Degree Program Assessment Reports : View Reports

Unit: Anthropology
Program: Anthropology (BA)
Degree: Bachelor's
Date: Mon Dec 07, 2020 - 1:09:58 pm

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

1. Learn to think anthropologically, specifically to include cross-cultural perspectives, especially in regard to issues of diversity and commonality in understanding human societies.

(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. Gain a basic understanding of the origin and development of humanity.

(1a. General education, 1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 1c. Understand Hawaiian culture and history, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 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. Develop the ability to think critically about cultural assumptions and use active learning modes in assessing their effects on social processes.

4. Acquire a holistic understanding of how biological evolution and cultural histories interact.

5. Understand how populations adapt to social and environmental change, especially in terms of human empowerment.

6. Become culturally literate with regard to the physical and cultural dimensions of the Pacific and Asian regions, including historical movements and connections among diverse populations.

7. Learn various methods employed by anthropologists from a variety of sub-disciplines and specializations.

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

Department Website URL: The SLOs are published on https://anthropology.manoa.hawaii.edu/ba-requirements/

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:

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

Curriculum Map File(s) from 2020:

File (11/20/2020)

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 November 1, 2018 and October 31, 2020?

Yes

No (skip to question 17)

7) What best describes the program-level learning assessment activities that took place for the period November 1, 2018 and October 31, 2020? (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)

Investigate other pressing issue related to student learning achievement for the program (explain in question 8)

Other:

8) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place since November 2018.

In Fall 2017, a faculty member created the Signature Assignment and Rubric to assess PLO1, 'Thinking Anthropologically' for ANTH 490 (capstone course) for majors. The Signature Assignment was designed to help students self evaluate their learning and insights based on the department's PLO. Three subskills related to 'thinking anthropologically' that were important emphasis in the curricula were identified. Faculty brainstormed and exchanged teaching strategies and developed a pedagogical inventory to ensure the development of student skills in our bachelor's degree program.

In Fall 2020, the department continued with these efforts, and all signature assignments since the last assessment were analyzed. Faculty in the department collaboratively evaluated student papers of varying levels of achievement. Each student response was assessed by two faculty members in a large review process coordinated by the department's assessment team. Faculty brainstormed and discussed the department's assessment methodologies, re-evaluated the pedagogical inventory to ensure the development of student skills in the degree program, and established strategies to institutionalize assessment protocols into our program.

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.

Twenty-one student papers were collected, of which 42 assessments were completed. The relatively small sampling is due to the infrequency of the course offerings and the number of student majors in the courses, i.e., non-majors papers were not included in the sampling.

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 from the evaluation, analysis, interpretation of evidence (checked in question 12). For example, report the percentage of students who achieved each SLO.

The signature assignment for ANTH 490 (capstone) examined PLO#1 'thinking anthropologically' based on four areas of learning: 1) Discussion of Learning; 2) History of Anthropology; 3) Quality of Analysis; and 4) Spit and Polish. The rubric was scored using approximately 60 prompts. The scoring range was between "0" for no evidence of accomplishment to "4" for highly accomplished.

For the three areas of Discussion of Learning, Quality of Analysis, and Spit and Polish, the students averaged a score of "3" for all the papers evaluated by faculty, indicating a very high level of achievement. For the area of History of Anthropology, the average score was "2" or a satisfactory level of achievement.

The evaluations indicate that all the graduating students not only met the minimal expectations for PLO 1: 'Thinking Anthropologically', but achieved a high level or had exceeded expectations in 3 of the 4 areas and also achieved a satisfactory level of expectation in the fourth area.

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 its findings/results.

The department faculty collaboratively scored and evaluated student papers for ANTH 490. In general, faculty evaluators were pleased with the results of the signature assignments. The faculty was able to reflect on what were important criteria in scoring student work to scaffold student learning across the curriculum. The faculty noted that: 1) students were able to see detailed connections across subfields/foci/ departments; 2) identify in detail themes, theories across the curriculum; and 3) carefully weave in several different authors in their analysis.

Moving forward, the assessment team, the department chair, and other faculty members recognized that there is room for improvement, e.g. to better integrate the assessment processes into the regular operations of the department.

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.

Faculty members were generally resistant to the assessment process as attention is diverted from their efforts to develop curricula, fulfill teaching workloads and academic administrative tasks, write grants, conduct research, and work on publications. Assessment may also tend to be more reflective of student motivations than about the department's pedagogical abilities in the view of some faculty.

However, regardless of these views, as the assessment results have indicated, majors achieved on average high levels of understanding as seen by the BA signature assignment scores, and faculty were pleased to see this.

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

1. Learn to think anthropologically, specifically to include cross-cultural perspectives, especially in regard to issues of diversity and commonality in understanding human societies.

2. Gain a basic understanding of the origin and development of humanity.

3. Develop the ability to think critically about cultural assumptions and use active learning modes in assessing their effects on social processes.

4. Acquire a holistic understanding of how biological evolution and cultural histories interact.

5. Understand how populations adapt to social and environmental change, especially in terms of human empowerment.

6. Become culturally literate with regard to the physical and cultural dimensions of the Pacific and Asian regions, including historical movements and connections among diverse populations.

7. Learn various methods employed by anthropologists from a variety of sub-disciplines and specializations.

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

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

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 November 1, 2018 and October 31, 2020?

7) What best describes the program-level learning assessment activities that took place for the period November 1, 2018 and October 31, 2020? (Check all that apply.)

8) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place since November 2018.

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.

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 from the evaluation, analysis, interpretation of evidence (checked in question 12). For example, report the percentage of students who achieved each SLO.

14) What best describes how the program used the results? (Check all that apply.)

15) Please briefly describe how the program used its findings/results.

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.

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