Unit: Communications
Program: Communication (BA)
Degree: Bachelor's
Date: Thu Oct 09, 2014 - 3:06:34 pm

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

1. Design communication and media projects to make meaningful contributions to diverse social, professional or academic communities, communicating effectively orally, in writing, and through digital media.

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

2. Reflect critically on communication products such as media productions, research and policy reports and everyday texts.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2a. Think critically and creatively)

3. Demonstrate preparedness for academic and professional careers in communication.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 3a. Continuous learning and personal growth)

4. Demonstrate global awareness, including an awareness of cultures in the Hawaii-Pacific region and issues related to cross-cultural communication.

(1a. General education, 1c. Understand Hawaiian culture and history, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture)

5. Engage in collaborative problem solving, both face-to-face and in online environments.

(1a. General education)

6. Analyze the ethical dimensions of communication.

(1a. General education, 2a. Think critically and creatively)

7. Critically evaluate the use of technology in communication.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2a. Think critically and creatively)

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

Department Website URL: http://www.communications.hawaii.edu/com/index.html
Student Handbook. URL, if available online:
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online: NA
UHM Catalog. Page Number: 108
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online: http://socialsciences.people.hawaii.edu/esyllabi/index.cfm
Other: Many faculty post syllabi on their own UHM websites
Other: Department website --http://www.communications.hawaii.edu/com/index.html

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.

This year, we took a different approach (although we plan to resume the overall program assessment in 2015). The Media Arts track, in consultation with the School's Chairman, decided to create a separate set of track SLOs and a separate assessment process to assess these track-specific 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.

The faculty member leading the track-specific process recommended collecting and selecting the best student work.

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

No evidence has been collected at the time of this report.

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.

No results at the time of this report.

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

Faculty in the track are motivated to create a specific assessment process for the track. We will look at the alignment between track SLOs and Program SLOs.

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.

How can we integrate the track-specific evaluation into the ongoing program assessment process? How can we use the track-specific evaluation to improve teaching and learning?

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.

Civic engagement has not been a formally assessed part of the Communication Department's curriculum  in the past, but a recent internal evaluation has  revealed it to be an important aspect of our faculty's  teaching. Taking an official position on the teaching of civic engagement would enhance the curriculum. The students, more importantly, would benefit from new competencies and gain an awareness of issues of public concern that are essential to sound democratic governance. 
Using twenty-eight student portfolios for the ICTs & Policy capstone course, we assessed civic engagement with a rubric created by the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U). The AAC&U rubric consists of six categories of assessment. If a student's work exhibits a measurable level of civic engagement, their performance is divided into four ranks: Benchmark, lesser Milestone, greater Milestone, and Capstone. While all six categories informed our evaluation, two proved to be particularly useful, Civic Communication and Civic Action and Reflection. 
Almost half of the students demonstrated some level of civic engagement in their portfolio.


Not meeting the benchmark

Benchmark 1








Total meeting benchmark and above

Civic Communication






14 (50%)

Civic Action and Reflection






13 (46%)

We have proposed a new SLO: Demonstrate participation in civic engagement activities.  

We have modified our curriculum map and also found that there are gaps. Due to limited resources, we are postponing the formal addition of this SLO. However, we are encouraging related activities throughout the curriculum.