Program: Global Environmental Science (BS)
Date: Fri Oct 08, 2010 - 3:50:02 pm
1) Below are the program student learning outcomes submitted last year. Please add/delete/modify as needed.
Students completing the Global Environmental Science degree program will be able to:
1. Define and explain the basic principles and concepts of chemistry, physics, biology, calculus, geology, geophysics, meteorology, and oceanography.
2. Apply their understanding of the fundamentals of science and mathematics to the description and quantification of the interactions of the atmosphere, hydrosphere, lithosphere, and biosphere, including humans.
3. Employ the scientific approach to problem solving, and hypothesis formation and testing.
4. Conduct scientific research, and analyze and evaluate results.
5. Demonstrate information literacy by collection and evaluation of scientific literature.
6. Express themselves clearly and concisely in written form.
7. Demonstrate skilled delivery of well organized informal and formal oral presentations.
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:
Other: In program office (MSB 205D)
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.
SLO #1 - We continued the assessment activity of last year focused on evaluation of science and math backgrounds of GES majors.
SLO # 7 - We evaluated students' abilities to give formal scientific presentations.
6) State the type(s) of evidence gathered.
#1 - The test designed last year was reformulated and given to majors in OCN 310 at the beginning of Fall 2010.
#7 - A preliminary rubric was designed and used to evaluate final student presentations of their senior thesis research projects.
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.
# 1 - All 16 students in OCN 310 submitted tests and all tests were evaluated.
#7 - 5 students made presentations and all 5 were evaluated by a committee of 5 faculty.
10) Summarize the actual results.
#1 - In addition to the deficits in chemistry background noted last year, new questions on reading of graphs and use of logarithms revealed additional deficits.
#7 - Students were evaluated on 5 aspects of oral presentation on a scale of 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest). All scores were 3 or better, and average scores were between 4-4.2 on each aspect evaluated.
11) How did your program use the results? --or-- Explain planned use of results.
Please be specific.
#1 - Specific homework exercises were designed to address chemistry background deficiencies. A handout was developed that reviews basic logarithmic and exponential functions.
#7 - Results were shared with the instructors of OCN 490, our oral communication focus class.
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 found that the initial rubric used to evaluate oral presentations was useful in determining that overall, students are very capable of giving well organized, well delivered presentations. The lack of space for specific comments, however, limited the usefulness of the rubric in improvement of instruction.
13) Other important information:
The program chair spent a week in spring 2010 working with colleagues at the Carl Wieman Science Initiative at University of British Columbia. Work focused on developing course level assessment tools for our global change curricula. Pre-post exam questions were designed and are being used this semester in OCN 310 as well as in classes at UBC.