Unit: Urban & Regional Planning
Program: Urban & Regional Plan (PhD)
Degree: Doctorate
Date: Thu Oct 13, 2011 - 10:06:16 pm

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

Upon completion of the PhD/MURP degree, students should be able to:

  1. Describe and explain historic, social and economic processes leading to the transformation of human settlements and their habitats;
  2. Articulate justifications for planned interventions;
  3. Think critically about how to create more socially just and environmentally sustainable regions, cities and communities.
  4. Apply methods of social and spatial analysis to gather, organize, display and interpret social-spatial information at a variety of scales;
  5. Work with clients to clarify organizational, neighborhood or regional problems, generate and assess potential strategies to address these problems and assemble strategies in a plan or professional report.
  6. Collaborate with residents, agency officials and others to design and implement strategies for identifying, acknowledging, gathering, and collectively assessing and prioritizing individual and group perceptions and knowledge;
  7. Make a public presentation of a plan, professional report or public commentary in a coherent and persuasive fashion;  
  8. Acknowledge and take responsibility for the ethical implications of the choices we make as professionals. 

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

Department Website URL: http://www.durp.hawaii.edu/
Student Handbook. URL, if available online: NA
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online:
UHM Catalog. Page Number:
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online:

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.

DURP’s PhD program was established as a provisional program in 2002 and this year was reviewed and accepted as a permanent degree program. As part of this process, the outcomes of the PhD program were documented.  While no specific Student Learning Objective was targeted for assessment, this process led the faculty to reflect on the PhD program more broadly. 

DURP is also currently undergoing a strategic planning process and assessment of the outcomes of the PhD program is an area of future inquiry (DURP is currently focusing on assessment of the Master degree curriculum). 

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.

  • Number of applicants, admissions and entrants each year
  • Faculty ability to support PhD research (based on areas of expertise and grant dollars)
  • Average Years to Completion
  • Percent “On Track” based on the Stated Timeline
  • Percent dropped out
  • Current PhD Students per Faculty FTE
  • List of all Graduates and Current Positions (i.e. job placement)

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

Current faculty (9) submitted information on grants and PhD committee service.  Other information came from admission records, student progress reports, and contact with graduates.

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)
Other: Board of Regents

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.


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

This data was used as evidence of the importance of the PhD program and to make it a permanent degree program.  It will be used in the future, as a starting point, to assess ways to make the PhD program more effective.

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.

DURP is currently undergoing a strategic planning process (as described in the 2011 Annual Assessment Report for the Master Degree Program).  Now that the PhD is a permanent degree program, the department plans to gather further evidence on ways to ensure that student learning objectives are being met.