Unit: Political Science
Program: Political Science (BA)
Degree: Bachelor's
Date: Thu Nov 15, 2018 - 3:56:47 pm

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

1. 1.  Students will be able to think critically and historically about power and the political. Students identify and analyze power dynamics in a range of social contexts and processes, including but not limited to language, government, images of the future and civil society institutions. Students will be able to pose and explore relevant, open-ended questions about authority and legitimacy.

(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. 2. Students will be able to craft and defend evidence-based arguments. This argumentative capacity is built upon their ability to rigorously and respectfully weigh competing views, synthesize multiple sources and critically reflection their own and others assumptions. Students should be able to make arguments in both written and oral forms of communication.

(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)

3. 3. Students will be able to communicate effectively in public settings, with attention to and appreciation of diverse cultural contexts. Students are equipped for productive, civic participation in their communities, able to synthesize critical thinking, empathic, collaborative and argumentative capacities, and futures thinking with an audience in mind.

(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)

4. 4. Students will be able to cogently explain the interconnectedness of local and global dynamics of power within the context of the political and cultural specificities of Hawai`i nei.

(1a. General education, 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) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.

Department Website URL: http://www.politicalscience.hawaii.edu/undergraduate/index.html
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.

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.

We collected students' assignments of three capstone courses--two POLS 406 (Senior Seminar, Spring 2018 and Fall 2018) and one POLS 403 (Community Internship, Spring 2018)--and assessed students' papers based on the rubric. The total number of assignments was 30.

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.

We collected 30 papers (30 students) from three different capstone courses. Generally, capstone courses have a small class size (around 10 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.

Identification and explanation: 84% of students were able to identify and describe the central issues that they examined.

Argument, position or thesis: 66% of students were able to state the central argument clearly.

Use of evidence: 76% of students were able to effectively use evidence to support the main claim and draw different sources.

Power analysis: 46% of students were able to explore questions about power and examine power dynamics at work.

Embracing complexity and contradictions: 77% of students were able to weigh competing views and consider different perspectives.

This rubric was developed to focus on two of the Political Science departments program-wide undergraduate student learning objectives. It is designed to be used on various kinds of final products, including written, oral and other forms of student work.

Overall, the majority of papers were effective or accomplished in identifying problems, making arguments, using evidence, and understanding different perspectives. The weakest performance is related to analyzing power relations in their papers. While recognizing power is essential in studying the political, we suspect that some assignment did not particularly ask students to address power relations. For the future reference, we might need to collect more papers from more diverse classes for a better assessment.

 

 

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.

This pilot assessment will be reviewed by the department in the near future.

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.

We as a department will discuss how to expand assessment with survey and/or more sample assignments. This semester, the department started an undergrad mentoring program. Each faculty member was assigned to mentor 10-15 undergrad students as an advisor. By reaching out to undergrad students, faculty memebrs try to advise students regarding academic concerns or seeking career opportunities. 

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