Unit: Public Health Studies
Program: Public Health (DrPH)
Degree: Doctorate
Date: Fri Oct 09, 2015 - 6:16:27 am

1) Below are your program's student learning outcomes (SLOs). Please update as needed.

Upon completion of the Doctor of Public Health (DrPH) program at the University of Hawai‘i, the graduate should master the following competencies:

DrPH Competencies

  1. Analyze and translate the impact of current and proposed policy on public health [ADVOCACY/POLICY DEVELOPMENT].
  2. Demonstrate effective written and oral skills for communicating with persons across the lifespan from diverse cultural, lifestyle, socioeconomic, educational, racial, ethnic and professional backgrounds [COMMUNICATIONS].
  3. Facilitate and expand collaborative relationships with a variety of entities (e.g. government, non-profits, community, and academia) [COMMUNITY COLLABORATION].
  4. Utilize the integrating concepts and skills involved in culturally appropriate community engagement, empowerment, and intervention translation with diverse communities [COMMUNITY COLLABORATION].
  5. Apply data management, analysis, interpretation, and visualization techniques in: intervention development, evaluation, and monitoring of public health problems and interventions [DATA].
  6. Demonstrate and apply high ethical standards to all activities, including communication and interaction with diverse populations, the conduct of research, and the handling of information and data [ETHICS].
  7. Engage stakeholders and manage teams, groups, and organizations to identify issues of concern and develop and/or translate public health solutions to diverse communities [LEADERSHIP].
  8. Integrate evidence and community experience to describe, anticipate, and mediate public health needs and problems [PLANNING/EVALUATION].
  9. Identify and apply appropriate theory and evidence-based approaches to inform the design and evaluation of public health interventions for diverse communities [PLANNING/EVALUATION].
  10. Apply monitoring and evaluation frameworks to assess global and domestic programs, policies, and systems [PLANNING/EVALUATION].
  11. Select appropriate research designs and methods to address public health questions of importance to diverse communities [RESEARCH].
  12. Critique research appropriateness, including the ethical aspects of research designs, subject recruitment, and data collection that involves communities [RESEARCH].
  13. Promote co-learning between researchers, public health professionals, and communities [RESEARCH].
  14. Critically analyze, use and synthesize information from multiple sources to address public health problems/issues [SYSTEMS THINKING].

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

Department Website URL: http://manoa.hawaii.edu/publichealth
Student Handbook. URL, if available online: http://manoa.hawaii.edu/publichealth/sites/manoa.hawaii.edu.publichealth/files/downloads/drph_handbook.pdf
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online:
UHM Catalog. Page Number: http://www.catalog.hawaii.edu/schoolscolleges/medicine/phse.htm
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online: http://www.manoa.hawaii.edu/publichealth/academics/courses.html
Other: DrPH Handbook http://manoa.hawaii.edu/publichealth/sites/manoa.hawaii.edu.publichealth/files/downloads/drph_handbook.pdf
Other:

3) Please review, add, replace, or delete the existing curriculum map.

Curriculum Map File(s) from 2015:

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.

  • Competencies are linked to specific courses.
  • Courses are evaluated through e-CAFÉ.
  • At the end of 2nd semester, DrPH students present a qualifying paper and take a qualifying exam, testing their mastery of Year-1 DrPH competencies.
  • In the required Teaching Practicum, the faculty member with whom the DrPH student teaches provides a written assessment of student mastery of teaching-related competencies. Student-teachers also are evaluated by OFDAS.
  • In the required Research Practicum, the faculty member with whom the DrPH student is conducting research provides a written assessment of student mastery of relevant research-related competencies.
  • Starting in their 2nd year, DrPH students complete an Annual Review (every October). In this, they report completed and planned coursework, completed and planned portfolio elements, and a self-assessment of mastery of the DrPH competences.  Annual review data are discussed between the student and his/her Chair and also presented to the DrPH Committee.
  • Time to being qualified, to ABD, and to graduation are tracked by the DrPH Grad Chair.
  • After graduation, DrPH graduates complete a Post-Grad Survey (every October) with information on what they are doing re: job, pubs, presentations, grants, etc.
  • Every 3 years (beginning in summer 2015) employers of DrPH graduates are surveyed about these graduates’ mastery of DrPH competencies.

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.

100% of DrPH students have completed Annual Reviews by Oct 1 of the year. This is the second year we will institute the Post-Grad Survey, and the response rate is about 65%. Research and Teaching Practica mentors also provide feedback on all their students. The 2015 DrPH grad employers’ survey was completed for 67% of the 15 graduates.

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.

 

 

Indicator

Progress

At least 60% are female and/or from minority groups.

 

Of the 41 students admitted since Fall 2008 (7 years):

  • 29% (12/41) are NHPI
  • 39% (16/41) other minority Americans or non-white International
  • 87% (36/41) are female

 

The size of the program appropriate to the size/skills of the faculty.

1:1 student/faculty ratio (We anticipate 4 graduates and 4 new admits each year, for a total of 15-16 DrPH students in any given Fall.  We have 15 Public Health faculty members able to chair DrPH committees)

 

Funding will be available for at least 70% of accepted students.

 

Overall, 24/41 (83%) have some type of funding or UH support through a GA position or as employees

 

100% will pass “qualifying phase” by the end of the 4th semester

100% (excluding those who dropped out or are on leave)

 

At least 70% are ADB by the end of the 6th semester.

 

100% (excluding those who dropped out or are on leave)

 

100% of students will be “on-track” in mastering competencies

 

100% are on track (excluding those who dropped out or are on leave)

At least 60% of students will have presented their work prior to graduation.

 

100% of 19 graduates as of Aug 2015 presented on their work at a conference or community meeting prior to graduation

At least 50% of students publish their work in peer-reviewed journals.

 

Of 19 graduates as of Aug 2014

  • 79% (15/19) submitted/published manuscripts from their dissertation  or work completed while in the program

Average graduation time < 6 years

 

Of 19 graduates as of Aug 2015, 100% graduated in < 6 years.

Average time to graduation is 3.6 years.

 

At least 70% of graduating students will have positions in post-docs, public health leadership, research, or faculty positions within 2 years of graduation.

Of 19 graduates as of May 2013

  • 100% secured positions within 12 months of graduation
  • 13 in academia
  • 4 with NGOs
  • 1 with UNICEF
  • 1 post doc

 

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.

  • Student Annual Review data are reviewed by student, advisor, DrPH chair and DrPH Committee to guide student progress. Suggestions are provided to students/Chairs on how students can further their mastery of competencies rated “low” or “mid” (vs. high).  For example, a student “low” in leadership was given a supervisory role through her Graduate Assistantship job, and a student “mid” in teaching (even after Teaching Practicum) was scheduled to lead some workshops for MPH and DrPH students.
  • DrPH program data are reviewed by DrPH Committee, the entire PH faculty at an annual presentation, and by the UH Graduate Division. Suggestions are provided to improve the program. For example, to give students more options for teaching, we modified the Teaching Practicum (PH 771) to make it repeatable. Also, with the opening of our undergrad PH degree, we have added two TA slots, with priority in hiring given to doctoral students

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.

Our recent site visit by the Council on Education for Public Health (CEPH) suggests that our curriculum should require more than 33 credits. We are currently re-researching credit requirements for DrPH degrees at other universities.

16) If the program did not engage in assessment activities, please explain.

Program did engage in assessment activities.