Unit: Second Language Studies
Program: Second Language Studies (BA)
Degree: Bachelor's
Date: Tue Oct 06, 2015 - 3:40:40 pm

1) Institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs) and Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs)

1. Demonstrate critical thinking and awareness of issues within the context of their professional work and social practice.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2a. Think critically and creatively)

2. Demonstrate an understanding of the value bases of their professional work.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2c. Communicate and report)

3. Understand and interpret the history of second and foreign language study and its contemporary issues.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field)

4. Critically evaluate and make use of research into the learning, use, structure, and/or pedagogy of second languages.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2a. Think critically and creatively)

5. Develop and apply sound frameworks in the assessment and evaluation of institutions and agents involved in second language instruction, planning, and policy.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field)

6. Show an understanding of local language issues of Hawai'i and the Pacific in their professional work.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 1c. Understand Hawaiian culture and history, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture)

7. Be able to support language minority students' development of academic and/or professional literacies.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 1c. Understand Hawaiian culture and history)

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

Department Website URL: http://www.hawaii.edu/sls/ba/?page_id=246
Student Handbook. URL, if available online:
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online:
UHM Catalog. Page Number:
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online:

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.


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.)

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)

7) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place in the last 18 months.

1. Student Learning Outcomes Assessment.

  • Revision of the SLOs and curriculum map
  • Assessment of (new) SLOs 1 and 4
  • Discussion of course content and curriculum coherence with regard to SLOs

2. Five-Year Provisional Review.

Because the BA in SLS is a new major (as of Fall 2011), we are currently under “provisional” status, and will be up for review in spring, 2016. We have engaged in the following program review activities in order to prepare the proposal to be moved from “provisional” to “established” status.

  • Collection and analysis of program cost and revenue data to determine program efficiency
  • Development of an outcomes assessment plan and timeline, assessment of SLOs
  • Collection and analysis of data regarding program quality and its alignment with the university’s mission and strategic plan.
  • Development of the proposal to move from provisional to established status

3. LLL Survey of Students Graduating with a BA in SLS.

The College of Languages, Linguistics, & Literature (LLL) encourages all students in its programs to complete exit surveys when they graduate. Among the information sought, of particular relevance to SLS, is students’ self-assessment of the program-level student learning outcomes, as well as their satisfaction with the program and our courses and recommendations for the 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: Alumni survey and faculty communication with alumni to gather data on student placement after graduation
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.

  1. Student Learning Outcomes Assessment.

Evidence was collected from the capstone course e-portfolios of 30 students. The 30 students were randomly selected from all students who had completed the capstone course between fall 2012 and fall 2014.

  1. Five-Year Provisional Review.


  1. LLL Survey of Students Graduating with a BA in SLS.

Out of 35 graduating seniors, 29 students who graduated in AY 2014-2015 completed the survey. All responses were included in the analysis.

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)
Other: LLL staff compiled the LLL survey results. A graduate assistant working as an assessment specialist in SLS analyzed the LLL survey results, and compiled and prepared SLO assessment results, presenting them to the faculty committee for interpretation.

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)

12) Summarize the results of the assessment activities checked in question 6. For example, report the percent of students who achieved each SLO.

1. Student Learning Outcomes Assessment. Assessment of (new) SLOs 1 and 4

Student work was assessed using a rubric and rated as “Below expectations,” “Meets expectations,” or “Exceeds expectations.” SLS BA Committee members felt that too many students were below expectations in the area of critical analysis and are developing steps for scaffolding development of students’ critical analysis skills into the curriculum. Additionally, the committee is also considering revisiting and improving the instructions for rater training for the next time these SLOs are assessed.

2. Five-Year Provisional Review.

Initial cost and revenue data indicates a highly efficient program.

3. LLL Survey of Students Graduating with a BA in SLS.

Self-Assessment of SLOs. Student self-assessment with regard to attainment of the program’s SLOs was high. Students rated their ability to perform the SLOs on a 5 point Likert scale, where 1 = not at all and 5 = very well. 5 (Very well) was the most frequently selected rating for all of the SLOs. This indicates that students felt confident they had attained the program’s SLOs.

Overall satisfaction with the program. Students rated their satisfaction with the program on a 5 point Likert scale where 1 = very dissatisfied and 5 = very satisfied. Ratings indicate high levels of satisfaction with most of the SLS program elements. 5 (Very satisfied) was the most frequently selected rating for 9 out of 10 program components. Students chose 4(somewhat satisfied) most frequently for 1 component: extra-curricular activities.

Satisfaction with courses in the program. Students were highly satisfied with the courses in the program. 5 (Very satisfied) was the most frequently selected rating or all six survey items in this section.

Satisfaction with the capstone course. Students were highly satisfied with the capstone course. 5 (Very satisfied) was the most frequently selected rating for all si5x survey items in this section.

Comments and recommendations. Open-ended responses continue to indicate the need for a practicum course. (The program has started its first practicum course this semester.)

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)

14) Please briefly describe how the program used the results.

1. Student Learning Outcomes Assessment.

  • The program’s SLOs were revised for clarity, and some SLOs were removed as it was decided that they functioned better as general goals for the program. The number of SLOs was reduced from nine to seven.
  • The instructors for the capstone course have revised instructions and rubrics for some assignments to provide better guidance for students.
  • Instructors for SLS 302 are currently revising aspects of the course to update and address gaps in course content.
  • The faculty committee is currently discussing how to enhance teaching and learning so as to improve student outcomes with regard to critical analysis skills.
  • The faculty committee is also currently discussing strategies to encourage faculty involvement so as to promote scaffolding of skills and enhance curriculum coherence.

2. Five-Year Provisional Review.

  • IRO and MAPS data collected for the provisional review proposal has been used to inform program planning decisions during faculty committee meetings; e.g., discussions regarding course planning in light of budget constraints.

3. LLL Survey of Students Graduating with a BA in SLS.

  • The results of the LLL surveys, as well as an internal departmental study conducted in 2012, all indicated a demand for a practicum course in the SLS curriculum. In response to this demand, the SLS program is has developed a practicum course, which is being offered for the first time this semester. Feedback from the students in the course has so far been extremely positive.
  • The results of the AY 2013-2014 LLL survey suggested that the only area in the program where students were not highly satisfied was “Research opportunities”. The department designated a faculty member to serve as “faculty resource for research”, which includes providing information about UROP (Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program) and other research opportunities, as well as helping interested students explore potential research possibilities. As a result of these efforts, students rated this component of the program much more highly in the most recent 2014-2015 LLL survey. (5 - Very satisfied was the most frequently selected rating.) This semester a faculty member is teaching a 480R course specifically focusing on conducting research in SLS and assisting students to develop research proposals for UROP or other relevant programs.

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.