Program: Animal Science (BS)
Date: Fri Sep 27, 2013 - 5:24:38 pm
1) Below are your program's student learning outcomes (SLOs). Please update as needed.
- Know and understand the basic principles of applied animal biology.
- Understand the fundamental tenets of animal science disciplines including genetics, growth and development, meat science and muscle biology, comparative nutrition, feeds and feeding, anatomy, basic and environmental physiology, endocrinology and reproduction.
- Apply this knowledge to the basic understanding and application of appropriate husbandry best practices to animals of economic value.
- Read and be able to analyze scientific or technical papers critically.
- Communicate clearly both orally and in writing.
- Develop problem-solving skills for lifetime learning.
- Understand the importance of good citizenship in both personal and professional habits.
- Understand the scientific method and design of experiments to test hypotheses and as such experience the process of discovery.
- Explore the relationship between applied animal biology and society, including contemporary ethical issues raised by animal research, the interactions of animals and humans, and the role and impact of animal agriculture and applied animal biology on the planet.
- Recognize and use appropriate technologies, such as computer applications and laboratory methodologies.
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, 2012 and September 30, 2013? (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, 2012 to September 30, 2013: State the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goals. Include the SLOs that were targeted, if applicable.
Internship supervisors were asked to rate senior students on the following:
A. Attendance at designated work site.
B. Work Performance
1. Ability to learn
2. Ability to analyze problems
3. Ability to organize and plan work
4. Quality of work
5. Time to complete tasks
6. Ability to meet deadlines
7. Initiative to identify needs and proposed solutions
8. Ability to utilize and apply previously gained knowledge
9. Ability to communicate orally
10. Ability to write clearly, accurately
11. Ability to work independently
14. Use of professional judgement
15. Interest and enthusiasm
C. Professional Relationships
1. Courteous, sensitive to others
2. Ability to work cooperatively with other employees
3. Ability to deal with clients, consumers
4. Ability to assume effective leadership (when needed)
5. Receptivity to suggestions
6. Ability to accept constructive criticism
7. Ability to be flexible and adaptable
8. Ability to handle personal and work-related frustrations
D. Professional Role
1. Professionalism in manner and work performance
2. Interest in operations of facility
3. Confidence and pride in self and work
4. Ethical behavior
5. Personal appearance (as appropriate for job)
6. Ability to evaluate self and own work
E. General Overall
1. Overall performance in this field
2. Potential in professional field
3. Would employ student in the future if an opportunity developed
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 supervisors of students in ANSC 492, a required field experience class for students in their senior year, submitted evaluations. The questions were rated on a scale of 1 to 4.
8) State how many persons submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
Data was collected on 27 students over 3 years.
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)
Other: Scored supervisor evalulations
11) For the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goal(s) stated in Question #6:
Summarize the actual results.
Student scores are above average on Attendance, Ability to organize and plan work, Ability to meet deadlines, Ability to write clearly/accurately, Promptness/puctuality, Ethical behavior.
Student scores are below average on Initiative to identify needs and proposed solutions, Ability to communicate orally, Interest in operations of facility, Confidence and pride in self and work.
12) State how the program used the results or plans to use the results. Please be specific.
The program has added an oral communications focus to ANSC 432 Swine Production for fall 2013.
The program plans to conduct a more thorough assessment of oral and writing skills based on samples of work from the Field Experience class. Oral skills will be assessed because they were identified as being weak and we need to see whether the O class helps. The writing skills will be assessed because the type of writing (eg case notes) done in the field tends to be limited so assessment beyond supervisor evaluations will be useful.
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.
We will continue to use a rolling 3 year average to provide sufficient student numbers in a reasonably timely way.
We will see whether evaluating student writing in class correlates with supervisor evalutions.