Program: Educational Psychology (PhD)
Degree: Doctorate
Date: Wed Nov 14, 2018 - 5:08:19 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.)
2. 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.)
3. 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.)
4. 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.)
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.
8. Collect/evaluate student work/performance to determine SLO achievement
1. (Knowledge) Faculty members rated the literature reviews of candidates' dissertation proposals and dissertations to determine the extent to which they demonstrated expected bodies of knowledge.
2. (Skills) Faculty members rated the method sections of candidates' dissertation proposals and and dissertations to determine the extent to which they demonstrated expected skills to conduct scholarly research.
3. (Skills) Faculty members rated candidates' dissertation 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 the Collaborative Institional Training Initiative (CITI) 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 the 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.)





















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' dissertation proposals (required of all students): 1
Ratings of candidates’ dissertations (required of all students): 2
Ratings of candidates’ dissertation presentations (required of all students): 2
Candidates' evaluated for completion of the human subjects' training (required of all students): 1
Candidates self-report on on-line survey (all students recruited in their last semester): 2
2016-2017
Ratings of candidates' dissertation proposals (required of all students): 0
Ratings of candidates’ dissertations (required of all students): 2
Ratings of candidates’ dissertation presentations (required of all students): 2
Candidates' evaluated for completion of the human subjects' training (required of all students): 0
Candidates self-report on on-line survey (all students recruited in their last semester): 2
2017-2018
Ratings of candidates' dissertation proposals (required of all students): 10
Ratings of candidates’ dissertations (required of all students): 6
Ratings of candidates’ dissertation presentations (required of all students): 6
Candidates' evaluated for completion of the human subjects' training (required of all students): 5
Candidates self-report on on-line survey (all students recruited in their last semester): 2
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.
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 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Organization | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Statement of research question | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Style and writing conventions | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
EDEP Final Literature Review | Exemplary | Satisfactory | Unacceptable | Total |
Context | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Organization | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Revision | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Statement of research question | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Style and writing conventions | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
2016-2017 | ||||
EDEP Proposal Literature Review | Exemplary | Satisfactory | Unacceptable | Total |
Context | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Organization | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Statement of research question | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Style and writing conventions | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
EDEP Final Literature Review | Exemplary | Satisfactory | Unacceptable | Total |
Context | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Organization | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
Revision | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Statement of research question | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Style and writing conventions | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
2017-2018 | ||||
EDEP Proposal Literature Review | Exemplary | Satisfactory | Unacceptable | Total |
Context | 6 | 4 | 0 | 10 |
Organization | 6 | 4 | 0 | 10 |
Statement of research question | 8 | 2 | 0 | 10 |
Style and writing conventions | 5 | 5 | 0 | 10 |
EDEP Final Literature Review | Exemplary | Satisfactory | Unacceptable | Total |
Context | 4 | 2 | 0 | 6 |
Organization | 4 | 2 | 0 | 6 |
Revision | 5 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
Statement of research question | 5 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
Style and writing conventions | 6 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
Student Self-Assessment of SLO 1 on Completion Surveys
The doctoral program in educational psychology helped me to . . .
