1) Successful completion (80% with a grade of B or better) of ENHS 660 Concepts of Public Health including mastery of selected concept questions on the final exam;

2) Successful completion (80% with a grade B or better) of Public Health 700 including mastery of selected concept questions on the final exam;

3) Successful completion (80% with a grade B or better) of Epidemiology 700 or 701 including mastery of selected concept questions on the final exam;

4) The ability of students to communicate technical environmental and public health information will be measured by successfully completing research projects and presentations in selected graduate courses. A minimum of 80% of all PhD Students will average B or better on these assignments.

5) A minimum of 80% of all PhD Students will satisfactorily pass their PhD Qualifying Examination on their first attempt and average 3 or higher on the associated Rubric (attached).

6) In accordance with Graduate School regulations, all PhD students must pass a Comprehensive Exam. A minimum of 80% of all PhD Students will satisfactorily pass their Comprehensive Examination on their first attempt.

1)      The instructor in ENHS 660 will compile the average grade of PhD students and their success rate at completing the selected concept questions on the final exam and provide this data to the Graduate Director.

2)      The instructor in PUBH 700 will compile results of the average grade of PhD students and their success rate at completing the selected concept questions on the final exam and provide this data to the Graduate Director.

3)      The instructor in EPI 700 or 701 the average grade of PhD students and their success rate at completing the selected concept questions on the final exam and provide this data to the Graduate Director.

4)      ENHS classes are determined by each student’s PhD Committee, selected before and after successful completion of the PhD Qualifying Examination. At the beginning of each semester, the Graduate Director will contact the professors of courses in which ENHS PhD students are enrolled and let those professors know that for these Assessments a summary of the passing rate for PhD students in the course for presentations and reports completed for the course will be needed. The professor will provide a summary of what percentage of students received a B or better for the specific presentation or report to the Graduate Director.

5)      The Qualifying Exam consists of a written component and an oral component, with admittance to candidacy dependent upon successful completion of both portions. This exam is administered following completion of formal coursework and prior to the taking of dissertation research credit. Members of the Ph.D. qualifying examination committees will submit questions in their technical area of expertise that is germane to  the research area of interest by the student, review the students response to these question and then rate the student's knowledge of theory and research in each of specific areas of environmental health science including ecology and ecosystem science, toxicology, environmental microbiology and public health practice using a rating scale of 1 to 5 (1=Clearly Unsatisfactory, 3=B or Clearly Satisfactory, and 5= A or Very Satisfactory). Each academic year, the Graduate Advisor will keep track of how many PhD students took qualifying exams and request a summary from the students’ committees concerning the strengths and weaknesses of the student and if the student passed the exam.

6)      The comprehensive exam, administered by the Research Committee, is usually taken during the semester the student defends her/his dissertation research and can cover any courses taken by the student as well as the research topic itself. Each academic year, the Graduate Advisor will keep track of how many PhD students took comprehensive exams and request a summary from the students’ committees concerning the strengths and weaknesses of the student and if the student passed the exam.

The Director will aggregate and analyze the data for all of the measures listed above and will submit a report to the Department Chair. Results will be shared and discussed with the Department Faculty as a whole at the end of the spring semester. Appropriate recommendations for the program change will be made and recorded in the program faculty minutes. Appropriate recommendations will be made concerning the overall effectiveness of courses and the program in addressing potential consistent weakness among students.

1) ENHS 660 – All ENHS PhD Students earned a grade of B or higher in the course. Graduate student mean scores for selected question on the finale exam were 92.07 (+/- 8.98 Standard Deviation) and a Range = 63.4 – 100 for Summer, 2016; 93.25 (+/-1.79 Standard Error) and a Range = 78 – 100 for Fall, 2016; and 92.8 (+/-1.60 Standard Error) and a Range of 83-100 for Spring, 2017.

2) PUBH 700 - All ENHS PhD Students passed the course (100%). Exam scores for PhD students are not available.

3) EPI 700 or 701 - All ENHS PhD Students earned a grade of B or higher in the course (100%). Exam scores for PhD students are not available.

4) Oral and Written Reports in ENHS Classes - All ENHS PhD Students (100%) received a grade of B or higher on written and/or oral presentations in ENHS classes.

5) PhD Qualifying Exam (QE) – a total of 5 ENHS students took the Qualifying Exam in 2016-2017. Four out of five students (80%) passed the QE on the first try and 5/5 (100%) passed the QE on the second try. The Rubric Score for students ranged from 3.75-4.00, averaging 3.87 for 2017 for the 5 students.

6) Comprehensive Exam – A total of one PhD student took and passed the Comprehensive Exam in 2016 (100%).

All criteria were met.

