Unit: Plant & Environmental Protection Sciences
Program: Tropical Plant Pathology (MS)
Degree: Master's
Date: Fri Oct 29, 2010 - 10:31:26 am

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

SLO 1. TPP students communicate effectively.

SLO 2. TPP students are competent and knowledgeable biologists.

SLO 3. TPP students conduct research in plant pathology.

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: http://www.ctahr.hawaii.edu/peps/tppgradhandbook/Graduate_handbook_home.html
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online:
UHM Catalog. Page Number: 352-355
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online:
Other: With graduate chair as we edit and refine them

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 2009:

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.

We assessed students ability to communicate, their biological knowledge, and their ability to conduct plant pathology research. The specific SLOs were:
    TPP students communicate effectively.
    TPP students are competent and knowledgeable biologists.
    TPP students conduct research in plant pathology.

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

We evaluated at student communication through a portfolio of thesis/dissertation submissions, journal manuscript submissions, seminar presentations, and annual meeting presentations.

We evaluated knowledge in biology by conducting oral examinations and looking at performance in courses.

Research performance was evaluated by public presentation, laboratory work, and in small venue focus-discussion groups.

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.

We evaluated 69 pieces of evidence in the form of publications, course work, presentations, and examinations. This was a comprehensive portfolio of all student work.

10) Summarize the actual results.

The program is meeting most of the goals. The proposals seminars that were given were deemed acceptable. The Defenses conducted for graduating students were found to be sufficient by the faculty. Graduates continued on in studies at respectible peer institutions. Course work was completed with satisfactory competency - no students were placed on probation. Several students presented their research in symposia and at national meetings.

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

We find that in general the TPP program is meeting its goals and producing acceptable graduates. Students are graduating, publishing, and continuing on in successful careers related to plant pathology. We continue to be lower than we want on competency and knowledge in plant disease. We are continuing discussions on how to address this issue.

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:

Our greatest challenge is in limited resources that can support student learning activities. Our instructional and laboratory infrastructure is aged, in some cased out dated, and generally in need of renovation, repair, and replacement.