Departmental Assessment Update - Languages, Linguistics and Literature Report

Department: English
Program: M.A. and Ph.D.
Level: Graduate

1. Has your program developed learning outcomes? If yes, please list.

Yes. The English Department offers both the M.A. and the Ph.D. degrees. We currently have about 120 graduate students, about 75 in the Masters Program and 45 in the Ph.D. program. While students in these two programs take many of their classes together, the two programs have different expectations and SLOs. The M.A. program is designed to give students a broad overview of the changing field of contemporary English Studies while also allowing them to work within an area of concentration of their own choice: Literary Studies in English, Composition and Rhetoric, Cultural Studies in Asia/Pacific, or Creative Writing. Students take courses both within and outside their concentration. M.A. students explore the ways in which methodologies and assumptions are evolving in their own area of interest and how each part of English studies is being affected by developments taking place throughout the discipline. Students who concentrate in Literary Studies in English, Composition and Rhetoric, or Cultural Studies in Asia/Pacific complete a Master’s project, in which they apply the theoretical and methodological perspectives of more than a single course to the study of a particular group of texts or other forms of cultural production or to a particular theoretical problem. Students in Creative Writing complete their M.A. with a creative thesis, which they are then asked to place, in their oral thesis defense, within the context of other works in the same genre. The Ph.D. program is intended for highly motivated students who have a clear sense of direction and are likely to contribute significantly to the field. Ph.D. candidates are given a great deal of freedom to create an individualized program around their own interests and objectives. Students are required to take a small number of courses, both within the department and outside of it, but the focus of their study is determined by the students themselves in consultation with their advisors, and their preparation for their area examinations in three fields takes place largely outside of class. The three principal formal requirements are the area exams, the prospectus, and the dissertation.defense, which is open to the public. The doctoral program prepares students to become professionals in the field. Candidates completing the program should have the skills and experience to function as critics, scholars, and writers in an area associated with the profession of English.

2. If your program has learning outcomes, where are they published (e.g., department web page)?

An online version of the expectations and learning outcomes for our M.A. and Ph.D. students is available on our department website: www.english.hawaii.edu on the Graduate Program page. Learning outcomes also appear in the UHM 2008-2009 Catalog.

3. Do your faculty list course learning outcomes on their syllabi?

Graduate faculty are encouraged to list SLOs on their syllabi.

4. Does your program have a curriculum map that links course outcomes to program outcomes? If so, please include.

We do not have a curriculum map that links graduate course outcomes to program outcomes. We do have a well-articulated roadmap of required courses through which students proceed to prepare them for completing their projects, theses, or dissertations. To prepare methodologically, all M.A. students take two required courses. The first, English 620 (The Profession of English) introduces students to the methods and questions germane to postgraduate study and to the historical development and current issues in the field. Students must also take at least one of the 625 alpha courses, which give them an overview of theory and specific methods as well as the critical problems and vocabularies of a given concentration. M.A. students take other courses both within and outside their concentration (Literary Studies in English, Composition and Rhetoric, Cultural Studies in Asia/Pacific, Creative Writing) that enable them to explore the ways in which methodologies and assumptions are evolving in their own area of interest and how each part of English Studies is being affected by developments taking place throughout the discipline. Students in Creative Writing complete their M.A. with a creative thesis, which they are then asked to place, in their oral thesis defense, within the context of other works in the same genre. Students in the other three concentrations complete a Master’s project, in which they apply the theoretical and methodological perspectives of more than a single course to the study of a particular group of texts, to other forms of cultural production, or to a particular theoretical problem. Ph.D. candidates must take the following to ensure that the SLOs are met: 1. At least seven graduate-level courses in the Department of English; 2. At least two courses, normally at the 400-level or above, in a field outside of English but related to the student's research interests (students who have completed a graduate degree or who have done extensive work in a field outside of English may be considered to have fulfilled this requirement); 3. One course with substantial content in Asia/Pacific, to be fulfilled at the 400-, 600-, or 700-level, in or out of the English Department, while in residence at UH Mânoa. At least two of these nine courses [seven in our program, two out] must relate to the intended or likely subjects of the student’s dissertation. Also, at least two of these nine courses (not necessarily the same as those relating to the dissertation) should bear directly upon the choice of each of their three area examination subjects. (One course can serve for more than one area exam.) On the area exam proposal, students list the two or more courses that bear directly upon each of their area exam topics.

5. Does your program benchmark or have goals for student performance? (e.g. 70% students will graduate within 5 years)

We do not have specific benchmarks for student performance, partly because the expectations for M.A. and Ph.D. students differ and because we have four different M.A. concentrations and a highly individualized Ph.D. program. The progress of all students is monitored by the Graduate Chair annually through course grades and progress in the program; by the Associate Chair through student course evaluations and faculty review of teaching and instructional assistance; and by the Director of Composition and Rhetoric for graduate student mentoring and tutoring. M.A. students must obtain approval for a Master’s project from research conducted in at least two different courses in the program or obtain approval for and successfully develop a creative writing thesis. All M.A. candidates must write and defend orally either a written Project or Thesis evaluated by a committee of three faculty members and revise their work, if necessary, to meet the professional expectations of the committee. Successful Ph.D. student performance requires positive outcome on area exams, approval of dissertation prospectus, and ability to teach courses in their areas of specialization. Ph.D. candidates are required to take (and pass) three area exams, evaluated by a committee of 4-7 faculty members. These exams have a substantive written component, followed by an oral exam. Once all three exams are passed, Ph.D. candidates must prepare a written dissertation prospectus and must have it approved after a 90-minute colloquium with the candidate’s dissertation committee, which must include at least five faculty members, at least one from a field other than English. The final evidence for achieving student outcomes is a 90-minute oral defense of the completed written dissertation before the student’s dissertation committee. Ph.D. candidates may be required by their committees to take any of their exams again or to revise either prospectus or dissertation if their work is unacceptable to their committees. As noted above, the Department uses student course evaluations and faculty review of courses for Ph.D. teaching assistants and M.A. candidates providing instructional assistance to evaluate M.A. and Ph.D. candidate work in the classroom. Instruction, training, and successful practice by graduate teaching assistants is one of the most important student learning and pre-professionalization outcomes of our Ph.D. program.

