Unit: Educational Psychology
Program: Educational Psychology (MEd)
Degree: Master's
Date: Wed Nov 14, 2018 - 12:29:56 pm

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

1. Educational Psychology graduate students are knowledgeable about learning and development, inquiry methods, and student assessment.

(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., 4. Critically analyze, synthesize, and utilize information and data related to one’s field of study.)

2. Educational Psychology graduate students present scholarly research effectively.

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

3. Educational Psychology graduate students model the ethical treatment of research participants.

(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., 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.)

4. Educational Psychology graduate students have inquiry skills to conduct scholarly research effectively.

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

Department Website URL:
Student Handbook. URL, if available online: https://coe.hawaii.edu/documents/2371
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.

Collect/evaluate student work/performance to determine SLO achievement

1. (Knowledge) Faculty members rated the literature reviews of candidates' theses and Plan B proposals and final papers to determine the extent to which they demonstrated expected bodies of knowledge.

2. (Skills) Faculty members rated the methods section of candidates' theses and Plan B proposal and final papers to determine the extent to which they demonstrated expected skills to conduct scholarly research.

3. (Skills) Faculty members rated candidates' theses and Plan B final presentations to determine the extent to which they demonstrated skills to present scholarly research effectively.

4. (Dispositions). Faculty members documented whether their advisees successfully completed an on-line course on the ethical treatment of human participants in research.

Collect/analyze student self-reports of SLO achievement via surveys, interviews, or focus groups

In their final semester of the students' program, the Dean's Office distributed an online survey which asked students to self report the extent to which the program helped them to become (a) more knowledgeable in the field and (b) more skillful in the field and in the areas of research, writing, and making professional presentations.

 

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: Proposal for thesis or Plan B paper
Other 2: Completion of Citi online training

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

2015-2016

Ratings of candidates' thesis or Plan B Proposals (required of all students): 5

Ratings of candidates' thesis or Plan B final papers (required of all students): 7

Candidates' evaluated for completion of the human subjects' training (required of all students): 4

Ratings of candidates' thesis or Plan B presentations (required of all students): 7

Candidates self-report on on-line survey (all students recruited in their last semester): 5

2016-2017

Ratings of candidates' thesis or Plan B Proposals (required of all students): 8

Ratings of candidates' thesis or Plan B final papers (required of all students): 8

Candidates' evaluated for completion of the human subjects' training (required of all students): 4

Ratings of candidates' thesis or Plan B presentations (required of all students): 8

Candidates self-report on on-line survey (all students recruited in their last semester): 7

2017-2018

Ratings of candidates' thesis or Plan B Proposals (required of all students): 10

Ratings of candidates' thesis or Plan B final papers (required of all students): 9

Candidates' evaluated for completion of the human subjects' training (required of all students): 9

Ratings of candidates' thesis or Plan B presentations (required of all students): 9

Candidates self-report on on-line survey (all students recruited in their last semester): 9

 

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: Director of Assessment compiled survey results.

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.

We wanted to know whether candidates were knowledgeable about learning and development, inquiry methods, and student assessment (SLO 1).
 
Faculty Assessment of SLO 1
2015-2016        
EDEP Proposal Literature Review Exemplary Satisfactory Unacceptable Total
Context 4 1 0 5
Organization 4 1 0 5
Statement of research question 3 2 0 5
Style and writing conventions 2 3 0 5
         
EDEP Final Literature Review Exemplary Satisfactory Unacceptable Total
Context 2 5 0 7
Organization 1 6 0 7
Revision 2 5 0 7
Statement of research question 3 4 0 7
Style and writing conventions 3 4 0 7
         
2016-2017        
EDEP Proposal Literature Review Exemplary Satisfactory Unacceptable Total
Context 4 4 0 8
Organization 6 2 0 8
Statement of research question 5 3 0 8
Style and writing conventions 6 2 0 8
         
EDEP Final Literature Review Exemplary Satisfactory Unacceptable Total
Context 4 4 0 8
Organization 5 3 0 8
Revision 5 3 0 8
Statement of research question 4 4 0 8
Style and writing conventions 5 3 0 8
         
2017-2018        
EDEP Proposal Literature Review Exemplary Satisfactory Unacceptable Total
Context 4 5 1 10
Organization 6 4 0 10
Statement of research question 5 5 0 10
Style and writing conventions 7 2 1 10
         
EDEP Final Literature Review Exemplary Satisfactory Unacceptable Total
Context 5 4 0 9
Organization 6 3 0 9
Revision 6 3 0 9
Statement of research question 7 2 0 9
Style and writing conventions 7 2 0 9

Student Self-Assessment of SLO 1 on Completion Surveys

The master's program helped me . . .

2015-2016  Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Total
Become more knowledgeable  in my field 4 0 0 0 0 4
Grow as an educational professional 2 1 1 0 0 4
Develop my knowledge of research methodology 4 0 0 0 0 4
Target areas of development for my professional growth. 2 1 1 0 0 4
             
2016-2017  Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Total
Become more knowledgeable  in my field 3 4 0 0 0 7
Grow as an educational professional 4 3 0 0 0 7
Develop my knowledge of research methodology 5 2 0 0 0 7
Target areas of development for my professional growth. 2 4 1 0 0 7
             
2016-2017  Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Total
Become more knowledgeable  in my field 4 3 0 0 0 7
Grow as an educational professional 4 2 1 0 0 7
Develop my knowledge of research methodology 6 1 0 0 0 7
Target areas of development for my professional growth. 3 4 0 0 0 7

We wanted to know whether candidates had inquiry skills to conduct scholarly research effectively (SLO 2).

