Program: Pacific Islands Studies (BA)
Date: Fri Oct 12, 2012 - 2:33:40 pm
1) Below are your program's student learning outcomes (SLOs). Please update as needed.
BA in Pacific Islands Studies
1.1 Students can describe the diversity of Oceania.
1.2 Students can identify major events in the history of the region.
1.3 Students can explain indigenous issues and concerns.
1.4 Students can analyze processes of change in island societies.
1.5 Students can interact with and advocate for Pacific Island communities at home or abroad.
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: NA
UHM Catalog. Page Number:
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online: NA
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.
We asked ourselves: How well are PACS BA course SLOs aligned with the BA program SLOs? Do we need to change the program SLOs or adapt courses? How do we accommodate SLO 5 given inconsistent faculty commitment to service learning? How well are students demonstrating SLO3?
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.
Faculty presented course SLOs on their syllabi and reconsidered how program outcomes were introduced, reinforced, mastered or assessed in their courses. We examined student writing assignments and specific essays on exams in 100 and 200 level courses that related to SLO 3, explaining indigenous issues and concerns.
8) State how many persons submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
There were approximately 5 essays/writing samples evaluated per course evaluated (enrollment is 20 students on average). All exams and students papers are scanned and archived. Particular exam questions and written assignments that target SLO3 were identified and every fourth paper in the batch scan of the assignment was selected for evaluation. A total of 15 individual students’ work was evaluated.
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.
The evaluations of student writing relevant to SLO3 revealed that 80% of students demonstrated competence, 20% demonstrated accomplished work.
In discussing SLO5, the faculty decided that since not all faculty are comfortable with community engagement and service learning, that not every course would introduce or reinforce the skills and outcome in program SLO5. Those that did not support SLO5 through service learning would support SLO5 through research and writing assignments, providing additional skills for students as they prepare for the Senior capstone which requires a collaborative student/community research project.
12) State how the program used the results or plans to use the results. Please be specific.
Approaches to SLO3 at the 100 and 200 level are successful. Faculty plan to identify specific assignments in advance for regular archiving and assessment in order to simplify the evaluation process.
In discussing SLO5, the faculty decided that since not all faculty are comfortable with community engagement and service learning, that not every course would introduce or reinforce the skills and outcomes in program SLO5. SLO5, community advocacy, can be addressed through service learning as well as through research, analysis, and writing assignments, all of which provide skills for students as they prepare for the Senior capstone which requires an collaborative student/community research project.
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.
Archiving student work is becoming the norm, but targeting specific assignments in advance will be the next step. Faculty are cognizant of course and program SLOs, but are challenged to identify how each is clearly assessed within the context of his or her course. Support for this would be helpful so that assignments are clearly linked to specific student outcomes.
Assessing program SLOs in 100 and 200 level courses will require better rubrics and guidelines to define “accomplished”, “competent”, “developing” and “beginning” quality work. How exactly does an accomplished response in an introductory 100 level class differ from an accomplished response in a 200 level course, which is to reinforce skills and knowledge? The rubrics need to be more specific, but also accessible in our interdisciplinary field of study. Sample work is helpful, as was the process of collectively scoring and calibrating the initial examples.