Degree Program Assessment Reports : View Reports

Unit: Geography and Environment
Program: Geography (PhD)
Degree: Doctorate
Date: Tue Nov 10, 2020 - 2:54:33 pm

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

1. Develop a basic understanding of the discipline of geography as a whole, its relationship with cognate fields, and its contribution to knowledge. This entails a working knowledge of the general literature in geography, and familiarity with the structure of the discipline, including the principal sub-disciplines, the main philosophical approaches and unique geographical concepts.

(1. Demonstrate comprehensive knowledge in one or more general subject areas related to, but not confined to, a specific area of interest.)

2. Develop a detailed understanding of at least one specialty within the discipline. This entails thorough knowledge of a particular literature, its major works, its historical development and its main theories and empirical findings.

(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.)

3. Develop an ability to do independent research of professional quality. This requires gaining theoretical and practical knowledge of specific research techniques and demonstrating this knowledge in the conduct of original research.

(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.)

4. Develop an ability to communicate the results of research in both oral and written forms. This requires the demonstration of skills in oral presentations and formal papers within the context of graduate course work. The thesis ultimately provides evidence of the ability to write up research and, although a formal presentation and defense is not required, students are strongly encouraged to present their work orally to the department.

(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.)

5. Develop a familiarity with, and respect for the codes of practice established for academic study, including academic honesty and research ethics (as outlined in the Appendix of the UHM General Graduate and Information Catalog [www.catalog.hawaii.edu/pdf] and the Student Conduct Code in the Schedule of Courses ). All students are expected to conform with these codes of conduct.

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

Department Website URL: http://www.geography.hawaii.edu/gradOverview.html

Student Handbook. URL, if available online: https://geography.manoa.hawaii.edu/geog-phd-handbook/

Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online:

UHM Catalog. Page Number:

Course Syllabi. URL, if available online:

Other: Graduate Division approved program statement

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

Curriculum Map File(s) from 2020:

File #1 (11/10/2020)
File #2 (11/10/2020)

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.

Every spring, students are required to check in with their respective advisor and re-state their target dates to achieve discreet steps towards degree goal, and propose necessary actions on the part of both the student and the advisor/department.
When a student graduates, the thesis advisor makes an independent assessment on how the student meet the standards established in the program SLOs
At the end of each academic year, a faculty committee convenes to evaluate the performance of all students and give awards on a) the best paper published by a graduate student; b) the best presentation (oral and poster) by a graduate student at the department symposium; and c) the best graduating student (for both MA and PhD) overall

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.

1) annual self report by graduate students: all enrolled students (30 PhD students in Sp 2019; 29 MA students in Sp 2020)

2) presentation of dissertation proposals: 6 in 2018-20

4) PhD theses defense (required of all graduating students): 7 in 2018-20

5) Final theses evaluation (all graduating students): 7 PhD dissertations

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: Graduate Chair

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.

Theory (SLO1, 2)	3.71
Methods (SLO 3)	3.71
Oral Communication (SLO 4)	3.71
Written Communication (SLO 4)	3.86
Originality / Creativity (SLO 3)	3.71
Overall assessment (SLO 1-5)	3.71

number of PhD students = 7

score legend:

1 = unacceptable

2 = marginal

3 = acceptable

4 = exceptional

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.

1) refinement of course design and offerings

2) The end of school year celebration in May.

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.

Since we started the competition for best publications by a graduate students, more students were encouraged to start publishing before finishing the program.

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

2. Develop a detailed understanding of at least one specialty within the discipline. This entails thorough knowledge of a particular literature, its major works, its historical development and its main theories and empirical findings.

3. Develop an ability to do independent research of professional quality. This requires gaining theoretical and practical knowledge of specific research techniques and demonstrating this knowledge in the conduct of original research.

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.