Program: Hawaiian (BA)
Date: Thu Nov 19, 2020 - 5:16:48 pm
1) Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) and Institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs)
1. Speaking: Engage in conversations, provide and obtain information, express feelings and emotions, and exchange opinions on more abstract topics at an advanced level of fluency and accuracy
(1b. Specialized study in an academic field)
2. Speaking: Present information, concepts, and ideas to an audience of listeners at an advanced level of fluency and accuracy
(1b. Specialized study in an academic field)
3. Listening: Understand and interpret spoken Hawaiian at an advanced level on a variety of topics beyond the immediacy of the situation
(1b. Specialized study in an academic field)
4. Reading: Comprehend and interpret a wide variety of texts written in Hawaiian that are more conceptually abstract and linguistically complex, and/or texts that focus on unfamiliar topics and situations (e.g., primary source materials like literature, poetry, newspaper articles written by native speakers of Hawaiian)
(1b. Specialized study in an academic field)
5. Writing: Present information, concepts, and ideas to an audience of readers in a variety of more lengthy written forms about a number of possible topics using advanced vocabulary, expressions, and structures
(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2c. Communicate and report)
6. Cultures, Comparisons, Connections, Communities: Deepen understanding of and respect for the Hawaiian culture and its people through the study of unique practices, perspectives, issues, and products of the culture that are expressed through and embedded in the Hawaiian language.
(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture)
7. Cultures, Comparisons, Connections, Communities: Continue to develop insight into the nature of language and culture by comparing Hawaiian language and culture to other languages and cultures.
(1a. General education, 1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 1c. Understand Hawaiian culture and history, 2a. Think critically and creatively)
8. Cultures, Comparisons, Connections, Communities: Expand and broaden appropriate application of Hawaiian language and culture in authentic settings within and beyond the classroom in order to connect to other disciplines, contexts, and domains, access information, and interact with others in the Hawaiian language community.
(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 1c. Understand Hawaiian culture and history, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture, 3d. Civic participation)
2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.
Student Handbook. URL, if available online: http://manoa.hawaii.edu/nhss/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Fall-2017-Welina-Kawaihuelani-Student-Handbook-Final.pdf
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online:
UHM Catalog. Page Number:
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online:
Other: We are adding our program SLOs to the UHM 2021-2022 Course Catalog
3) Please review, add, replace, or delete the existing curriculum map.
- File (11/19/2020)
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.
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?
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.)
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: Pilot new assessment documents, tools, processes for First-Year level courses (e.g., course SLOs, exam, rubric)
8) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place since November 2018.
In our last Assessment Report, we reported on a new program assessment cycle that we were beginning for our First Year Hawaiian language courses. Specifically, an ad hoc committee of instructors of HAW 101 and 102 courses revisited previously created program materials/documents for this language level (e.g., Program SLOs, internal articulation agreements), revised them where necessary, and then created new materials/documents/processes (e.g., course SLOs, exam, rubric) for the purposes of aligning the content, pedagogy, and student learning outcomes of our First Year courses as well as assessing our student’s learning at this important entry point into our program. Since our last Assessment Report, we shared our newly drafted/revised First Year assessment documents with our department’s Curriculum and Academic Affairs committees for feedback. Then, the First Year instructors who developed these documents began to pilot them in their courses, beginning in Fall 2018 and continuing to the present. After two years of piloting we are now poised to reconvene this ad hoc committee next semester to revisit the draft documents, discuss what worked and what did not based on evidence collected during the pilot, and then make revisions before presenting the documents to the entire faculty for adoption.
During this same timeframe, our department began to look closely at an outcome of our 2016 MA rubric assessment analysis: to develop and strengthen our undergraduate program by creating a capstone experience required for majors and/or develop a rubric assessment process for our undergraduate program in order to directly assess our undergraduate program SLOs. Through conversations at committee and departmental levels, our faculty decided this semester to revisit an existing course and explore ways to reimagine it to possibly become a capstone course for our majors. This activity is still in the early stages but some preliminary and very promising ideas have already begun to surface.
9) What types of evidence did the program use as part of the assessment activities checked in question 7? (Check all that apply.)
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.)
10) State the number of students (or persons) who submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
In the time since our last Assessment Report, we piloted new/revised First Year course SLOs, pedagogical guidelines, and learning opportunities (assignments, exams, and rubrics) in HAW 101 and 102 courses taught by the 5 instructional faculty who helped develop these new assessment materials and tools. Next semester the same ad hoc committee of faculty who developed and piloted the new assessment materials will be reconvening to share evidence of student learning collected from their pilots in order to assess the effectiveness of the new assessment materials and then make revisions where necessary before presentation of these materials to the entire faculty for adoption. We look forward to reporting on this next step of our assessment cycle in our next Assessment Report.
We are still in the very early stages of discussion around the creation of a capstone course/experience for our majors, therefore, the evidence we collected so far has focused on materials (syllabi, assignments, course proposal, etc.) associated with a course that our faculty identified as the one to be reimagined into a capstone for our majors.
11) Who interpreted or analyzed the evidence that was collected? (Check all that apply.)
Ad hoc faculty group
Persons or organization outside the university
Advisors (in student support services)
Students (graduate or undergraduate)
12) How did they evaluate, analyze, or interpret the evidence? (Check all that apply.)
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)
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.
While the faculty who are conducting our First Year pilot have been doing their own, real-time evaluation of the effectiveness and appropriate of the new assessment materials, tools, and procedures in their individual classes, the formal evaluation, analysis, and interpretation of evidence is set to begin next semester. We look forward to reporting on these results in our next Assessment Report.
Our faculty began to review existing documents associated with the course that could potentially become a capstone. This initial review lead to a decision to create an ad hoc committee made up of members of both our departmental Curriculum and Academic Affairs committees that would take the lead in modifying the course into a capstone, thus creating a way for us to directly assess student achievement of our undergraduate program SLOs. This committee will discuss and develop the capstone and share back its progress and ideas with the full faculty periodically and then, after departmental approval, the committee will submit the modified course and BA degree requirements for official approval.
14) What best describes how the program used the results? (Check all that apply.)
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)
15) Please briefly describe how the program used its findings/results.
As explained above, our faculty decided to revisit an existing course in our undergraduate curriculum and explore ways to reimagine it to possibly become a required, capstone course for our majors. This decision is a direct result of findings from our 2016 MA rubric assessment analysis, which called for our department to consider creating a capstone experience required for majors in order to directly assess our undergraduate program SLOs. We are excited to move forward with this activity in the semesters to come. As for our other assessment activity, results of our First Year pilot are forthcoming.
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.
While not directly related to a specific assessment activity, we did want to report that our department spent a considerable amount of time over the last two years developing a relationship with the College of Education in order to create a Bachelor’s to Master’s Degree (BAM) Pathway for students who are interested in becoming Hawaiian language immersion teachers. The Kula Kaiapuni or Hawaiian Language Immersion Schools make up a community to whom our department has a kuleana (responsibility) to support in various ways, one of which is preparing future kaiapuni teachers in the area of Hawaiian language. You see this kuleana reflected in many of our undergraduate and graduate courses that focus on language within the context of the kaiapuni classroom. Our BAM Pathway is in the final stages of approval and will become available to qualified HAW majors in Fall 2021, thus providing a pathway through our undergraduate curriculum that relates to one of our Program SLOs: to expand and broaden appropriate application of Hawaiian language and culture in authentic settings within and beyond the classroom in order to connect to other disciplines, contexts, and domains, access information, and interact with others in the Hawaiian language community.