6. Other than GPA, what data/evidence is used to determine that graduates have achieved stated outcomes for the degree? (i.e. capstone project, class assignment)

The Department engages in continual, selected assessment activities on an annual basis, with foci determined by the Graduate Program Committee and the Assessment Committee, which was established in 2002. A comprehensive assessment of the graduate program outcomes was a Spring 2004 Graduate Program survey, devised and distributed by the Department's Assessment Committee in Spring 2004 to faculty, graduate students, and alumni (211 total). The survey comprised 12 questions allowing for quantitative data analysis (1-5 scale) and for qualitative analysis based on written comments. The results measured students’, faculty’s and alumni’s perceptions of and experience with the Graduate Program in relation to its goals and means. We examined the 80 surveys that were filled out--a 37.91% response rate. The data showed 79-90% positive responses as to whether or not the Ph.D. and M.A. programs in the English Department fulfilled their stated goals. Discussion of weaker areas took place in 2004-2005 on the Assessment Committee and was extended to include graduate faculty and graduate students at separated meetings. The Assessment Committee made recommendations to the Graduate Program Committee in May 2005 and in November 2005, the Department voted to approve proposed changes concerning: 1) the articulation of area exams with course work; 2) articulation of common learning goals for courses introducing students to M.A. concentrations; 3) possible plagiarism on area exams; and 4) career placement. Since then, we have implemented workshops for preparing conference abstracts and academic job applications. Beyond this major re-evaluation and adjustment of the graduate program, the Graduate Program Committee (GPC) annually reviews our M.A. and Ph.D. programs and provides recommendations for changes that must be discussed and then voted on for implementation by the faculty at large. To cite one example, following listening sessions in 2006 with graduate students in our program who are concentrating on Creative Writing and expressed interest in building stronger foundations to their training, the Graduate Program Committee proposed the introduction of a new graduate-level introductory course, English 610 (“Elements of Creative Writing”), focused on the form and theory of creative writing. The course was approved by the Department at large in 2007 and is being taught for the first time in this academic year. Unlike the Undergraduate Program, the Graduate Program has not heretofore used an exit survey to provide indirect assessment of graduating M.A. and Ph.D. student evaluation of the program. Such a survey will be included in the College-wide LLL digital exit survey that is currently under construction and will be available for our graduates next spring. This will allow us to monitor our graduates’ satisfaction with the program annually in response to Department-specific and more general LLL M.A. and Ph.D. graduate questions. For further explanation of the survey, see #6 in the 2008 Undergraduate Program assessment report.

7. Who interprets the evidence of student learning?

Student learning, which includes instructional effectiveness and professional development as well as graduate student course and exam outcomes, is interpreted by the relevant faculty project, thesis, prospectus, and dissertation committees for M.A. and Ph.D. candidates and by the Associate Chair, in consultation with the Graduate Director, for instructional work. In addition, the Graduate Chair organizes numerous workshops and reviews the progress of each student in our two programs annually.

8. How are the assessment data/results used to inform decisions concerning the curriculum and administration of the program?

As illustrated in #6 above, the Graduate Program undergoes continual, selective review and changes in curriculum, student requirements and expectations, while encouraging, facilitating, and monitoring student professionalization. The Assessment Committee and Graduate Program Committee work together to come up with recommendations for improvement and implementation of those recommendations. Graduate students serve on all Department Program Committees, providing feedback and recommendations, with two students, an M..A. and a Ph.D. Representative, on both the GPC and the Policy Committee.

9. What attempts are made to monitor students’ postgraduate professional activities?

Monitoring, recording, updating, and publicizing its students’ postgraduate professional trajectories is one of the Graduate Program’s most important priorities. Unfortunately, we do not currently have either the technical or secretarial resources to fulfill this need as well as we would should—as noted in the undergraduate program review, the English Department badly needs an APT to help digitalize both programs and monitor student progress before, during, and after their time at UHM. Nonetheless, important improvements in this area have been made since 2007 through the annual publication of an electronic Department journal, Tradewinds, which encourages our M.A. and Ph.D. students to submit and share updates about their careers (employment positions, awards and honors, publications) with the rest of the Department. Most of our M.A. students pursue their degrees either to further credentialize themselves as educational professionals in public or private schools, to teach in the UH System Community Colleges, or to gain admittance to Ph.D. programs. Our Ph.D. students have a 100% employment record, mostly in colleges and universities throughout the United States, internationally (e.g., Kenya, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, and Japan in the last several years), or here on O‘ahu. Documenting the level and varieties of success of our graduates requires and will receive greater investment by the Department, but it will also require financial and/or technical assistance to supplement our own limited resources.