Degree Program Assessment Reports : View Reports

Unit: Earth Sciences
Program: Earth and Planetary Sciences (PhD)
Degree: Doctorate
Date: Fri Nov 16, 2018 - 5:39:48 pm

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

1. Technical knowledge: Ph.D. graduates are proficient in applying technical knowledge of relevant theory, laboratory methods, field methods, computer applications, and the supporting disciplines (math, physics, chemistry, biology) to advance the fields of geology and geophysics.

(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., 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., 5. Proficiently communicate and disseminate information in a manner relevant to the field and intended audience., 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. Expertise in a sub-discipline: Ph.D. graduates are able to comprehensively synthesize, evaluate, and interpret relevant fundamental knowledge in her or his sub-discipline.

3. Scientific method (effective and ethical practice): Ph.D. graduates are able to independently (a) construct scientific hypotheses, (b) design and carry out research to evaluate them in a timely manner, (c) analyze and synthesize the results of their research, and (d) derive conclusions that advance the fields of geology and geophysics. The highest standards of ethical practice are emphasized.ï¿½

4. Communicate geological knowledge: Ph.D. graduates are able to effectively communicate the findings of their research in writing at a level comparable to that of scientific journal publications, and defend it orally to the satisfaction of a scientific audience. They are also able to communicate orally about Geology though seminar or conference presentations.

5. Employability/Contributions: Post-Graduation Ph.D. graduates have acquired the knowledge and skills in the profession needed to pursue employment or other activities that contribute to the advancement of the Earth sciences and/or the solution of societal problems.

2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update asneeded.

Department Website URL: http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/GG/resources/docs/gg-grad-SLO_Master_Checklist_Final.pdf

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: http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/GG/academics/gg_syllabi.html

Other:

3) Please review, add, replace, or delete the existing curriculum map.

Curriculum Map File(s) from 2018:

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.

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):

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.

All PhD candidates in our department are evaluated annually (by their employers, advisors and the Graduate Studies Committee). They must also submit updated CV’s annually. In addition, they are formally evaluated during their dissertation proposals, comprehensive exams and final oral exams. As a follow up to this, we adjust the timing and offerings of our graduate lecture and seminar courses to accommodate our students. We do this to respond to student needs, keep course offerings current, topical, and up-to-date.

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.

102.

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: The student surveys contain information on progress on their thesis and class availability; this bears on SLOs.

13) Summarize the results of the assessment activities checked in question 7. For example, report the percentage of students who achieved each SLO.

We assess all the graduate students annually. We adjust the timing and offerings of our graduate lecture and seminar courses to accommodate our students. 100% of our MS students meet the PhD SLOs.

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.

We adjusted the timing and offerings of our graduate lecture and seminar courses to accommodate our students. We also have filed forms to open up more classes at the 600-level.

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 need to better coordinate and share information on assessment matters on faculty members. This might be done via Google docs. We have been focusing our assessment attention primarily on our undergraduate curriculum and our new MGeo program, which has stopped out. We are aware that we need to also address the assessment of our graduate program beyond the assessment of our graduate students. We also plan to develop a graduate student showcase this coming spring for our graduate students to display their research results.

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

We did engage in assessment activities.