Program: Educational Psychology (PhD)
Degree: Doctorate
Date: Fri Oct 31, 2014 - 11:39:34 am
1) Below are your program's student learning outcomes (SLOs). Please update as needed.
1. Educational Psychology graduate students are knowledgeable about learning and development, inquiry methods, and student assessment.
2. Educational Psychology graduate students have inquiry skills to conduct scholarly research effectively.
3. Educational Psychology graduate students present scholarly research effectively.
4. Educational Psychology graduate students model the ethical treatment of research participants.
2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.
Department Website URL: https://coe.hawaii.edu/academics/educational-psychology 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: Other: Other: 3) Select one option:
- File (03/16/2020)
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 program faculty wanted to know whether candidates:
1. Were knowledgeable about learning and development, inquiry methods, and student assessment (SLO 1).
2. Had the inquiry skills to conduct scholarly research effectively (SLO 2).
3. Could present scholarly research effectively (SLO 3).
4. Modeled the ethical treatment of research participants (SLO 4).
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.
We collected candidates’ proposals and final dissertations and analyzed the literature reviews and methods sections of those documents. We also collected information on whether or not students had passed an online ethics course by the National Institutes of Health (for students who entered the program before fall 2012) or the Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI) Program for the Protection of Human Research Subjects (for students who entered the program in fall 2012 or later).
8) State how many persons submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
Evidence was submitted by five students, the entire population of students who defended their dissertation during the reporting period.
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.
1.Were knowledgable about learning and development, inquiry methods, and student assessment (SLO1).
Overall, students were rated exemplary for almost all indicators that were assessed. They scored highly on aspects of their dissertation proposal, paper, and presentation.
2. Had the inquiry skills to conduct scholarly research effectively (SLO 2).
When evaluating the method section of the dissertations we see that 100% of students earned the highest ranking, of exemplary, for all categories in our rubric.
Students also earned high ratings for the literature review section of their dissertation. As a group they achieved 100% exemplary ratings for four of the five criteria and near 100% for the fifth criteria, which is style and writing.
3. Could present scholarly research effectively (SLO 3).
Assessment of this SLO indicates that students excelled in the final presentation of their dissertation research. As a group, students had 100% “exemplary” ratings for three of the five criterion of this objective, and near 100% for the remaining two criteria.
4. Modeled the ethical treatment of research participants (SLO 4)
The required Human Subjects Review course was completed by 100% of the students who were evaluated.
12) State how the program used the results or plans to use the results. Please be specific.
There were not any major areas of weakness demonstrated by the current group of students. However, we will continue to work with students to ensure that they understand the SLOs and the evaluation 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.
We will need to be sure that our rubric address all components of SLO 1 and may not to be more specific about how we assess learning and development.