Unit: Law
Program: Law (LLM)
Degree: Master's
Date: Thu Sep 17, 2015 - 11:04:05 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.

The Law School's LLM Program is for foreign law graduates only and it takes one academic year (and 24 credits) to complete.  Two courses are offered specifically for the LLM students, one required and one optional, but the LLM students take all the rest of their courses with the JD students.  The specific SLOs are given below:

The William S. Richardson School of Law LL.M. complies with American Bar Association standards, having received acquiescence in 2003. Students in the Richardson LL.M. program have already trained as lawyers in diverse global legal systems and often have substantial practice experience when they begin their LL.M. year of study at Richardson. The Richardson LL.M. Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) are specific and tailored to their foreign law experience and training. The LL.M. SLOs are:

(1) To gain a comparative understanding of the importance of law and legal institutions in the U.S., and the role of lawyers and the judiciary in the American legal system;

(2) To understand the professional ethics and service obligations of lawyers;

(3) To master fundamental skills in American legal research, legal analysis, and legal reasoning;

(4) To learn to communicate an understanding of U.S. legal issues effectively both orally and in writing; and

(5) To develop expertise in a specialized area of U.S. or international law through successful completion of an organized program of courses in a selected specialization. (Updated Aug. 2014)

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

Department Website URL: https://www.law.hawaii.edu/llm-curriculum
Student Handbook. URL, if available online: https://www.law.hawaii.edu/student-handbook
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.

No map submitted.

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.

Course evaluations done in individual courses and meetings, informal evaluations during the course (anonymous comments on any topic the student chooses), and meetings with students individually at the end of their first semester to assess their pogress and seek their suggestions.

As a formal matter, the Law School does a thorough self-study for accredidation purposes every seven years. The LLM Program underwent a complete assessment as part of the last self-study process (2009-10) and will participate in the next one this year.

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.

This is a very small program and most but not all participate in inform assessments and the course evaluations at the end of the semester. The faculty adviser meets wih the students individually to discuss their individual goals and their general progress.

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.

For informal assessment exercises and in indivdual meetings, we ask open-ended questions of the students, to see what they find most helpful in the two LLM courses; we also ask which JD courses they would recommend to other LLM sudents and why.

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.

We use the results to help future LLM students plan their courses during the year  they spend at the Law School.

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.