Unit: Languages & Literatures of Europe and the Americas
Program: Spanish (MA)
Degree: Master's
Date: Fri Sep 17, 2010 - 1:59:54 pm

1) Below are the program student learning outcomes submitted last year. Please add/delete/modify as needed.

SLO 1.Apply analytical and critical skills in the interpretation of literature and other forms of visual and textual expression. (will be assessed via research projects)

SLO 2a. Locate and retrieve relevant secondary criticism. (will be assessed via research projects)

SLO 2b. Apply secondary criticism in research projects. (will be assessed via research projects)

SLO 3. Demonstrate familiarity with texts that are representative of traditions in Latin America and Spain. (via comprehensive exams)

SLO 4. Demonstrate breadth and depth of knowledge of Ibero-Latin literary expressions. (via research projects and comprehensive exams)

SLO 5. Demonstrate breadth and depth of knowledge of Ibero-Latin cultural expressions. (via research projects)

SLO 6. (Teaching Assistants only) Demonstrate familiarity with current L2 teaching methodologies and practices. (via pilot class demonstrations, classroom observations, class presentations, and final exam in LLL 455 or SPAN 658)

2) As of last year, your program's SLOs were published as follows. Please update as needed.

Department Website URL:
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: NA

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.

Curriculum Map File(s) from 2010:

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.

6) State the type(s) of evidence gathered.

End of semester CAFE evaluations

Final projects/Research papers


Exit survey for graduating students

7) Who interpreted or analyzed the evidence that was collected?

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)

8) How did they evaluate, analyze, or interpret the evidence?

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)

9) State how many persons submitted evidence that was evaluated.
If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.

·         Exit survey- A total of 10 students were invited to respond; 6 students responded the survey (response rate = 60%).
·         All students completed research projects and/or exams.
·         3 students were evaluated via MA graduating exam in Spring 2010.

10) Summarize the actual results.

From the exit survey- Students reported to be more than adequately prepared in all but one of the student learning objectives:

SLO 1 - Apply analytical and critical skills in the interpretation of literature and other forms of visual and textual expression (50% well, 50% very well); SLO3-. Apply secondary criticism in research projects (50% Adequately, 50% very well prepared);  SLO4- Demonstrate familiarity with texts that are representative of traditions in Latin America and Spain (25% well, 75% very well prepared); SLO5- Demonstrate breadth and depth of knowledge of Ibero-Latin literary expressions (75% well, 25% very well); and SLO6- Demonstrate breadth and depth of knowledge of Ibero-Latin cultural expressions (25% adequately, 50% well and 25% very well).  The only area requiring improving was SLO2- Locate and retrieve relevant secondary criticism, in which 25% of the students found they were less than adequately prepared.

Overall students were satisfied with the program, especially with the department culture, climate and opportunities to interact with other students, as well as the quality of courses and the flexibility of the program to pursue their academic interests. The opportunities for teaching were very highly scored (100% were very satisfied), which was confirmed by the qualitative data. The students reported a need to improve the variety of courses offered by the department and the frequency of course offerings. From the data it was clear that students’ main dissatisfaction with the institution was the lack of funding for conference travel and other activities, as well as the lack of office space and library resources.

The students reported the faculty to be the main strength of the program (dedicated, knowledgeable, and approachable) together with the possibility of obtaining a Teaching Assistantship and tuition waiver.

Based on recent MA qualifying exam results of three graduate students, the faculty discussed possible ramifications of time constraints on the students’ performances.  The faculty decided to alter the format of the exam on the second day of questions (students write for three hours on two consecutive days).  By eliminating the traditional section on “textual analysis” which is taught more at the undergraduate level, the graduate students have 90 minutes for two exam sections rather than 60 minutes for three different sections.  

11) How did your program use the results? --or-- Explain planned use of results.
Please be specific.

Each faculty member modifies/improves their curriculum based on the results from students’ research projects, presentations and final exams, as well as the students’ end-of semester evaluations.

Due to students’ dissatisfaction with the amount, variety and frequency of courses offered by the department, we have requested a new faculty position (Spain in the Pacific Rim) as well as an additional full-time instructor to help us improve our schedule.

To alleviate the generally poor funding for graduate students at UHM, the faculty regularly share funding opportunities with their students (scholarships, grants, etc. that are offered by various organizations, universities, academic units, and other countries). In addition, the department web site is adding a page to incorporate these funding possibilities so that students have easy access to all of them. 

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.

One of the professors has developed and presented a special workshop for the graduate students on “How to prepare for the qualifying examinations.”  This has been a very informative and useful meeting for our graduate students.

13) Other important information:

Two of our faculty members are team-teaching two courses during the spring semester 2011 in order to enrich both of their classes.  They will offer students theoretical frameworks, background information, and course content from different perspectives in an interdisciplinary approach to issues affecting early Latin America.