Unit: Languages & Literatures of Europe and the Americas
Program: French (MA)
Degree: Master's
Date: Sat Oct 26, 2013 - 1:09:27 am

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

1. Understand theoretical issues and research methods discussed in the current literature in French literature, philosophy, film, cultural studies, art, and the history of the French language.

2. Critically evaluate theoretical issues and research methods discussed in the current literature in French literature, philosophy, film, cultural studies, art, and the history of the French language.

3. Communicate effectively in speaking about the theoretical issues and research methods in French literature, philosophy, film, cultural studies, art, and the history of the French language.

4. Communicate effectively in writing about the theoretical issues and research methods in French literature, philosophy, film, cultural studies, art, and the history of the French language.

5. Conduct research or engage in systematic investigation in your area of expertise by applying certain theoretical frameworks and methodological knowledge and techniques specific to the field.

6. Teach first-year French language courses under supervision.

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: NA
UHM Catalog. Page Number:
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online:
Other:
Other:

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.

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.

The French Division continues a vigorous process of assessment, targeting multiple aspects of the program. The assessment areas and questions have included, since June 2012:

  • Program assessment for the past five years, as part of the five-year Program Review. The Division produced its own self-assessment, including assessment of its 5-year accomplishments and areas of strength (which include growth in the BA and MA programs, international and cross-disciplinary initiatives, student-focused instruction, student successes before and after graduation), as well as weaknesses (losses in our tenure lines that impact courses and student progress towards degrees)
  • Strategic planning for the next decade. The short and long term goals of the program at all levels were discussed and analyzed by the faculty and M.A. students, with input from faculty from other departments and units. A meeting with undergraduates is upcoming.
  • Understanding student expectations and responding to their perceived needs.
  • Better communication to all students in our program about possibilities for use of the field of study in careers, study abroad, teaching abroad, etc.
  • Increasing feedback from students at all program levels
  • How to revise existing courses and/or prepare new courses that respond to student interests, that take advantage of research opportunities unique to U.H. and/or the Pacific, or that will enrich the learning experience
  • Seeking to establish better and deeper connections to other departments, units, and faculty with overlapping interests/fields of study.

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.

The division used a number of different procedures for gathering evidence, including:

A. Faculty meetings to discuss assessment issues. Multiple graduate faculty and general faculty meetings were devoted to discussing the topics above.

 B. Meetings with faculty from other departments and units both in the college of LLL and in other colleges and schools

1.The Initiative  on French-speaking Oceania and Asia involves faculty from French, Pacific Islands Studies, Indo-Pacific Languages and Literatures, Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Hamilton Library Pacific Collection. Informal and formal meetings continue to develop shared programs in the French-speaking Pacific and Asia

2. French and Fashion.  In 2012, a series of meetings between faculty in French, the Department of Apparel Design and Merchandising (CTAHR), Study Abroad, and involving an institution in Paris were begun to look at ways of combining fashion and French/Italian studies for students who want to pursue fashion studies with a European focus or study abroad experience. Those discussions continue.

C. Meetings with faculty and students.

A meeting of all French faculty and graduate students was held on September 12, 2012 with Program planning for the next decade as its agenda.  Five out of six I2-I5 faculty,  five lecturers, all eleven graduate assistants, and one graduate student attended. Contributions were made orally at the meeting, and optional written program planning survey was distributed. Notes were taken and 17 written response surveys were returned and analyzed by the faculty.

D. M.A. exit surveys were distributed to the graduate faculty, analyzed by Graduate Advisor and the Division chair and discussed a graduate faculty meetings.

E. Student course evaluations and peer evaluations.  The language coordinator reads all evaluations of 102-202 students and observes all graduate assistants.  The division chair reads all evaluations of tenure-track faculty, instructors,  and lecturers and discusses the results with those faculty. New evaluation forms were developed for class observations that mesh with teaching and assessment goals.

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

a. Six (2012) / seven (2013) full-time faculty, all graduate assistants (11), 2 graduate students, faculty from other units interested in shared programs (approximately 12-15)

b. Exit surveys: French MA (data collected during Fall 2011-Spring 2012 and distributed Sept. 6, 2012, 8 students, 88% participation rate).

c. Narrative course evaluations: approx. 1,500 students at all levels from Fall 2012-Summer 2013 (evaluation ongoing).

