Program: East Asian Lang & Lit: Korean (PhD)
Degree: Doctorate
Date: Thu Oct 18, 2012 - 11:05:04 am
1) Below are your program's student learning outcomes (SLOs). Please update as needed.
[Ph.D. in Korean Language and Linguistics]
1. Demonstrate comprehensive knowledge about the field, especially in areas of their expertise and its connection of related areas of research
2. Evaluate the purposes, approaches, designs, and analyses of published research in areas of their expertise
3. Produce scholarly work at the level of quality adequate for publication
4. Establish membership in their field and develop their presence in that discipline
5. Design and teach graduate-level courses in the areas of their specialization
6. Handle a job interview and job talk
[Ph.D. in Korean Literature]
[In addition to the M. A. SLOs,] recipients of the Ph.D. in Korean literature should be able to:
1. Demonstrate an understanding of current secondary literature in the field by critically engaging the arguments of major scholars.
2. Produce a significant and original contribution to current scholarly discourse in his/her area of specialization.
2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.
Department Website URL: www.hawaii.edu/eall
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: http://www.hawaii.edu/eall/kor/courses.html Other: Other: 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.
0% 1-50% 51-80% 81-99%
100%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.)
Yes 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.
No specific questions were asked. However, curriculum committees in each academic program regularly review data such as enrollment figures, results of diagnostic and comprehensive examinations, and student surveys to assess how effectively it meets its objectives. This includes revising curriculum, course requirements, exams, etc.
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. Dissertation/comprehensive exams. All MA programs culminate in capstone projects (dissertation and comprehensive examination). In addition to the graduate programs, especially those in PhD programs, encourage their students to present their work at national and international conferences.
2. Participation in the College of LLL student exit survey (satisfaction with the program, learning outcomes in terms of publications and conference presentations, plans after graduation, suggestions for program improvement).
For AY 2011-12, no Korean Language and Linguistics/Korean Literature Ph.D. recipient participated in the survey.
3. Monitoring postgraduate professional activities and achievements. The department's Graduate Student Services Specialist makes use of limited time and resources to monitor postgraduate professional activities and achievements. This information is compiled and published each semester in a newsletter which is distributed to faculty, graduate students, and interested community members as well as to peer programs at other institutions, and posted on the department website.
Link to the EALL newsletters: http://www.hawaii.edu/eall/nl/index.html
List of recent dissertations: http://www.hawaii.edu/eall/kor/diss.html
8) State how many persons submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
Please see #7.
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) Dean/Director Other: 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) Other: 11) For the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goal(s) stated in Question #6:
Summarize the actual results.
The AY 2011-2012 survey data were distributed among EALL graduate faculty members. We discussed the results at a recent EALL graduate faculty meeting. Other types of data on student learning are normally discussed in individual sections.
1. Within each individual course, the course instructor interprets evidence of student learning.
2. Within each program, the student's advisor and committee monitor student progress through the program and achievement of its objectives.
3. Also, the graduate faculty in each program rank orders graduate students annually for tuition waiver eligibility based on their overall level of academic achievement. Applicants for graduate assistantships are evaluated in a similar way.
12) State how the program used the results or plans to use the results. Please be specific.
The following program modifications were made based on information gathered about our students' learning experiences and outcomes:
1. We will make the information about our graduate courses more available to our students (e.g., post them on the department website)
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.
In order to better respond to the internal and external needs for assessment, the EALL Assessment Committee has been formed.
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.
We will develop strategies for improving the response rate of the exit survey.