Report to WASC
University of Hawai‘i at Hilo
Special Visit
March 18-20, 2008
Submitted by
April Komenaka Scazzola
komenaka@hawaii.edu
Accreditation Liaison Officer
January 15, 2008
Table of Contents
1. Institutional Context and Major Changes since Last Visit
Institutional Context
Major Changes since March 2004 Site Visit
Academic Programs
Personnel
Facilities
1
1
1
1
2
2
2. Report Preparation and Campus Review
4
3.
Response to Issues Identified by the Commission in the 2004
Action Letter
Institutional Resources and Planning
Budget Processes
Strategic Planning
Extramural Funding and Private Donations
Faculty Governance
Diversity
Improving Faculty Diversity
Integrating the Indigenous Culture and Ways of Knowing
throughout the Curriculum
Educational Effectiveness: Assessment of Student Learning
4. Other Issues Raised by the March 2004 Site Team
General Education Program
Retention and Persistence to Graduation
Program Review
Strategic Plan Performance Indicators
5
5
5
6
8
10
12
12
14
15
17
17
19
22
23
5. The Doctorate in Hawaiian and Indigenous Language and Culture
Revitalization
24
6. The College of Pharmacy
25
7. Other Issues Facing the Institution
Graduate Council and Graduate Programs
Management of Documents
27
27
29
8. Preparing for the Next Cycle of Review
30
9. Conclusion
How Have Our Responses to WASC’s Challenges Impacted
the Institution?
Major Recommendations
31
Appendix A. Required Attachments
Appendix B. Other Supporting Materials
31
32
In Text and on CD
On CD
ii
1. Institutional Context and Major Changes since Last Visit
Context. The University of Hawai‘i at Hilo is a comprehensive regional university located
on the island of Hawai‘i, the southernmost and largest island in the Hawaiian archipelago.
UH Hilo is part of the University of Hawaii’s ten-campus system of public higher education
and is the only accredited, four-year educational institution on the island. Formerly named
Hilo College, the university began offering the baccalaureate degree in 1970 and was first
accredited by WASC in 1976.
The primary mission of UH Hilo is to offer high quality undergraduate liberal arts and
professional programs. In addition to 32 baccalaureate programs, UH Hilo now offers
master’s programs in five fields, a doctorate in Hawaiian and Indigenous Language and
Culture Revitalization, and the doctoral degree in Pharmacy. The university provides
students with opportunities in hands-on learning, leadership, and community service, and
encourages close student-faculty interaction, including student-faculty collaboration on
research projects.
The university is comprised of five degree-granting colleges and one outreach college:






the College of Arts and Sciences (CAS)
the College of Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resource Management (CAFNRM)
Ka Haka ‘Ula O Ke‘elikōlani College of Hawaiian Language (CHL)
the College of Business and Economics (CoBE)
the College of Pharmacy (CoP)
the College of Continuing Education and Community Service (CCECS)
In Fall 2007, UH Hilo had 3,071 FTE students and a headcount of 3,573. Of these, 196
were graduate students (headcount), including students admitted to the College of
Pharmacy. Total FTE faculty numbered 242.5, with full-time faculty headcount at 211 and
part-time faculty at 83. (Attachment A.2, Required Data Displays)
Upon completion of the educational effectiveness review in Spring 2004, WASC reaffirmed
the accreditation of the university and scheduled the next review to begin with a proposal in
2010, the Preparatory Review for 2013, and the Educational Effectiveness Review for 2014.
Major Changes since March 2004 Site Visit. The past four years have seen many
changes in degree programs, administration, and physical facilities.
Academic programs. Since the last WASC visit in March 2004, when the MA in
Hawaiian Language and Literature and the MEd were being offered, three more master’s
degree programs have admitted students: China-US Relations, Tropical Conservation
Biology and Environmental Science (both in Fall 2004), and Counseling Psychology (Fall
2005).
1
The PhD program in Hawaiian and Indigenous Language and Culture Revitalization
admitted its first students in Fall 2006. (Section 5 describes the progress of this doctorate
program since approval of the substantive change proposal in June 2006.) The College of
Pharmacy admitted the first students to its Doctor of Pharmacy program in Fall 2007.
(Section 6 of this report describes the advances made by the College of Pharmacy since
approval of the substantive change proposal in June 2007.) A well developed pre-pharmacy
program has been established in the College of Arts and Sciences.
The new BA in Environmental Studies and BS in Environmental Science were first offered in
Fall 2007. The BS in Marine Science and the BBA in Accounting have just been approved by
the Board of Regents and will be offered beginning Fall 2008.
Personnel. For the first time in many years, all major administrative positions are now
held by permanent incumbents. In August 2007, a permanent vice chancellor for
administrative affairs and a permanent vice chancellor for academic affairs joined the
university; they filled positions held by interim appointments since Spring 2004 and January
2005 respectively. A new vice chancellor for student affairs joined the university in January
2008, immediately following the retirement of her predecessor. Permanent deans are now in
place at the College of Agriculture, Forestry, and Natural Resource Management, the
College of Arts and Sciences, the College of Pharmacy, and the College of Business and
Economics.
Between Fall 2004 and Fall 2007, the university succeeded in increasing staff in all categories
except part-time instructional staff:






The number of instructional staff positions overall increased from 302 to 345, or
14.23%, with compensated instructional faculty increasing in number from 267 to 294
(10.11%).
While the number of full-time faculty increased from 174 to 211 (+21.26%), the
number of part-time instructional staff declined from 93 to 83 (-10.75%).
The number of administrative, professional, and technical staff positions increased
from 96 to 111, or 15.65%.
Civil service support positions increased in number from 119 to 141 (+18.48%).
Executive/managerial positions went from 15 to 18 (+16.6%).
Non-instructional faculty positions in the Mookini Library and Office of Student
Affairs increased in number from 17 to 33 (+94.1%).
Facilities. The university is in the midst of major expansion in physical facilities. The
facilities webpage lists all ongoing projects with regular updates on their status.1 The
university is presently revising its Long Range Development Plan; expected date of
completion is June 2008.
1
The facilities webpage is at http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/uhh/planning/
2
The new facility most visible and accessible to the public is the Hawai‘i ‘Imiloa Astronomy
Center of Hawai‘i, situated in the University Park adjacent to the UH Hilo campus.2
Dedicated in February 2006, this $28 million state-of-the-art facility was constructed
primarily through NASA funding and is supported fiscally by the Hawai‘i state legislature,
admission receipts, and membership fees. Faculty from UH Hilo’s Department of Physics
and Astronomy and Ka Haka ‘Ula O Ke‘elikōlani (the College of Hawaiian Language) have
made significant contributions to ‘Imiloa’s distinctive programming and its intellectual
vitality. A member of UH Hilo’s astronomy faculty serves as‘Imiloa’s astronomer in
residence. ‘Imiloa embodies the university’s commitment to support research, to make
scientific knowledge accessible to the community, and to “weave Native Hawaiian and
broader Pacific Islander culture and perspectives into science and engineering research and
education in Hawai‘i.”
Two other new facilities serving both our academic and the larger community have
recently opened their doors. One is the Pacific Aquaculture and Coastal Resources
Center (PACRC), a $5.5 million research and demonstration facility completed in 2005,
the product of UH Hilo’s collaboration with federal, state, county and local
governments. The Center is located in the Native Hawaiian coastal area of Keaukaha in
Hilo and provides facilities for aquaculture and marine science undergraduate
programs, graduate and faculty research, and public education. Since June 2006, the
North Hawai‘i Education and Research Center in Honoka‘a has been enabling the
university to bring educational opportunities to the northern communities of Hawai‘i
Island; the second phase of the $2.8 million facility will be completed in early 2008.
Three major facilities projects are scheduled for completion by Spring or Summer 2008.


The $16.5 million Student Life Center is a modern recreation center with an outdoor
swimming pool and other athletics and fitness facilities.
The $3.3 million renovation of the library, begun in Spring 2006 and scheduled for
completion in Summer 2008, is being accomplished with relatively little disruption
of services to students and other library patrons.
By late 2009, two more buildings are expected to be in use:


2
The College of Pharmacy Interim Facilities ($6 million), located in the University
Park next to Komohana Agriculture Complex, will open in late Fall 2008 or early
Spring 2009 and will provide faculty offices, research labs, classrooms, and practice
labs.
The $28 million Science and Technology Building will house Physics, Astronomy,
and Chemistry faculty offices, classrooms, and laboratories.
The ‘Imiloa webpage is at http://www.imiloahawaii.org/
3
UH Hilo is hopeful that two other major facilities will soon be built.


