Program: Tropical Plant Pathology (PhD)
Date: Tue Sep 13, 2011 - 11:50:59 am
1) Below are your program student learning outcomes (SLOs). Please update as needed.
TPP students communicate effectively.
TPP studentsc are competent and knowledgeable biologists.
TPP students conduct research in plant pathology.
2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.
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: 351-355
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online:
Other: With graduate chair as we edit and refine them
3) Below is the link(s) to your program's curriculum map(s). If we do not have your curriculum map, please upload it as a PDF.
- File (03/16/2020)
4) For your program, the percentage of courses that have course SLOs explicitly stated on the syllabus, a website, or other publicly available document is as follows. Please update as needed.
5) For the period June 1, 2010 to September 30, 2011: State the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goals. Include the SLOs that were targeted, if applicable.
We assessed our three SLOs: students communicate effectively, students are competent and knowledgeable biologists, and students conduct research in plant pathology. Where students able to orally and in written format convey the plant pathological research they had conducted? Where students able to demonstrated through questioning, and/or logical argument an understanding of the biology underlying plant pathology.
6) State the type(s) of evidence gathered to answer the assessment question and/or meet the assessment goals that were given in Question #5.
Students presented seminars and participated in focused discussion groups. Students submitted theses and dissertations. Faculty members evaluated student performance in theses areas.
7) State how many persons submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
Approximately 6 sources submitted evidence for evaluation. Three sources of thesis/dissertation data were evaluated by small faculty groups. These faculty evaluated written and oral work which assessed our three SLOs. All students participating in topic seminars and discussions were evaluated by single faculty.
8) Who interpreted or analyzed the evidence that was collected? (Check all that apply.)
Ad hoc faculty group
Persons or organization outside the university
Advisors (in student support services)
Students (graduate or undergraduate)
9) How did they evaluate, analyze, or interpret the evidence? (Check all that apply.)
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)
10) For the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goal(s) stated in Question #5:
Summarize the actual results.
We found students to be competent in our SLOs. Our students were able to communicate in oral and written formats. Our students are knowledgeable biologists. Our students conduct scientifically sound and rigorous science that is published in peer-reviewed journals.
11) State how the program used the results or plans to use the results. Please be specific.
We will continue on the successful track that the program is on.
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.
Please note: If the program did not engage in assessment, please explain. If the program created an assessment plan for next year, please give an overview.