Faculty Assessment of SLO 2

2015-2016        
EDEP Proposal Method Section Exemplary Satisfactory Unacceptable Total
Data analysis 4 1 0 5
Participants 3 2 0 5
Procedures 5 0 0 5
Research design 2 3 0 5
         
EDEP Final Method Section Exemplary Satisfactory Unacceptable Total
Data analysis 4 3 0 7
Participants 3 4 0 7
Procedures 1 6 0 7
Research design 6 1 0 7
Revision 4 3 0 7
         
2016-2017        
EDEP Proposal Method Section Exemplary Satisfactory Unacceptable Total
Data analysis 5 3 0 8
Participants 4 4 0 8
Procedures 5 2 1 8
Research design 3 5 0 8
         
EDEP Final Method Section Exemplary Satisfactory Unacceptable Total
Data analysis 3 5 0 8
Participants 3 5 0 8
Procedures 4 4 0 8
Research design 2 6 0 8
Revision 2 6 0 8
         
2017-2018        
EDEP Proposal Method Section Exemplary Satisfactory Unacceptable Total
Data analysis 6 4 0 10
Participants 6 4 0 10
Procedures 7 3 0 10
Research design 8 2 0 10
         
EDEP Final Method Section Exemplary Satisfactory Unacceptable Total
Data analysis 5 4 0 9
Participants 4 5 0 9
Procedures 7 2 0 9
Research design 4 5 0 9
Revision 5 4 0 9

Student Self-Assessment of SLO 2 on Completion Surveys

The master's program helped me . . .

2015-2016  Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Total
Develop important new skills in my field. 3 1 0 0 0 4
Develop my ability to apply research skills. 3 1 0 0 0 4
             
2016-2017 Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Total
Develop important new skills in my field. 5 2 0 0 0 7
Develop my ability to apply research skills. 4 3 0 0 0 7
             
2017-2018 Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Total
Develop important new skills in my field. 5 2 0 0 0 7
Develop my ability to apply research skills. 5 2 0 0 0

7

 

We wanted to know whether candidates could present scholarly research effectively (SLO 3).

Faculty Assessment of SLO 3

2015-2016        
EDEP Research Presentation Exemplary Satisfactory Unacceptable Total
Attention to the audience's perspective 4 3 0 7
Clarity and organization 4 3 0 7
Summary of the research 2 5 0 7
Time limitations 3 4 0 7
Visual aids 5 2 0 7
         
2016-2017        
EDEP Research Presentation Exemplary Satisfactory Unacceptable Total
Attention to the audience's perspective 4 4 0 8
Clarity and organization 5 3 0 8
Summary of the research 5 3 0 8
Time limitations 6 2 0 8
Visual aids 6 2 0 8
         
2017-2018        
EDEP Research Presentation Exemplary Satisfactory Unacceptable Total
Attention to the audience's perspective 7 2 0 9
Clarity and organization 5 4 0 9
Summary of the research 7 2 0 9
Time limitations 6 3 0 9
Visual aids 6 3 0 9

Student Self-Assessment of SLO 3 on Completion Surveys

The master's program helped me . . .

2015-2016 Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Total
Develop my presentation skills. 2 2 0 0 0 4
             
2016-2017 Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Total
Develop my presentation skills. 3 3 1 0 0 7
             
2017-2018 Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Total
Develop my presentation skills. 4 3 0 0 0 7

We wanted to know if candidates modeled the ethical treatment of research participants (SLO 4).

Faculty Assessment of SLO 4

All students successfully completed the on-line Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI) course on the ethical treatment of human participants in research.

Student Self-Assessment of SLO 4 on Completion Surveys

The master's program helped me . . .

2015-2016 Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Total
Develop my ability to make informed decisions about complex issues. 3 1 0 0 0 4
             
2016-2017 Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Total
Develop my ability to make informed decisions about complex issues. 1 5 1 0 0 7
             
2017-2018 Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Total
Develop my ability to make informed decisions about complex issues. 4 3 0 0 0 7

 

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.

Course changes (course content, pedagogy, courses offered, new course, pre-requisites, requirements)

Our previous years' assessments indicated that students continued to have difficulty with data analysis. Because of this, we changed one of our course requirements in fall 2017 that was effective in spring 2018. Instead of enrolling in EDEP 416: Student Assessment, candidates would need to take a course that could help them with their data analyses. They could choose from EDEP 602: Survey Research Design and Analysis, EDEP 604: Applied Regression and Analysis of Variance, and EDEP 613: Qualitative Research Methods in Education.

Students' Out-of-Course Experience Changes

One of the items with the lowest scores on the student completion surveys (fewer students reporting strongly agree) had to do with candidates' reporting the extent to which the program helped them "target areas of development for my professional growth." In response, the faculty decided to schedule a workshop or meeting that focuses on professional development regarding students' post-degree plans. In the comment section of the course completion survey, one student suggested that we focus a little more on peer connectedness, so we think developing such a session would also address this need.

One student commented that he or she wished that advising was mandatory. The faculty noted that advising is mandatory, and wondered why the student did not realize this. They decided to continue to emphasize this in the new student orientation and to make sure students have advisors when people are on sabbatical or other leave.

Celebration of student success!

Generally high scores on the assessments suggest that the changes we have made previously appear to be working, especially in regard to students' previous lower scores in data analysis. We are happy with these outcomes and celebrated this success.

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 additional comments.

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

This does not apply to our program.