Program: Plant & Environmental Biotechnology (BS)
Degree: Bachelor's
Date: Tue Nov 16, 2010 - 1:30:23 pm
1) Below are the program student learning outcomes submitted last year. Please add/delete/modify as needed.
· Complete with good grades a rigorous foundation in biotechnology background courses.
· Complete the upper division core of biotechnology courses with good grades.
· Have a well-rounded background in science.
· Have the science coursework preparation that permits in depth understanding.
· Demonstrate creativity, critical thinking, problem solving skills, competency is using state of the art scientific instrumentation, self-confidence, and communication skills in a student research symposium.
2) As of last year, your program's SLOs were published as follows. Please update as needed.
Department Website URL: www.ctahr.hawaii.edu/mbbe 
Student Handbook. URL, if available online: Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online: NA UHM Catalog. Page Number: 350 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.
- 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.
Whether there were good outcomes of our educational efforts. Evaluate all of the SLOs to assess if they helped with positive final outcomes.
6) State the type(s) of evidence gathered.
We interview students as they are to graduate and ask them to follow up with outcomes. Before graduation we use mandatory advising periods to assess progress.
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.
For the final evaluation, each of the five students submitted evidence during interview. Before this, most students come in for advising and information is gathered.
10) Summarize the actual results.
C.K. was accepted into graduate school at UH. Received Kamehameha scholarship.
R.O. was accepted to the scientific illustrations post graduate school of choice. He received financial aid.
P.T. was accepted into graduate school at UH. He received a graduate assistantship.
J.Y. was accepted into graduate school at UH. She received the equivalent of a graduate assistantship.
M.P. was accepted into graduate school at UH. She received a graduate assistantship.
Among the intermediate outcomes assessed, before graduation most tended to get good grades. They probably averaged about a 3.7 GPR. R.O. won an award at the Student Research Symposium as did P.T. J.Y. won the top award in the Student Research Symposium as did M.P.
11) How did your program use the results? --or-- Explain planned use of results.
Please be specific.
For this batch of students, the assessment was more than satisfactory. The factor that was not satisfactory was not asked and it was recruitment. Student enrollment has dropped off in spite of the fact that students have done very well for themselves. Therefore of the limited time that was available, the catalog and the web page were thoroughly re-written.
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:
No disrespect but we do not follow the standard program or ways of doing things. We try to do what our students need or want.