Program: Civil Engineering (MS)
Date: Mon Oct 22, 2012 - 7:53:40 am
1) Below are your program's student learning outcomes (SLOs). Please update as needed.
The student learning outcomes are 1) attainment of in-depth technical knowledge in subdiscipline of specialization; 2) an ability to perform engineering with enhanced technical proficiency in subdiscipline of specialization; 3) an ability to present work orally and in written form; and 4) an ability to perform either original research, possibly with direction, and/or detailed, open-ended project work.
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.
The goal was to evaluate achievment of all SLOs in a direct evaluation of defense/thesis using a Likert scale (unsatisfactory, developing, satisfactory, exemplary).
The SLOs were all targeted.
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.
Commitee members each fill out form and can add comments.
8) State how many persons submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
Two students were evaluated.
This was the first year of evaluations and it was a trial of the process.
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)
Other: graduate chair
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.
Students are satisfactory or exemplary in all SLOs.
The sample did not include ESL students, which is anticipated to yield a wider range of assessments in SLO 3 (communication).
We found that the process is workable.
The findings will yield more usable/actionable information if faculty are encouraged to add comments (in that section of assessment form)
12) State how the program used the results or plans to use the results. Please be specific.
Faculty will be encouraged to use the "comments/explanations" section of the evaluation form to obtain more actionable information this year, when all graduating MS students will be evaluated.
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.
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.