Unit: Travel Industry Management
Program: Travel Industry Mgt (BS)
Degree: Bachelor's
Date: Tue Oct 09, 2012 - 4:01:09 pm

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

1. Effective Communication

  • Students can employ communication skills effectively to accomplish organizational and professional objectives.

2. Leadership and Teamwork

  • Students can demonstrate leadership.
  • Students can work effectively, respectfully, and professionally as a team member.

3. Critical and Creative Thinking

  • Students can analyze situations and develop alternative options to resolve identified issues.
  • Students can select appropriate information to develop reliable, valid, and logical arguments.

4. Knowledge and Global Perspective

  • From a global perspective, students can explain and apply the principles of travel industry management and of hospitality, tourism, and/or transportation management.

5. Ethics and Stewardship

  • Students can demonstrate integrity and ethical behavior.
  • Students can comprehend the importance of host cultures to the global travel industry and apply sustainable practices.

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

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

3) Select one option:

Curriculum Map File(s) from 2012:

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.

Assessment goal:

  1. Check if the guidelines for the capstone course's term paper (case analysis) to see if they align well with SLOs
  2. Revise the rubric for assessing students' performance in the case analysis then test the revised rubric for a trial assessment.

SLOs that were targeted

  • Effective communication
  • Critical and creative thinking
  • Knowledge and global perspectives

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.

  1. Check if the guidelines for the capstone course's term paper (case analysis) to see if they align well with SLOs: During Fall 2011, the curriculum committee members and professors teaching the capstone course had meetings to check the guidelines for the term paper. Since there were more than one section for the course, professors agreed to share their guidelines in the meeting and agreed to develop a model guideline to better align with SLOs. It was ready for use for Spring 2012.
  2. Revise the rubric for assessing students' performance in the case analysis then test the revised rubric for a trial assessment: based on the previous trial assessment, TIM faculty members pointed out that the rubric be revised to collect comments about both strengths and weaknesses in students' performance for balanced evaluation comments. Upon revising the rubric and the model guideline used for Spring 2012, another trial assessment was conducted during the summer of 2012.

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

For revising the guideline, four professors who have taught the capstone course shared their course syllabus.

For trial run assessment, four sample student reports were assessed by four different faculty members. Their assessment responses were collected via the revised rubric form. Since there were two sections of the capstone class, the assessment coordinator asked the professors to choose one paper from excellent group and the other from weak group (two papers from two sections). Then the papers were distributed in a blind fashion to four different faculty members who did not teach the capstone course. They did not get the information about which level work they were getting to assess.

9) 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: Assessment coordinator

10) 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)

11) For the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goal(s) stated in Question #6:
Summarize the actual results.

1. Guidelines were revised: the original guidelines included more that what SLOs require. Curriculum committee and capstone course instructor agreed that the paper guideline could be somewhat simplified so students can focus more on the areas that are directly related to SLOs. After agreeing on areas that could be eliminated, draft guidelines were circulated for final agreement before finalized guidelines were confirmed.

2. Revised rubric requesting both strengths and weaknesses solicited balanced comments about students' performance from evaluators.There comments not only identified areas to improve on but also areas that are working fine. Based on assessment comments in this trial, students performed satisfactorily in the effective written communication (SLO 1). Students weaknesses were discovered in critical and creative thinking (SLO3) and knowledge and global perspective (SLO 4). Even though there were evidences that students could apply basic principles and techniques of travel industry management in the case analysis, students' performance could improve more in interpreting the results of the concept applications. Students also could improve on viewing the cases in a more global perspectives.

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

The results of this trial assessment were just compiled. During the school year of 2012-2013, TIM assessment coordinator will share the results with the TIM faculty members before the faculty members are asked to suggest ideas that we all could to in our classes to improve students' analysis skills. By the end of school year, TIM faculty members will develop a plan to improve students' analysis skills based on the suggestions.

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.

By requesting comments on strengths of student performance in the assessment rubric, the SLO areas that students perform satisfactorily became clear. While many more areas to improve were identified, it was nice to learn about the area that students are doing well. 

14) If the program did not engage in assessment activities, please explain.
Or, if the program did engage in assessment activities, please add any other important information here.