I. Introduction Assessment Plan for M.A. in Musicology School of Music, College of Fine Arts

I. Introduction Assessment Plan for M.A. in Musicology School of Music, College of Fine Arts Unit Mission Statement: First, the Division of Musicology and Ethnomusicology seeks to foster learning and scholarship among its faculty and students. Second, the division fills a service role for students and faculty in the School of Music whose concentration is an area of study other than musicology or ethnomusicology, for the university at large, and for the Commonwealth. Basic Assessment Approach: Assess all outcomes within a three-year cycle, using direct and indirect methods. Please see the attached Curriculum Map and Artifact Map. Definition of Key Terms: Assessment: A strategy for understanding, confirming, and improving student learning through a continuous, systematic process. Curriculum Map: A visual depiction of how learning outcomes and/or professional standards are translated into individual courses taught within a program Learning Outcomes: Statements of learning expectations. Indirect Evidence: Data from which you can make inferences about learning but do not demonstrate actual learning, such as perception or comparison data. Includes, but is not limited to: surveys, focus groups, exit interviews, grades, and institutional performance indicators. Direct Evidence: Students show achievement of learning goals through performance of knowledge and skills. Includes, but is not limited to: capstone experiences, score gains between entry and exit, portfolios, and substantial course assignments that require performance of learning. NASM: National Association of Schools of Music. The accrediting agency for the School of Music 2. Assessment Oversight, Resources

The Coordinator of the Division of Musicology and Ethnomusicology will act as assessment coordinator who will forward the results to the College of Fine Arts Assessment Coordinator. It is the responsibility of the Coordinator to monitor the activities of assessment that occur in the program. The Coordinator will lead the assessment conversation held each fall and will write the assessment report due to the university on October 31st. Subsequently, the Coordinator will engage the Division in conversation leading to updating the Assessment plan and/or Student Learning Outcomes as appropriate. 3. Program-Level Learning Outcomes Outcome #: 1 Students will acquire and develop foundational and comprehensive knowledge of the disciplines of musicology and ethnomusicology. This is in conformance with NASM standards for accreditation. The doctoral degree program in musicology or ethnomusicology emphasizes the scholarly study of music and its relationship with other fields.competencies include an understanding of the theories and methodologies of musicology and/or ethnomusicology; bibliography, research, and analytic techniques; reading ability in appropriate foreign languages; and writing skills. Outcome #2: Students will acquire and develop appropriate research tools to conduct secondary library source searches, and primary archival, electronic, and field work investigation leading to completion of the doctoral dissertation. This complies with NASM accreditation. The doctoral degree program in musicology or ethnomusicology emphasizes the scholarly study of music and its relationship with other fields.competencies include an understanding of the theories and methodologies of musicology and/or ethnomusicology; bibliography, research, and analytic techniques; reading ability in appropriate foreign languages; and writing skills. Outcome #3: Students will acquire and increase facility in making critical assessments, organizing and synthesizing knowledge, and communicating clearly through written and oral modalities. This is in conformance with NASM standards for accreditation.

The doctoral degree program in musicology or ethnomusicology emphasizes the scholarly study of music and its relationship with other fields.competencies include an understanding of the theories and methodologies of musicology and/or ethnomusicology; bibliography, research, and analytic techniques; reading ability in appropriate foreign languages; and writing skills. The ability to speak and write cogently is critical for all professional musicians. 4. Curriculum Map I=introduce, R=reinforce, E= emphasize COURSE CORE DISCIPLINARY COURSE SLO1 SLO2 SLO3 MUS 618 - I, E - ELECTIVE COURSEWORK MUS 501 I R E MUS 502 I R E MUS 503 I R E MUS 504 I R E MUS 505 I R E MUS 506 I R E MUS 622 I R E MUS 623 I R E MUS 624 I R E MUS 627 I R E MUS 690 I,E E E

MUS 702 I,E E E MUS 703 I E E MUS 710 I E,R E MUS 711 I E,R E,R OTHER STUDIES IN MUSIC MUS 670 - - R MUS 671 - - R MUS 672 - - R MUS 673 - - R MUS 674 - - R MUS 677 - - R MUS 678 - - R MUS 672 - - R MUS 622 - - R MUS 719 I I, E E 5. Assessment Methods and Measures Direct Methods: Placement/Entrance Examinations in Music History and Music Theory taken in application for admission to the program. Examinations in most courses except seminars, special topic and independent study courses. Written Term Papers in Musicology/Ethnomusicology courses

