Unit: Ocean & Resources Engineering
Program: Ocean & Resources Engineering (PhD)
Degree: Doctorate
Date: Mon Nov 16, 2015 - 11:31:09 am

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

The graduate program in Ocean and Resources Engineering channels the students’ previous education and work experience to ocean-related engineering careers. Students upon graduating from the program will have:

1.    A broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal context;

2.    An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and basic engineering topics that include statics, dynamics, fluid mechanics, solid mechanics, and probability and statistics;

3.    Proficiency in the core program that comprises hydrostatics, oceanography, water waves, fluid-structure interaction, underwater acoustics, laboratory and at-sea experience;

4.    Working knowledge of at least one of the three option areas that include coastal, offshore, and ocean resources engineering;

5.    An ability to use the techniques, skills, and latest engineering tools necessary for ocean and resources engineering practice;

6.    An ability to identify, formulate, and solve ocean and resources engineering problems;

7.    An ability to design and optimize engineering systems to meet the needs of the marine community;

8.    An ability to work independently and function on multi-disciplinary teams;

9.    An appreciation of professional and ethical responsibilities;

10.    An ability to communicate effectively to technical and non-technical audiences;

11.    An awareness of the latest research and contemporary issues in and beyond the marine community, and;

12.    Recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning and continuing professional development.

 

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

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

Department Website URL: http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/ore/
Student Handbook. URL, if available online: http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/ore/
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online: http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/ore/
UHM Catalog. Page Number:
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online: http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/ore/OE/ore_courses.htm
Other: ABET Self-Study Report dated July 1, 2015
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.

We analyzed all the courses in the department and wrote the July 2015 250 page ABET self assesment report. We analyzed the results of the SOEST blue ribbon assessment report of 2013  and aded more courses as suggested. For the first time in Spring 2015 we taught a new course 'Technology in the Sea'.

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.

As required by the PhD program, ALL students submitted disertation work, grant proposals , papers , etc. As we received 100% compliance there was no samping technique

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 students achieved the SLO mandated results . This is a requirement for ABET and is also used in our PhD program as the courses are in common with the master's programs ( other than research oriented efforts)

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.

It is the program's main goal that over 90%  of the graduating students get engineering related positions on finishing the program . This was achieved.

As the program was highly ranked in international surveys we are trying to increase enrolllment by advertising more as we could take more students in if they are qualiified.

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.

We found the program to be very highly ranked internationally . The graduates have been extremely successful as noted in suverys and are generally well pleased with the program's outcomes

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

The program engaged in rigorous assessment during 2015.