Program: History (PhD)
Degree: Doctorate
Date: Wed Aug 26, 2015 - 10:07:01 am
1) Below are your program's student learning outcomes (SLOs). Please update as needed.
PhD Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs)
1) Students can demonstrate a mastery of the theories and methodologies of the discipline of history.
2) Students can demonstrate a comprehensive knowledge of the historiography of their fields of specialization.
3) Students can conduct original research based on primary sources.
4) Students can write expository prose and orally present their ideas at a professional
standard.
1) Institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs) and Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs)
2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.
Department Website URL: http://manoa.hawaii.edu/history/graduate
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) Please review, add, replace, or delete the existing curriculum map.
- 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 learning assessment activities between June 1, 2014 and September 30, 2015?
Yes No (skip to question 16)6) What best describes the program-level learning assessment activities that took place for the period June 1, 2014 to September 30, 2015? (Check all that apply.)
Create/modify/discuss program learning assessment procedures (e.g., SLOs, curriculum map, mechanism to collect student work, rubric, survey) Collect/evaluate student work/performance to determine SLO achievement Collect/analyze student self-reports of SLO achievement via surveys, interviews, or focus groups Use assessment results to make programmatic decisions (e.g., change course content or pedagogy, design new course, hiring) Investigate curriculum coherence. This includes investigating how well courses address the SLOs, course sequencing and adequacy, the effect of pre-requisites on learning achievement. Investigate other pressing issue related to student learning achievement for the program (explain in question 7) Other: 7) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place in the last 18 months.
The Assessment Committee of the Department of History finalized the rubric for SLO#3 and drew up the ones for SLO#2 and SLO#1. In addition, it prepared "Assessment Forms" that could be put to use by the faculty for the assessment of graduate SLOs at both M.A. and Ph.D. levels. The purpose of the Assessment Forms is to have the individual faculty involved in the graduate assessment process, namely, by using the Assessment Forms when chairing or taking part in an M.A. thesis defense or a Ph.D. dissertation defense.
After consultation with the Department Chair and the Graduate Chair, it has been decided that the assessment forms will be put to use in Fall 2015 onwards. The assessment forms thus filled will be collected on a regular basis, and the Assessment Committee will make a report on the findings upon completion the Four-Year Graduate Assessment Plan.
8) What types of evidence did the program use as part of the assessment activities checked in question 6? (Check all that apply.)
Direct evidence of student learning (student work products)
Artistic exhibition/performance Assignment/exam/paper completed as part of regular coursework and used for program-level assessment Capstone work product (e.g., written project or non-thesis paper) Exam created by an external organization (e.g., professional association for licensure) Exit exam created by the program IRB approval of research Oral performance (oral defense, oral presentation, conference presentation) Portfolio of student work Publication or grant proposal Qualifying exam or comprehensive exam for program-level assessment in addition to individual student evaluation (graduate level only) Supervisor or employer evaluation of student performance outside the classroom (internship, clinical, practicum) Thesis or dissertation used for program-level assessment in addition to individual student evaluation Other 1: Other 2: Indirect evidence of student learning
Alumni survey that contains self-reports of SLO achievement Employer meetings/discussions/survey/interview of student SLO achievement Interviews or focus groups that contain self-reports of SLO achievement Student reflective writing assignment (essay, journal entry, self-assessment) on their SLO achievement. Student surveys that contain self-reports of SLO achievement Other 1: Other 2: Program evidence related to learning and assessment
(more applicable when the program focused on the use of results or assessment procedure/tools in this reporting period instead of data collection)
Assessment-related such as assessment plan, SLOs, curriculum map, etc. Program or course materials (syllabi, assignments, requirements, etc.) Other 1: Other 2: 9) State the number of students (or persons) who submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
No sampling was carried out during the said period.
10) 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: 11) 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: 12) Summarize the results of the assessment activities checked in question 6. For example, report the percent of students who achieved each SLO.
