Unit: Educational Administration
Program: Educational Admin (MEd)
Degree: Master's
Date: Wed Oct 03, 2018 - 2:11:37 pm

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

1. Educational leaders are knowledgeable about and understand organizational life in schools/colleges and the dynamics of institutional change processes by examining trends, traditions, theory and policies of institutions in order to improve educational practice which promotes the learning success of all students.

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

2. Educational leaders understand, can articulate, and act within the moral/ethical, political, collaborative, strategic and caring dimensions of administrative roles within diverse cultural contexts.

(5. Proficiently communicate and disseminate information in a manner relevant to the field and intended audience., 6. Conduct research or projects as a responsible and ethical professional, including consideration of and respect for other cultural perspectives., 7. Interact professionally with others.)

3. Educational leaders demonstrate a well developed analytic capacity that is informed by theory, research, and practice to solve organizational problems and generate policy.

(2. Demonstrate understanding of research methodology and techniques specific to one’s field of study., 3. Apply research methodology and/or scholarly inquiry techniques specific to one’s field of study., 4. Critically analyze, synthesize, and utilize information and data related to one’s field of study.)

4. Educational leaders can apply knowledge and skills to changing organization contexts impacted by social, political, economic, cultural, and technological forces in order to foster the growth and development of the organization and its members.

(3. Apply research methodology and/or scholarly inquiry techniques specific to one’s field of study.)

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

Department Website URL:
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 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.


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):

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?

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)

8) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place.

Data were entered into the College of Education Student Information System (SIS) for target courses to indicate student performance on SLO's.

The department curriculum map was reviewed by the entire department and modified to reflect where program standard and outcomes are covered in various courses and projects.

Faculty in the K-12 track of the Master's degree met with administrators from the Hawaii State Dept. of Education and faculty from Chaminade University to determine how student performance in courses (based on collected student work and the SIS meet professional standards identified by accrediting bodies and others in the field. 

The Master's degree was modified from 36 to 30 units, and several courses were modified, including name and content change, to reflect the current expectations for preparation in the profession.

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:
Other 2:

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

Student assignments in both the K-12 and Higher Education tracks of the program (including papers, tests, and case studies) are identified in four targeted courses, their internship or leadership seminar, and their research project/portfolio to determine student performance with respect to the ILO's.  All students in the K-12 track all complete a portfolio which is created over two semesters, during which time most students (approximately 95%) are doing an internship in administration.  During the internship, the course instructor meets with the supervising administrator to get feedback on the student's performance in the field.  

Students in the Higher Education track can do either a thesis, project, or capstone based on their interests and career goals.  While not as many Higher Education students complete internships as they are generally already employed in positions at colleges or universities in Higher Ed, those who do internships receive feedback from their field superviser in 

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)

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: Students, particularly in the Higher Education track, are encouraged to submit papers to professional organizations and conferences for peer review, and these reviews are used in evaluation.

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

100% of the graduating students achieved all or PLO 1, 2, 3, and 4.

20% exceed.

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)

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

Faculty in each track meet twice annually to review results about student outcomes and based on their findings, make modifications to courses, evaluations, or other pieces of evidence collected for program evaluation.  Based on these modifications, certain areas are targeted for improvement, for example, student writing or critical analytic skills.  


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.

In both the K-12 and Higher Education tracks, the department faculty has worked to create a professional learning community for students.  

In Higher Ed, the Higher Education Student Association meets monthly with a faculty advisor to discuss the department and activities that might support scholarship and a shared sense of service and learning.  At the beginning and end of each semester there is a department-sponsored dinner meeting for students, with students planning the agenda.  In addition, in 2015, the department began sponsoring travel for students to attend local and out of state conferences at which they were presenting papers or otherwise participating in the program.  After their travel, students are required to present their work and share their experience at a department-sponsored forum.  Although the department has just begun to develop a rubric to assess their presentations tor use for program evaluation, the number of students applying and presenting has seen a dramatic increase, with students presenting at national conferences.  

While K-12 students are also eligible for the travel program, fewer of them participate due to different goals and interests, however the students also meet twice a semester to discuss the program and give summative and formative feedback on their experience. The K-12 program has also recently seen a noticeable rise in applications over the past three years.


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