Unit: Asian Studies
Program: Asian Studies (BA)
Degree: Bachelor's
Date: Mon Oct 06, 2014 - 3:58:31 pm

1) Institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs) and Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs)

1. Possess basic skills in at least 1 Asian language by demonstrating intermediate level proficiency in reading, writing, and speakingStudents possess basic skills in at least 1 Asian language. Demonstrate college-level fluency in reading, writing, speaking at basic and intermediate levels.

(1a. General education)

2. Students can demonstrate a basic understanding of the interrelationship of economy, politics, literature, religion, the arts, history of Asian countries. Demonstrate an understanding of major themes in Asian history and cultural development. Be able to explain how Asian Studies is constituted in the West. Be able to explain the ways in which global forces have interacted with the Asian regional context in shaping the character and course of societies in Asia today.

(1a. General education, 1b. Specialized study in an academic field)

3. Students can demonstrate an advanced understanding of two Asian countries or regions (example Southeast Asia) Be able to explain Asian world views Be able to explain intra-Asian as well as West vs Asia differences Be able to analyze and interpret specific issues in research projects

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture)

4. Students can find and evaluate sources of information about Asia Be able to use the library to find appropriate sources of information for a research project Be able to evaluate the probable quality sources found on the web

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 2b. Conduct research, 2c. Communicate and report)

5. Students conduct and communicate research findings Be able to outline, organize and present a research project Be able to design and deliver a presentation that communicates key findings of their research

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 2b. Conduct research, 2c. Communicate and report)

6. Students gain a greater appreciation of the variety of human experience. Make students open to different and creative ways of seeing the world. Foster a spirit of inquiry so that received mainstream knowledge is never accepted uncritically.

(1a. General education, 1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 2c. Communicate and report, 3a. Continuous learning and personal growth, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture)

7.

2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.

Department Website URL: http://manoa.hawaii.edu/asianstudies/?page_id=58#learning%20objectives
Student Handbook. URL, if available online:
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online:
UHM Catalog. Page Number:
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online: Course syllabi available in departmental office.
Other:
Other:

3) Select one option:

Curriculum Map File(s) from 2014:

4) For your program, the percentage of courses that have course SLOs explicitly stated on the syllabus, a website, or other publicly available document is as follows. Please update as needed.

0%
1-50%
51-80%
81-99%
100%

5) Did your program engage in any program assessment activities between June 1, 2013 and September 30, 2014? (e.g., establishing/revising outcomes, aligning the curriculum to outcomes, collecting evidence, interpreting evidence, using results, revising the assessment plan, creating surveys or tests, etc.)

Yes
No (skip to question 14)

6) For the period between June 1, 2013 and September 30, 2014: State the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goals. Include the SLOs that were targeted, if applicable.

1.   Are our course SLOs in line with out program SLOs?

2.   Does our grading criteria reflect attainment of SLOs?

3.   Does our course progression reinforce our ability to attain program SLOs?

7) State the type(s) of evidence gathered to answer the assessment question and/or meet the assessment goals that were given in Question #6.

1.  Asian Studies course syllabi were reviewed by the departmental chair, curriculum committee and academic advisor to see if courses met stated program SLOs.  Some professors were asked to review their syllabus restate course goals to reflect programatic SLOs.

2.  Professors were asked to evaluate their grading criteria and assess whether student grades reflected attainment of SLOs.  A template was created to provide uniformity in the evaluation of grading criteria.

3.   Student class evaluations were reviewed and student comments were evaluated alongside the professors assessment of class performance.

4.  Exit interviews with graduating students.

8) State how many persons submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.

The sample size for student evaluations was 547 students enrolled in ASAN classes during the assessment period.  Student comments and rankings were matched and reviewed alongside the professors assessment of class performance.

Twelve Asian Studies faculty and Center directors who taught undergraduate classes during the assessment period evaluated their class performance and grading criteria in terms of meeting stated SLOs.  A template was created to chart the percentage of students who met the stated SLOs  as reflected by the grading curve.

Professors were then asked to evaluate perceived strengths and weaknesses they observed in their classes and how the Asian Studies curriculum could be improved to address shortfalls in student achievement. 

 

9) Who interpreted or analyzed the evidence that was collected? (Check all that apply.)

Course instructor(s)
Faculty committee
Ad hoc faculty group
Department chairperson
Persons or organization outside the university
Faculty advisor
Advisors (in student support services)
Students (graduate or undergraduate)
Dean/Director
Other:

10) How did they evaluate, analyze, or interpret the evidence? (Check all that apply.)

Used a rubric or scoring guide
Scored exams/tests/quizzes
Used professional judgment (no rubric or scoring guide used)
Compiled survey results
Used qualitative methods on interview, focus group, open-ended response data
External organization/person analyzed data (e.g., external organization administered and scored the nursing licensing exam)
Other:

11) For the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goal(s) stated in Question #6:
Summarize the actual results.

The majority of Asian Studies instructors felt their grading criteria reflected accurately the students attainment of stated course SLOs.  A review of grading criteria also resulted in a re-examination of course SLOs  and whether they mirrored program SLOs  with some instructors making adjustments to their course SLOs to more closely reflect the program SLOs.

Student evaluations of instructor performance and course relevance were in line with the instructors evaluation of class performance and grading curve.

An examination of both instructor and student evaluations revealed a need to provide a stronger course progression foundation. Students who took the pre-req ASAN 201 and 202 then proceeded to the 300/400 level classes had more success in these classes with the instructor spending less time providing background material that the student should have covered in the earlier classes.  The assessment also revealed that it was necessary for Asian Studies majors to take  both ASAN 310 a humanities based course and ASAN 312 a social sciences based course rather then either/or in order to successfully complete the upper division topics based courses.  The change in major requirements to require both ASAN 310 and ASAN 312 will be instituted in AY 2015/2016.

A review of the program SLOs in conjunction with the Institutional Learning Outcomes(ILO) revealed a need to review program goals.

 

12) State how the program used the results or plans to use the results. Please be specific.

1.  ASAN 201/202 and ASAN 310/312 are pre-reqs for the upper division ASAN courses and the pre-reqs for the upper division courses are more closely reviewed before instructors provide student overrides.

2.  A review of the course curriculums for both ASAN 310 and ASAN 312 were reviewed to insure they provided a course progression from ASAN 201/202.

3.  Instructors have been asked to review their course syllabi and stated SLOs in keeping with program SLOs.

4.  A standardized template was created to help instructors evaluate class performance and grading criteria.

 

13) Beyond the results, were there additional conclusions or discoveries?
This can include insights about assessment procedures, teaching and learning, program aspects and so on.

1.  The assessment process generated discussions on how to more closely engage students in program goals.

2.   Revealed weaknesses in student academic skills and how to address those weaknesses by adjusting course curriculum.  Major requirements were adjusted to require both ASAN 310 and ASAN 312 rather then ASAN 310 or ASAN 312.  The change in curriculum will be instituted for AY 2015/2016.

3.   An evaluation rubric will be created for grading purposes in Spring 2015.

14) If the program did not engage in assessment activities, please explain.
Or, if the program did engage in assessment activities, please add any other important information here.