Funding has been appropriated by the legislature for a $24 million Student Services
Building to be started in Summer 2008. Its planned location is adjacent to the existing
building that houses the Office of Student Affairs.
A building to house the College of Hawaiian Language is in the preliminary design
stage. Construction funds for the building are included in the current supplemental
budget request recommended by the governor but not yet approved by the state
legislature.
2. Report Preparation and Campus Review
The Accreditation Steering Committee, comprised of the accreditation liaison officer, the
assistant vice chancellor for academic affairs, the institutional researcher, and
representatives from the Faculty Congress and from the Office of Student Affairs, has been
responsible for preparing the special visit report and for making arrangements for the
special visit itself. The assistant to the chancellor helped edit and polish the final draft of the
report.
This progress report is an edited compilation of materials submitted by such principals as
the vice chancellor for administrative affairs, deans and directors of the colleges, the chair
of the Chancellor’s Committee on the Diversification of the Faculty and Staff, the chair of the
Research and Graduate Council, the chairs of the Faculty Congress and key congress
committees, the director of the Hilo office of the Research Corporation of the University of
Hawai‘i, and the university’s development officer. The institutional researcher has provided
all data. Interviews with a number of administrators, staff, and faculty have provided
additional information.
Complete drafts of the report have been reviewed by the contributors and administration.
While it was still in draft form, the report was made available to the entire campus
community on the university’s accreditation webpage and comments and corrections were
invited.
In addition to the copies sent to the Commission and to site team members, hard copies of
the report are going to the president of the University of Hawai‘i system, the chair of the
system Board of Regents, UH Hilo administrators, university governance leaders, college
offices, and to the university library. The report and supporting materials are posted on the
university’s accreditation website at http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/uhh/accreditation .
4
3. Response to Issues Identified by the Commission in the 2004
Action Letter
Institutional Resources and Planning
The Commission observed in its action letter that “the UH system approach to budgeting
does not lend itself to institutional development related to enrollment or program
expansion. It funds institutions in ways that support neither program expansion nor
enrollment growth.” (Attachment B.1) The Commission encouraged “the University and the
System to consider ways in which to expand the University’s funding base, and the Board of
Regents is encouraged to support that expansion.”
UH Hilo itself, the Commission urged, “should strive more systematically to understand the
impact of expanding enrollment on the overall University infrastructure, student services,
and staff workload” and “continue its efforts to attract external funding.”
Budget Processes. Since June of 2004, the University of Hawai‘i at Hilo has
made improvements to the budget process at the campus level. (The FY 2008 budget is in
Attachment A.3.) The process includes tying the budget requests to strategic plan objectives.
UH Hilo, due to tight budget allocations from the system, has consistently made efficient
use of existing funds and has prioritized its initiatives so that funding is allocated to the
most pressing needs that are central to its core mission.
The UH Hilo Long Range Budget Development Committee was recently created. The
committee’s goal is to provide:




broad input to the chancellor and Chancellor’s Cabinet regarding budget criteria
strategies for obtaining additional university budget resources
long range strategic planning for budget
suggestions for methods of budget communication.
The committee will also assist the vice chancellor for administrative affairs to achieve
transparency in budgeting by helping her to communicate user-friendly information on UH
Hilo’s current budget status, the budget process for upcoming years, and other budget
information affecting the campus.
It is anticipated that having such a committee, with members from various campus
constituencies, will improve college budgeting and planning in a number of ways: budget
results will be better communicated; budget processes will be known; and important budget
initiatives will be widely discussed and tied to important campus priorities.
At the UH system level, however, the budget process is not yet tied to strategic plan goals
nor does it take enrollment growth into account. The university system’s budget is still, by
5
and large, allocated to the campuses based on historical proportions of the budget, despite
the relative enrollments of the campuses having changed over time.
In this biennium budget cycle (2007-09), the campuses presented their requests in terms of
the system’s four over-arching priorities: increasing educational capital, expanding
workforce development, diversifying the economy, and addressing underserved regions
and populations. A system “stocktaking” process took place, by which each campus
presented their budget needs to the other campuses.
Although UH Hilo presented prioritized requests linked to the four budget criteria, in the
end, the allocations were still based on the historical budget proportions already in place.
Such historical budgeting provides no incentive for a campus to take on additional
programs or new initiatives or expand the student body, because the consequent growth in
size and complexity is not supported with resources. This is particularly troublesome since
Hawai‘i is already lagging behind the national norm in producing enough four-year
graduates.
In general, the UH system does not link student enrollment (Full Time Equivalent Students)
and budget allocation. A formalized budget funding formula for the system would greatly
improve the budget allocation process, making the process more quantitative, less political,
more predictable, and better for planning purposes. Most other states use some version of a
formula for allocating to their various campuses.
There has been discussion recently at the system level of possibly linking additional budget
incentives to the system strategic plan, specifically with outcome measures. However, this
discussion is at a very preliminary stage, and it is UH Hilo’s concern that, without an
allocation formula to ensure sufficient basic infrastructure for enrollment, and instead
linking outcomes to new budget amounts, the situation could result in campuses that are
simply unable to achieve the desired outcomes or to serve the state’s needs for professional
workforce development.
Recommendation:

Continue discussions with the UH system regarding the budget process and
resources to support enrollment and program growth, which are badly needed for
Hawai‘i’s future workforce, human capital, and economic development.
Strategic Planning. As UH Hilo develops, the campus is guided by two planning
documents: the campus strategic plan and the UH system’s strategic plan. Both were
finalized in fall of 2002. In its action letter of June 2003 to the system and again in its action
letter of June 2004 to UH Hilo, the Commission stated that:
The System’s and University’s strategic planning processes will need to be
followed up with a set of priorities for development among and within
6
campuses and must be supported by an accompanying financial plan. This
will provide the basis for the University to develop realistic planning
priorities and objectives.
This has yet to be accomplished at the campus and system levels. The office of the system
vice president for academic planning and policy has embarked on a process called the
“Second Decade Project,” which seems to supplement the strategic plans. According to the
office’s website, the Second Decade Project is “a two to three year undertaking,” which
“seeks to identify the state’s higher education needs in the next decade, determine which of
those needs should be met by which campuses, and to develop a set of priorities that will
enable the University to plan for the next decade (2020).” 3
The project has produced a document entitled “Serving the State of Hawai‘i Second
Decade” (February 2007), consisting of a series of Powerpoint slides assessing the relative
need for postsecondary education of ten different regions within the state. (Attachment A.3)
The UH Hilo faculty and local community had little opportunity for input into this
document. The assumptions, methods, and data used to decide where in the state growth in
higher education is most needed have been questioned by the UH Hilo institutional
researcher and others on campus.
UH Hilo has planned for years to grow in order to increase the number of four-year
graduates in the state and help build a solid professional workforce for Hawai‘i. The
university serves the entire state of Hawai‘i, not just East Hawai‘i Island. UH Hilo is an
important gateway institution for people who are the first in their family to attend college,
those that hold down fulltime jobs or are raising children, members of under-served
minority groups, people from rural areas, and others for whom higher education has
historically been out of reach. Our plan to grow responds to the needs of the entire state of
Hawai‘i.
The system strategic plan is now being updated by the vice president for academic policy
and planning, who has developed a document entitled “Serving the State of Hawai‘i: UH
System Strategic Outcomes and Performance Measures, 2008–2015.” (Attachment A.3) The
system planning office calls this “a companion piece to the plan that assigns strategic
priorities and performance measures and extends the plan to 2015.”
UH Hilo has many questions and concerns about this document as well. A major concern is
that overall enrollment growth (both FTES and headcount) should be recognized as a
prominent strategic priority and tracked as a performance measure, but this document does
not include it.
It appears that this document adds to the existing strategic plan and extends its time frame.
The vice president for academic policy and planning will come to Hilo mid-January to
3
The webpage for this project is at http://www.hawaii.edu/offices/app/seconddecade/
7
discuss UH Hilo’s concerns at our request. It is hoped that, during this visit, UH Hilo and
the system can arrive at consensus about how best to include the campuses in planning
processes as well as substantive planning and budgeting issues.
See section 4 for information about how UH Hilo is measuring its success in meeting the
objectives of the campus strategic plan.
Recommendation:

