Program: Cell & Molecular Biology (MS)
Date: Thu Oct 01, 2015 - 7:01:23 am
1) Institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs) and Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs)
1) Below are your program's student learning outcomes (SLOs). Please update as needed.
1. Knowledge and Understanding
A. Demonstrate a comprehensive knowledge in Cell and Molecular Biology and associated principles of research methodology and techniques.
B. Demonstrate familiarity with principles of measurement, design and conduct of scientific experiments and, interpretation of current literature with respect to one's technical field of study.
2. Intellectual and Applied Skills
A. Exhibit mastery in traditional and state-of-the-art research methodology and investigative techniques.
B. Demonstrate ability to develop and synthesize information and data related to one's field of study to execute and critically analyze experimental work.
C. Show an understanding of the administrative procedures common to academic departments.
3. Communication Skills
A. Demonstrate the ability to present oral presentations on one's work at scheduled laboratory meetings and/or seminars.
B. Show writing skills and familiarity with scientific reporting sufficient to present one's work and assist in the preparation of posters and publications for peer-reviewed journals and reports, grants and/or contract applications for various types of funding.
4. Professional Responsibilty
A. Conduct research or projects as a responsibility and ethical professional, including consideration and respect for Native Hawaiian and other cultural perspectives.
B. Professionally interact with peers.
2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.
Student Handbook. URL, if available online: http://www.hawaii.edu/cmb/
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online:
UHM Catalog. Page Number: 393-394, 242-244
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online: http://www2hawaii.edu/~lesaux/cmb621/Home
Other: program information distributed to prospective applicants by e-mail
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.
5) Did your program engage in any program learning assessment activities between June 1, 2014 and September 30, 2015?
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.)
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)
7) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place in the last 18 months.
This past school year the Cell and Molecular Biology Graduate Program (CMB) Excecutive and Curriculum Committees met regularly over several months to update and revise our Graduate Program Handbook.
The final product was reviewed by faculty and students. Suggestions and improvements were carefully considered and incorporated.
The addition of a timeline and chart showing clearly and simply the requirements for a MS degree from CMB were added to our new handbook and also to our website.
All courses had students do evaluations on the last day of class each semester and the results were distributed to the faculty.
The curriculum committee also revised and updated the SLOs for our program and distributed them to the faculty and students.
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)
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
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
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.)
9) State the number of students (or persons) who submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
2 MS students submitted evidence to be evaluated. (We are primarily a PhD program)
Both students did course and faculty evaluaions at the end of each class.
Both students did oral presentations in journal clubs during the school year and were evaluated by peers and faculty.
Both students presented posters detailing their work at the Biomedical Sciences and Health Disparities Symposium in Honolulu this year. They were each interviewed, judged and scored by three John A. Burns School of Medicine and UH Manoa faculty members (not CMB faculty).
One student did a culminating research experience and an oral presentation of his findings to his research group at the UH Cancer Center for his final requirement for his MS.
10) Who interpreted or analyzed the evidence that was collected? (Check all that apply.)
Ad hoc faculty group
Persons or organization outside the university
Advisors (in student support services)
Students (graduate or undergraduate)
11) How did they evaluate, analyze, or interpret the evidence? (Check all that apply.)
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)
12) Summarize the results of the assessment activities checked in question 6. For example, report the percent of students who achieved each SLO.
100% of our 2 MS students achieved our 4 SLOs
13) What best describes how the program used the results? (Check all that apply.)
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)
14) Please briefly describe how the program used the results.
Our program used our assessment results to revise our SLOs and Handbook.
The students especially responded well to the new timeline and chart detailing clearly and simply what is required each semester from admission to graduation.
Also, our new course in grant writing has proved very successful. It received excellent ratings from the students who participated and the weekly course has been expanded from 1 credit to 2 credits at the request of the students and faculty so more time can be spent by the students presenting and reviewing grant applications. Both students and faculty participate in the review process. Additionally, 3 students have been awarded NIH or AHA training grants due to this course.
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.
16) If the program did not engage in assessment activities, please explain.