Program: Sociology (MA)
Date: Mon Nov 26, 2012 - 1:29:39 pm
1) Below are your program's student learning outcomes (SLOs). Please update as needed.
Student Learning Outcomes for the Plan MA Degree (draft): a. understanding of a broad range of sociological theories and methods, and commonly used statistical techniques b. ability to design a feasible research project to address a sociological problem or issue of theoretical interest c. understanding of principles of protection of human subjects and how to design sociological research that respects and protects human subjects. d. ability to carry out an independent research project to collect and analyze research data that addresses a sociological question e. ability to interpret research results in relation to sociological theory, to draw reasonable inferences, and to report research results and conclusions accurately and effectively.
2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.
Student Handbook. URL, if available online: There is a detailed handbook students receive, which will be posted on the new website.
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online: will be when new department website is published
UHM Catalog. Page Number:
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online: individual course syllabi are published in e-syllabi for CSS
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.
Annual review of all graduate students in the department (conducted at a closed faculty meeting with all current faculty present) assessed the progress of 11 MA students. Six were completing coursework required for SLOS A and C, and the rest were in the process of completing the requirements covered by the SLOs B, D, and E. Eight were making satisfactory progress through the program and three received warnings. Of the three who received warnings, one completed the degree, one was making progress, and the third was counseled out of the program.
The faculty consensus is that our annual review of all graduate students works effectively in conjunction with the course requirements and evaluation steps that are tracked in the SLOs. No changes or revisions to the SLOS or the program were suggested.
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 students were given their annual review by the full faculty, which is based on the department graduate student database that tracks each student's progress through the standard program milestones, and includes a report by the student's advisor or committee chair and contributions by others who work with that student. As noted in the previous answer, six of the student reviewed were taking courses and thus were in the process of completing SLOs A and C. Several were newly admitted in fall 2011 or spring 2012, and the required core courses are offered only once a year on a staggered schedule. The remaining student evaluated were working with their committee to produce a thesis proposal (B) (getting human subjects approval if required (C)), doing the necessary research and writing the thesis (D) and completing the writing and oral defense of the thesis (E). Four students successfully completed the MA in 2011-2012, meaning that they successfully passed all of the SLO milestones successfully. Two of those students were subsequently admitted to the doctoral program and the other two have returned to their home country and are employed there. One student who was having difficulty with the program was successfully counseled out of the program in spring 2012, after discussion of her case in the annual review.
8) State how many persons submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
Twelve students were evaluated (including one who completed the degree in December 2011, before the annual review). The actual assessments of each student were performed by the instructors in their required core courses (3), and their committees (3 committee members per student for those at the thesis proposal level or above, for a total of 15 committee members with some overlap). All 15 faculty participated in the annual review, heard the committee chair's report on each student, and collectively participated in determining the letter that would be sent to the student (A for making satisfactory progress, D for warning, C for serious warning).
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: full faculty in annual review of all graduate students
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)
Other: assessed quality of thesis proposal, actual thesis, and oral defense
11) For the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goal(s) stated in Question #6:
Summarize the actual results.
This is nonsense. I have already provided sufficient information about all of this in the previous questions.
12) State how the program used the results or plans to use the results. Please be specific.
We use the annual review to evaluate how well the program is meeting its goals. We have determined that the MA program is meeting its goals and that we are able to deal with any problems. We continue to track our students, to work closely with them through their thesis committees, and to hold them to the department's high standards so that we are proud of their final products. What more are we supposed to be doing? The theses that represent their final products are available through Proquest.
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.
No, except that this mechanical assessment device is not really appropriate for graduate programs and the one the Graduate Division conducts is much more useful for our program. We had already determined that previously, so it is not a new finding.