Faculty as well as administration must participate actively in the reshaping of the
UH system strategic plan, which includes strategic priorities and performance
measures that will affect system allocations to the campus and with which our own
strategic planning must be aligned.
Extramural funding and private donations. The 2004 action letter repeated the
Commission’s “strong recommendation that the University continue its efforts to attract
external funding from donations, grants and contracts.” The university has been successful
in attracting external funding. As Figure 1 shows, extramural funding has grown
substantially since 2000, when the Hilo office of the Research Corporation of the University
of Hawai‘i (RCUH) was established. Since that time, 613 awards totaling $104.4 million have
been made to UH Hilo, and 1,714 workers have been hired to staff these projects on
Hawai‘i Island. This external funding has created tremendous opportunities for new
programs and allowed the expansion of current programs.
Recognizing the extraordinary gains made in science research by the University, the
National Science Foundation is funding the temporary position of vice chancellor for
research for up to two years. (Attachment B.4) This position is charged with strengthening
the university’s scientific research programs, capacity, and competitiveness. The university
intends to apply for funding for a permanent vice chancellor for research in the next
biennial budget cycle.
Since 2001, UH Hilo’s participation in the NSF’s Experimental Program to Stimulate
Competitive Research (EPSCoR) program has helped the university to increase research
funding. EPSCoR has also been instrumental in establishing the M.S. in Tropical
Conservation Biology and Environmental Science, funding faculty and research facilities in
genetics, ecology, and cyber infrastructure, and fostering collaboration among faculty and
federal and state agencies.
In addition to research grants, the university has benefited from a five-year, $2.5 million
National Science Foundation grant designed to increase the number of Native Hawaiian
students in the fields of science, technology, and mathematics; and a $4 million NSF Louis
Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation grant to 19 Hawai‘i institutions, with UH Hilo as
lead institution, aiming to increase the overall number of underrepresented students
receiving bachelor degrees in the areas of science, technology, engineering and math. Title
8
III grants totaling $4 million have also been received since 2001 and have been used to
increase retention and academic success of Native Hawaiian students and to integrate
Native Hawaiian culture into the curriculum.
Figure 1.
Extramural Funding at UH Hilo, 2000-2007
UH Hilo Awards
Millions
18.6
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
16.7
16.7
14.6
11.2
9.0
9.9
7.8
4.2
4.7
3.2
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Fiscal Year
During a visit to UH Hilo in June 2007, the chair of the National Science Board, Dr. Steven C.
Beering, praised UH Hilo for “weaving Native Hawaiian and broader Pacific Island culture
and perspectives into science and engineering research and education in Hawai‘i.” Dr.
Beering stated that “We can learn from the Hawai‘i model for pro-actively broadening
participation of under-represented minorities in fields of science, technology, engineering
and mathematics.”
Private fundraising at UH Hilo has been making steady gains since 1999, with the
permanent staffing of the university’s Office of Development. UH Hilo and the UH
Foundation (UHF) share the cost of the development office, which will expand to a staff of
five by March 2008. Since 2003, private donations have totaled $8.1 million. Operating under
the umbrella of the UH System’s Centennial Campaign, UH Hilo has set a campus-specific
fundraising goal of $15 million. The primary campus goal of the campaign is to increase the
size of UH Hilo’s small endowment—currently $3.25 million—to support the recruitment
and retention of faculty and to fund student scholarships.
9
Recommendations:






Seek to establish the position of vice chancellor for research to support both research
proposals and institution improvement grants
Increase funding for faculty research start-up projects, including library resources
Continue faculty teaching buy-out programs to improve UH Hilo’s research
capability and undergraduate research opportunities
Strengthen the existing faculty mentoring program in order to build strong linkages
for research as well as social support
Encourage wider campus and community interest and involvement in the
community fundraising mission through the 2007-2008 60th Anniversary Celebration
and subsequent development activities
Encourage departments and programs to work with the University of Hawai‘i
Foundation to create alumni fund raising campaigns to fund student scholarships
and/or targeted scholarly activity
Faculty Governance
For some years, the Commission has been concerned that the university’s two-tiered
governance system might “foster redundancy in governance functions.” The Commission
asserted in the 2004 action letter that the university must demonstrate, that “it has
established and operates with effective governance and administration.” The university
administration has chosen to leave faculty free to work toward a governance structure that
allows college senates to determine internal curricular and academic policies, while giving
the Faculty Congress the responsibility of establishing academic policies that affect all
degree-granting colleges.
The university’s faculty Congress includes representatives from all degree-granting colleges,
the UH Hilo Student Association, the Library, and the Office of Student Affairs. Chairs of
the college senates serve on the Congress; in 2007-2008, the chairs of the CAS and CoBE are
on the Congress Executive Committee.
The Congress Charter states its role as “the policy making body of UH Hilo for all academic
matters of concern to more than one unit.” (Attachment B.5) The Congress webpage is a
graphic and timely representation of the Congress’s operations: displayed there are the
charter and by-laws, schedule of meetings, minutes of past meetings, committee
membership, committee reports, and links to the webpages of the college senates.4
The Congress interacts frequently with all faculty through the UH Hilo email system and
invites faculty to complete online surveys on key issues. It has acted on a number of policies
that affect all colleges.
4
The Congress webpage is at http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/uhh/congress
10




The Congress standardized the UH Hilo student teaching evaluation form in 2007.
A new GE curriculum is being proposed by the General Education Committee.
The Assessment Support Committee is working with all UH Hilo programs to revise
statements of student learning outcomes and to develop assessment plans.
The Admissions Committee is looking at our admission policy and other student
data in an effort to determine how we can improve retention and graduation rates.
There is occasional resistance to the notion that the Congress should make policy on crosscollege matters. In November 2007, for example, CAFNRM faculty rejected use of the
campus-wide course evaluation system approved in Spring 2007 by the Congress and the
vice chancellor for academic affairs; their faculty prefer the form developed and used by the
college for many years. Some CAS faculty have asserted that because CAS faculty teach
almost all GE courses, the CAS senate—not the Congress—should determine GE
requirements. Other faculty have argued that each college—not the Congress—should
determine its own GE requirements.
One source of resistance to Congress that occasionally finds expression among faculty of
other colleges is the numerical predominance of CAS faculty in the Congress. This appears
to be unavoidable, given that Congress representation is linked to college size, and CAS
faculty comprise 85% of UH Hilo faculty. Prior to the Educational Effectiveness visit in
March 2004, there had been extended discussion about dividing CAS into smaller colleges.
In January 2004, the School of Business and Economics split off from CAS, becoming a
separate college. However, in a December 2003 referendum, sixty percent of CAS faculty
voted against further division, and the issue has not been raised since.
Since Spring 2004, at least one college senate has undergone significant change. Early in his
term, the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences formed a "Department Chairs Advisory
Committee" in an effort to get feedback from those who have been elected to administer
departmental affairs. The CAS Senate perceived this move as threatening its role as CAS
policy-maker. The result was the elimination of the advisory committee and addition of all
CAS department chairs to the Senate, significantly increasing the size of the Senate.
The charters of the college senates do not explicitly acknowledge that the Congress serves as
the voice of the faculty in campus-wide issues. On the other hand, each college is
represented on the Congress by an elected representative or representative, and it appears
that in their charters and in practice, the college senates are primarily concerned with
internal curriculum and policy. The CAFNRM charter was last updated in 1992, before the
Congress was formed. (Attachment B.6) The CAS senate charter, last revised in 2004, does
not refer to the Congress. (Attachment B.7) The CoBE senate charter, approved in 2004 and
revised in 2007, specifies only that “The Senate may make recommendations to the faculty
Congress on matters affecting more than one college within the University” [emphasis
added]. (Attachment B.8) The CHL senate does not have a written charter, but its focus is
11
on curriculum and other internal academic matters. The CoP does not have a senate, but it
has a number of faculty committees that address various matters internal to the college.
By dint of its campus-wide influence and representation, and because it manages the major
academic issues of the university—General Education, admissions requirements, conditions
for student success, and assessment of student learning—from year to year, the Faculty
Congress is already generally recognized the dominant force in faculty governance.
Recommendation:

