Program: Educational Foundations (MEd)
Degree: Master's
Date: Tue Nov 13, 2018 - 2:50:00 pm
1) Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) and Institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs)
1. Knowledge: Demonstrates analysis and critical thinking, and an understanding of concepts and/or theories and/or issues and/or complexities of the subject.
(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., 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.)
2. Knowledge: Demonstrates a socio-cultural or historical or philosophical or comparative understanding of the subject.
(1. Demonstrate comprehensive knowledge in one or more general subject areas related to, but not confined to, a specific area of interest., 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., 5. Proficiently communicate and disseminate information in a manner relevant to the field and intended audience.)
3. Knowledge: Demonstrates the ability to synthesize information coherently.
(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. Skills: Writing or Presentation is organized, clear, and engaging. If applicable, uses correct grammar, spelling, punctuation, and proper citation.
(5. Proficiently communicate and disseminate information in a manner relevant to the field and intended audience.)
5. Disposition: Keeps an open mind to multiple perspectives and interpretations.
(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.)
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: Other: Other: 3) Please review, add, replace, or delete the existing curriculum map.
- File (03/16/2020)
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 SLOs6) 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.
1. Development of a system for ogoing assessment of all core courses in relation to SLOs in the department by department faculty.
2. Collection and evaluation of student work and classroom performance in relation to SLOs in EDEF core courses specifically.
3. Collection and analysis of student self-reports through completer surveys conducted by assessment faculty in the dean's office.
4. Discussion item related to program assessment in every regularly scheduled department meetings.
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.
276 students took EDEF core courses that were evaluated using criteria related to EDEF SLOs during this time period. All students in these core courses were so evaluated.
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.
Of the 276 students analyzed by means of criteria of Unacceptable, Acceptable, or Target on SLOs, 92% scored Acceptable or higher overall. Some students, who received Incompletes in the core courses, were not scored but are included in the percentage.
Also, History of Education courses were not scored on SLO #5 - Disposiitons, while Comparative/International courses were not scored on SLO #2 Understanding.
On SLO #1 Analysis and Critical Thinking, 264 out of 276 students (95.6%) scored Acceptable or higher.
On SLO #2 Understanding of the Subjecct, 233 out of 245 students (95.1%) scored Acceptable or higher.
On SLO #3 Synthesis of Information, 264 out of 276 students (95.6%) scored Acceptable or higher.
On SLO #4 Writing and Presentation Skills, 264 out of 276 students (95.6%) scored Acceptable or higher.
On SLO #5 Professional Dispositions, 220 out of 223 students (98.7%) scored Acceptable or higher.
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.
Faculty used the course and program data to 1) examine how we evaluate the courses included in our M.Ed. tracks, 2) ask anew what we look for in our Plan Bs, 3) examine how we advise in our Plan Bs, 4) develop parameters for permissible kinds of Plan Bs in relation to our SLOs.
Program completer surveys allow us to examine from the student perspective what they find valuable in our courses and in the program as a whole, and where necessary modify either or both.
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.
Beyond continuing our discussions at monthly department meetings on assessment and assessment activities, we look to refine what we are doing to discover how our students are doing.