Unit: Anthropology
Program: Anthropology (BA)
Degree: Bachelor's
Date: Wed Oct 08, 2014 - 11:57:59 am

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

1. Learn to think anthropologically, specifically to include cross-cultural perspectives, especially in regard to issues of diversity and commonality in understanding human societies.

2. Gain a basic understanding of the origin and development of humanity.

3. Develop the ability to think critically about cultural assumptions and use active learning modes in assessing their effects on social processes.

4. Acquire a holistic understanding of how biological evolution and cultural histories interact.

5. Understand how populations adapt to social and environmental change, especially in terms of human empowerment.

6. Become culturally literate with regard to the physical and cultural dimensions of the Pacific and Asian regions, including historical movements and connections among diverse populations.

7. Learn various methods employed by anthropologists from a variety of sub-disciplines and specializations.

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

Department Website URL: http://www.anthropology.hawaii.edu/index.html
Student Handbook. URL, if available online:
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online: http://www.anthropology.hawaii.edu/Programs/Degrees/Bachelor%20of%20Arts/Majoring_Flyer.pdf
UHM Catalog. Page Number:
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online: http://socialsciences.people.hawaii.edu/esyllabi/index.cfm
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.

SKIP

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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.

The program did not complete the planned assessment activities because of other academic and scholarly commitments of the faculty concerned. Our plan at this point is to reassemble the concerned faculty to review the whole assessment process.