College senates and the Faculty Congress should continue to work together to
delineate clearly distinct areas of responsibility and to resolve such long-standing
concerns as college representation on the Congress.
Diversity
Improving Faculty Diversity. The 2004 action letter pointed out that the university
lacked a plan for improving the diversity of the faculty. In addition, the site team had
pointed out that the EEO/AA officer had no support staff; a permanent clerical position has
since been added to the office. (Attachment B.2)
The Chancellor’s Committee on the Diversification of the Faculty and Staff has prepared a
report on diversity among faculty and staff and on past and current efforts to enhance
diversity and has developed a set of strategies to promote the hiring and retention of underrepresented groups. (Attachment B.9) The committee’s report will be reviewed by the
faculty Congress and the Chancellor’s Executive Committee in Spring 2008, with
implementation to begin shortly thereafter.
The committee observes that a growing body of research indicates that campus diversity has
a positive impact on student learning, intellectual motivation, cognitive, academic, and
social development. Campus diversity also helps to prepare students as employees working
in multi-cultural organizations and as citizens living in a multi-cultural global society.
Diverse faculty, staff, and administrators provide students with a broader range of
experiences, perspectives, and pedagogy, as well as to a more varied pool of mentors.
Table 1, adapted from the committee report, shows the current gender and ethnic
distribution of faculty and administration (E/M, Executive/Manager) in Fall 2007. It shows
that across the ranks, UH Hilo’s faculty and administration are more ethnically diverse than
are faculty at American universities in general. It also indicates that the University should
direct its efforts to improve representation of Native Hawaiians among tenure-track faculty
and representation of women in the associate and full professor ranks.
The committee proposes an institutional strategy of opportunity hires—that is, establishing
with legislative support a special fund of at least a million dollars and a special pool of 50
12
permanent positions, to expedite the hiring of highly qualified women and underrepresented minorities who become available through the usual recruiting processes or
through visiting appointments or distinguished visiting professorships.
Table 1
Gender and Ethnic Distribution, UH Hilo Administration and Faculty, Fall 2007
Employee
Type
Lecturers
Instructors
Asst. Prof
Assoc. Prof
Prof
E/M
Pct
Women
Pct
Caucasian
Pct
Asian
Pct
Native
Hawaiian
Pct
Other
57.8
57.8
39.8
20.5
2.4
59.3
77.8
18.5
3.7
3.7
57.3
62.7
36
16
1.3
34.7
67.3
24.5
0
8.2
20
73.3
21.7
.5
5
44.4
44.5
49.9
11.2
5.6
The committee proposes that the standing Campus Diversity Committee be charged with
monitoring gender and race/ethnicity distributions among faculty, staff, and administrators,
prioritizing diversity hiring needs, and making recommendations to the chancellor to
improve faculty, staff, and administrator diversification at UH Hilo.
The committee also proposes that “UH Hilo facilitate the production of doctoral graduates
who will one day become a part of the pool of underrepresented faculty applicants by
expanding research and career development opportunities available to UH Hilo students
through research assistantships, teaching assistantships, and graduate education.”
Recommendations:


Charge the standing Campus Diversity Committee with monitoring and promoting
hiring/retention practices to recruit and retain underrepresented minority faculty
and staff.
Continue to encourage faculty mentoring, faculty-student research projects, student
internships, and other activities that promote student retention to graduation and
aspiration for graduate study and academic careers.
13
Integrating the Indigenous Culture and Ways of Knowing in the Curriculum.
The Commission urged the university to develop a plan to infuse understanding of the
indigenous culture and ways of knowing throughout the curriculum. The university does
not yet have a formalized plan but is progressing in this area. Since Fall 2003, UH Hilo’s
New Faculty Orientation program has devoted at least half a day to educating incoming
faculty and staff about Hawai‘i‘s unique culture and history. In particular, we have
emphasized the need to incorporate non-western and indigenous worldviews (especially
Native Hawaiian perspectives) for a more relevant and balanced educational experience.
Since 2002, two programs have made notable progress in this area: Keaholoa STEM and
Kīpuka Native Hawaiian Student Center.
In 2002-07, Keaholoa STEM, funded by the National Science Foundation, brought together
UH Hilo faculty, Native Hawaiian kūpuna and other cultural experts, so that faculty could
gain understanding of and appreciation for Native Hawaiian culture and ways of knowing.
Keaholoa STEM program has provided seminars and off-campus retreats for faculty to
deepen exposure to Hawaiian culture. As a result, several UH Hilo faculty members have
revised curricula, to varying degrees, to reflect awareness of cultural issues and values as
well as learning styles associated with indigenous cultures of Hawai‘i and the broader
Pacific.
The Keaholoa STEM internship program for Native Hawaiian students has provided
opportunities for faculty and students to reciprocally share knowledge about their own
science and culture, as they jointly develop research programs that address problems and
issues of importance to indigenous communities. Faculty research has been enhanced
through the indigenous knowledge gained in this manner.
Kīpuka Native Hawaiian Student Center has added to the enculturation work begun by
Keaholoa STEM. Drawing on Title III funds, Kīpuka has worked to increase faculty
understanding of the Hawaiian language and of Hawaiian culture. In 2004, Keaholoa began
offering Hawaiian language classes to faculty, an effort joined by Kīpuka in Fall 2005. Since
then, Kīpuka has offered these classes to both faculty and staff throughout the academic
year and in the summer, using Kīpuka Native Hawaiian tutors as instructors.
In Fall 2006, Kīpuka began the Eia Hawai‘i lecture series, presentations on a diversity of
issues and concepts important to the indigenous population, for faculty, staff and students
to learn about Hawaiian worldviews. Since Fall 2005, the Uluakea Faculty Development
Program, also funded through Title III, has trained cross-disciplinary cohorts of faculty to
transform their courses by incorporating Hawai‘i and/or Hawaiian perspectives.
Participating faculty have come from the disciplines of agriculture, art, biology, business,
geography, history, health & physical education, marine science, sociology, political science,
psychology, and sociology.
14
Keaholoa STEM and Kīpuka-Uluakea have established effective models for enriching the
curriculum with “important ways of knowing that are unique to the indigenous people” of
Hawai‘i and the wider Pacific region.
Recommendation:

Support and institutionalize the Keaholoa and Uluakea models for integrating the
indigenous culture into the curriculum and across all colleges.
Educational Effectiveness
The Commission observed in 2004 that “efforts to implement assessment initiatives have not
yet reached the level of campus-wide engagement” and urged the university to ensure that
faculty would understand “that the ultimate purpose of assessment is to improve teaching
and learning.”
Over the past four years, there has been modest progress in involving faculty in student
learning assessment. The campus Assessment Plan, first developed in 2001, was updated by
the Congress Assessment Support Committee and reviewed and approved by the Congress
in April 2005. (Attachment B.10) All departments but one have developed statements of
student learning outcomes that are included in the college catalog, but most departments
are not assessing student performance in those terms and do not require inclusion of such
statements in course syllabi, nor is there presently a campus system for collecting and
preserving syllabi.
Since 2003 the Office of Academic Affairs has maintained an annual assessment fund of
approximately $40,000 that has enabled departments to experiment with different ways of
documenting student learning. The Congress Assessment Committee reviews departmental
proposals, suggests improvements, and recommends funding to the vice chancellor for
academic affairs. (Attachment B.11)
The grant program has succeeded in engaging a number of departments in assessment
activities of various kinds. The English Department completed a one-time assessment of
student learning in the freshman composition course that promises to lead to some
pedagogical changes, and is developing pre- and post-testing for English 209, one of its
high-demand writing courses. The History Department is experimenting with electronic
portfolios, and the Chemistry Department is using standardized pre- and post-testing. The
Mathematics Department has used assessment grants to calibrate its placement testing and
to make the now-required placement test available to students year-round in the Math Lab.
Through the assessment grant program, departments have been encouraged to try
standardized testing, in particular the ETS Major Field Tests, following the lead of
Computer Science and Business, which have used these tests to good effect for many years.
15
Moving beyond standardized testing, the College of Business and Economics is trying out
the STEPS portfolio hosting service and training.
Academic program review guidelines require that departments describe their student
learning assessment activities and assessment results. Review of the self study reports
submitted since the new guidelines went into effect indicates that the assessment
requirement has, at the minimum, alerted programs to the concepts of assessment and
continuous improvement.
Some programs have used the occasion of the program review to develop their own
assessment instruments and an assessment plan. Since 2003, the Communication
Department has been refining assessment instruments for its core courses, a challenging
task for a small faculty with a large number of majors. In addition to a capstone course (Pols
470S) required of all majors, the Political Science Department has been offering a 64-item
multiple-choice questionnaire to introductory and senior-level courses to measure student
learning in the program; it continues to refine this instrument. Economics has used the ETS
Field Exam for many years now, pre-dating any financial assistance from an assessment
fund, and is planning to begin some focused pre-and post-testing in selected GE Econ
courses. The department expects to eventually use portfolio assessment for majors.
The Marine Science Department promises to be among the most productive in student
learning assessment. Included in their Fall 2007 program review report are a curriculumlearning objectives matrix, rubrics for senior theses and presentations, and a five-year plan
to integrate a cumulative exam, embedded assessment, capstone courses organized around
student learning objectives and continuous curricular improvement, and feedback about
graduate competence from such stakeholders as graduate school advisors and employers.
Review of all available program review reports, however, indicates that most departments
might be willing to undertake systematic assessment of student learning but simply do not
understand how to conduct assessment systematically and productively. (Copies of
program review reports will be available in the site team room.)
Programs accredited by professional agencies have well-developed systems for student
learning assessment as required by those agencies: the Nursing program (NLNAC, National
League for Nursing Accrediting Commission), the teacher educations programs of CAS and
CHL (SATE, State Approval of Teacher Education Programs), and CoBE (AACSBInternational, The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business). In its first year of
operation, the College of Pharmacy is working rapidly to comply with the assessment
expectations of the American Council for Pharmaceutical Education. (Section 6 below
describes these efforts.)
It is apparent that the institution as a whole needs to establish a clear understanding of what
“student learning assessment” is, what it can accomplish in terms of continuous
16
improvement of teaching and learning, and how programs and the institution can conduct
such assessment—and that this understanding must be shared and translated into action by
all units.
Renewed efforts to address this need are underway. In Fall 2007, the office of the vice
chancellor for academic affairs and the Faculty Congress undertook to engage all CAS and
CoBE departments, CHL, CAFNRM, and CoP in reviewing program statements of student
learning outcomes, and beginning to plan for student learning assessment. Part of the
project is a series of workshops in February 2008 for faculty, staff, and administration,
conducted by a national expert in student learning assessment, funded by the vice
chancellor for academic affairs. Rather than requiring participation, the project involves
paying programs stipends of up to $500 to attend an assessment workshop and complete
and submit curriculum maps and preliminary assessment plans. (Attachment B.12)
The administration has faithfully supported assessment activities, the Assessment Support
Committee provides informal guidance to departments in the preparation of program
review self studies, and the institutional researcher works with programs on developing
and interpreting data for the self studies. However, neither the committee nor the
institutional researcher is able to provide faculty and administration with a broad vision of
institution-wide assessment or ongoing expert training or guidance in the development of
assessment tools or assessment plans.
Recommendation:

