Program: Plant & Environmental Biotechnology (BS)
Degree: Bachelor's
Date: Mon Oct 07, 2013 - 2:59:16 pm
1) Below are your program's student learning outcomes (SLOs). Please update as needed.
1.The program provides a strong grounding in the fundamentals, chemistry and biology as well as supporting classes.
2.The program follows this up with a core of upper division sciences, molecular biotechnology, genetics, genomics, and bioinformatics, cell biology, biochemistry and the ethics of biotechnology which is a set of organizing principles we should live with. The upper division courses and electives form the basis of a well rounded and high level understanding of biological science (the components of biotechnology).
3.Application of cutting-edge knowledge to a practical problem is practiced in research in a mentor’s laboratory culminating in a presentation in the Student Research Symposium which is the capstone requirement and which emphasizes development of
4.Problem solving and critical thinking skills as well as familiarity with state of the art instrumentation.
1. The program provides a strong grounding in the fundamentals, chemistry and biology as well as supporting classes.
2. The program follows this up with a core of upper division sciences, molecular biotechnology, genetics, genomics, and bioinformatics, cell biology, biochemistry and the ethics of biotechnology which is a set of organizing principles we should live with. The upper division courses and electives form the basis of a well rounded and high level understanding of biological science (the components of biotechnology).
3. Application of cutting-edge knowledge to a practical problem is practiced in research in a mentor’s laboratory culminating in a presentation in the Student Research Symposium which is the capstone requirement and which emphasizes development of
4. Problem solving and critical thinking skills as well as familiarity with state of the art instrumentation.
2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.
Department Website URL: Student Handbook. URL, if available online: 
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online: Flyer UHM Catalog. Page Number: Course Syllabi. URL, if available online: Other: Other: 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.
0% 1-50% 51-80% 81-99%
100%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.)
Yes 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.
We did more than this. We changed the program's name and streamlined the confusing curricular options. These were long standing student requests. Our program had an unattractive name and we thought that a more modern name would be better.
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.
Comprehensive student survey and comprehensive student exit survey. The changes reflect what students wanted.
8) State how many persons submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
As memory serves all students were surveyed in the normal survey. We had about 15 majors at a time. In addition, each student is given an exit interview by the advisor.
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.
Students did not generally volunteer that they didn't like the name of the program though a few would use a nickname. When asked, however, they almost unanimously preferred the new name, Molecular Biosciences and Bioengineering. All along the students and their advisor were flexible as to the electives in the specialties. Flexibility was insured by abolishing specialties.
12) State how the program used the results or plans to use the results. Please be specific.
It was a major thing to change the program's name. It was only accepted after a third meeting of the Council of Deans. We hope that with the new name enrollment will rise.
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.
The main thing we always discover is that the best liked aspect of the program is spending a year in a mentor's laboratory doing a project.
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.
The program relies on the peer reviews by a board of faculty members as its main assessment tools. Secondary tools are acceptances into graduate or professional schools.