The results from ENHS 660 were used to compare performance of students among the 3 different professors teaching the 3 different sessions each year. As shown above all PHD students were performing well on questions in ENHS 660 designed to test fundamental knowledge students. Feedback from PUBH 700 identified a PhD student who had great interest in class room teaching and as a result did a Teaching Assistantship in the Spring, 2017 and will now be the TA for PUBH 700 in the Fall, 2017.Results from the Qualifying Exam were used to identify a deficiency in Epidemiology in one PhD student who then took additional course work in Epidemiology before successfully retaking the Qualifying Exam.

A research grant proposal on a research topic will be written and patterned after the N.S.F. or N.I.H. format for proposals. They will be evaluated by the ENHS 793 course instructor, and constructively commented upon. The overall average score using the Assessment Rubric is expected to be at least 3.0 (attached).

The grant proposal will be constructively evaluated by the instructor for ENHS 793, and in some cases the student advisor. This will constitute a portion of the course grade. Each year the Graduate Director will review assessment data and present results to the faculty as part of a curriculum retreat. The data and analyses will be used to improve mentoring of students.

The ENHS 793 Boot Camp course was not offered in 2016-2017 academic year. Instead all PhD students were working with their PhD Mentor to develop a Career Development Plan, which will include a timeline for proposal submissions. A total of 5 students submitted proposals  for funding and two were funded (40%) through the USC Office of Research for Dissertation Research Proposal written in part for ASPIRE Funding. The Rubric Score for funded proposals was 4.40 versus 2.97 for non-funded studies and the overall average was 3.46 for all PhD Students submitting proposals. In addition, as part of the Career Development Plan, students met with staff from the Office of Research to learn about the different research funding programs for graduate students at USC.

This criterion was met.

The results of the proposals were used as a springboard to advance the research for the two students funded in 2016-17.For the PhD Students who were not funded they were able to receive constructive feedback on their proposed research, which will be used to better refine their dissertation research. The faculty used this information to gauge how well our students are performing in competitive proposals submitted for internal funding. Over the past two years we have had two students received Breakthrough Graduate Student Recognition and one student receive a funding for an Internal Fellowship. The department is working to improve the Career Development Planning process for our doctoral students. We will continue to use this process to evaluate this learning outcome next year,

1) Students will prepare and present seminars as part of the ENHS 793 course, and for the Departmental faculty every two years during their tenure as a graduate student. They will be evaluated by the ENHS 793 course instructor, and constructively commented upon. The overall average score using the Assessment Rubric is expected to be at least 3.0 (attached).

2) Each student will prepare a 50 min lecture on a scientific topic, usually relating to their area of research, as part of an already-existing graduate or undergraduate course. The overall average score using the Assessment Rubric is expected to be at least 3.0 (attached).

1) At least two Departmental seminars on research will be presented for faculty and students, and at least one presentation will be given as part of the course ENHS 793. Each year the Graduate Director will review assessment data and present results to the faculty as part of a curriculum retreat. The data and analyses will be used to improve mentoring of students.

2) The “guest lecture “presentation will be evaluated by the faculty advisor or peer faculty. Constructive suggestions for improvement will be provided by evaluator.

The Director will aggregate and analyze the data for all of the measures listed above and will submit a report to the Department Chair. Results will be shared and discussed with the Department Faculty as a whole at the end of the spring semester. Appropriate recommendations for the program change will be made and recorded in the program faculty minutes. Appropriate recommendations will be made concerning the overall effectiveness of courses and the program in addressing potential consistent weakness among students.

The ENHS 793 Boot Camp course was not offered in 2016-2017 academic year. Five PhD students presented their research findings as seminars in the ENHS Seminar Series during the Fall, 2016 and Spring, 2017 Semesters. One PhD student presented a guest lecture in a course. The Rubric Score for PhD student presentations ranged from 5-5, averaging 5 (Excellent) for both scientific content and delivery.

The students received significant constructive feedback on their oral presentations in the seminar course and the guest lecture in one class form the course instructors and faculty attending the seminars, so as to improve both their presentation style and enhance their ongoing PhD research. The faculty used this information to gauge how well PhD students are mastering the technical content of their chosen area of research focus as all students were doing exceptionally well and will provide this feedback formally to students in the development of their Professional Development Plan.

Since the ENHS 793 Boot Camp course will not be offered in 2017-18, we will use our individual Student Development Plan for each student to identify mechanisms to enhance technical writing, grantsmanship, oral communication skills and technical research skills customized for each student.

ENHS PhD students in ENHS 899 are able to clarify critical gaps in scientific knowledge concerning the resolution of public health and environmental health problems by planning and executing original research that will lead to solutions of such problems. Students who complete the PhD degree must conceive, develop, and conduct original research, under the guidance of a faculty mentor and Research Committee, leading to useful applications in environmental health sciences and this research must culminate into the successful completion of a dissertation.

