Program: Educational Psychology (PhD)
Date: Wed Nov 18, 2020 - 8:21:52 pm
1) Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) and Institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs)
1. Educational Psychology graduate students are knowledgeable about learning and development, inquiry methods, and student assessment.
(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.)
2. Educational Psychology graduate students have inquiry skills to conduct scholarly research effectively.
(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.)
3. Educational Psychology graduate students present scholarly research effectively.
(5. Proficiently communicate and disseminate information in a manner relevant to the field and intended audience., 7. Interact professionally with others.)
4. Educational Psychology graduate students model the ethical treatment of research participants.
(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., 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) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.
Student Handbook. URL, if available online: https://drive.google.com/file/d/12CSIsLV36t11C7ijydGrd9lbDc_J4Qo1/view
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online:
UHM Catalog. Page Number:
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online:
3) Please review, add, replace, or delete the existing curriculum map.
- File (11/18/2020)
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)
8) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place since November 2018.
Evaluation of student work and performances to determine SLO achievement
1. (Knowledge) Faculty members rated the literature reviews of candidates' dissertation proposals and final papers to determine the extent to which they demonstrated expected bodies of knowledge.
2. (Knowledge). We analyzed students' grades on an assignment in EDEP 661: Development and Learning that required them to apply their knowledge of learning theories to plan, teach, and reflect on a lesson they taught to a person or group of people.
3. (Skills) Faculty members rated the methods section of candidates' dissertation proposal and final papers to determine the extent to which they demonstrated expected skills to conduct scholarly research.
4. (Skills) Faculty members rated candidates' dissertation final presentations to determine the extent to which they demonstrated skills to present scholarly research effectively.
5. (Dispositions). Faculty members documented whether their advisees successfully completed the on-line CITI modules on the ethical treatment of human participants in research.
Student self-reports of SLO achievement via surveys, interviews, or focus groups
6. Completion Survey. In their final semester of the students' program, the Dean's Office distributed an online survey which asked students to self report the extent to which the program helped them to become (a) more knowledgeable in the field and (b) more skillful in the field and in the areas of research, writing, and making professional presentations.
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.)
Other 1: Completion of CITI human subjects ethics modules
10) State the number of students (or persons) who submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
1. The faculty evaluated the literature review and method section of 2 students’ dissertation proposals.
2. The faculty evaluated the final presentations and literature review and method section of 12 students’ theses and Plan B papers.
3. Twelve students successfully completed their CITI training. All students who were completing their final papers were sampled.
4. Two doctoral students were evaluated for their Teaching Project Papers.
5. Two students completed the Completion Survey in 2019.
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.
|fall 2018-summer 2020|
|EDEP Proposal Literature Review (n=2)||Exemplary||Satisfactory||Unacceptable|
|Statement of research question||50%||50%||0%|
|Style and writing conventions||50%||50%||0%|
|EDEP Final Literature Review (n=12)||Exemplary||Satisfactory||Unacceptable|
|Statement of research question||84%||16%||0%|
|Style and writing conventions||67%||33%||0|
Teaching Paper Project Grades
Mean grade (100 possible)
Student Assessments on Completion Survey
Become more knowledgeable about learning and development.
Become more knowledgeable about research methods
Become more knowledgable about student assessment
1.00 = "Strongly agree"
2.00 = "Agree"
3.00 = "Neither agree nor disagree"
4.00 = "Disagree"
5.00 = "Strongly disagree"
Assessment of SLO 2: Educational Psychology graduate students have inquiry skills to conduct scholarly research effectively.
|Fall 2018-Summer 2020|
|EDEP Proposal Method Section (n=2)||Exemplary||Satisfactory||Unacceptable|
|EDEP Final Method Section (n=12)||Exemplary||Satisfactory||Unacceptable|
Students' Assessments on Completion Survey
Develop my research skills
Assessment of SLO 3: Educational Psychology graduate students have inquiry skills to conduct scholarly research effectively.
|fall 2018-summer 2020 n=9|
|EDEP Research Presentation||Exemplary||Satisfactory||Unacceptable|
|Attention to the audience's perspective||67%||33%||0%|
|Clarity and organization||84%||16%||0%|
|Summary of the research||84%||16%||0%|
Student Assessments on Completion Survey
Develop my professional presentation skills.
Assessment of SLO 4: Educational Psychology graduate students model the ethical treatment of research participants.
Faculty Assessment: 100% of students completed the CITI training.
Student Assessment on Completion Survey
Apply ethical considerations to research with human participants.
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.
In order to increase the accuracy of the faculty ratings of the literature reviews, method sections, and final presentations, the faculty decided to report mean scores with decimals, rather than rounding to the nearest whole number.
In general, the faculty is pleased with the results of the assessment and feel that it reflects that students are achieving the SLOs.
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.
The faculty decided to develop a criteria of the proposal and final literature review rubrics related to the students' choice of theoretical or conceptual framework. They felt that this is often not as strong as other aspects of candidates' literature reviews.
17) If the program did not engage in assessment activities, please justify.