The academic leadership, the Institutional Researcher, and the faculty Congress
Assessment Support Committee must continue to work together to ensure that
faculty, staff, and administration are trained in assessment policy and practices in
accordance with the guidelines of the WASC Evidence Guide and the 2007 WASC “
Rubrics for Evaluating the Effectiveness of Assessment Processes.”
4. Other Issues Raised by the 2004 Site Team
General Education
The 2004 WASC site team commended the efforts of the Congress General Education
Committee to shape a GE program, noting that “the plan includes systematic assessment,
feedback, and program improvement and the structures to achieve them.” (Attachment B.2)
Faculty, however, found much to object to in the 2003-2004 proposal, and subsequent GE
committees have devoted themselves to developing a plan that would both alleviate faculty
objections and provide a meaningful and assessable General Education program. The
current GE Committee has taken a new and promising approach to designing a program
that could be acceptable to most faculty. (Attachment B.13)
17
The considerations guiding the GE Committee are: inclusion of learning outcomes and
mechanisms for assessment in GE courses and ensuring a rigorous, high-quality education
that would be of genuine benefit to students. The Committee has used the results of a
Spring 2007 faculty survey on GE, a Fall 2007 faculty survey administered by the Congress
Admissions Committee, and its own Fall 2007 faculty survey on possible GE revisions.
Following meetings with the college senates in November and December 2007, the
Committee will ask faculty to respond via an online survey to proposed revisions in another
survey in January 2008.
On the basis of WASC recommendations and faculty input, the GE committee has devised a
draft plan, which is attached to this narrative. Among the innovations being proposed are
the following:




Instead of elaborate hallmarks for each of the basic, area, and other requirements (as
was previously proposed and which was unpopular with the faculty), the committee
proposes a list of learning goals for the entire General Education program, divided
into three phases.
The syllabi of GE courses must include learning goals and requirements that
articulate with all of Phase 1 goals, one of the Phase 2 goals, and one of the Phase 3
goals.
Because the faculty surveys indicated concern about critical thinking, writing, and
analytical skills, the proposal incorporates more rigorous and sustained work in
these three areas than is now the case, and would require that all GE courses
incorporate writing or quantitative exercises.
To be accepted for GE, a course would have to satisfy the requirements for its
category. Upper-division as well as lower-division courses would be eligible so long
as they met the appropriate requirements.
The proposal envisions a General Education Review Committee that would solicit and
review applications from departments for courses to be included in the GE program, and
audit courses to ensure they continue to comply with the GE requirements. The course
assessment process is thus internal to the review and monitoring process.
The committee is also exploring options for a university-level GE examination, which would
be taken by students upon completion of their first two years of college to determine
whether they have acquired the knowledge and skills offered through GE. The results of the
exam would be used to determine how to improve delivery of the GE program.
The committee will work with the assessment consultant during her visit to campus in
February 2008 to refine its GE plan. It is possible a new GE plan will be ready for review by
the faculty by the end of February, with preparations for implementation to begin as soon as
the plan is approved.
18
Recommendation:

UH Hilo must move expeditiously to revise its General Education program so that it
embodies the institution’s expectations for student learning across the curriculum
and provides a meaningful and useful foundation for undergraduate and lifelong
learning. The institution must also be able to document that students have indeed
achieved the skills and knowledge that it claims to deliver through the General
Education program.
Retention and Persistence to Graduation
The Data. The site team recommended that the university “undertake a focused effort
to increase student retention and graduation rates.” In the years 2001 through 2007, the
campus has exerted considerable effort in several specific areas to gain better understanding
of the complex campus issues surrounding student retention. These efforts include:




Student focus groups discussing issues bearing on retention and student satisfaction
A series of committees examining admissions, retention, and student success
Participation since 2001 in the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) and
campus presentations of NSSE results
Surveys of new admit transfer students, freshmen, graduating seniors, and students
who did not return to UH Hilo.
Results of a number of these studies are posted on the institutional research webpage:
http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/uhh/iro along with a new collection of longitudinal retention
and graduation tables which focus on newly admitted transfer and first-time freshman
cohorts from Fall 2003 through 2007. (Attachment B.14)
While increasing the number of graduates each academic year between 2003-2004 and 20062007 (at 522, 542, 573, and 596 respectively), the campus also demonstrates improved Fall to
Fall retention of the total student population (excluding graduates) between the 2003/04 and
2006/07 enrolled cohorts: 63.8%, 66.2%, 67.1%, & 67.5% respectively. The campus has also
seen modest but steady improvement in the IPEDS standard measure “6 year graduation
rate of 1st time full time degree seeking undergraduates”—from 30.2% of the 1998 cohort, to
30.6% and then 31.5% of the 1999 and 2000 cohorts respectively.
It should be noted that measuring UH Hilo’s retention and graduation rates on the basis of
first-time full-time students who graduate from UH Hilo within six years disadvantages this
institution by virtue of our specific service population. Typically, many of UH Hilo’s most
successful students take part time credit loads while maintaining full time jobs and fulfilling
family obligations; others are nontraditional, older adult transfer students who return to
college after the passage of a significant number of years with newfound commitment
resulting in high intellectual achievement, high rates of graduation, and productive new
19
careers; others begin their studies at UH Hilo with the clear intention to transfer to other
campuses in the system to complete programs not available on this campus (e.g.
Engineering, Architecture, allied health fields). These are successful students whose
experiences demonstrate the strength of UH Hilo’s programs as well as the benefits of a
State system in which different campuses purposely provide different opportunities for the
state’s population.
The Institution’s Responses. Research at other institutions as well as local
surveys and focus groups have shown that the institution can retain more students by
taking appropriate action.
First Year Planning Committee. In Summer 2007, the Office of Student Affairs,
the Office of Academic Affairs, and the deans of the four colleges with freshman students
sent a team of 14 UH Hilo faculty, student affairs professionals, and a dean to the
International First Year Experience conference in Waikoloa, Hawai‘i. The First Year team
returned to campus prepared to make students’ first year at UH Hilo more inviting,
supportive, and intellectually challenging. The first step was to make an inventory of all
services and activities already offered to first year students (transfers as well as first-time
freshmen). (Attachment B.15)
The chancellor’s First Year Committee, with representatives from the four baccalaureatedegree granting colleges and Student Affairs, is now


drafting a statement of UH Hilo’s commitment to providing students with a
welcoming and intellectually challenging first year program that complements our
existing programs, such as new Student Orientation and University 101, and
proposing an organizational structure through which current and new First Year
activities can be coordinated, delivered, and assessed.
The committee is to submit a report to the chancellor by March 31, 2008, which will then go
to the Congress and the Chancellor’s Executive Committee for review and action.
New, Transfer, and Returning Student Orientation. Added to an already
fully developed Fall orientation program have been 25 new student sessions in the areas of
community, culture, and safety; a revitalized parent program; and community involvement
that generates over $4,500 in sponsorships and prizes.
Student Learning and Success Center. In the 2007-2009 Legislative budget,
funds were appropriated to open a Student Learning and Success Center that would
provide tutoring, placement testing, and learning tools for students in the sciences and in
writing. Faculty positions for a Director of Academic Support, a Writing Coordinator, and a
Science Coordinator were approved, as were student help funds for the first two years of
operation.
20
Office of Student Affairs. Since Spring 2004, the Office of Student Affairs has
continued to enrich and expand its support for entering students, informed by campus
research, best practices guidelines, and strategic planning priorities. (Attachment B.16)
Among the more notable achievements in easing the entry of new students and facilitating
success of all students:





