Theatre, Cincinnati Playhouse in the Park, Indiana Repertory Theatre, the Alley Theatre,
Disney, Carnival Cruiselines, and many others. Recent alums have gone on to top-notch
graduate schools such as Yale, University of Texas at Austin, University of Washington, and
Cincinnati College-Conservatory of Music.
In 2009-2010, 30 of 33 Design/Technology/Stage Management students passed their end-ofthe-year Portfolio Review and were retained in the program (or graduated), indicating to us
that we are meeting the stated outcomes (the other three were placed on probation for review
at the end of this quarter).
The Design/Technology area has discussed two ongoing areas of concern: a trend towards
lower student enrollment in our program, and the College’s decision to fill a vacant
Design/Technology faculty position with a 1-year Faculty Associate for this year and next.
Long-term continuation of either of these situations would be disastrous for our program and
for the department’s ability to produce theatre. Although we are unsure of the reason(s) for
lower enrollment, we have discussed a number of possible ways to reverse this. As for the
vacant faculty position, although we were lucky to find a strong person for the current year
Faculty Associate appointment, we feel it is imperative that the tenure-track position be
restored as soon as feasible. It is vital that we are able to get the best candidates possible for
this core member of the Design/Technology faculty, and a series of 1-year appointments will
insure neither the quality or continuity we need in that position.
3. PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS
List planned or actual changes (if any) to curriculum, teaching methods, facilities,
or services that are in response to the assessment findings.
In planning for conversion to semesters in 2012, we identified several changes we want to
make to strengthen our curriculum and bring us into closer compliance with NAST (National
Association of Schools of Theatre) guidelines. We will be adding an Art History
requirement for all of our students, and we plan to consolidate separate Acting and Directing
classes into one class (TH 1510-Introduction to Performance Process) that will better address
the needs of designers and technicians. In response to feedback from current students as well
as alums, we will be adding Vectorworks training to Computer Graphics I (in addition to
Autocad). Across all 10 of our concentrations we will meet the NAST criteria that “studies
in the major area and supportive courses in theatre” will comprise at least 65% of the
curriculum.
The addition of James Dunlap to the Design/Technology staff has greatly enhanced the
education of our students, particularly in sound design and engineering. The students have
been very enthusiastic about working with and learning from him, and his presence on our
staff is a valuable recruiting tool, especially given increasing numbers of potential students
who are specifically interested in sound design and technology.
With regard to student enrollment, the area believes that improvements to the Department
website, although involving some cost, would pay off in higher numbers of applicants.
Students today are searching for colleges primarily online, and we believe that
Design/Technology students, especially, respond positively to well-designed, “sexy”
websites. Until that happens, we will continue to update and add to our section of the current
Department website.
This fall (2010) we held a “High School Institute for Design/Technology” which had
disappointing registration numbers, especially compared with one we held a few years ago.
We will need to discuss whether this is something we want to try again. The area is also
working to foster relationships with specific high schools with whom we’ve had contact or
from whom we’ve gotten students – we’re hoping this more individual approach might pay
off in number of students applying to the program.
4. ASSESSMENT PLAN COMPLIANCE
Explain deviations from the plan (if any).
The area did not proceed with the planned survey of former students as outlined in last year’s
Assessment Report. In gathering feedback from former students in preparation for designing
the semesters curriculum, it became more efficient and informative (albeit less scientific,
probably) to have personal discussions with several of them (across various concentrations)
in the course of our normal contacts with them over the year.
5. NEW ASSESSMENT DEVELOPMENTS
Describe developments (if any) regarding assessment measures,
communication, faculty or staff involvement, benchmarking, or other
assessment variables.