Program: Microbiology (MS)
Date: Thu Oct 11, 2012 - 5:47:08 pm
1) Below are your program's student learning outcomes (SLOs). Please update as needed.
The MS degree program in the Department of Microbiology at the University of Hawaii is designed to give students advanced coursework in microbiology and an in-depth introduction to microbiology research. Students are expected to design and execute original research projects using traditional and advanced research technologies. We strive to provide each Master’s student with broad knowledge microbiology and in depth knowledge in their area of specialization such that they can enter the workforce as professional microbiologists or continue their academic training in advanced graduate or professional programs.
Student Learning Outcomes
1. Demonstrate the ability to design experiments with appropriate controls, and to conduct original research.
2. Demonstrate proficiency with a variety of classical and modern microbiology techniques.
3. Read, understand and evaluate current literature in their discipline.
4. Research results and interpretations of those results should be clearly presented both orally and in written works
5. Develop awareness and perspective as a member of a local, national and global scientific community
6. Compete successfully for productive employment or enter advanced degree programs in microbiology or health-related fields.
2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.
Student Handbook. URL, if available online:
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online:
UHM Catalog. Page Number:
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online:
3) Select one option:
- 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) Did your program engage in any program assessment activities between June 1, 2011 and September 30, 2012? (e.g., establishing/revising outcomes, aligning the curriculum to outcomes, collecting evidence, interpreting evidence, using results, revising the assessment plan, creating surveys or tests, etc.)
No (skip to question 14)
6) For the period June 1, 2011 to September 30, 2012: State the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goals. Include the SLOs that were targeted, if applicable.
Because this is primarily a research degree, publication of results is normal. However, we noticed that time to graduation was increasing, often because of the adoption of an unwritten rule of a minimum of one first-author publication prior to graduation. Successful publication relates to all 6 of the SLOs and many cases demonstrates mastery. The question we asked was whether or not this was a fair standard for a master's student. The concern that this was more of a mini-PhD and may, in fact, be too rigorous in some cases, especially considering that many of the students will move to positions that do not require such a rigorous degree program.
7) State the type(s) of evidence gathered to answer the assessment question and/or meet the assessment goals that were given in Question #6.
All faculty serve as mentors and committee members for proposals and defenses.
8) State how many persons submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
During this time 5 Master's students graduated.
9) 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)
10) 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)
11) For the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goal(s) stated in Question #6:
Summarize the actual results.
It was determined that holding students the unwritten criterion of first-author publication was excessively rigorous.
12) State how the program used the results or plans to use the results. Please be specific.
Faculty were instructed to not use publication as a criterion for graduation at the Master's level.
13) Beyond the results, were there additional conclusions or discoveries?
This can include insights about assessment procedures, teaching and learning, program aspects and so on.