The Advising Center has four professional staff as of Summer 2007 and participates
actively in all new student orientation activities, trains departments in advising
procedures and the student information system, and advises new students and all
students on General Education and graduation requirements.5
The Admissions office has created a new transfer evaluation system allowing
transfer students to learn of transfer possibilities within 14 days of being accepted
and has appointed a Communications Manager to enhance all forms of
communication, especially electronic, with potential UH Hilo students.6
The Financial Aid Office has reduced the default rate on student loans to just 2.8
percent, the lowest in school history and a 40 percent drop in the university’s
previous cohort-default rate. At the same time, federal student loan volume at UH
Hilo has doubled to about $6 million a year. The office now has a turn-around time
of two weeks between application completion and student award letter receipt.
The Housing Office assists students in finding off-campus accommodations and
provides shuttle service to off-campus apartment complexes with which the
university has agreements, as well as to local shopping centers.
The Records Office has assisted in the establishment and implementation of the UH
system’s MyUH Portal system, which is a one-stop “self-service” website enabling
students to register for classes, check their grades, send and receive email and
announcements, and view their financial account.
Keaholoa STEM Program. A five-year NSF grant has enabled Keaholoa STEM
to support the development of coordinated peer tutoring and supplemental education in all
STEM disciplines at UH Hilo, fund renovations to the mathematics and science tutoring lab,
which has experienced an increase in usage of over 25% since the improvements were
completed in 2006. Keaholoa STEM has offered Summer Intensive Tutorial Mathematics and
Chemistry (and Physics) Summer Bridging Course, cultivating study skills and basic
knowledge so as to increase the possibility of students’ retention as science majors.
5
The Advising Center home page is at http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/studentaffairs/advising
Home pages of these student affairs offices are, respectively,
http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/studentaffairs/admissions/
http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/studentaffairs/finaid.php
http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/studentaffairs/housing/
http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/studentaffairs/records/
6
21
Kīpuka Native Hawaiian Student Center. With Title III funds and matching
UH Hilo funds, the Kīpuka Native Hawaiian Student Center was fitted out with offices, a
technology/learning center, and perhaps most important for student retention, comfortable
and attractive areas for students to study and gather. During the period when Kīpuka has
provided tutorial and support services, the graduation and retention rate for Native
Hawaiian students has risen to a level above the campus average. In Fall 2005, Kīpuka also
developed a comprehensive Native Hawaiian recruitment plan with the goal of increasing
Native Hawaiian student enrollment from 16% to 25% by 2008.
Using NSSE to Develop Strategies for Student Engagement. UH Hilo has
participated in the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) since Spring 2001. Over
these seven years, our standings in almost all categories have been consistently below that
of our peer institutions. 7 Acting on the belief that engaged students are students who
persist to graduation, the university has made occasional attempts to use NSSE results to
motivate faculty to raise the level of academic challenge in courses and to make themselves
more available to students outside the classroom for mentoring and advising of student
organizations.
In Spring 2007, the Faculty Congress vowed to work with faculty to define higher academic
expectations and to provide students with the support needed to meet those expectations. In
April 2008, the vice chancellor for student affairs and the vice chancellor for academic affairs
are bringing to campus a founder of NSSE, with the aim of beginning serious campus
discussion on how UH Hilo can become a more engaging institution—one in which
students will want to complete their degrees. The Congress will be an important player in
designing and implementing any policies or practices that may emerge from that
conversation.
Recommendations:



