Unit: Earth Sciences
Program: Earth and Planetary Sciences (PhD)
Degree: Doctorate
Date: Thu Oct 10, 2013 - 5:51:01 pm

1) Below are your program's student learning outcomes (SLOs). Please update as needed.

Student Learning Objectives for the Ph.D.

1. Technical knowledge Ph.D. graduates are proficient in applying technical knowledge of relevant theory, laboratory methods, field methods, computer applications, and the supporting disciplines (math, physics, chemistry, biology) to advance the fields of geology and geophysics.

2. Expertise in a sub-discipline Ph.D. graduates are able to comprehensively synthesize, evaluate, and interpret relevant fundamental knowledge in her or his sub-discipline.

3. Scientific method (effective and ethical practice) Ph.D. graduates are able to independently (a) construct scientific hypotheses, (b) design and carry out research to evaluate them in a timely manner, (c) analyze and synthesize the results of their research, and (d) derive conclusions that advance the fields of geology and geophysics. The highest standards of ethical practice are emphasized. 

4. Communicate geological knowledge Ph.D. graduates are able to effectively communicate the findings of their research in writing at a level comparable to that of scientific journal publications, and defend it orally to the satisfaction of a scientific audience. They are also able to communicate orally about Geology though seminar or conference presentations.

5. Employability/Contributions Post-Graduation Ph.D. graduates have acquired the knowledge and skills in the profession needed to pursue employment or other activities that contribute to the advancement of the Earth sciences and/or the solution of societal problems.

2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.

Department Website URL: http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/GG/academics/gg_academics.html
Student Handbook. URL, if available online: http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/GG/resources/gg_documents.html
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online: http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/GG/resources/docs/gg-grad-SLO_Master_Checklist_Final.pdf
UHM Catalog. Page Number:
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online: this is in process of being added

3) Select one option:

Curriculum Map File(s) from 2013:

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.

Every graduate student meets with and is assessed by their doctorasl ommittee of faculty mentors every semester

Each  student is evaluated by the advisor and a graduate studeis faculty committee once each year.

GG610 assesses oral communication skills once per year for students.  Also oral skils are evaluate at the defense.

For PhD students without an MS there is an oral and written qualifying exam, and all PhD students must pass a comprehensive

exam (usually after 2 years in program). These are all documented

There are a series of milestones in the graduate program, along with course work, that contribute to the

assessment process

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.

questionnaires, GG 610 course grades, and faculty observations.

8) State how many persons submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.

Three to five.

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)

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)

11) For the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goal(s) stated in Question #6:
Summarize the actual results.

All studentsd evaluated were either found to be adequately reaching milestones on the way to the degree and attainment of each SLO, or corrective action was implemented by the GG Chair and Faculty Advisor, in consulation with the Graduate Stuies Committee.

12) State how the program used the results or plans to use the results. Please be specific.

No program changes are being proposed at this time.

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 GG Dept. Curriculum Committee finalized the SLOs for the PhD degree this past year, after consultation with GG department faculty and graduate students, and got department approval by voice vote at a faculty meeting in April 2013. These new SLOs will be incorporated into new course syllabi and will be required on all new course and course revision actions we initiate on UHM-1 and UHN-2 request.

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.