Pooled papers are presented to outside evaluators. Using the same 5-point scale described above, they do an evaluation of each paper, scoring and commenting within a series of five knowledge and skill categories based on art history knowledge and skill goals. They also comment on the overall quality of each paper and write a summary report on the overall quality of the pooled papers with recommendations to guide ongoing development of the art history program, curriculum and assessment process. This is consistent with averaged scores for the year 1995-1996 in these same categories. It is noted that 1996-1997 evaluators commented on the vagueness of this concept, which may affect the scores in this assessment category.
Evaluators comment that writing skills are a problem.
Evaluators over the past two years have made statments about other aspects of the papers read. In 1995-1996 evaluators thought that papers reflected an understanding of the relation of art to its social and cultural context and that such an understanding comes about only through the influence of teachers in the classroom. Visual analysis seemed strong in the 1995-96 papers while difficulty in supporting an academic argument with evidence was a weakness. In addition to the external evaluation of student work in the studio art and art history areas, beginning in 1992-1993, a survey has solicited direct feedback about students' educational experiences. Over the years, students feel that their strongest abilities are their originality, their ability to express their ideas clearly and the development of a personal style.