2015-2016 | Strongly Agree | Agree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | Total |
Become more knowledgeable about learning and development. | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Become more knowledgeable about research methods. | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Become more knowledgeable about student assessment. | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
2016-2017 | Strongly Agree | Agree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | Total |
Become more knowledgeable about learning and development. | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Become more knowledgeable about research methods. | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Become more knowledgeable about student assessment. | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
2017-2018 | Strongly Agree | Agree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | Total |
Become more knowledgeable about learning and development. | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
Become more knowledgeable about research methods. | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
Become more knowledgeable about student assessment. | 1 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
5 |
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 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Participants | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Procedures | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Research design | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
EDEP Final Method Section | Exemplary | Satisfactory | Unacceptable | Total |
Data analysis | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Participants | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Procedures | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Research design | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Revision | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
2016-2017 | ||||
EDEP Proposal Method Section | Exemplary | Satisfactory | Unacceptable | Total |
Data analysis | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Participants | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Procedures | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Research design | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
EDEP Final Method Section | Exemplary | Satisfactory | Unacceptable | Total |
Data analysis | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Participants | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Procedures | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Research design | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Revision | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
2017-2018 | ||||
EDEP Proposal Method Section | Exemplary | Satisfactory | Unacceptable | Total |
Data analysis | 6 | 4 | 0 | 10 |
Participants | 7 | 3 | 0 | 10 |
Procedures | 5 | 5 | 0 | 10 |
Research design | 8 | 2 | 0 | 10 |
EDEP Final Method Section | Exemplary | Satisfactory | Unacceptable | Total |
Data analysis | 4 | 2 | 0 | 6 |
Participants | 5 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
Procedures | 3 | 2 | 1 | 6 |
Research design | 4 | 2 | 0 | 6 |
Revision | 3 | 2 | 1 | 6 |
Student Self-Assessment of SLO 2 on Completion Surveys
The doctoral program in educational psychology helped me to . . .
2015-2016 | Strongly Agree | Agree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | Total |
Develop my ability to apply research skills. | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
2016-2017 | Strongly Agree | Agree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | Total |
Develop my ability to apply research skills. | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
2017-2018 | Strongly Agree | Agree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | Total |
Develop my ability to apply research skills. | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
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 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Clarity and organization | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Summary of the research | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Time limitations | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Visual aids | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
2016-2017 | ||||
EDEP Research Presentation | Exemplary | Satisfactory | Unacceptable | Total |
Attention to the audience's perspective | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Clarity and organization | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Summary of the research | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Time limitations | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Visual aids | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
2017-2018 | ||||
EDEP Research Presentation | Exemplary | Satisfactory | Unacceptable | Total |
Attention to the audience's perspective | 3 | 3 | 0 | 6 |
Clarity and organization | 4 | 2 | 0 | 6 |
Summary of the research | 3 | 3 | 0 | 6 |
Time limitations | 5 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
Visual aids | 3 | 3 | 0 | 6 |
Student Self-Assessment of SLO 3 on Completion Surveys
The doctoral program in educational psychology helped me to . . .
2015-2016 | Strongly Agree | Agree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | Total |
Develop my professional presentation skills. | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
2016-2017 | Strongly Agree | Agree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | Total |
Develop my professional presentation skills. | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | |
2017-2018 | Strongly Agree | Agree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | Total |
Develop my professional presentation skills. | 1 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
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
2015-2016 | Strongly Agree | Agree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | Total |
Apply ethical considerations to research with human participants. | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
2016-2017 | Strongly Agree | Agree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | Total |
Apply ethical considerations to research with human participants. | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
2017-2018 | Strongly Agree | Agree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | Total |
Apply ethical considerations to research with human participants. | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
14) What best describes how the program used the results? (Check all that apply.)









15) Please briefly describe how the program used the results.
Celebration of student success!
The faculty is pleased that the ratings of student proposals and dissertations appear to show improvement from 2015 to 2018. They also noted that the dissertation ratings were higher than those of the proposals, perhaps also suggesting positive change across time. We celebrated these successes.
Students' Out-of-Course Experience Changes
In the comment section of the student completion survey, one student commented on needing more guidance for choosing the dissertation chair and committee members, and another student commented on wanting more opportunities for students to connect with one another. The faculty discussed convening a workshop for students to discuss how to choose a chair and committee members and that such an event would also provide an opportunity for students to connect more with each other.
Assessment Procedure Changes
The faculty discussed a result from the student completion survey that indicated that a few students were dissatisfied with funding from the Department. The item was stated, “How satisfied were you with funding you received from your department?” The Department has limited funding for graduate students, but faculty members try to bring funding opportunities from the College and University to students’ attention. Thus, we decided to change that item to, “How satisfied were you with funding you received from the Department, College, or University?” in order to reflect other sources of funding that are available to students.
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 other comments.
17) If the program did not engage in assessment activities, please justify.
Not applicable.