Unit: Natural Resources & Environmental Management
Program: Natural Resources & Environmental Mgt (PhD)
Degree: Doctorate
Date: Wed Nov 14, 2018 - 11:50:34 am

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

1. Students demonstrate knowledge of social and ecological principles, and interdisciplinary aspects of natural resource and environmental management issues

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

2. Students can analyze and address natural resource and environmental management problems by using appropriate methods from social and/or natural science disciplines

(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.)

3. Students communicate effectively, both orally and in writing, to diverse audiences including professionals, resource managers, local communities and policy makers.

(5. Proficiently communicate and disseminate information in a manner relevant to the field and intended audience.)

4. Students can conduct original, independent scientific research of professional quality in their specialization area (Ph.D.)

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

5. Students can function as professionals in their specialization area by demonstrating responsible and ethical conduct, effective collaboration, informed decision making, and life-long learning

(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: https://cms.ctahr.hawaii.edu/nrem
Student Handbook. URL, if available online: https://cms.ctahr.hawaii.edu/nrem/GRADUATE
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online:
UHM Catalog. Page Number:
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online: Not available online; contact NREM directly for syllabi
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.

In 2013-2016, the NREM curriculum committee worked to develop a new, required MS/MEM core course that meets departmental SLOs. In this assessment period, follow up activities have taken steps to finalize the course concepts and transfer the responsibility for implementation to the instructors.  A pilot course was taught in Spring 2016, with full roll out AY 2017-2018.
In Spring 2018, we conducted a student self-learning “exit” assessment against our program SLOs (using an online form-fillable survey). In Fall 2018, we conducted a similar “entrance” survey for incoming graduate students. We will be conducting this entrance and exit survey every semester for incoming and outgoing students.
Our graduate core (NREM 600/601), capstone (NREM 696), and MS thesis (NREM 700) cover our program SLOs, and grades from these courses also reflect a type of assessment against program SLOs.
Finally, we piloted a program SLO assessment rubric in NREM capstone defenses (NREM 696) in Spring 2018, and will be using a modified form of this rubric in all graduate student defenses starting in Fall 2019.
 

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: Rubrics created for capstone, thesis, and dissertation (proposal and final stages)
Other 2:

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

Incoming student self-evaluation: 17 (Spring 2018); 23 (Fall 2018)

All teaching faculty (syllabi, curriculum map).

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.

Core course designed, piloted Spring 2016, then successfully taught for two years, with solid student evaluation scores and evidence of improved preparation of students in subsequent courses.

Rubric to measure SLO achievement piloted in Spring 2018, and deployed Fall 2018 at the stages of capstone/thesis/dissertation proposal and final defenses. The rubric is now included in grad program guidelines. This will enable us to assess percentage of students who meet each SLO in future assessments.

At retreats, faculty discussed prioritizing staffing to reinforce quantitative skills.

Students have self assessed level of understanding of key principles at entry to the program. We will compare this to exit surveys to evaluate learning. We will also have them self-assess achievement of SLOs.

MEM program was approved.

PhD and MS-C program requirements were revised.

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.

Please see answers for questions 13 and 14

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 continue to struggle to replace retired faculty, which leaves big gaps in the curriculum.

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

Program engaged in assessment activities.