Program: Oceanography (Phd)
Degree: Doctorate
Date: Tue Sep 29, 2015 - 1:48:03 pm
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.
Upon completion of the Doctoral program in Oceanography, students will be able to:
- Perform all of the Master’s program SLOs
- Comprehensively synthesize, evaluate, and interpret the fundamental knowledge in their subdiscipline and how it relates to the other subdisciplines
- Independently construct scientific hypotheses and design and carry out research to evaluate them
- Critically analyze and synthesize the results of their research to derive conclusions which advance the field and are of a quality suitable for publication in the peer-reviewed literature
2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.
Department Website URL: www.soest.hawaii.edu/oceanography/SLO.pdf Student Handbook. URL, if available online: www.soest.hawaii.edu/oceanography/GradHandbook15.pdf
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online: UHM Catalog. Page Number: Course Syllabi. URL, if available online: www.soest.hawaii.edu/oceanography/courses.html Other: Other: 3) Please review, add, replace, or delete the existing curriculum map.
- File (10/02/2019)
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.
Effective September 2015, the annual required Division Symposium (presentations given by the graduate students), will not be evaluated by the audience using the same form and rubric. In past years, the presentations were evaluated by separate forms and rubrics.
Exit intervews continue to be conducted for every graduate student that graduates from our program.
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.
6 students graduated with PhD in Oceanography during June 2014 through September 2015.
12 students gave a formal annual presentation at the POGS Symposium in September 2015, and were evaluated under the new form and rubric.
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.
All graduating students met all program SLOs, as required by the departmental Degree Requirements.
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.
Effective August 2015, the Department changed course requirements of the Physica Oceanography students sohey are similar to the requirements of the other Divisions. This change was based on responses from the students as well as faculty from the Physical Oceanography Division.
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.
Program SLO assessment at the graduate level has been an integral part of the Department's degree program since its formation, and continues to work well. Since Fall 2013, the Department has changed their policy to only require one comprehensive exam for PhD students instead of two. This should significantly reduce the time it takes for our students to graduate from the program since that has been an ongoing concern among the graduate students and external review assessment boards.