Unit: Communicology
Program: Communicology (MA)
Degree: Master's
Date: Fri Nov 16, 2018 - 11:41:35 am

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

1. Demonstrate mastery of theories of communication, particularly in the areas of relational, persuasion/social influence, and message processing functions

(1. Demonstrate comprehensive knowledge in one or more general subject areas related to, but not confined to, a specific area of interest.)

2. Demonstrate mastery of fundamentals of research design and analysis in communication

(2. Demonstrate understanding of research methodology and techniques specific to one’s field of study., 6. Conduct research or projects as a responsible and ethical professional, including consideration of and respect for other cultural perspectives.)

3. Demonstrate an integrative and systematic understanding of the human communication process

(1. Demonstrate comprehensive knowledge in one or more general subject areas related to, but not confined to, a specific area of interest., 4. Critically analyze, synthesize, and utilize information and data related to one’s field of study.)

4. Conduct independent social scientific research

(3. Apply research methodology and/or scholarly inquiry techniques specific to one’s field of study., 6. Conduct research or projects as a responsible and ethical professional, including consideration of and respect for other cultural perspectives.)

5. Orally articulate ideas/positions and respond to questions cogently and thoughtfully

(3. Apply research methodology and/or scholarly inquiry techniques specific to one’s field of study., 5. Proficiently communicate and disseminate information in a manner relevant to the field and intended audience., 7. Interact professionally with others.)

6. In written form, articulate ideas/positions and synthesize research;

(1. Demonstrate comprehensive knowledge in one or more general subject areas related to, but not confined to, a specific area of interest., 2. Demonstrate understanding of research methodology and techniques specific to one’s field of study., 7. Interact professionally with others.)

7. Demonstrate presentation and teaching effectiveness

(5. Proficiently communicate and disseminate information in a manner relevant to the field and intended audience., 7. Interact professionally with others.)

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

Department Website URL: http://manoa.hawaii.edu/communicology/graduate.html#header2
Student Handbook. URL, if available online: Posted on Laulima site available to graduate students
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online:
UHM Catalog. Page Number:
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online:
Other:
Other:

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

Curriculum Map File(s) from 2018:

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) Does the program have learning achievement results for its program SLOs? (Example of achievement results: "80% of students met expectations on SLO 1.")(check one):

No
Yes, on some(1-50%) of the program SLOs
Yes, on most(51-99%) of the program SLOs
Yes, on all(100%) of the program SLOs

6) Did your program engage in any program learning assessment activities between June 1, 2015 and October 31, 2018?

Yes
No (skip to question 17)

7) What best describes the program-level learning assessment activities that took place for the period June 1, 2015 to October 31, 2018? (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)
No (skip to question 17)
Investigate other pressing issue related to student learning achievement for the program (explain in question 7)
Other:

8) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place.

At the end of each semester, all graduate faculty meet. The progress of each student in the program is reviewed and discussed, and students are evaluated on the extent to which they are meeting each SLO. These evaluations are recorded and tracked for each student across their time in the program, concluding in the semester a student graduates.

9) What types of evidence did the program use as part of the assessment activities checked in question 7? (Check all that apply.)

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
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
Assessment-related such as assessment plan, SLOs, curriculum map, etc.
Program or course materials (syllabi, assignments, requirements, etc.)
Other 1: Faculty evaluation of student performance (based on materials checked above)
Other 2:

10) State the number of students (or persons) who submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.

Between June 2015 and October 2018, all students currently enrolled in the graduate program were evaluated in end-of-semester meetings. Of these, 16 completed their second year of the program during this period; we report assessment results for those (16) students. 

11) 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:

12) 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:

13) Summarize the results of the assessment activities checked in question 7. For example, report the percentage of students who achieved each SLO.

By the end of their second year (i.e., 4th semester in the program), the following percentage of students acheived each SLO (i.e., were rated as "acceptable" or "exceptional" for the SLO).

SLO#1: 81.25% (12.5% "developing"; 6.3% "unacceptable")

SLO#2: 81.25% (12.5% "developing"; 6.3% "unacceptable")

SLO#3: 81.25% (12.5% "developing"; 6.3% "unacceptable")

SLO#4: 81.25% (12.5% "developing"; 6.3% "unacceptable")

SLO#5: 62.5% (37.5% "developing")

SLO#6: 81.25% (18.8% "developing")

SLO#7:  75% (18.8% "developing"; 6.3% "unacceptable")

Note: All "unacceptable" scores recorded here were from a single student, who decided to leave the program at the end of his/her fourth semester (without having completed a thesis or Plan B project).

14) 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:

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

Results of evaluations for each student are communicated to the student via letters at the end of each semester to inform students of their progress in the program, and to provide the opportunity to address any potential issues. Individual feedback is also discussed in advising meetings (with advisor or Director of Graduate Studies) if needed. 

In aggregate, these results are used to regularly check whether the program is meeting its SLOs, if there are areas of concern for student development (which may be connected to more than one SLO), and to make adjustments as needed. This year, in response to indications that students were sometimes having difficulty with library and literature search skills, an information session with a university librarian was set up for all students. This received positive feedback, with students expressing that the session was very helpful and informative. 

The results reported here for SLO acheivement have also led to reflection about ways to improve our program. For example, acheivement statistics suggested that oral articulation is the area in which our students appear to have to most difficulty (though a majority still met this program SLO). This has prompted us to think about additional resources we could make available to students that would help develop these skills, and ultimately lead to a higher proportion of students achieving this SLO.

16) 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.

No additonal conclusions or discoveries at this point in time. The results from the last three years suggest that a majority of students in our program are acheiving program SLOs by the end of their second year. At present, we are satisfied with our assessment procedures, although we remain open to possible changes in the future.

17) If the program did not engage in assessment activities, please justify.

N/A