Oral Examination in Music History Oral Defense of MA Thesis Indirect Methods: Grades: Only the grade of a B or higher is acceptable GPA: An acceptable GPA (defined as 3.5 or higher) must be maintained in order to retain funding support. Progress in the is reviewed annually at the end of the spring semester. program Matriculation Rates: Comparison of those students taking the Entrance/Placement Examinations and who are admitted to the program. Most students are now encouraged to apply to the Ph.D. program in Musicology and Ethnomusicology that includes both the M.A. and Ph.D. 6. Data Collection and Review Assessment is made at three levels: the Entrance/Placement Admission Examination, the Intermediate Level of grades received for three semesters of coursework in musicology and theory, and at the Exit the oral history examination combined with submission and defense of the master s thesis. The Entrance and Placement Examination is structured according to the three Student Learning Objectives: 1) Section one tests acquisition of foundational and comprehensive knowledge of the discipline of musicology through the ability to listen to musical examples and analyze them according to composers, era, composition, and stylistic analysis. Sections two and three test foundational and comprehensive knowledge of the discipline of musicology by asking questions concerning composers, terms, eras, and compositions. The Intermediate stage of assessment consists of grades earned in three semesters of coursework. All three SLOs are addressed in regular coursework, though MUS 618 (Research Methods) is focused squarely on SLO #2. The Division of Musicology and Ethnomusicology assessed that students moved through coursework with fluidity in 1/1/2-2 years, but were often taking an excessive amount of time to research, write, and submit the master s thesis. There was no Graduate School-mandated

deadline for submission of a thesis following coursework completion. Further, there was no residency requirement coupled with tuition payment to incentivize timely thesis completion. Consequently the Division inaugurated a blended program that incorporated both the M.A. and Ph.D. programs in an accelerated course of study. The stand alone M.A. option continues to exist as a seldom-used option designed to prepare students at the graduate level who wish to continue doctoral work elsewhere. The final level of assessment consists of the defense of the thesis and submission of the final document. Master s All three Student Learning Outcomes culminate in the successful oral defense of the thesis and the acceptance of the written form of the thesis. Overall assessment of the program is predicated on comparison of examination scores at each level and graduation rate of students entering the program. External success of the program is measured by acceptance rate and quality of doctoral programs to which our M.A. graduates apply for admission. 7. Assessment Cycle and Data Analysis Assessment of student learning takes place throughout the program and occurs in all courses and requirements. Program faculty will be asked to maintain records of course-level assessment. Program-level assessment data will only be gathered at summative points in the curriculum (placement/entrance examination and culminating thesis defense). The program will follow a variable multi-year assessment cycle with all three outcomes assessed at various points of the cycle. Generally, the Placement Exam is assessed upon admission, coursework is continuously assessed in years one through two, and the thesis is assessed when research and thesis are completed and the thesis is submitted for the final oral defense. All students must be evaluated for course purposes. Therefore, all student data will be gathered for the purpose of program assessment. No samples of data will be taken for normal, regularly scheduled assessment. Results will be analyzed and interpreted at a Divisional meeting held in September of each year. Assessment reports will be

completed no later than October 1 st of every year and turned in to the College of Fine Arts assessment coordinator for review. Final reports will be disseminated to the university s assessment office no later than October 31 st of every year. Assessment Cycle by SLO and Year for incoming cohort (2015-2016) 2015-2016 Entrance and Placement Exam assesses SLO 1, 2, 3 Course grades for first year of coursework assess SLOs 1,2, & 3. MUS 618 is addressed in SLO #2 2016-2017 Course grades for second year of coursework assesses SLO 1,2,3 2017- Defense of Thesis assesses SLO 1,2,3. Note: the year of the final assessment of student progress is variable, based on completion of research and writing leading to the completion of the thesis. 8. Teaching Effectiveness All instructors will use the University Teacher Course Evaluation (TCE) process to be evaluated by their students each semester. Each instructor will complete a self-reflective statement as part of the Teaching Portfolio submitted bi-annually in the case of senior faculty, and annually in the case of junior faculty. The reflective statement should include areas of improvement. The Director of the School of Music and Coordinator of the Division of Musicology and ethnomusicology will review the TCE results and the Teaching Portfolio reflective statements, and provide constructive comments to the instructor. 9. What are the plans to evaluate students post-graduate success? The Division of Musicology maintains a current website devoted to Recent Accomplishments by Musicology Students, and Recent M.A. Theses. The Division will retain currency of this web site. In addition it will look at data provided by the Alumni Survey and will collaborate with the School of Music and the Office of Institutional Research to look at other possible methods. The Division will consider creation and implementation of an Exit Survey to be disseminated to students upon graduation with a possible follow-up survey sent five years following graduation.

10 Appendices: Appendix Item #1 Description of the Music History/Literature entrance/placement Examination MUSIC HISTORY AND LITERATURE EXAM This exam tests knowledge of music literature, historical periods, styles, composers, and pieces through aural and written test questions. For the aural test, a number of brief excerpts are played, and you are asked to provide information on each excerpt, such as its historical period, a possible composer, the type of piece it is (e.g., symphony, sonata, opera, etc.), and an approximation of when the piece might have been written. The written exam asks for knowledge of important pieces in music literature, important composers, music terminology, and important stylistic and historic periods and genres. Suggested sources for review: Grout and Palisca; A History of Western Music (W.W. Norton) Stolba; The Development of Western Music: A History (W.C. Brown) Pen; Introduction to Music (McGraw-Hill) Additional Appendix Note Note: There are no grade sheets or rubrics for the M.A. Thesis Defense. Decisions at this level are made by discussion and vote by the Graduate Advisory Committee following guidelines provided by the Graduate School.