Program: Library & Information Sciences (MLISC)
Date: Sun Sep 05, 2010 - 6:17:21 pm
1) Below are the program student learning outcomes submitted last year. Please add/delete/modify as needed.
We have no modifications to the SLOs. To successfully complete requirements for the Master of Library and Information Science (MLISc) degree, the student must be able to:
1. Demonstrate an understanding of the history, philosophy, principles, policies, and ethics of library and information science and technology
2. Demonstrate an understanding of the development, organization, and communication of knowledge
3. Apply basic competencies and knowledge that are essential for providing, managing, and designing information services and programs in a variety of information environments
4. Demonstrate an understanding of the development and interrelationship of librarianship and information science
5. Demonstrate theoretical understanding of and basic competencies in evaluating, selecting, and organizing information sources
6. Demonstrate theoretical understanding of and basic competencies in storage, retrieval, dissemination, utilization, and evaluation of information
7. Demonstrate an understanding of the principles of administration applicable in libraries, archives, and information centers
8. Demonstrate basic competencies required for instructional program development in particular information environments
9. Demonstrate an understanding of research techniques and methods of applying new knowledge as it becomes available
10. Demonstrate the professional attitudes and the interpersonal and interdisciplinary skills needed to communicate and collaborate with colleagues and information users
11. Demonstrate basic competencies in the latest specialized information technologies
12. Demonstrate an understanding of the above goals within the perspective of prevailing and emerging technologies
2) As of last year, your program's SLOs were published as follows. Please update as needed.
Student Handbook. URL, if available online:
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online:
UHM Catalog. Page Number:
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online: http://www.hawaii.edu/lis/courses.php?page=descriptions [this is still current]
3) Below is the link to your program's curriculum map (if submitted in 2009). If it has changed or if we do not have your program's curriculum map, please upload it as a PDF.
- File (03/16/2020)
4) The percentage of courses in 2009 that had course SLOs explicitly stated on the syllabus, a website, or other publicly available document is indicated below. Please update as needed.
5) State the assessment question(s) and/or goals of the assessment activity. Include the SLOs that were targeted, if applicable.
The major purposes of the assessment process were to (1) obtain substantiating evidence of how well our students were meeting all the SLOs, (2) use the evidence to fuel more in-depth discussions about the quality of our curriculum, and (3) collaboratively identify strategies for improving our efforts to design instruction that fosters student achievement of the SLOs. The SLOs were described in the response to #1.
6) State the type(s) of evidence gathered.
Oral comprehensive exams: The program collected assessment data from the oral comprehensive exam administered at the point of graduation each fall and spring. This was an hour-long examination with two faculty members presiding. Students received a series of scenarios relating to a broad range of LIS topics and themes, and they were permitted to study in advance for the four scenarios that they elected to address. All scenarios were aligned to relevant SLOs. More details on the exam are available at http://www.hawaii.edu/lis/program.php?page=orals No notes were allowed in the session, and faculty members asked follow-up questions during the exam. For each scenario addressed, the administering faculty members rated students on a 4-point scale (4=exceeds expectations; 3=meets expectations; 2=approaches expectations; and 1=does not meet expectations). If a student scored a 1 or 2 on a particular scenario, he/she waited at least two weeks to retake the scenario. Faculty members examined the data results to identify areas where students were having difficulties and the implications for both the oral comprehensive scenarios as well as the curriculum.
Course assessment portfolios: The LIS Program is in its fourth year of implementing an outcome-based approach to student learning that focuses on clearly stated performance expectations for major course assignments as well as criteria by which performances are assessed. Because this is still a relatively new area of emphasis for most of the LIS faculty, we have been working incrementally starting with the required core courses and working through all of the elective courses. Both tenure track faculty and adjunct faculty are participating in the process. Upon request, portfolios are available in the LIS administrative office for review.
7) Who interpreted or analyzed the evidence that was collected?
Ad hoc faculty group
Persons or organization outside the university
Advisors (in student support services)
Students (graduate or undergraduate)
8) How did they evaluate, analyze, or interpret the evidence?
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)
9) State how many persons submitted evidence that was evaluated.
If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
All tenure track faculty members (8) submitted ratings for the oral comprehensive exams that they helped to administer. All tenure track faculty members (8) also submitted portfolios for the courses that they taught in the last academic year. We also asked adjunct faculty members (7) to do the same.
10) Summarize the actual results.
Achievement of student learning outcomes is most directly addressed in the oral comprehensive exams. Students are scored on a 1-4 scale with 1 being "not meeting expectations" and 4 being "exceeding expectations." To pass the exam, students must score 3s or 4s on all for scenarios that comprise the exam. Current data revealed that at least 75% of the responses in the oral comp exams met or exceeded expectations on the following 8 of the 12 SLOs:
· SLO 3: Apply basic competencies and knowledge that are essential for providing, managing, and designing information services and programs in a variety of information environments
· SLO 2: Demonstrate an understanding of the development, organization, and communication of knowledge
· SLO 9: Demonstrate an understanding of research techniques and methods of applying new knowledge as it becomes available
· SLO 1: Demonstrate an understanding of the history, philosophy, principles, policies and ethics of library and information science and technology
· SLO 7: Demonstrate an understanding of the principles of administration applicable in libraries, archives, and information centers
· SLO 10: Demonstrate the professional attitudes and the interpersonal and interdisciplinary skills needed to communicate and collaborate with colleagues and information users
· SLO 8: Demonstrate basic competencies required for instructional program development in particular information environments
· SLO 6: Demonstrate theoretical understanding of and basic competencies in storage, retrieval, dissemination, utilization and evaluation of information
On the remaining four SLOs, the percentage of responses meeting or exceeding expectations ranged from 53.8% to 72%. The SLOs were
· SLO 5: Demonstrate theoretical understanding of and basic competencies in evaluating, selecting and organizing information sources
· SLO 12: Demonstrate an understanding of the above goals within the perspective of prevailing and emerging technologies
· SLO 11: Demonstrate basic competencies in the latest specialized information technologies
· SLO 4: Demonstrate an understanding of the development and interrelationship of librarianship and information science
11) How did your program use the results? --or-- Explain planned use of results.
Please be specific.
Faculty members will be examining last year's assessment data from the oral comp exams at an annual strategic retreat to help them develop a multi-year action plan. Priorities set in the action plan will then be delegated to committees or individuals that make regular progress reports at the monthly LIS faculty meetings. We have also begun to incorporate 30-minute focus group sessions within the monthly faculty meeting to wrestle with curriculum issues resulting from examination of assessment results, feedback from students, and observations of faculty. The current assessment results have led us to consider the following essential questions: A) Does the program’s current core adequately meet the needs of our students? B) Does the ICT slate of elective courses adequately reflect the rapidly changing technological landscape? C) Does the current oral examination accurately measure the range of SLOs in our program? D) What actions might we take to effect improvements?
12) Beyond the results, were there additional conclusions or discoveries? This can include insights about assessment procedures, teaching and learning, program aspects and so on.
The assessments help us to also address how teaching impacts student learning. This has led to informal focus group sessions at our regularly scheduled faculty meetings where we discuss issues of effective teaching and learning. For example, last year we exchanged techniques to enhance hybrid forms of teaching in our face-to-face classes (e.g., use of Skype, Laulima, and Halawai for both synchronous and asynchronous situations). One instructor shared the exciting possibilities with Second Life. This year, we plan to focus on the incorporation of multiculturalism in curriculum and we also plan to re-examine the courses that students take to meet the ICT requirement in their degree work.
13) Other important information:
Nothing at this time.