The Assessment Committee of the Department of History finalized the rubric for SLO#3 and drew up the ones for SLO#2 and SLO#1. In addition, it prepared "assessment forms" that could be put to use by the faculty for the assessment of graduate SLOs at both the M.A. levels. The assessment form for the M.A. level is as shown below:
Graduate Student SLO Assessment Form
Department of History
Semester: _____
To Instructors:
Thank you for helping us assess our graduate program in accordance with expectations of the University’s Assessment Office.
Please evaluate the quality of your student’s thesis or dissertation by completing the form below. Answer each section including assigning the appropriate score. You are encouraged to provide additional comments as necessary. This is strictly for assessment purposes and all results will be confidential.
Assessment Committee
Department of History
PhD Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs)
1) Students can demonstrate a mastery of the theories and methodologies of the discipline of history.
2) Students can demonstrate a comprehensive knowledge of the historiography of their fields of specialization.
3) Students can conduct original research based on primary sources.
4) Students can write expository prose and orally present their ideas at a professional standard.
Scoring Guide for PHD SLO #1:
Students can demonstrate an understanding of the theories and methodologies of the discipline of history.
|
Level |
Interpretation and Use |
|
3 – Accomplished |
Demonstrates mastery of the theories and methodologies of the discipline of history.
|
|
2 – Competent |
Demonstrates an understanding of the theories and methodologies of the discipline of history.
|
|
1 – Developing |
Demonstrates familiarity of the theories and methodologies of the discipline of history.
|
Scoring Guide for PHD SLO #2:
Students can demonstrate a comprehensive knowledge of the historiography of their fields of specialization.
|
Level |
Interpretation and Use |
|
3 – Accomplished |
Situates their own argument in historiographical debate Demonstrates a comprehensive knowledge of historiography
|
|
2 – Competent |
Demonstrate a critical understanding of historiography
|
|
1 – Developing |
Recognize issues and shifts in historiography
|
Scoring Guide for PHD SLO #3:
Students can conduct original research based on primary sources.
|
Level |
Interpretation and Use |
|
3 – Accomplished |
Conducts original research using relevant primary sources to advance sophisticated arguments
|
|
2 – Competent |
Conducts original research using relevant primary sources
|
|
1 – Developing |
Identifies relevant primary sources
|
Scoring Guide for PHD SLO #4:
Students can write clear expository prose and orally present their ideas at a professional level.
|
Level |
Interpretation and Use |
|
3 – Accomplished |
Communicates sophisticated analytical ideas and arguments Clear and coherent narrative Expressive grammatical use of language
|
|
2 – Competent |
Clear and coherent narrative Grammatical use of language Correct use of citations and formatting
|
|
1 – Developing |
Lacks clarity and narrative organization Has some grammatical errors Has errors of citations and formatting
|
13) What best describes how the program used the results? (Check all that apply.)
Assessment procedure changes (SLOs, curriculum map, rubrics, evidence collected, sampling, communications with faculty, etc.) Course changes (course content, pedagogy, courses offered, new course, pre-requisites, requirements) Personnel or resource allocation changes Program policy changes (e.g., admissions requirements, student probation policies, common course evaluation form) Students' out-of-course experience changes (advising, co-curricular experiences, program website, program handbook, brown-bag lunches, workshops) Celebration of student success! Results indicated no action needed because students met expectations Use is pending (typical reasons: insufficient number of students in population, evidence not evaluated or interpreted yet, faculty discussions continue) Other: 14) Please briefly describe how the program used the results.
The completed rubrics, which are reflected in the Ph.D. Assessment Form, will be put to use by the faculty at large starting in Fall 2015.
15) Beyond the results, were there additional conclusions or discoveries? This can include insights about assessment procedures, teaching and learning, and great achievements regarding program assessment in this reporting period.
The Assessment Committee has the following general observations about the strengths of the history M.A. curriculum and its assessment tools, based on its assessment activities for the last few years or so:
1. That the graduate students’ achievements on each SLO are generally satisfactory.
2. That, however, the data collected to date are insufficient to draw a conclusive assessment. The existing assessment tools are acceptable but they need some revamp in order to generate more reliable data, systematically and comprehensively on a regular basis. The completion of rubrics and the implementation of the Assessment Forms will be a major step forward in this regard.
16) If the program did not engage in assessment activities, please explain.
n/a