Program: History (BA)
Degree: Bachelor's
Date: Tue Nov 06, 2018 - 12:04:12 pm
1) Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) and Institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs)
1. Students can explain historical change and continuity.
(1a. General education, 1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 1c. Understand Hawaiian culture and history, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 2b. Conduct research, 2c. Communicate and report, 3a. Continuous learning and personal growth, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture, 3c. Stewardship of the natural environment, 3d. Civic participation)
2. Students can write clear expository prose and present their ideas orally according to disciplinary conventions.
(1a. General education, 1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 1c. Understand Hawaiian culture and history, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 2b. Conduct research, 2c. Communicate and report, 3a. Continuous learning and personal growth, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture, 3d. Civic participation)
3. Students can identify, interpret, and evaluate primary sources and other relevant information.
(1a. General education, 1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 1c. Understand Hawaiian culture and history, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 2b. Conduct research, 2c. Communicate and report, 3a. Continuous learning and personal growth, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture, 3d. Civic participation)
4. Students can identify the main historiographical issues in a specific area of concentration.
(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 1c. Understand Hawaiian culture and history, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 2b. Conduct research, 2c. Communicate and report, 3a. Continuous learning and personal growth, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture, 3d. Civic participation)
2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update asneeded.







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.





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):




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


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.)







8) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place.
The Assessment Committee revised the SLOs and we collected and evaluated student work for SLO #3.
9) What types of evidence did the program use as part of the assessment activities checked in question 7? (Check all that apply.)





















10) State the number of students (or persons) who submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
The evidence for your evaluation consisted of fourteen final papers by students enrolled in HIST 496 in Fall 2016 and Spring 2017. Instructors of 496 sections provided representative samples of excellent, average, and below average work. Papers were anonymized before they were given to members of the History Department Assessment Committee to evaluate, using a four-point rubric.
11) Who interpreted or analyzed the evidence that was collected? (Check all that apply.)










12) How did they evaluate, analyze, or interpret the evidence? (Check all that apply.)







13) Summarize the results of the assessment activities checked in question 7. For example, report the percentage of students who achieved each SLO.
Each paper was assessed by two faculty evaulators. The scores of each paper were averaged. The range was from 1 (low) to 4 (high)
Most of the faculty evaluators agreed on the score within one point (12 to 14 papers, 86%)
The results were tabulated as score ranges, from "beginning (1±)" to "developing (2±), " to "competent (3±), to "accomplished (4)"
64% of the student papers scored 2.5 or higher
35% of the student papers scored 3 or higher.
Most students were scored in the range from developing to competent, or higher.
14) What best describes how the program used the results? (Check all that apply.)









15) Please briefly describe how the program used the results.
Because there was a switch-over between the History assessment chairs, there was a bit of a learning curve, interrupted by a sabbatical. In general, the committee decided that the results were as expected. In our next cycle of assessment, we plan to focus on SLO #4, "Students can identify the main historiographical issues in a specific area of concentration. We will use the same method of collecting samples and creating a rubric.
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.
The History Assessment Committee will encourage faculty to mindful of implementing activities to help develop students' proficiency in using primary source documents. TO that end, the former assessment chair, Yuma Totani, has been working with librarians at Hamilton Library in an effort to expose students to resources for historical documents in its collection.
17) If the program did not engage in assessment activities, please justify.
N/A