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.

A. The Sept. 21, 2012 written assessment activity revealed particular graduate student  interest in the following areas: tracks, increased opportunities for language study such as double-language options, more translation options, study abroad and exchange opportunities for graduate students, interdisciplinary and thematic courses. Faculty and grad students were in agreement and program revisions in response to assessment are now ongoing. The assessment activity results were taken into account in position requests. Two position requests (both replacements for faculty who left or retired in 2012/2013) took into account student interest areas.  History of the language will no longer be taught and an older stylistics course at the MA level is being revised  and modernized to Translation practice and theory. More interdisciplinary material is included in graduate courses this semeser (FR 601 and 690 include literature, film, art, opera, ballet).

B. MA exit surveys:

  • 8/8  answered “very well” or “well” for: “Teach first-year French language courses under supervision (via pilot class demonstrations, classroom observations, pedagogical workshops)”
  • 8/8 were “very satisfied” with “faculty mentoring and advising”
  • 8/8 were “very satisfied” or “somewhat satisfied”  with “student morale”, “department climate and culture”, “Teaching/tutoring opportunities”, “Opportunities to establish collegial relationships with peers”, “quality of courses offered within the department”, “Availability of scholarships and fellowships, tuition waivers, GA/TA-ships”, and “amount stipend for GA/TA-ship”
  • 7/8 answered “very well” or “well” for”  Communicate effectively in speaking about the theoretical issues and research methods in French literature, philosophy, film, cultural studies, art, and the history of the French language”

C. Exit survey comments were collected, summarized, distributed, and analyzed.

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

A. Six undergraduate and graduate students had been sent on an experimental exchange to an advanced institute for translation and interpretation studies in Brussels, Belgium for Spring 2011. After their successful completion of the program and further analysis, a formal exchange was set up and signed in August 2012 between UHM and the Institut Supérieur de Traducteurs et Interprètes, Haute Ecole de Bruxelles. This is a direct response to student interest in French-English translation studies from earlier assessment activities.

B. Two hires were made in 2013. Both positions, while replacements for faculty who had left/retired, were also targeted to respond to student interests.  One position includes work in French-speaking Oceania and Asia. The other position inlcudes work on translation.  Both new faculty are currently developing and offering courses that respond to student interests indicated in assessment activities (FR 661, FR491, LLEA 264). Exit survey results and assessment information gathered at meetings were used to help structure the two position requests.

C. In response to student interests in the French-speaking Pacific, Prof. Bouquet organized and directed an intensive study trip to Tahiti in May 2013. Five UHM French students attended and this was an opportunity to develop our relationship with the University of French Polynesia. 

D. The division diffuses more information about study, work, and teaching assistant opportunities in France to students at all levels via the instructors

E. The division maintains and distributes records of the number of students participating in weekly social and cultural activities in French. Teaching staff attend all activities and also gather informal reactions to the activities. Activities are popular with students, offer opportunities for learning  and language use outside of class, and continue.

F. In response to student interest in translation, FR 406 is being taught this semester and FR 661 will be taught in Fall 2014 (Prof. Ségeral).  A UHM-2 form has been submitted to revise and update 661 to include practical translation and theoretical issues.
G. In keeping with the research interests of the current faculty, and in response to MA exit surveys in which satisfaction with research opportunities in class and outside of class was good, but not as high as some other categories, the division increased research requirements in several 400- and 600-level courses in Spring and Fall 2013, and encouraged the most qualified graduate students to pursue thesis options and to apply for scholarships through the division or the College of Arts and Sciences. 100% of the MA students currently enrolled full-time are conducting research projects inside or outside of class and several are considering thesis options.

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 assessment activities reveal high student satisfaction in the MA program especially in the areas of teaching, mentoring, graduate student teaching and peer relationships. The results are shared with the faculty to boost morale and encourage continued program planning.  While faculty and graduate students all wish to increase student reseach and this is a highly desirable goal, students and faculty are also concerned about loss of faculty lines that limits our ability to direct thesis projects and other graduate research. The loss of faculty lines in the Medieval and the Renaissance limits the range of our program. These concerns are being communicated to the appropriate administrative bodies, supported by evidence gathered from assessment activities.

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.