Degree Program Assessment Reports

For the 2017-2019 assessment, the University of Hawaii at Mānoa’s Department of Women’s Studies employed a student survey. Exit interviews from graduating seniors were not collected due to Departmental restructuring and COVID-19, and thus are not represented in this three year assessment report. The student survey asked questions that aligned with departmental Student Learning Objectives (SLOs). This assessment report includes several tables depicting data ranges and table summaries to assist in data interpretation for both the Department and the University. 

For the 2017-2019 assessment, 164 students completed self-assessment surveys. Surveys were conducted in class and near the end of the regular semester with the aim of collecting student perceptions of their learning and achievement of SLOs. 

Summaries 

As demonstrated in Table 1, students believed that Women’s Studies classes improved their understanding of key concepts. Conceptual understanding, however, is inconsistent with the significant majority of students reporting that they better understood intersectionality, sexuality, gender, and masculinity (over 90% respectively). Almost one-third of students were neutral or disagreed that they had a better understanding of how key concepts manifest in an Asia-Pacific context. During our October faculty meeting, we discussed this issue: going forward, we plan to be more explicit about how the course discusses Asia-Pacific concepts and contexts, and how they relate with field concepts. In other words, the Women’s Studies faculty have indeed been teaching Asia-Pacific materials in courses, but we recognize it may need to be made clearer for students in order for them to connect materials specifically related to this concept more easily and in connection with field concepts more readily recognized and understood. 

Key terms with high rates of neutral response to better understanding include Race (19.5%), Class (19.8%), and Social Stratification (20.1%). On this matter, Women’s Studies faculty have decided to remove “social stratification” from our SLO for future years, particularly because this concept is outdated in the field. In terms of “race and class” designations, we have also discussed these in our courses using specific materials and unit themes. However, because these are articulated as intersecting with gender, students may not immediately grasp the concepts/contexts as distinct topics. The majority of students in Women’s Studies classes (more than 80%) do understand that race and class are being discussed in the course and to what ends. Nonetheless, to help everyone in the class learn better and understand these topics more clearly, we will articulate “race and class” more explicitly in both our course syllabi and materials. Generally, students report better understanding. However, the areas most impacted with neutral or disagreement reporting were consistent in individual years and across the three year data totals. To boost these responses, we intend—as stated above—to further articulate the explicit nature of specific topics and themes via syllabi, course units/themes, and course materials. 

Tables 2-4 represent individuated data per collection year. These tables show significant improvement (10% or more) in students’ conceptual understanding in the areas of Race and Asia-Pacific concepts from 2017-2019, although a drop between 2018 and 2019 still reflecting overall improvement across three years. This is critical to place-based applications and students’ survey responses indicate improvements across courses in these areas. Conversely, there is fluctuation from 2017 to 2019 in students’ conceptual understanding in the following areas, both expressed in 2018 and 2019 as represented in neutral and disagree/strongly disagree responses: Social Stratification and Masculinity. Intersectionality, Sexuality, and Gender remain consistent. 

Tables 5 shows a decrease in freshman and graduate or unclassified students enrolled in Women’s Studies courses; this is countered by an increase in senior students enrolled in courses by nearly double (16.9% in 2017 to 28.3%% in 2019). Junior student enrollment remains steady in these reporting years, with small increase from 2017 to 2019 (only 0.6%). However, there is sharp decrease in senior-level students from 2018 to 2019, from 51.9% to 28.3%, despite expressing an overall increase over three years. This could reflect higher graduation rates in the 2018 AY.  

Table 6 shows an increase in Women’s Studies majors comprising course enrollments (10.4% in 2017 to 11.5% in 2019), but also shows a sharp decrease in minors (7.8% in 2017 to just 1.6% in 2019). Table 6 also shows undergraduate and graduate students reporting they are undeclared or potentially in certificate programs (14.3% in 2017 to only 4.9% in 2019), and nearly a 15% increase in Other students during these reporting years. 

Tables 7 and 8 show an interesting combination of increased speaking in class and decreased written production. Specifically, Table 7 shows an increase in written production in 2019, but a total reduction in written production from an average of 36.3% of 2017 respondents writing 11 or more pages in the course to only 19.9% of total 2019 respondents writing 11 or more pages in the course. Similarly, Table 8 shows both an increase from 2017 to 2019 in students self-reporting that they never speak in class and students self-reporting that they speak in almost every class, at 16.9% in 2017 to 27.1% in 2019 and 3.8% in 2017 to 11.9% in 2019 respectively.

Table 9 is perhaps one of the most encouraging in that it depicts a significant increase in community applications and practices for Women’s Studies students. Designing courses, providing instruction, and facilitating learning that enables students to think and write across disciplines is an integral function of Women’s Studies. Students report that their coursework does indeed translate to women-, gender-, and/or sexuality-related community engagement. Of special note is that 76.7% of students in 2019 report that they agreed or strongly agreed that their course fostered this engagement, up from 48% in 2017. Substantial decrease also occurred in both neutral and disagree/strongly disagree responses, with the latter seeing a reduction from 16.9% in 2017 to just 3.3% in 2019.