Program: Law (JD)
Degree: Doctor, Juris
Date: Wed Nov 18, 2020 - 5:31:49 pm
1) Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) and Institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs)
1. Understand ethical responsibilities as representatives of clients, officers of the court, and public citizens responsible for the quality and availability of justice
(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. Obtain basic education through a curriculum that develops: (a) understanding of the theory, philosophy, role, and ramifications of the law and its institutions; (b) proficiency in legal analysis, reasoning, problem solving; oral and written communication; legal research; (c) fundamental professional practices necessary to participate effectively in the legal profession; (d) mastery of substantive law regarded as necessary to effective and responsible participation in the legal profession through a completion of a curriculum of required and elective study;
(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., 7. Interact professionally with others.)
3. Understand the law as a public profession calling for performance of Pro Bono legal services
(6. Conduct research or projects as a responsible and ethical professional, including consideration of and respect for other cultural perspectives.)
4. Promote the development of students' critical thinking skills and other intellectual tools that will serve their life-long learning needs, and enable them to provide leadership in law through contributions in research and practice
(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. Understand and respect law as a social institution in the context of a diverse state with a unique and important history
(6. Conduct research or projects as a responsible and ethical professional, including consideration of and respect for other cultural perspectives.)
6. Recognize our global connectedness, especially to the Asia and Pacific regions
(6. Conduct research or projects as a responsible and ethical professional, including consideration of and respect for other cultural perspectives.)
2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.
Department Website URL: https://www.law.hawaii.edu/jd/student-learning-outcomes Student Handbook. URL, if available online: https://www.law.hawaii.edu/student-handbook
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.
- File (11/14/2020)
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.
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 SLOs6) 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.
Most students take the bar exam in July and/or February following graduation. The bar exam is an accreditation test that demonstrates evidence of learning (SLO 2). We receive and post results of bar passage rates on our website and report the results to the American Bar Association annually. (https://www.law.hawaii.edu/about-us/quick-facts/bar)
All existing students are required to provide 60 hours of pro bono service. Their participation provides evidence for SLO 3. Every student is evaluated by a pro bono supervisor(s) who provides a final assessment of their performance.
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: Completion of Supervisors' Registration and Evaluation Forms for students' pro bono service. Other 2: 10) State the number of students (or persons) who submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
Total number of 2019 graduates who took the bar exam (any jurisdiction): 70 (of 88 total graduates)
Total number of 2019 graduates sitting for a bar exam who passed: 46
2019 graduates bar pass rate: 65.72%
See: https://www.law.hawaii.edu/about-us/quick-facts/bar and 2020 ABA Bar Passage Report info.
The 2019 bar pass rate of first-time test takes from UH Law had dropped in the last few years (81% passage in 2018 and 76% passage in 2017).
While assessment and use of findings are ongoing activities, recent Hawaii bar results show promise:
Total number of 2020 graduates taking the Hawaii bar for the 1st time: 53 (of 86 graduates)*
Total number of 2020 graduates (1st time takers) passed the Hawaii bar: 42
2020 graduates (1st time takers) bar pass rate: 79.2%
For SLO 3, 100% of students completed pro bono requirements prior to graduates.
*Fewer people sat for the Hawaii bar exam in 2020 due to pandemic challenges (e.g., safety concerns, exam dates postponed, etc.)
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: record tracking13) 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.
Related to SLO2, the bar exam passage rate for UH Law graduates in Fall 2019 was 65.72%.
This was down from prior years of 81% in 2018 and 76% in 2017.
Most recently, the Fall 2020 bar passage rate was 79.2%.
Results from SLO3 indicate that 100% of all graduating students completed their required 60 hours pro bono service.
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: sought and received funding to assess new bar prep courses15) Please briefly describe how the program used its findings/results.
Faculty discussed the results of the bar exam as a full faculty and in committee meetings (Bar Success Committee, Curriculum Committee) and made a series of actions intended to improve students' bar passage rates:
1. Added a free, uncredited "MBE Intensive Course" (bar skills prep course) during Spring Break (March 2020).
2. Added a 3-credit course "Advanced Legal Analysis" (bar skills prep course) to Fall 2020 curriculum.
3. Sought and obtained a grant from AccessLex to evaluate bar prep courses above.
4. Curriculum Committee has initiated a comprehensive survey of curriculum to assess bar content coverage.
5. Experiential Learning (Clinics) Committee is developing a plan to survey bar and practice skills in coordination with the Curriculum Committee.
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.
During this reporting period, the Law faculty undertook assessment actions related to faculty hiring and Dean's search activities. Specific actions include the following:
1. Survey of curriculum needs related faculty hiring completed during Fall 2019. 23 of 40 faculty identified core and desired curricular needs; faculty engaged in robust discussions about curriculum needs; and Appointments Committee proposed candidates related to the identified needs and curriculum gaps.
2. Law School SWOT analysis completed by a majority of faculty during Fall 2019 in anticipation of Dean's search. Identified range of issues, including needs for strategic planning, curriculum review, and other program considerations.
17) If the program did not engage in assessment activities, please justify.
N/A