Integrated Monitoring and Evaluation in the Intercollege Nutrition
Transcription
Integrated Monitoring and Evaluation in the Intercollege Nutrition
Integrated Monitoring and Evaluation in the Intercollege Nutrition PhD Program University of University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa Marie Kainoa Fialkowski and Rachel Novotny Outcome Assessment Development The Intercollege Nutrition PhD Program is a relatively new program, begun in Fall 2007. The Program has recently redoubled efforts to communicate at all levels - in student recruitment, among enrolled students, and among faculty across the participating colleges. This effort includes enhancing student and program monitoring and evaluation at all program and academic milestones. The effort involved revising the program’s student learning outcomes (SLOs) for the program and development of rubrics and other assessment tools that will be used to monitor and evaluate student completion of SLOs. These rubrics and assessments tools are being implemented for the first time in 2014 – 2015. A summary of results will be presented to program faculty annually. These results will inform any necessary program changes and the implementation of those changes. Monitoring and evaluation tools serve to enhance program communication and development. Qualifying Examination Domain Basic nutrition Nutrition biochemistry SLO1 Question Appropriate Rating (1) Does not meet (2) Marginal (3) Meets (4) Exceeds SLO1 Teaching Evaluation (1) Does not meet (2) Marginal (3) Meets (4) Exceeds In-class lectures SLO7 Acceptable Preliminary Ideas for Dissertation Research (1) Does not meet (2) Marginal (3) Meets (4) Exceeds Open-ended Literature Review SLO1 SLO2 SLO7 Laboratory Instruction Nutrition research methods (1) Does not meet (2) Marginal (3) Meets (4) Exceeds SLO1, SLO4 Level Appropriate Rating Open-ended Instructional activities Dissertation Proposal/Defense and Comprehensive Exam Methods Open-ended SLO4 SLO7 The Intercollege PhD Program in Nutrition Student Teaching Evaluation is completed at the end of the semester by the student’s teaching mentor. SLO2 Analysis SLO4 Student Learning Outcomes (SLO) SLO 1: Comprehensive understanding of core nutrition knowledge SLO 2: Advanced scholarship in a specialty area SLO 3: Demonstrate multi-disciplinary perspectives when forming research questions, designing research, drawing inferences, and articulating implications of research findings through the exposure to social and career-building disciplines SLO 4: Develop skills in research methodologies demonstrated by conducting original scholarly research SLO 5: Develop skills in grant writing SLO 6: Understand research ethics SLO 7: Effectively disseminate research findings via peer-reviewed publications, seminars and practical applications such as teaching Teaching Experience (SLO 1 and SLO7) Circle One Content delivered Addresses key points in sufficient detail to address lesson/course objectives (1) Poor (2) Fair (3) Average (4) Good (5) Excellent Classroom teaching technique Suitability of techniques for level and type of class (including individual/ pair/ group work) Use of teaching aids (1) Poor (2) Fair (3) Average (4) Good (5) Excellent Classroom management Demonstrates ability to monitor, control, and adapt (1) Poor (2) Fair (3) Average (4) Good (5) Excellent Teacher attitude Rapport with students Motivation of learners Maintenance of students' interest and attention (1) Poor (2) Fair (3) Average (4) Good (5) Excellent Student Evaluation SLO Question SLO1 What activities/experiences SLO2 enhanced your learning? SLO 6 What activities/experiences impeded your learning? Discussion SLO1 Language use General intelligibility & adequate pronunciation Open-ended (1) Does not meet (2) Marginal (3) Meets (4) Exceeds Applies appropriate and rigorous methods. Methods align with the research question/hypothesis and theory. Identifies study groups. Identifies study design. Identifies measurements to be used. Points out the advantages and disadvantages of each method/measurement used. (1) Does not meet (2) Marginal (3) Meets (4) Exceeds Aligns with research questions/hypotheses. Is replicable. (1) Does not meet (2) Marginal (3) Meets (4) Exceeds Demonstrates critical understanding. Evaluation of results. Integration of results. Able to apply findings broadly. (1) Does not meet (2) Marginal (3) Meets (4) Exceeds Original Contribution Expands or alters thinking of the field. (1) Does not meet (2) Marginal (3) Meets (4) Exceeds SLO4 Nutrition knowledge Responses to questions demonstrate synthesis of knowledge in nutrition. (1) Does not meet (2) Marginal (3) Meets (4) Exceeds SLO1 SLO3 SLO5 Please rank your career building skills Please rank your grant writing skills (1) Poor (2) Fair (3) Average (4) Good (5) Excellent (1) Poor (2) Fair (3) Average (4) Good (5) Excellent (1) Poor (2) Fair (3) Average (4) Good (5) Excellent Comprehensive & up to date. Contextualizes the problem. Selective, analytical, and thematic. Clearly articulates gap in knowledge being addressed by the dissertation. If relevant, contains table of key papers addressing topic, showing estimates of association. Contains conceptual framework. Clearly states research questions. Appropriate Rating Interdisciplinary knowledge The Intercollege PhD Program in Nutrition Student Evaluation also assesses feedback related to degree program, advisers, post-graduation goals and other factors that may affect student performance. Intercollege PhD Program in Nutrition University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa Responses to questions demonstrate synthesis of knowledge in nutrition & nutrition’s application to specialty field(s). (1) Does not meet (2) Marginal (3) Meets (4) Exceeds SLO2 Dissemination SLO7 Voice Audibility and projection Appropriate Ranking Open-ended SLO7 Other areas related to instruction Expected Performance Research Ethics SLO6 Communication is effective, skillfully presenting arguments in support of (1) Does not meet (2) Marginal thesis. (3) Meets (4) Exceeds Responses to questions exhibit superior breadth and depth of knowledge in subject area. Demonstrates honesty, objectivity, integrity, carefulness, openness, confidentiality, responsibility, competence and protection of participant rights (1) Does not meet (2) Marginal (3) Meets (4) Exceeds