Unit: Natural Resources & Environmental Management
Program: Natural Resources & Environmental Mgt (BS)
Degree: Bachelor's
Date: Tue Oct 07, 2014 - 4:51:13 pm

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

1. Students value science and scientific evidence in NREM.

2. Students demonstrate what is expected of an entry-level professional working in the field of natural resources and environmental management.

3. Students describe and interpret the theory and application of the linkages among the environment, economics, and society.

4. Students demonstrate the relevance of biological, physical, and social science using analytical and quantitative skills in the context of NREM.

5. Students communicate proficiently in writing and orally to both technical and general audiences in natural and social sciences.

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

Department Website URL: http://www2.ctahr.hawaii.edu/nrem/students/undergrad-assess.html
Student Handbook. URL, if available online:
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online: http://www.manoa.hawaii.edu/ovcaa/programsheets/
UHM Catalog. Page Number:
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online:

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.


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.)

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.

How do you assess mastery of NREM student learning outcomes in your course?

All SLOs were targeted.

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.

Instructor responses were the primary source.

Instructors were also asked to provide course syllabi. The syllabi were used to infer evaluation of course SLOs where instructor answers were missing or incomplete.

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

Seven instructors covering thirteen courses responded.

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)

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)

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

Instructors are using a variety of assessment tools, with class assignments and exams as the primary ones. Grades for these are the primary quantitative indicator. Other tools used include performance in individual or group projects and performance in internships, which is assessed through written assignments and an evaluation of work and personal skills completed by the intern's supervisor.

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

The results will be used for two main purposes.

1. Collect direct evidence of student progress and overall achievement of program SLOs. 

2. Adjust course prerequisites and requirements so that students naturally progress through the SLOs in a step-wise fashion.

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.

Assessing SLO mastery is a diverse and ultimately subjective process that depends upon course content, pedagogical approach, assessment tools used, and of course, the instructor's judgment.

It is also historically true and evident from the assessment that course objectives and SLOs have been formulated with their own purposes in mind and are not ideally aligned with program SLOs. 

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.

For next year, our goals will be

1. To ask instructors to collect and report on actual levels of achievement of mastery of course SLOs.

2. To ask instructors to review their course objectives and SLOs and adjust them to better align with program SLOs.