Report retention and graduation rates in a more comprehensive way so as to
demonstrate real achievement and success
Coordinate all first-year programs and activities to minimize redundancy and maximize
efficiency and assess first-year efforts to ensure continuous improvement
Review NSSE results carefully, prioritize areas for action, and involve all units in the
project of engaging more of our students more deeply and actively in campus life and in
learning.
Program Review
The 2004 site team observed that the university had just put into effect a new academic
program review process that incorporated student learning assessment and external review.
7
Annual results of our NSSE surveys are posted at the Institution Research website:
http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/uhh/iro/student_natsurvey.php
22
The process concludes with a memorandum of agreement between the department and the
vice chancellor for academic affairs that specifies actions to be taken in response to the
findings of the review.
Academic program review is now solidly established at UH Hilo. The current program
review guidelines, approved by the Congress in 2006, are provided in Attachment B.17.
CoBE, CHL, CAFNRM, and all CAS departments but two have either completed the review
cycle or are in process. (Attachment B.19) External reviewers have contributed to all
reviews, and self studies have led to allocation of resources and changes in curriculum.
Program review guidelines are under continuous review; graduate program review
guidelines are now being developed by the institutional researcher and the Congress
Assessment Committee and will be reviewed by the Graduate Council before being
submitted to the Faculty Congress. Memoranda of understanding have been agreed upon
by the vice chancellor for academic affairs and departments and are posted on the VCAA’s
website.
The Office of Student Affairs has also established a smoothly operating program review
system. To date, five of the 18 programs within Student Affairs have undergone and
completed the program review process (Career Center, Disability Services, Upward Bound,
Counseling, and Student Health Services). Four more programs/units are undergoing the
process in 2007-2008 (Kīpuka Native Hawaiian Student Center, Minority Access and
Achievement Program, Admissions, and National Student Exchange). The process has
resulted in programs incorporating the recommendations that have been made into its
strategic plan. (OSA program review materials will be available in the site team room.)
Strategic Plan Performance Indicators
The site team for WASC’s educational effectiveness review commended UH Hilo “for its
significant progress in developing a strategic plan with persuasive performance indicators
for achieving its educational objectives. The success metrics include specific data gathering
and means of reporting for each objective.” However, the team also observed that, while
many of the performance indicators devised in connection with the Strategic Plan were
assessable, “a number [were] stated in vague terms with measures of success that [were] not
definitive.” Target completion dates were also lacking in many cases. (Attachment B.2)
In 2006-2007, a working committee comprised of the institutional researcher, the chair of the
Faculty Congress, and two faculty-administrators reviewed the indicators, separating out
those for which measures already existed and those for which measures could not be
devised and identifying others for which measures could be developed. In Spring 2007, the
institutional researcher presented a report on UH Hilo progress in terms of measurable
indicators to the Chancellor’s Cabinet and to the Faculty Congress. (Attachment B.20)
23
Discussion is beginning about preparation of UH Hilo’s next strategic plan. At present, the
UH system is in the process of updating its strategic plan. It is anticipated that measurable
objectives and associated performance indicators, complete with targets and target dates,
will be prominent components of UH Hilo’s next plan. Section 3 discusses strategic planning
at the system and campus levels.
5. The Doctorate in Hawaiian and Indigenous Language and
Culture Revitalization
Ke‘elikōlani College’s Ph.D. in Hawaiian and Indigenous Language and Culture
Revitalization has attracted international attention as the first doctoral degree in a Native
American language and in indigenous language and culture revitalization. Two additional
graduate programs (approved at the same time as the Ph.D.), together with the increase in
the College’s undergraduate and P-12 laboratory school enrollments, have given rise to
resource challenges.
After WASC approval, the Ph.D. program began in the Fall 2006 with an initial cohort of
five students—all experienced professionals, each with no less than ten years in Hawaiian or
New Zealand Māori language education. The students have completed all coursework, will
take their comprehensive examinations in January 2008, and will soon begin their
dissertations. The first student is expected to graduate in December 2008.
The Ph.D. has adhered to the program proposal as approved by WASC. The involvement of
internationally renown faculty from Western Washington University, the University of
Minnesota, the University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, and Oxford University have enhanced the
program’s research base. In all cases where external faculty have taught, College faculty
regularly attended courses, often providing additional instruction. External faculty have
committed to serve on dissertation committees.
The Ph.D. program faculty is small enough that informal discussion of strengths,
weaknesses, and outcomes of the program have been productive relative to strengthening
courses, syllabi, and requirements within the framework of program student learning
outcomes. The initial SLO matrix did not include the area community leadership,
development of which is an important feature of successful application of language and
culture revitalization to communities. The program is planning an exit interview with
members of the first cohort. Before a second cohort is admitted, the College will carry out
an additional internal evaluation of the program and make appropriate changes. The
program coordinator will participate in the Congress assessment project, including the
February 2008 program assessment workshop.
Obtaining faculty is the greatest challenge for the College. The Ph.D. is a means to develop
faculty using external and internal resources while supporting similar efforts worldwide.
24
Six of the College’s 12 teaching faculty are focused on post-baccalaureate education. Of the
six remaining faculty, two are assigned 100% time to the Hawaiian language immersion
laboratory school and one, 75% time to the College’s Hale Kuamo‘o Hawaiian Language
Center. As part of the process of strengthening the College and drawing new faculty, UHHilo is according it greater responsibility for the interdisciplinary undergraduate linguistics
program. Three new faculty positions are being advertised in the Spring of 2008, in addition
to an educational specialist, a technology specialist, a dean, and an assistant to the dean.
Additional resources will be needed to address continued growth. Of the 12 current faculty,
only three are assigned 100% time to serve 710 undergraduate students (the total in Fall
2007, 116 of them majors) and only two to serve 340 students in grades preschool through
high school at the associated Hawaiian language immersion laboratory school.
The College is satisfied with its representation on the Graduate Council, Research Council,
and Congress and is pleased that, during this first cohort, policies relative to the doctoral
program are being clarified. However, the long-standing goal of the College to have an
internal student services system operated and administered through Hawaiian has not yet
been addressed. Furthermore, the College has not yet received support from the University
of Hawai‘i system for graduate assistantships or graduate student work space—crucial
areas for any graduate program. While the campus has focused on the need to include
sensitivity to Native Hawaiians in other colleges, the College’s unique needs have been left
largely unaddressed.
Space is a crucial problem for the College, which is currently unable to provide new faculty
with their own offices. Progress toward the construction of a College building includes a
plan developed with strong faculty input and which has been given high priority for 2008
legislative funding. Because such funding will likely provide only half the estimated total
cost of construction, College faculty hope to find matching funds from external sources. The
building will play an important role in strengthening all programs of the College, including
its graduate programs.
The College of Pharmacy
Following WASC approval of a substantive change proposal, the College of Pharmacy
received a site visit by the American Council for Pharmaceutical Education (ACPE), and
pre-candidate status was awarded at the Board meeting in June 2007. All of the 75 ACPE
standards and numerous guidelines had been met, and the inaugural class of 90 students
began instruction in August 2007. In April 2008, the College will undergo a second site visit
scheduled by the ACPE for advancement to candidate status. Full accreditation is expected
when the first cohort graduates in 2011.
In addition to the dean, the College Pharmacy has recruited two Associate Deans, two
Department Chairs, two Assistant Professors, an Instructor, and a Clinical Coordinator.
25
Currently, recruitment is underway for an additional 16 faculty and staff. The first class, of
90 students, has successfully completed its first semester. For enrollment of the second class
of 85-90 students, interviews are being conducted, with approximately 250 students selected
from an applicant pool comprised of about 600 individuals.
The college’s pressing need for classroom, office, and laboratory space is being addressed by
the university. Clinical sites have been arranged for experiential learning at hospitals and
pharmacies across the state of Hawai‘i. In addition to the director of experiential learning
and the chair of pharmacy practice, one more faculty member will be hired during the next
few months to assist with this process. College faculty and administration presently occupy
offices in the Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry near the main campus. On-campus
classrooms and laboratory space are being shared by the other colleges, and study space has
been found for students in the Campus Center during afternoon and early evening hours.
Additional office space will be provided for the six new faculty scheduled to join the college
in the Spring 2008 semester.
New facilities, with office and classroom space, are being constructed above the main UH
Hilo campus and will be available for use by late Fall 2008 or early Spring 2009. In addition
to legislative funding, the cost of CoP facilities will be covered by surplus tuition revenues
and gifts.
Campus support services have also been enhanced. A student services office is located on
the main campus. Additional staff have been added to the Mookini Library who will work
the College, and the Library collection has been greatly expanded to include pharmacy
resources. The University of Hawai‘i Foundation has assigned a development officer to
procure gifts for the College.
Faculty governance at CoP is developing expeditiously. CoP sends a representative to the
UH Hilo Faculty Congress and a representative to the Graduate Council. The following
college committees have been formed and have been very active: assessment, curriculum,
admissions, and the student promotion and graduation committee. Eventually there will be
committees on by-laws, awards, and tenure and promotion review. Committees will
develop and propose policies to the entire faculty for ratification.
The college Curriculum Committee has revised the preliminary curriculum, developed for
the purposes of achieving pre-candidacy status with ACPE and WASC. The proposed new
curriculum has been presented to the faculty and was approved for implementation. The
curriculum is organized around four themes or strands: basic science, clinical science, social
and administrative science, and experiential learning in clinical settings. At the core of the
curriculum are courses in pharmacology, medicinal chemistry, pathophysiology, and
therapeutics. These core courses will be taught in an integrated fashion, comprising a four
semester sequence. (Attachment B.21)
26
The college Assessment Committee, chaired by a faculty member with extensive experience
in all areas of assessment including student learning assessment, has been at work since
May 2007. A proposed set of assessment activities and a detailed list of program learning
objectives have been presented to the faculty and approved. (Attachments B.22 and
B.23)Consistent with ACPE expectations, all CoP syllabi include course learning objectives
formulated in terms of program objectives. Experienced faculty members are accustomed to
assessment, and the faculty members coming from industry and research can be expected to
learn these practices as they adapt to their other academic responsibilities.
7. Other Issues Facing the Institution
Graduate Council and Graduate Programs
UH Hilo offers master’s degree programs in China-U.S. Relations (MA), Counseling
Psychology (MA), Education (MEd), Hawaiian Language and Literature (MA), and Tropical
Conservation Biology and Environmental Science (MS). It also offers the PhD in Hawaiian
and Indigenous Language and Culture Revitalization and the Doctor of Pharmacy degree.
The doctoral programs are described in sections 5 and 6 above.
Table 2 displays the number of graduates in the master’s degree programs as of May 2007;
the doctoral programs are too new to have graduated students. In Fall 2007, the doctoral
program in Hawaiian and Indigenous Language and Culture Revitalization currently has
five enrolled students and is considering admission of a second cohort in Fall 2008. The
Doctor of Pharmacy program has 90 students in its first cohort and will admit a similar
number in its second cohort in Fall 2008.
Table 2. Number of Graduates per Year in Master’s Degree Programs
Degree Title
MA Hawaiian Language
and Literature
MEd Education
MS Tropical Conservation
Biology and
Environmental Sci.
MA Counseling Psychology
MA China-US Relations
2001-02
1
-
-
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
1
2
-
5
-
15
-
11
-
3
-
14
-
6
-
-
-
4
8
8
The UH Hilo Graduate Council, established in 2003, consists of appointed representatives of
graduate programs at UH Hilo, the graduate student association, and the Admissions
27
Office, a Faculty Congress liaison, the university registrar, and the coordinator of research
and graduate education. During the current developmental period, when just six graduate
programs exist at UH Hilo, the Graduate Council also has members who are faculty
representing the academic units of the university. 8
Since 2004, the council has established general policies for graduate education, specific
requirements for the master's degree, and standing committees on courses, programs, and
admissions. More recently, the council has established policies for the doctoral degree,
focusing on the PhD. Policies for the professional doctorate in pharmacy will be considered
next. The policies and requirements for graduate programs are listed in the UH Hilo Catalog
in a section labeled "Graduate Catalog." (Attachment A.4)
The graduate programs are beginning to formulate program-level student learning
objectives and, in interviews conducted in Fall 2007 in connection with the WASC progress
report, all coordinators will attend the assessment workshops scheduled for February 2008.
The graduate program that is most advanced in this area is the College of Pharmacy, which
during its first year of operation is developing learning outcomes and a well-articulated
assessment plan to meet the expectations of the American Council for Pharmaceutical
Education and the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (see Section 6 above).
Graduate programs must submit reports to the Board of Regents for review within five
years after they have enrolled their first students; the Board awards permanent status to
programs that demonstrate satisfactory progress. Once made permanent, the graduate
programs are integrated into the university’s program review schedule. The Board
conferred permanent status on the MA in Hawaiian Language and Literature in 2002 and on
the Master of Education program in 2006.
Two graduate programs, the China-US Relations MA and the Tropical Conservation Biology
and Environmental Sciences MS are currently being reviewed by the UH Hilo Graduate
Council, with their report to be forwarded to appropriate deans and then to the vice
chancellor for academic affairs. The China-US Relations program is undergoing special
review by the university because of a variety of issues, ranging from low enrollment to
overuse of special topics courses to problems evaluating foreign transcripts before program
admission. In response, the Graduate Council last fall approved a procedure to use
professional services for interpretation of undergraduate transcripts from non-US
institutions, and the China-US relations program submitted requests for three new courses
that include the content of courses formerly offered under the special topics rubric.
During 2007-08, the Graduate Council is refining a draft recommendation on faculty
workload related to graduate education and expects to present it to the vice chancellor for
8
The Graduate Programs webpage is at http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/academics/graduate/
28
academic affairs in Spring 2008. There has been some concern that faculty involved in
graduate education are becoming overwhelmed by their workload, including service on
graduate committees. (The normal teaching load at UH Hilo was designed for
undergraduate education.) Other concerns that the Council has discussed but has not
resolved: UH Hilo needs resources for graduate assistantships and adequate space for
graduate student offices and workrooms.
A core concern for graduate education is that no formal graduate office is available on
campus. The coordinator of research and graduate education is a half-time faculty position
with no staff.
In January 2008, a temporary vice chancellor for research will join UH Hilo for up to two
years. The position is funded by the National Science Foundation to support research
activity and development on campus. (Attachment B.4) The coordinator of research and
graduate education will report to this vice chancellor, and a temporary office for graduate
studies is being established. Admissions and registration are handled by individuals whose
primary position is in undergraduate education and who assist graduate programs on a
part-time basis.
UH Hilo will continue to add graduate programs. Even now, with just six graduate
programs, a dedicated administrative position is needed, along with clerical staff, and one
or more educational specialists in admissions and registration who are trained in the specific
issues of graduate education. The university has submitted "program change requests" to
the system office to establish these positions, but the requests have not been accorded a high
enough priority to obtain funding.
Recommendations:



