GE-Related Comments and Recommendations from the July 2003 WASC Site Report

UHH Home > Faculty & Staff > General Education for Faculty

http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/~accred/wasc/TeamReport2003.pdf

Standard IV-Creating an Organization Committed to Learning and Improvement

  . . . Like many other WASC institutions, the University is young in deeds in using tools and processes that demonstrate Commitment to Learning and Improvement. Structures, and processes exist to assure quality at each level of institutional functioning (e.g., curriculum approval, program review, ongoing evaluation, and data collection), but broader participation and commitment to using the structures and processes is needed.

The same is true of the campus's activities around issues of educational effectiveness, especially assessment of student learning, General Education program review , and retention initiatives. Faculty and students have been involved, but room for improvement exists. (p. 8)

Issue 1. Assessment

[including General Education] and Program Review. . .

. . .

The General Education program has an appropriate faculty oversight body in the Faculty Congress. That body is actively engaged in carrying out its charge. They demonstrate the commitment, interest and fortitude to develop the measurable student learning outcomes needed for each GE category and to identify and implement ways to gather evidence that will help determine the GE program's effectiveness in achieving its learning goals. The GE Committee's first task is to ensure that there is a system to collect and analyze course syllabi.   (p. 10)

. . .

. Dedicated members of the General Education Committee have embarked on their commitment to begin a process for GE Assessment.   (p. 11)

. The GE Committee faces a number of challenges as it commences with its work.While there are broad goals for General Education, they are not framed in measurable terms . Also, GE categories lack student learning outcomes. The energy and interest of the GE committee is robust, but the dual structure of the School Senates and the Faculty Congress complicates the significant task of authentically assessing the GE program. (p. 11)

. . .

Short-Term (Prior to the Educational Effectiveness Review) Recommendations:

  1. Implement a procedure that will ensure the University maintains a current set of approved syllabi for the approved courses in the official University Catalog . (CRF 2.3 and 2.6)
  2. Ensure that all degree programs have a set of measurable student learning outcomes for both the programs and the courses within the programs that express what students will demonstrate as a consequence of completing the academic major.
  3. Develop measurable learning objectives for each of the General Education categories. (p. 12)

Issue 2. Faculty Development and Diversity

. . .

Short-Term Recommendations:

2. The academic leadership should review the campus' needs and allot funds in a systematic way to establish measurable student learning outcomes for both General Education and the undergraduate majors at the Hilo campus. The faculty development needs in this area are critical to achieving Educational Effectiveness. Outside assistance and coaching may well be required for this plan to be well conceived and effective.    (p. 17)

Long-Term Recommendation:

2. The University should consider bringing in some outside assistance for the faculty who are still unsure of either the necessity or the way to develop student learning outcomes . Use of some development funds could assist the institution better assess the effectiveness of General Education and courses in the majors in the long run if faculty have this understanding and need clearly in their minds.   (p. 17)

. . .

Preparation for the Educational Effectiveness Review

. . .

UH Hilo is properly and effectively engaged in preparations for the educational effectiveness review. The campus clearly has the resources and infrastructure to support educational effectiveness. The next step, which the campus has begun to take, is the illumination of how the resources and infrastructure, the institutional capacity to be effective, has played out in individual academic programs, in general education, and in student support programs.   (p. 29)

Major Recommendations

  . . .

Based on its findings, the visiting team wishes to delineate and summarize the particular recommendations which it believes should be implemented or addressed within the next 6-8 months prior to the WASC educational effectiveness review that will take place a year from now:

  1. Ensure that all degree programs have a set of measurable learning outcomes for both the programs and the courses within the programs that express what students will demonstrate as a consequence of completing the academic major; and, in addition, develop measurable learning outcomes for each of the General Education categories .
  2. Implement a procedure that will ensure the University maintains a current set of approved syllabi for the approved courses in the official University Catalog.

[Five other major recommendations follow, bearing on the budget and other non-academic matters.]