Annual Assessment Plan Timeline & Actions

Department of Music Education; Petrie School of Music, School of the Arts

A1.
lnLake 8asellne
uaLa
A2.
lnLake 8evlew
81.
lall Mld-1erm
LvenL uaLa
uevelopmenL
82.
lall Mld-1erm
LvenL uaLa
8evlew
C1.
lall Lnd-1erm
uaLa
uevelopmenL
C2.
lall Lnd-1erm
uaLa 8evlew
u1.
Sprlng Mld-
1erm LvenL
uaLa
uevelopmenL
u2.
Sprlng Mld-
1erm LvenL
uaLa 8evlew
L1.
Sprlng Lnd-
1erm uaLa
uevelopmenL
L2.
Sprlng Lnd-
1erm uaLa
8evlew
l.
Annual AssessmenL 8evlew &
8eporL on llndlngs & Acuons
1aken 8ased Cn SLudenL Learnlng
CuLcomes
Annual Assessment Plan Timeline & Actions
Department of Music Education; Petrie School of Music, School of the Arts
SOA Degree Program (Music Education):

A1. Intake Data (Audition, Portfolio Review, Other):
Spring and summer before matriculation
Activity: Admitting Audition, placement tests in music theory and piano
Method of Documentation Used: Audition form, test score for theory, video tape with rubric for piano
Participants: Faculty in the particular performance areas, (winds and percussion, strings, voice, or keyboard), piano faculty and
theory faculty
Responsible Party: Area coordinator, theory faculty, piano faculty
A2. Intake Review (Degree Program Faculty):
Date Of Review: Spring and summer before matriculation
Data Used: Audition scores, theory scores, piano scores
Key Observations: Level of proficiency in chosen performance area and piano, level of proficiency in theory
Actions Taken: Admit, do not admit, or provisionally admit to the Petrie School of Music based on audition, appropriate
placement made in theory and piano classes (potential for exemption of those requirements with high level of proficiency)
Participants: Performance area faculty, Admissions Office, theory and piano faculty
Responsible Party: Director of PSoM Advising, Freshman Advisors
B1. Fall Mid-Term Data Development (Recital, Performance, Exhibition, Portfolio Review, Other):
Date(s):mid to late October
Activity: Performance in chosen performance area, review of academic success
Method of Documentation Used: Observation, grades
Participants: PSoM Faculty,
Responsible Party: Advisors and major performance area teachers, Director of Academic Success
B2. Fall Mid-Term Data Review (Degree Program Faculty, External Reviewer, Accreditation Body, Other)
Date of Review: mid to late October
Data Used: observations, grades, early alert system
Key Observations: performance in chosen performance area, attendance and grades
Actions Taken: informal assessment given to student about progress
Participants: PSoM Faculty, College Faculty
Responsible Party: Advisors, Director of Academic Success, Retention Committee of the College
C1. Fall End-Term Data Development (Intake Report, Fall End Term Report, Surveys, External Reviews, Course Evaluations, Other)
Date(s): Exam week
Activity: Applied music exams, grades, course evaluations
Method of Documentation Used: grade sheets from applied exams, grades for courses
Participants: PSoM Faculty, Advisors
Annual Assessment Plan Timeline & Actions
Department of Music Education; Petrie School of Music, School of the Arts
Responsible Party: Area coordinator

C2. Fall End-Term Data Review (Degree Program Faculty, Guest Faculty, Professional Experts, Institutional Research Office, Other)
Date of Review: Exam week
Data Used: observations from applied music exams, course grades
Key Observations: Assessment of musicianship (junior music education), grades, Ideal Educator Rating (junior music education),
Disposition survey (junior music education), Praxis I results
Actions Taken: Pass or fail performance studies for the semester, decision of whether or not to admit juniors to the education
degree
Participants: Performance area faculty, music education faculty, faculty and staff from the School of Education and Graduate
Studies (juniors)
Responsible Party: Academic advisors
D1. Spring Mid-Term Data Development (Recital, Performance, Exhibition, Portfolio Review, Other):
Date(s): early April
Activity: Advisement sessions for Fall term
Method of Documentation Used: Grades, academic alerts
Participants: PSoM Faculty
Responsible Party: Advisors and major performance area teachers, Director of Academic Success
D2. Spring Mid-Term Data Review (Degree Program Faculty, External Reviewer, Accreditation Body, Other)
Date of Review: April Academic Advisement sessions
Data Used: Grades, academic alerts
Key Observations: progress in coursework, informal assessment in any public performance
Actions Taken: Advisory session with student, written record of any concerns
Participants: Academic advisors
Responsible Party: Academic advisors
E1. Spring End-Term Data Development (Intake Report, Event #1 Report, Surveys, External Review Report, Course Evaluations,
Other)
Date(s): Exam week
Activity: Applied music exams, Sophomore music education surveys, Sophomore Music Education Advisory reviews, Sophomore
barrier juries, course evaluations, Junior mock interviews, grades, Piano VI exams, Intermediate conducting exams
Method of Documentation Used: Applied music exam grade sheets, Rubric for Music Education Advisory results, course
evaluations, rubric for Junior mock interviews, rubric for conducting exam
Participants: Performance area faculty, conducting faculty, applied faculty
Responsible Party: Area coordinators, music education advisors
Annual Assessment Plan Timeline & Actions
Department of Music Education; Petrie School of Music, School of the Arts
E2. Spring End-Term Data Review (Degree Program Faculty, Guest Faculty, Professional Experts, Institutional Research Office,
Other)
Date of Review: Exam week
Data Used: Applied music exam results, results from surveys and reviews
Key Observations: Technical facility on an instrument or voice, musicianship; reports from end-of-term activities
Actions Taken: Determine whether sophomores can advance to the 300 level of applied study, advise sophomores of predicted
success in music education, advise juniors of predicted success in music education, make decision on whether student teaching
experience was successful.
Participants: PSoM Faculty, Faculty and Staff from the School of Education and Graduate Studies
Responsible Party: Program Director for Music Education

F. Annual Assessment Review & Report on Findings & Actions Taken (Degree Program Faculty, Dept/School Faculty, Guest
Faculty, Institutional Research Office, Other)
Date of Review: May
Data Used: Grades, Applied music exam results, Praxis II scores (for seniors and initial certification graduate students)
Key Observations:
Actions Taken:
Curriculum: determine whether adjustments need to be made in the curriculum based on Praxis II scores and applied
music exam results
Staffing: determine whether current staffing is adequate for needs
Facilities: determine whether facilities are adequate for needs
Operations: determine whether budget is adequate for needs
Procedures/Processes: determine whether or not seniors have fulfilled all requirements for state certification
Participants: Music Education Faculty
Responsible Party: Program Director for Music Education