Establish a Graduate Office after an evaluation of staffing requirements
Develop a strategic plan for the implementation of new graduate education
programs (MS or PhD) in high-demand fields such as pharmaceutical sciences.
Continue to build research infrastructure, including library collections, so faculty
can realize their full potential as scholars.
Management of Policies and Documents
The primary policies affecting the University of Hawai‘i at Hilo are Board of Regent bylaws
Title 20 of the Hawai‘i Revised Statutes, and the University of Hawai‘i Administrative
Rules. These are readily available on the UH system website.9 The Faculty Handbook,
updated annually, is a comprehensive reference for many academic practices and policies
At http://www.hawaii.edu/offices/bor/policy/index.html and
http://www.hawaii.edu/offices/bor/adminrules/index.html
9
29
(Attachment B.24), and many UH Hilo policies and documents are available on the
University’s website and in college and division offices. However, many are not.
The campus has long recognized that some academic policies exist in practice but have not
been committed to writing so that they can be readily consulted and adhered to. Other rules
and policies are difficult to find or are out of date. There is no unified webpage for policies
at the college level, nor are complete records of past Congress or senate actions readily
available. In addition, there is no list of all committees at UH Hilo. Such a list should include
committee charges, membership, and links to documents produced by the committees.
A remedy for some of these problems is on its way. The library’s University Archives,
previously limited to storing print copies of university documents, is establishing an online
presence. Over the years, the online archive will resolve the problem of lack of access to
UH Hilo’s academic and administrative policies and other important documentation.
University Archives will collect them in hard copy and electronic formats. Designated
university officers and representatives will be able to post documents to the website, which
will be managed by the head of the Hawaiian Collection. Ideally, however, such a
compilation should be maintained by a full-time archivist, who would acquire content in a
proactive and systematic way, assure overall compliance, apply archival protocols, and
facilitate access. It is expected that the online archive will be ready to receive documents
beginning in Summer 2008. (Attachment B.25)
Recommendations:



Evaluate the feasibility of establishing a position for a full-time archivist trained in
the orderly acquisition and management of digital materials.
Develop a comprehensive and logically organized institutional manual of policy and
procedures, to be made available in print form and online and annually updated.
Develop a webpage where policies and procedures are made available in an orderly
and easily accessible form.
8. Preparing for the Next Cycle of Review
Looking toward the beginning of the next accreditation review cycle, with the proposal for
the self study due in 2010, we see a number of scheduled projects that will certainly reshape
the institution in important ways—and we can be sure that unexpected events will also have
their effects.
A new campus strategic plan will need to be developed soon. The UH system is already
updating the current 2002-2010 plan and extending it to 2015, and UH Hilo will need to
envision and plan its own future in tandem with the system plan—without being
30
dominated by it. As pointed out in section 3, it is essential that representatives of all campus
constituencies participate in the development of the system and campus strategic plans.
Capacity issues will continue to demand sustained focus. As section 3 makes clear, UH Hilo
must continue to advocate formula funding and more rational budget processes tied to
strategic planning on campus and from the UH system, so that the institution can continue
to grow while providing quality education to its diverse student population. And we must
establish a solid infrastructure and adequate support for graduate students and faculty.
While these and other changes unfold, the institution will need to devote more resources to
developing a culture of evidence and accountability and to functioning as an institution that
places student learning at the center of all activities. Cooperation between the Faculty
Congress and the administration, and between the Congress and colleges and college
senates is essential to the success of these projects.
9. Conclusion
How Have Our Responses to WASC’s Challenges Affected the
Institution?
The accreditation steering committee was reconstituted in Spring 2007 to prepare for the
March 2008 special visit from WASC and to compose the special visit report. The committee
soon realized that efforts had been made regarding the recommendations of the May 2004
site team and the four issues raised in the Commission’s June 2004 action letter. The
institution has indeed been moving forward in most areas.
These projects are continuing: making the campus budget process more open and
participatory, expanding research activity and increasing research dollars, bringing in more
donations and growing the university’s small endowment, helping faculty to understand
the cultures and people of Hawai‘i, involving more departments in student learning
assessment, designing a more meaningful and assessable General Education program,
improving the new program review process, making our educational offerings more
engaging and more challenging, and reshaping services to students so that they match
student needs more closely. Faculty governance appears to be evolving towards a clear
division of responsibilities between the Congress and the college senates.
The committee has concluded that the WASC recommendations and expressions of concern
have given definition to the institution’s own sense of where it should be going and what it
should be doing for its faculty, its students, and the community.
31
Major Recommendations
The following recommendations are highlighted here because they directly address the
Commission’s concerns as expressed in the 2004 site team report and Commission action
letter. Other recommendations in the report address issues that the University should also
work to resolve over the coming years.











Continue discussions with the UH System regarding the budget process and
resources to support enrollment and program growth, which are badly needed for
Hawaii’s future, workforce, human capital, and economic development
Seek to establish the position of vice chancellor for research to support both
research proposals and institution improvement grants
Faculty as well as administration must participate actively in the reshaping of the
UH system strategic plan, which include strategic priorities and performance
measures that will affect system allocations to the campus and with which our
own strategic planning must be aligned
Encourage wider community interest and involvement in the community
fundraising mission through the 2007-2008 60th Anniversary Celebration and
subsequent development activities.
College senates and the Faculty Congress should continue to work together to
delineate clearly distinct areas of responsibility and to resolve such long-standing
concerns as college representation on the Congress
Charge the standing Campus Diversity Committee with monitoring and
promoting hiring/retention practices to recruit and retain underrepresented
minority faculty and staff
Support and institutionalize the Keaholoa and Uluakea models for integrating the
indigenous culture into the curriculum and across all colleges
The academic leadership, the Institutional Researcher, and the faculty Congress
Assessment Support Committee must continue to work together to ensure that
faculty, staff, and administration are trained in assessment policy and practices in
accordance with the guidelines of the WASC Evidence Guide and the 2007 WASC “
Rubrics for Evaluating the Effectiveness of Assessment Processes.”
UH Hilo must move expeditiously to revise its General Education program so that
it embodies the institution’s expectations for student learning across the
curriculum and provides a meaningful and useful foundation for undergraduate
and lifelong learning. The institution must also be able to document that students
have indeed achieved the skills and knowledge that it claims to deliver through
the General Education program.
Review NSSE results carefully, prioritize areas for action, and involve all units in
the project of engaging more of our students more deeply and actively in campus
life and in learning.
Report retention and graduation rates in a more comprehensive way so as to
demonstrate real achievement and success
32
 Coordinate all first-year programs and activities to minimize redundancy and
maximize efficiency and assess first-year efforts to ensure continuous
improvement.
33
A. Required Attachments in Print and on CD
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Organization Chart Showing Major Units
Required Data Displays
Budget for FY 2008
2007 Annual Report to the Commission
2007-08 University Catalog
Required Attachments on CD
6. Most Recent Financial Statement and Audit
7. Complete UH Hilo Organizational Chart
B. Supporting Materials on CD
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Commission Action Letter to UH Hilo, June 2004
Site Team Report on UH Hilo, May 2004
UH system draft “Outcomes and Measures 2008-2015” January 2008
NSF Letter regarding Vice chancellor for Research Position
Faculty Congress Charter
CAFRM Senate Charter
CAS Senate Charter
CoBE Senate Charter
Report of the Chancellor’s Committee on the Diversification of the Faculty and
Staff
10. UH Hilo Assessment Plan
11. 2006-2007 Assessment Projects Funded by VCAA
12. 2007-2008 Congress-VCAA Assessment Project
13. GE Proposal 2007-2008
14. Retention Tables
15. Inventory of Current First Year Activities
16. Office of Student Affairs Selected Accomplishments 2000-2007
17. Program Review Guidelines 2006-2007
18. Program Review: External Review
19. Program Review Schedule 2002-2008
20. UH Hilo Update on Strategic Plan Performance Indicators Spring 2007
21. CoP Revised Curriculum
22. CoP Planned Assessment Activities
23. CoP Student Learning Outcomes
24. 2007-2008 Faculty Handbook
25. UH Hilo Library Policy on Archiving
34