Program: Student Academic Services
Date: Fri Oct 14, 2011 - 11:59:47 pm
1) List your program's student outcomes.
- Throughout their academic career, students can identify and explain their interests, strengths, values, and career/life goals.
- Students can develop and implement an academic and educational plan.
- Students understand how the A&S degree prepares them for success in their personal, academic, and professional lives.
2) Where are your program's student outcomes published? Mark all that apply and include URLs when appropriate.
Program's Website. URL: http://www.advising.hawaii.edu/artsci/pages/academic_services/about.asp Student Handbook. URL, if available online: http://www.advising.hawaii.edu/artsci/docs/Advising%20Handbook%20Ch%201.pdf Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure. URL, if available online: http://www.advising.hawaii.edu/artsci/pages/academic_services/coresheets/docs/BA2011_2012.pdf UHM Catalog. Page Number: http://www.catalog.hawaii.edu/schoolscolleges/arts-sciences/advising.htm
Other: Other: 3) Provide the program's activity map or other graphic that illustrates how program activities/services align with program student outcomes. Please upload it as a PDF.
- File (10/14/2011)
4) For the period June 1, 2010 to September 30, 2011: State the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goals. Include the student outcomes that were targeted, if applicable.
Last year we focused on outcome #2: Students can develop and implement an academic and educational plan.
5) State the type(s) of evidence gathered to answer the assessment question and/or meet the assessment goals that were given in Question 4.
We explored two different assessment methods—administering a longitudinal pre-post questionnaire and using a rubric in a one-on-one advising session. The questionnaire, which asks students to describe their academic and educational interests, goals and plans, was given to incoming freshmen A&S majors during New Student Orientation. We will attempt to administer the post questionnaire during the student’s sophomore/junior year. For the rubric, the advisor scored the student’s academic/educational planning competency on three levels (emerging, developed, and highly developed) across 5 dimensions (goal, academic and co-curricular components, investigation, and reflection) during a “JUMP” sophomore/junior year planning session.
6) State how many persons submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
About 150 questionnaires were collected at the A&S group advising sessions at New Student Orientation and 6 JUMP individual advising sessions were used to test the rubric. Because of personnel changes that occurred in CASSAS, the number of sessions in which the rubric was used was low.
7) Who interpreted or analyzed the evidence that was collected. Check all that apply.
Program faculty/staff Faculty/staff committee Ad hoc faculty/staff group Director or department chairperson Persons or organization outside the university Students (graduate or undergraduate) Dean Other 8) How did he/she/they evaluate, analyze, or interpret the evidence? Check all that apply.
Compiled survey results Used qualitative methods on interview, focus group, open-ended response data Scored exams/tests/quizzes Used a rubric or scoring guide Used professional judgment (no rubric or scoring guide used) External organization/person analyzed data (e.g., Social Science Research Institute) Other: 9) For the assessment questions/goals stated in Question 4, summarize the actual results.
No results can be reported because the post-questionnaire has not yet been administered and too few sessions were scored by the rubric. Also inter-rater reliability needs to be checked among advisors when more rubrics are scored.
10) What was learned from the results?
(see question 11)
11) State how the program used the results or plans to use the results. Please be specific.
(See question11)
12) Reflect on the assessment process. Is there anything related to assessment procedures your program would do differently next time? What went well?
The “pre-“questionnaire was easy to administer at New Student Orientation, but may be more difficult to administer for the “post-“ because of students changing majors out of A&S and leaving UHM. Using the rubric was challenging. The rubric’s multiple dimensions was somewhat cumbersome in an appointment setting. Also the advisor had to come up with prompts to elicit student responses that could be scored by the rubric. However, advisors said that the multiple dimensions of the rubric provided a wider context to view the student’s planning efforts and made for a richer exchange between advisor and student. Some dimensions of the rubric may be collapsed. For the upcoming year, we plan to further test and refine this rubric and to determine the process for the post-questionnaire.
13) Other important information
Besides these learning outcomes, CASSAS uses other assessment measures. See CASSAS website:
http://www.advising.hawaii.edu/artsci/pages/academic_services/stats.asp
Some measures are in the process of being updated for the past academic year.