All graduating PhD students must successfully defend their dissertation. For consistency, the format of the assessment rubric for evaluating the defense is the same as for the proposal and an example is attached.  At least 80% of PhD graduates will successfully defend their dissertation research before the faculty and their committee and achieve an average score of 3 or higher on the attached Rubric.

The dissertation must be based on original research and should enhance existing or add new knowledge to the environmental health sciences. The student must formally defend the research to her/his Research Committee via an oral presentation open to the public followed by a question and answer period. The Graduate Advisor will summarize the successful completion of dissertation defenses each year and submit a report to the Department Chair. Results will be shared and discussed with the Department Faculty as a whole at the end of the spring semester. Appropriate recommendations for the program change will be made and recorded in the program faculty minutes.

One student successfully completed her PHD and defended her research in 2016-17. Her Rubric Scores ranged from 3-5, averaging 4.83 (Outstanding) based upon reviews by the faculty.

Feedback was provided to the student directly indicating how well her research had progressed. The faculty used this information to better inform each other about possible areas of new research collaboration.

After students have completed their dissertation-related research they will be required to submit at least one manuscript for publication of their results (in collaboration with their advisor) in peer-reviewed journals. This requirement differs from the MS degree, which does not necessitate submission, but rather only encourages submission.

1) At least 80% of the students will submit a paper for publication from their dissertation within one year after completion of their research.

2) At least 80% of the students will publish a paper within five years after completion of their research.

Students will be strongly encouraged to submit their dissertation research for publication. The Graduate Director will maintain a database concerning the submission of manuscripts by PhD students and the success of those students in getting the manuscripts accepted for publication. At the end of each academic year the Graduate Director will present summary of PhD graduates submitting and publishing research relating to their dissertation work. If submission and publication rates are not obtained, then faculty will discuss the potential reasons for this and make recommendations for adding course-specific activities that would enhance student publication rates or even adding an additional course as needed. Results of this assessment will be used to make recommendations for improvements to the program that could results in a better submissions and publication rates.

Our one PhD student graduating this year published two papers while a PhD Student (100%). Feedback was provided to the student directly indicating how well her research had progressed. The faculty used this information to better inform each other about possible areas of new research collaboration.

ENHS is developing a 5 year data base for student publications 2011-16, using the above data as part of it. It will be shared with faculty annually from here on out to track progress of students. The faculty will evaluate these data once the database is completed to see how well we have done in compliance with the 80% of our PhD students publishing a paper within 5 years of graduation.

1) Successful completion (at least 80% with a grade of B or better) of ENHS 660 Concepts of Public Health including mastery of selected concept questions on the final exam;

2) Successful completion (at lesat 80% passing) of Public Health 700 (pass/fail course);

3) Successful completion (at least 80% with a grade B or better) of Epidemiology 700 or 701;

4) The ability of students to communicate technical environmental and public health information will be measured by successfully completing research projects and presentations in selected graduate courses. A minimum of 80% of all PhD Students will average B or better on these assignments.

5) A minimum of 80% of all PhD Students will satisfactorily pass their PhD Qualifying Examination on their first attempt and average 3 or higher on the associated Rubric (attached).

6) In accordance with Graduate School regulations, all PhD students must pass a Comprehensive Exam. A minimum of 80% of all PhD Students will satisfactorily pass their Comprehensive Examination on their first attempt.

1)      The instructor in ENHS 660 will compile the average grade of PhD students and their success rate at completing the selected concept questions on the final exam and provide this data to the Graduate Director.

2)      The instructor in PUBH 700 report the number of students passing the course to the Graduate Director.

3)      The instructor in EPI 700 or 701 the average grade of PhD students to the Graduate Director.

4)      ENHS classes are determined by each student’s PhD Committee, selected before and after successful completion of the PhD Qualifying Examination. At the beginning of each semester, the Graduate Director will contact the professors of courses in which ENHS PhD students are enrolled and let those professors know that for these Assessments a summary of the passing rate for PhD students in the course for presentations and reports completed for the course will be needed. The professor will provide a summary of what percentage of students received a B or better for the specific presentation or report to the Graduate Director.

5)      The Qualifying Exam consists of a written component and an oral component, with admittance to candidacy dependent upon successful completion of both portions. This exam is administered following completion of formal coursework and prior to the taking of dissertation research credit. Members of the Ph.D. qualifying examination committees will submit questions in their technical area of expertise that is germane to  the research area of interest by the student, review the students response to these question and then rate the student's knowledge of theory and research in each of specific areas of environmental health science including ecology and ecosystem science, toxicology, environmental microbiology and public health practice using a rating scale of 1 to 5 (1=Clearly Unsatisfactory, 3=B or Clearly Satisfactory, and 5= A or Very Satisfactory). Each academic year, the Graduate Advisor will keep track of how many PhD students took qualifying exams and request a summary from the students’ committees concerning the strengths and weaknesses of the student and if the student passed the exam.

