Program: Russian (BA)
Degree: Bachelor's
Date: Fri Sep 17, 2010 - 2:01:30 pm
1) Below are the program student learning outcomes submitted last year. Please add/delete/modify as needed.
SLO1. The student can vocalize Russian non-technical texts with correct placement of stress in words and with the observance of pronunciation rules (i.e. reduction of unstressed vowels, voicing and devoicing of consonants individually and in clusters as dictated by the environment, and assimilation of consonants according to current Russian pronunciation norms).
SLO2. The student can read and comprehend non-technical texts in Russian from a variety of sources including magazines, newspapers, internet pages such as those found in the Russian Wikipedia, and belles-lettres.
SLO3. The student can engage in oral and written communication in Russian in various everyday and educational communicative contexts (e.g. asking directions, ordering in a restaurant, expressing opinions in a conversation or a written composition).
SLO4. The student can write Cyrillic in longhand and type Cyrillic using either the phonetic or standard keyboard arrangement.
SLO5. The student can recognize and identify and has a familiarity with key aspects of Russian culture (e.g. famous Russians; key works of literature, representative pictures, music and symbols; common Russian dishes).
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: 
Other: none Other: 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.
0%
1-50% 51-80% 81-99% 100%5) State the assessment question(s) and/or goals of the assessment activity. Include the SLOs that were targeted, if applicable.
. Assessments were carried via Student Exit Surveys in spring 2009 and 2010. The results of these surveys were combined and received by the Russian Division in fall 2010. The Following questions were asked on the surveys.
(1) What is you class standing?
(2) What are your majors and minors?
(3) Are you pursuing a Certificate in Russian Studies?
(4) Did you grow up in a family where language(s) other than English was/were spoken regularly?
(4.1) Which language?
(4.2) Who in your family spoke the languages?
5. Placement (i.e. which of the class 101, 102, 201 did you take?)
6. Did you study this language at other educational institutions?
7. How did you first learn about the course offerings in this language at UHM?
8. Why did you choose to study Russian at UHM?
9. After completing the 202-level course, do you plan to continue studying the language?
10. Overall satisfaction with the program and institutional support.
11. Satisfaction with the program.
12. Student learning outcomes (The degree to which students evaluated themselves as having attained stated outcomes).
13. Will the language competence and cultural knowledge acquired in the two-year program help you achieve your personal, academic, and career goals?
14. Strength of the program (Students give free comments on what they consider the strengths or weaknesses of the program.
15. Recommendations for program improvement (Students give free comments on how they think the program can be improved.)
16. Would you recommend the program to other students?
6) State the type(s) of evidence gathered.
. Evidence on student characteristics and opinions was gathered.
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) Dean/Director Other: 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) Other: 9) State how many persons submitted evidence that was evaluated.
If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
13 persons submitted evidence.
10) Summarize the actual results.
Many students expressed the desire for the emphasis on grammar instruction to be the same at the first and second year level and suggested that the emphasis on grammar be increased in the first year. The students liked communicative exercises but also felt the need for more intensive grammar drilling.
11) How did your program use the results? --or-- Explain planned use of results.
Please be specific.
The professors of the division consulted with each other and as a result additional grammar resources are being made available on the Divisional web site for Russian 101, 102, 201, 202. These resources consist of extensive materials on noun declension, verb conjugation and the stress patterns of nouns. Further, more time and attention is being given to the in-class drilling of grammatical forms in first year (the current Russian 101 course in fall of 2010).
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.
13) Other important information:
In the coming academic year (2010-2011), there will be an effort to provide detailed SLO’s for Russian 102 and Russian 102. It is also intended that the SLO’s for the Russian BA will be published on the Russian division’s web site and on the site that contains the syllabi for Russian 101-202. Additional work will be done on providing more grammar materials and grammar instruction at the first year level.