Unit: Information & Computer Science
Program: Computer Science (MS)
Degree: Master's
Date: Mon Sep 26, 2011 - 11:21:56 am

1) Below are your program student learning outcomes (SLOs). Please update as needed.

These SLOs have been officially approved by the ICS faculty and are posted on our Web site. 

M.S. Program:

The ICS M.S. graduate program provides courses for advanced education in Computer Science and affords opportunities to conduct research. Our objective is to help students achieve a high level of professional competence and lifelong learning, with the following Student Learning Objectives:

  1.   Master core computer science theoretical concepts, practices and technologies;

  2.   Identify, formulate and solve problems employing knowledge within the discipline;

  3.   Contribute effectively to collaborative team oriented activities;

  4.   Communicate effectively about computer science topics using appropriate media;

  5.   Demonstrate advanced knowledge in an area of specialization within the discipline;

  6.   Engage in significant research in their area of specialization within the discipline and/or in projects that respond to community and industry needs.

2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.

Department Website URL: http://www.ics.hawaii.edu/academics/graduate-programs
Student Handbook. URL, if available online:
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online: http://www.ics.hawaii.edu/academics/slos/ICS-GradPrograms-SLOs.pdf
UHM Catalog. Page Number:
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online: syllabi contain course-specific SLOs

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.

Curriculum Map File(s) from 2011:

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.

Our first three SLOs are done in courses, and the data is thus available from grades in those courses. For the last three SLOs, we have created an SLO Assessment Grid. However, since SLOs and the Grid were only approved by the ICS faculty at the end of the Spring 2011 semester, not Assessment Grid has been collected to date. We expecte about 10 Grids to be collected by the end Fall 2011. 

One assessment that took place was for the graduate student orientation. At the end of the orientation, the attendants were asked to rate the following 2 statements and answer the following 2 questions:

1) This session was useful to me

2) I would recommend this session to other incoming students

3) What was the most useful part?

4) What was the least useful part? 

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.

* The "Assessment Grid" is filled by ad-hoc committees of the faculty (Plan A final defense, Plan B project report) or the Graduate Chair alone (ICS690 presentation) .  These grids are kept in paper format in the Graduate Chair's office. No grid has been collected thus far (see answer to Question #5)

* The Student Orientation assessment is filled by the students themselves and kept in the Graduate Chair's office in paper format.

7) State how many persons submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.

* No SLO assessment grid has been collected to date because the grid was only approved by the ICS faculty at the end of Spring 2011.  

* 21 Graduate Student Orientation assessments were collected since June 2010.

8) Who interpreted or analyzed the evidence that was collected? (Check all that apply.)

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)

9) How did they evaluate, analyze, or interpret the evidence? (Check all that apply.)

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)

10) For the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goal(s) stated in Question #5:
Summarize the actual results.

* As explained earlier, no SLO Assessment Grid has been collected to date. 

* For the Graduate Student Orientation Assessment, associating the following scores to the answers:
Totally Disagree: 0
Partially Disagree: 1
Neither Afree nor Disagree: 2
Partially Agree: 3
Totally Agree: 4
We obtain the following averages for both questions since June 2010:
Fall 2010: (8 students)
  "This orientation was useful to me": 3.13
  "I would recommend this orientation to incoming students": 3.50
Spring 2011: (5 students)
  "This orientation was useful to me": 4.00
  "I would recommend this orientation to incoming students": 4.00
Spring 2011: (8 students)
  "This orientation was useful to me": 3.88
  "I would recommend this orientation to incoming students": 4.00

11) State how the program used the results or plans to use the results. Please be specific.

* Regarding SLOs assessment, the plan is to examine results once a statistically significant number of them has been gathered. The Graduate Committee, who meets monthly, will identify weaknesses in both our assessment method and our assessment results, and make recommendations to the faculty in a view to proposing improvements. 
* Regarding Graduate Student Orientation assessment, results over the last semester are so positive that the orientation seems in good shape. If the results were to become significantly worse, then the Graduate Committee would meet to propose a set of improvements.

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.

As the graduate chair, I was trying to enter the report for both the MS and the PhD program at the same time using your system, and turns out I wasted 1 hour because what I was doing in one window I was overwriting in the other. It seems your system doesn't allow concurrent report filing for two programs. This should either be fixed or stated clearly with a warning: "WARNING: You can only work on one report at a time".

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.