Unit: Curriculum Studies
Program: Curriculum Studies (MEd)
Degree: Master's
Date: Tue Oct 11, 2011 - 3:20:10 pm

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

The program is research-based and grounded in theory. Its goals are to:

  1. Develop well-informed and reflective practitioners.
  2. Enhance teachers’ knowledge and their instructional skills.
  3. Foster the application of new knowledge in the schools.
  4. Enhance teachers’ ability to understand and implement research.
  5. Encourage and increase the professionalism of teachers in Hawai‘i, as well as other States and nations of the Pacific Rim.
  6. Prepare those interested in entering doctoral programs in education.

Objectives of the CS program are that students:

  1. Increase knowledge in one or more areas of inquiry.
  2. Reflect on practice.
  3. Become better informed about the developmental and educational needs of children and adolescents from various communities.
  4. Become more skillful in developing educational programs to meet individual and group needs.
  5. Become more versatile in the use of a variety of teaching strategies.
  6. Learn about new issues and trends in their fields.
  7. Increase understanding of educational issues related to diversity and multiculturalism.
  8. Enhance ability to implement culturally responsive teaching practices.
  9. Investigate issues and trends in assessment.
  10. Increase understanding and ability to apply and conduct educational research.
  11. Acquire understanding of ethical dimensions of classroom research.
  12. Become more able to provide leadership in a classroom, school or school system. 

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

Department Website URL: http://coe.hawaii.edu/cs
Student Handbook. URL, if available online: http://www.coe.hawaii.edu/documents/cs/CS1_2011_12.pdf
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online: http://www.coe.hawaii.edu/documents/cs/CS2_2011_12.pdf
UHM Catalog. Page Number: http://www.catalog.hawaii.edu/schoolscolleges/education/edcs.htm
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.

The College of Education is accredited by the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), so our assessments address program standards (please see Curriculum Map) and the following NCATE standard:

Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Professional Dispositions

Candidates preparing to work in schools as teachers or other school professionals know and demonstrate the content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge and skills, pedagogical and professional knowledge and skills, and professional dispositions necessary to help all students learn. Assessments indicate that candidates meet professional, state, and institutional standards. (Professional Standards for the Accreditation of Teacher Preparation Institutions, NCATE, 2008, p. 16).

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.

What percent of students are judged to be acceptable on each of 6 assessments of Program and NCATE standards (Please see Curriculum Map)?

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

Assessment 1: 47

Assessment 2: 53

Assessment 3: 108

Assessment 4: 156

Assessment 5: 92

Assessment 6: 64

Total: 520 

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: Faculty during faculty meetings

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.



(1) Knowledge (knowledgeable):

1. Review of Literature 

2. Concluding chapter Plan A/B




(2) Skills (effective):

3. Lesson Series: Curriculum Emphasis

4. Application to Committee on Human Subjects (CHS)



       (3)Dispositions (caring/professional/ethical):

5. Lesson Series: Special Needs/Cultural Emphasis

6. Personal Curriculum History




(1) Knowledge (knowledgeable):

Assessment 1: Candidates performed satisfactorily on the two knowledge assessments, and generally met the standards for knowledge of research, and knowledge of content and pedagogy set by the department. Scores improved when compared to last year.

Assessment 2: This has been an area of improvement over the past 3 years. All  candidates reached target in their acquisition of technical writing skills associated with thoughtful preparation of research papers.

(2) Skills (effective):

Assessment 3: All assessed candidates met skills standards and demonstrated that they are able to create research-based curriculum, choose appropriate pedagogical strategies, provide effective instruction and assess the effects of that instruction. Candidates scored equally high on this assessment last year.

Assessment 4: This was the only assessment in which a few candidates (7) were found to be unacceptable. All students assessed on their IRB applications were deemed acceptable last year, so this should be an area of focus in the future.

(3)Dispositions (caring/professional/ethical):

Assessment 5: All candidates performed well in identifying special needs and planning a series of lessons for an inclusive classroom. Scores improved when compared to last year.

Assessment 6: There was appreciable improvement on this assessment with all candidates scoring at the acceptable level on their knowledge of professional ethics as shown in their personal curriculum histories. 

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

All department faculty received the results, and our report will be posted on the College's NCATE Web site. The College of Education is also making data entry and results available in an on-line Student Information System.

We were pleased to find appreciable improvement in results on the two knowledge assessments and the two disposition assessments.  Of the skills assessments, #3 Curriculum Emphasis was 100% acceptable as it was last year. 

However, the second skills assessment #4, Application to Committee on Human Subjects (CHS), was 100% acceptable in 2009-10 but had 4% unacceptable this year. We plan to investigate the reasons for this slight decline and further clarify the CHS and DOE research application procedures for students. Our Department continues to discuss how to improve our program and student learning.

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.

This is a meaningful process that points us to areas needing improvement. This year, we will be discussing ways to improve the Application to Committee on Human Subjects Committee process based on these results and analyses.

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.