Unit: Kamakakuokalani Center for Hawaiian Studies
Program: Hawaiian Studies (MA)
Degree: Master's
Date: Tue Oct 20, 2015 - 12:54:33 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 Hawaiian Studies master’s program students should be able to:

  • Demonstrate knowledge of Indigenous research methodologies and develop a Native Hawaiian epistemology from sources in comparative Indigenous thought.
  • Demonstrate understanding of Hawaiian archival research and familiarity with the rich historical primary sources existent in various archives.
  • Demonstrate critical analysis of Hawaiian literature and an understanding of the significance of secondary sources in Hawaiian topics.
  • Demonstrate critical thoughts and synthesis through the development of a research proposal and the completion of their thesis or practicum project (Plan A or Plan B).
  • With high scholarly ability, contribute to Hawaiian research and knowledge through publications, presentations, and/or community service.

 

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

Department Website URL: http://manoa.hawaii.edu/hshk/degrees-programs/graduate-degrees/
Student Handbook. URL, if available online: http://manoa.hawaii.edu/nhss/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/2015-Kamakakuokalani-Grad-Student-Handbook.pdf
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online: http://manoa.hawaii.edu/nhss/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/KCHS-MA-Brochure-Rev.pdf
UHM Catalog. Page Number: http://www.catalog.hawaii.edu/schoolscolleges/hawaiian/kamakakuokalani.htm
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online:
Other: http://manoa.hawaii.edu/nhss/academicadvising/graduate-students/masters-hawaiian-studies/
Other: http://manoa.hawaii.edu/nhss/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/HWST-Req-Checklist.pdf

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.

The Hawaiian Studies graduate faculty continued their program-level learning assessments between June 1, 2014 and September 30, 2015 through the following activities:

  • Conducted several curriculum mapping activities that supported faculty scaffolding by area of concentration of existing courses from undergraduate through graduate level.
  • Discussed and adopted secondary SLOs for each area of concentration that would strengthen undergraduate coursework in an effort to reinforce alignment with MA program SLOs and bolster BA students’ preparation and entry into the MA program.
  • For all Fall 2014 – Spring 2015 Hawaiian Studies graduates, collected from the designated Graduate Committee Chairs (faculty evaluator), their evaluations utilizing the adopted “Hawaiian Studies MA SLO Rubric” in order to determine and report the level that our students are meeting adopted Hawaiian Students MA Program SLOs.

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.

For this reporting period, all 6 Hawaiian Studies MA graduates (both Plan A and Plan B) in Fall 2014 and Spring 2015 were selected to solicit evaluation from their designated Graduate Committee Chairs.  In this case, two Hawaiian Studies graduate faculty members each served on three of the MA graduates committees.  The faculty were instructed to consider the following student submitted evidence for each evaluations:

  1. For students completing a PLAN A, the final thesis and oral defense would be evaluated.
  2. For students completing a PLAN B, the final written paper and oral defense would be evaluated.

Their evaluation was submitted utilizing the adopted Hawaiian Students SLO 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.

For this reporting period, the graduate faculty conducted their first MA program direct assessment piloting their adopted “Hawaiian Studies MA SLO Rubric.” During this assessment period, four completed Hawaiian Studies MA SLO Rubric forms were submitted by their respective Graduate Committee Chairs (faculty evaluator) from the six requested for a 67% return rate. The rubric evaluated each students’ achievement of the Hawaiian Studies MA Program Student Learning Objectives based on their final thesis/written paper and oral defense.  The compiled results were as followed:

SLO #1: Demonstrate knowledge of Indigenous research methodologies and develop a Native Hawaiian epistemology from sources in comparative Indigenous thought.

RESULT: 3 Excellent – 1 Competent/Proficient

SLO #2: Demonstrate understanding of Hawaiian archival research and familiarity with the rich historical primary sources existent in various archives.

RESULT: 3 Excellent – 1 Competent/Proficient

SLO #3: Demonstrate critical analysis of Hawaiian literature and an understanding of the significance of secondary sources in Hawaiian topics.

RESULT: 2 Excellent – 2 Competent/Proficient

SLO #4 Demonstrate critical thoughts and synthesis through the development of a research proposal and the completion of their thesis or practicum project (Plan A or Plan B).

RESULT: 3 Excellent – 1 Competent/Proficient

Additionally, the Hawaiian Studies graduate faculty participated in several curriculum mapping activities that initiated discussion items around possible revision to the existing MA curriculum map, expansion of the MA assessment rubric, and an annual MA assessment report on student achievement of MA Program Student Learning Objectives.  The Hawaiian Studies graduate faculty are committed to continue utilizing the Hawaiian Studies MA SLO Rubric in order to gather a larger pool of student data to facilitate further programmatic discussions around curriculum, faculty teaching/mentoring allocation, and program policy.

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 results from the ongoing faculty assessment meetings have initiated conversations around revision to the existing MA curriculum map, expansion of the MA assessment rubric, and the necessity for an annual MA assessment report on student achievement of MA Program Student Learning Objectives.

The results complied from the adopted Hawaiian Studies MA SLO Rubric is the first set of direct data reported to graduate faculty that evaluated each students’ achievement of the Hawaiian Studies MA Program Student Learning Objectives based on their final thesis/written paper and oral defense. Discussions continue on the need to gather a larger pool of these assessments in order to inform programmatic discussions around curriculum, faculty teaching/mentoring allocation, and program policies.

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.

It was beneficial this year to conduct multi-session curriculum mapping workshops in order to review the entirety of our Hawaiian Studies program.  The first set of workshops were intentionally designed to review the BA program, but it quickly became apparent that discussion about the BA program is difficult without reflecting on the MA program.  Although the initial goals to revise SLOs and review the curriculum maps were met through the workshop series, the success of these workshops were the connected conversations strengthening the BA in order to bolster up and strengthen our fairly young MA program to begin discussions about laying the foundation for a future PHD program.

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