6)      The comprehensive exam, administered by the Research Committee, is usually taken during the semester the student defends her/his dissertation research and can cover any courses taken by the student as well as the research topic itself. Each academic year, the Graduate Advisor will keep track of how many PhD students took comprehensive exams and request a summary from the students’ committees concerning the strengths and weaknesses of the student and if the student passed the exam.

The Director will aggregate and analyze the data for all of the measures listed above and will submit a report to the Department Chair. Results will be shared and discussed with the Department Faculty as a whole at the end of the spring semester. Appropriate recommendations for the program change will be made and recorded in the program faculty minutes. Appropriate recommendations will be made concerning the overall effectiveness of courses and the program in addressing potential consistent weakness among students.

All PhD students work with their PhD Mentor to develop a Career Development Plan, which includes a timeline for proposal submissions to internal and/or external funders. Research grant proposals will be written and patterned after the N.S.F. or N.I.H. format . They will be evaluated by faculty mentor and constructively commented upon. The overall average score using the Assessment Rubric is expected to be at least 3.0 (attached).

All grant proposals will be constructively evaluated by the faculty mentor. Each year the Graduate Director will review assessment data from the boot camp and from faculty mentors evaluating other proposals and present results to the faculty as part of a curriculum retreat. The data and analyses will be used to improve mentoring of students.

ENHS will use our individual Student Development Plan for each student to identify mechanisms to enhance technical writing, grantsmanship, oral communication skills and technical research skills customized for each student. As identified through this process, students will prepare and present seminars during their tenure as a graduate student. They will be evaluated by their faculty mentor and constructively commented upon. The overall average score using the Assessment Rubric is expected to be at least 3.0 (attached). In addition, presentations identified in the development plan will be evaluated for this learning outcome. The overall average score using the Assessment Rubric for is expected to be at least 3.0 (attached).

2) Each student will prepare a 50 min lecture on a scientific topic, usually relating to their area of research, as part of an already-existing graduate or undergraduate course. The overall average score using the Assessment Rubric is expected to be at least 3.0 (attached).

The Graduate Director will collect the data from the faculty mentors, aggregate and analyze the data for all of the measures listed above and will submit a report to the department . Results will be shared and discussed with the Department Faculty as a whole at the end of the spring semester. Appropriate recommendations for the program change will be made and recorded in the program faculty minutes. Appropriate recommendations will be made concerning the overall effectiveness of courses and the program in addressing potential consistent weakness among students.

ENHS PhD students in ENHS 899 are able to clarify critical gaps in scientific knowledge concerning the resolution of public health and environmental health problems by planning and executing original research that will lead to solutions of such problems. Students who complete the PhD degree must conceive, develop, and conduct original research, under the guidance of a faculty mentor and Research Committee, leading to useful applications in environmental health sciences and this research must culminate into the successful completion of a dissertation.

All graduating PhD students must successfully defend their dissertation. For consistency, the format of the assessment rubric for evaluating the defense is the same as for the proposal and an example is attached.  At least 80% of PhD graduates will successfully defend their dissertation research before the faculty and their committee and achieve an average score of 3 or higher on the attached Rubric.

The dissertation must be based on original research and should enhance existing or add new knowledge to the environmental health sciences. The student must formally defend the research to her/his Research Committee via an oral presentation open to the public followed by a question and answer period. The Graduate Advisor will summarize the successful completion of dissertation defenses each year and submit a report to the Department Chair. Results will be shared and discussed with the Department Faculty as a whole at the end of the spring semester. Appropriate recommendations for the program change will be made and recorded in the program faculty minutes.

After students have completed their dissertation-related research they will be required to submit at least one manuscript for publication of their results (in collaboration with their advisor) in peer-reviewed journals. This requirement differs from the MS degree, which does not necessitate submission, but rather only encourages submission.

1) At least 80% of the students will submit a paper for publication from their dissertation within one year after completion of their research.

2) At least 80% of the students will publish a paper within five years after completion of their research.

Students will be strongly encouraged to submit their dissertation research for publication. The Graduate Director will maintain a database concerning the submission of manuscripts by PhD students and the success of those students in getting the manuscripts accepted for publication. At the end of each academic year the Graduate Director will present summary of PhD graduates submitting and publishing research relating to their dissertation work. If submission and publication rates are not obtained, then faculty will discuss the potential reasons for this and make recommendations for adding course-specific activities that would enhance student publication rates or even adding an additional course as needed. Results of this assessment will be used to make recommendations for improvements to the program that could results in a better submissions and publication rates.