Unit: East Asian Languages & Literatures
Program: East Asian Lang & Lit: Chinese (PhD)
Degree: Doctorate
Date: Wed Oct 06, 2010 - 11:06:26 am

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

Ph.D. in Chinese Literature SLOs: 1. Demonstrate comprehensive knowledge of the history of Chinese literature and the relevant scholarship in the field of Chinese Literary Studies. 2. Be able to competently use and analyze sources written in Classical, early vernacular, and modern Mandarin, as well as evaluate them from an informed theoretical perspective. 3. Develop their field of scholarly expertise in the area of their concentration and be able to situate themselves within the critical field of Chinese Literary Studies. 4. Develop their own analytical and critical skills so as to be able to apply them to close textual readings of primary as well as secondary sources. 5. Be familiar with and able to use competently Chinese as well as Western theoretical literature, both modern and pre-modern. 6. Develop an interdisciplinary and cultural approach to the reading and teaching of literary texts. 7. Produce an original contribution to the scholarly discourse in their area of specialization. 8. Be able to handle professionally a conference talk or job interview.

2010: We deleted SLO # 8 because we did not feel we had sufficient evidence to assess this. 

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

Department Website URL: http://www.hawaii.edu/eall/chn/undergrad.html
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
Other: will publish in our depertment website soon

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.

SLO# 8 was eliminated this year because of lack of courses/activities in the program to assess this. However, this does not mean that program faculty did not feel this SLO is important. We are thinking about ways to included activities in existing courses that speak to this SLO. 

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

This year, we did not have graduating Ph.D. students in CHN literature, so assessment results were only based on course work, comps exams, and research papers. 

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.

All 4 Chinese literature faculty are actively engaged with the graduate students in our subsection and submit evidence (e.g. comments on papers, email to students containing assessment on class performance or research papers, annual Graduate Assistantship Assessment). 

10) Summarize the actual results.

We developed SLOs for our PhD program last year and based on these SLOs, we did not recommend that a Ph.D. student be advanced to candidacy because the student fell short of 80% of the SLOs. In other words, the SLOs helped us to be more precise in our evaluation and hold up standards which are adequate to the profession and the field. 

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

See previous answer. 

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.

We have created a curriculum map for our PhD program based on the SLOs we developed last year. We eliminated one SLO because we realized that while the SLO is valuable, we did not have activities in the program or specific courses that target this SLO. We need to re-think the current curriculum in light of this modification. 

13) Other important information:

One tenure-track faculty in our program just resigned and we are hoping to hire a new faculty in the same area of specialization. If successful, the CHN literature section will be in a better position next year to work on program and curricula improvements.