Program: Communicology (MA)
Degree: Master's
Date: Tue Dec 07, 2010 - 4:46:58 pm
1) Below are the program student learning outcomes submitted last year. Please add/delete/modify as needed.
1 To understand the central functions of human communication: message processing, relational communication, and social influence.
2 To develop an integrated and systematic understanding of the human communication process.
3 To be able to apply communication principles in their profession of future graduate study toward the Ph.D.
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: NA Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online: NA UHM Catalog. Page Number: Course Syllabi. URL, if available online: Other: 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.
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.
Data were collected this year to ascertain what post graduate work our MA students had obtained since completing their degrees. In addition, attitudes and perceptions toward the Speech Department were obtained from a large portion of our completed MA students from the prior 20 years.
6) State the type(s) of evidence gathered.
Former MA students (approximately 90 total) from the past 20 years (the current MA program began in 1990) were contacted via email. Two surveys were administered: one solicited information about their professional lives since completing their MA degree; the other assessed their retrospective attitudes and perceptions of the Speech Department graduate program.
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: