Evaluation form. Our
assessment tool will be
question #5. This SLO was
created, in part, to help
understand the poor
performance of students on
“breadth of knowledge” in
SLO2 in the 2007-08 year.student’s project in terms of
quality, design and
significance are collected.
Assessment of this SLO
began in Spring 2009. By
the nature of data
collection, assessment for
this SLO is pooled with the
Biology M.Sc. program.with 97% of students to be
satisfactory (59%) or
commendable (39%). These
numbers are similar to
previous years. In 2012-
2013, we collected 259
responses. Faculty deemed
student performance on this
SLO to be excellent with
98% of students to be
satisfactory (63%) or above
(commendable, 36%).that no action will be taken.SLO2: A graduate student
should be able to
independently answer
questions regarding their
research field. Link to
UNCW Learning Goal:
Information literacy, critical
thinking, thoughtful
expression.
Oral preliminary exam is
successfully completed. The
student’s committee
evaluates performance in
the exam with a form.Each student in the program
is assessed by each of
his/her committee
members. Data on the
student’s ability to
articulate information, on
the depth and breadth of
their knowledge, and
professional poise are
collected.Faculty compliance
improved significantly for
this SLO this year. In 2013-
2014 we had 40
respondents. Unfortunately
student performance for
this SLO is still low. We do
have >90% of students
performing at the level of
adequate (3 or better) but
the fraction of students
performing at levels 4 or 5
was 60% for articulation,
58% for breadth and 60%
for depth of knowledge.
Professional poise was
assessed at being above
level 3 for 73% of cases. In
2012 - 2013 we had 25
respondents for this SLO.
Faculty determined that the
fraction of students
performing above the level
of adequate students was
52% in ability to articulate,
50% in breadth, and 48% in
depth of knowledge, andStudent performance on
this SLO has been a concern
in the past. Given the small
sample size for this SLO, the
Graduate Assessment
Coordinator recommended
that we carefully monitor
performance for another
year before evaluating
whether any programmatic
changes are warranted. The
fraction of students in 2013-
2014 performing above
adequate for this SLO is
lower than 2012-2013 for
both of our M. Sc.
Programs. The faculty
discussed the results of
assessment to date at the
2014 retreat and decided to
adopt that suggestion. In
addition, the faculty will
discuss levels of expectation
for our programs (i.e. do we
expect our students to be
adequate [3] or better than
adequate [4 or 5]?). At the