Coordinator: Moshe Quinn
Assessment Progress
| Stage | 3. Outcome assessment data/results are currently being analyzed and discussed, but no further progress yet. |
|---|---|
| Number of Outcomes | 12 |
| Number of Outcomes Assessed to Date | 3 |
| Assessment and Analysis Frequency | Every year |
Improvements
| Details | The following changes have been made to the course: lecture content, assignment specifications, scheduling, demos, and in-class activities. |
|---|
Assessment and Analysis Review
| Assessment Methods | Student Learning Outcome assessed: • Apply corrective camera movements as they are used in tabletop and architectural photography. Method Used to Assess: • Evaluation of performance on two creative and technical project assignments that together relate directly to SLO components. This Student Learning Outcome can be usefully broken down and evaluated using two separate Categories: 1) Movements as applied to tabletop photography. 2) Movements as applied to architectural photography. Category 1 was directly addressed in Project 4 "Miniature Worlds", which required the following: Manipulate the front standard with tilts/swings in order to change the orientation of the plane of critical focus. Note: if you have a close-up vantage point that you like, but want to raise/lower/shift your perspective, it’s better to move the Rear Standard. This is because of Parallax Error: if you move the Front Standard, that changes your vantage point (coming through the lens) and the spatial relationships of things (foreground-to-background) will also change. Category 2 was directly addressed in Project 3 "Architectural Perspectives", which required the following: 1. Of the 2-3 selected images, submit at least one compelling photograph of an exterior architectural form that involved you inclining the camera to look upwards or downwards (where the monorail isn’t pointing perpendicular to the photographed plane), and where you corrected for perspective to straighten out converging lines. 2. For all images taken, have everything in complete focus. |
|---|---|
| When Was Data Gathered? | The data was gathered when each assignment was evaluated. It was evaluated at the end of the semester, Fall 2014. |
| Discussion Logistics | Data and analysis was shared with Department faculty. |
| Number Assessed | 18 |
| Data and Analysis Summary | The two Categories for this SLO assessment score in about the same way. For Category 1, about 89% of students demonstrated either a Good or Excellent learning outcome. For Category 2, about 83% of students demonstrated either a Good or Excellent learning outcome. This suggests that students were properly prepared by the combination of lesson plans, time frame, lectures, demos and in-class technical exercises. Therefore no changes to the course outline, planning, or content are recommended at this time. |
| Future Improvements | No changes seem necessary for this Student Learning Outcome. |
Future Plans
| Term | Fall 2015 |
|---|---|
| Details | A different SLO will be evaluated for this course. Some SLOs in the current Course Outline of Record are in need of modification. I plan to update the SLOs and present them to the Department for review. Some changes in the course - related to other SLOs - will be made to make the course more current with technology and industry trends. |
Extra
| Details | No answer |
|---|