Unit: Geology & Geophysics
Program: Geoscience (MGeo)
Degree: Master's
Date: Tue Oct 07, 2014 - 3:01:05 pm

1) Below are your program's student learning outcomes (SLOs). Please update as needed.

Student Learning Objectives for the MGeo, UHM Dept. of Geology and Geophysics

1. Technical knowledge MGeo graduates are proficient in applying technical knowledge of theory, laboratory methods, field methods, computer applications, and the supporting disciplines (math, physics, chemistry, biology) in solving societally relevant problems in the geosciences.

2. Scientific method (effective and ethical practice) MGeo graduates are able to (a) identify a problem and define set of project goals to address the problem, (b) define a strategy for meeting the goals, (c) successfully execute the strategy in a timely manner, (d) analyze and synthesize the results of their executed strategy, and (d) derive conclusions that help advance future related endeavors. The highest standards of ethical practice are emphasized.

3. Communicate knowledge MGeo graduates are able to effectively communicate the findings of their work in writing at a level comparable to that of a professional report, and defend it orally to the satisfaction of a scientific and professional audience. They are also able to communicate orally about geoscience related work though seminar or conference presentations.

4. Employability/Contributions Post-Graduation MGeo graduates have acquired the knowledge and skills needed to pursue employment or other activities in the geoscience related fields.

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

Department Website URL:
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 for Fall 2014 are listed: http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/GG/academics/gg_syllabi.html
Other: All this work remains to be completed.
Other: This is a recently approved program, and we have waited to post SLOs until approval of the program.

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.

The MGeo is a brand new program, so we have not yet begun assessing the students.  We have, however, begun to proactively assess the program once we heard it was to be approved.  On September 11, 2013 the department hosted a dinner for about 30 working professionals and about 10 members of the department to get direct feedback on the program, including its required internship.

In addition, the department has re-instituted its engineering geology class (GG454).  This writing-intensive class has received UH approval and will be offered this coming spring.  The department has contacted the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering (CEE) so that GG454 can be listed as satisfying an undergraduate CEE requirement to encourage CEE students to enroll in the course.  GG454 will be offered this coming spring.

The department also is the process of developing an upper-division course in continuum mechanics for Earth and environmental scientists that will support the MGeo program and help prepare undergraduates to enter into the program.

The first two students have been admitted to the MGeo program this term.

These actions directly or indirectly bear on all the SLOs for the MGeo program.

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.

The department solicited and received verbal feedback from the professional community on course offerings and internships at the dinner of September 11, 2013.

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

About 30 people in the professional community, and approximately 10 faculty members have provided feedback (verbal and/or written responses) on the fledgling program, for a total of about 40 people.

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.

See answers to question #6.

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

We have used the assessment information to (a) improve our plans for the MGeo internships, and (b) develop new classes.  See also the answers to question #6.

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.

The work done to set up the MGeo program seems to be paying off.  We have two students now and have offered a third student acceptance to the program.  The feedback from the professional community has been positive.  Some new useful classes have been approved or are pending.  The program appears to be off to a good start.

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.

With regard to question #4, all graduate courses for Fall of 2014 for which syllabi are appropriate have syllabi posted.  The response to question #4 gives the percentage of all graduate courses on the books that have syllabi posted.