To develop student understanding and utilization of rhetorical and communication theory in all major communication contexts, including the development of critical thinking skills. These contexts include interpersonal and family relationships, small group professional and business situations, and public/media messages.
Objective
Applying Rhetorical and Communication Theory
Graduates will be able to apply rhetorical and communication theory to specific communication contexts.
Indicator
Student Application Of Theory
We will measure attainment of Goal 1 through an annual evaluation of a sample of final student term papers in 300 and 400 level courses, such as Intercultural Communication, Small Group Communication, Nonverbal Communication, Communication Theory, and Family Communication. The components of this rubric include the following: Contro of the Mechanics of Written Composition, Evidence of Understanding of the Applicable Theory or Theories, and Effective Connection of Theory or Theories to Communication Behavior. The Communication Studies faculty met as a committee of the whole to develop consensus on the rubric and its components and to develop a Likert-type rating scale to be used as a holistic measure. The resulting numeric scale is as follows: 1=fails to meet the goal, 2=minimally meets the goal, 3=satisfactorily meets the goal, 4=meets the goal in an exemplary fashion, 5=exceeds expectations in meeting the goal. A score of 1 indicates serious deficiencies in all three of the components. 2 = moderate deficiencies in no more than two of the components. 3 = no deficiencies in any of the three components. 4 = superior handling of all three components. 5 = near flawless handling of all three components.
Criterion
Grade for Term Papers
An average grade of 4 is the criterion for satisfying the target outcome. This average will be taken over all term papers and all reviewers (faculty committee).
Finding
Application Of Theory
The average score for undergraduate student papers was 4.09.
Action
Application Of Theory
Based on favorable evaluation of student papers last year, the faculty agreed to raise the criterion for this indicator from 3 to 4 and to continue to stress the importance of applying theories of communication. That action proved successful, and the criterion of 4 will remain for the coming year.
Goal
Communication Presentations
To train students to make a variety of effective communication presentations in different professional, educational, and social contexts. These presentations include public speeches, group discussion, and argumentation and debate.
Objective
Communication Presentations
Graduates will be able to communicate effectively in a variety of oral communication situations.
Indicator
Student Presentations
We will measure attainment of Goal 2 through an annual evaluation of a sample of recorded final student presentations given in such courses as Public Speaking, Speech for Business and the Professions, Speech for Teachers, and the like. The components of this rubric include the following: Evidence of Content Mastery (including Source Citation) and Evidence of Mastery of Delivery (including Visual Aids). The Communication Studies faculty met as a committee of the whole to develop this rubric and its components and to construct a Likert-type rating scale for use as a holistic measure. The resulting numeric scale is as follows: 1=fails to meet the goal, 2=minimally meets the goal, 3=satisfactorily meets the goal, 4=meets the goal in an exemplary fashion, 5=exceeds expectations in meeting the goal. A score of 1 = serious deficiencies in both components. 2 = moderate deficiency in no more than one component. 3 = no deficiency in either component. 4 = superior handling of both components. 5 = near flawless handling of both components.
Criterion
Grade for Presentations
An average grade of 4 is the criterion for satisfying the target outcome. This average will be taken over all presentations and all reviewers (faculty committee).
Finding
Communication Presentations
The average score for student speeches was 3.68. The scores ranged from 2 to 5.
Action
Student Presentations
The criterion was raised from 3 to 4 for this year, but the average score fell a bit short of that number and fractionally lower than last year (3.77). The faculty agrees to continue the criterion at 4 for next year and redouble its efforts to attain it. Specific actions may include adding to the number of oral presentations required in class and utilizing peer evaluations.
Goal
Research Literacy
To develop student competencies in locating, understanding, assessing, and reporting communication research findings. This includes training in the use of both print and electronic media sources and focuses attention on published scholarly research.
Objective
Research Literacy
Graduates will be able to understand, assess, and report the results of communication research.
Indicator
Student Research Literacy
We will measure Goal 3 with an annual evaluation of a sample of student papers involving reviews of research literature assigned in such courses as Introduction to Communication Theory and Communication Theory. The components of this rubric are the following: Control of the Mechanics of Written Composition and Evidence of a Comprehensive Knowledge of a Confined Research Area. The Communication Studies faculty met as a committee of the whole to develop consensus on the rubric and its components and to construct a Likert-type rating scale for use as a holistic measure. The resulting numeric scale is as follows: 1=fails to meet the goal, 2=minimally meets the goal, 3=satisfactorily meets the goal, 4=meets the goal in an exemplary fashion, 5=exceeds expectations in meeting the goal. A score of 1 indicates serious deficiencies in both components. 2 = moderate deficiency in no more than one component. 3 = no deficiency in either component. 4 = superior handling of both components. 5 = near flawless handling of both components.
Criterion
Grade for Literature Reviews
An average grade of 4 is the criterion for satisfying the target outcome. This average will be taken over all presentations and all reviewers (faculty committee).
Finding
Student Research Literacy
The average grade for student literature review papers was only 3.5, which is substantially lower than expected.
Action
Student Research Literacy
The faculty acknowledges that it needs to increase its efforts in developing student skills in the evaluation of the research literature they read. Next year, all classes in which literature reviews are required will have additional lecture material on the subject. Additionally, next year's assessment will include at least an upper and a lower division course's papers.
Goal
Computer Literacy
To develop student competency in utilizing personal computers, software, and the internet to perform research and prepare reports in the field of communication studies.
Objective
Computer Literacy
Graduates will be able to utilize appropriate personal computers and related software, as well as the internet, to perform routine assignments and tasks in the field of communication studies.
Indicator
Computer Literacy
We will measure attainment of Goal 4 through an annual evaluation of a sample of student papers submitted in COM 231, Introduction to Communication Theory, a course required for both majors and minors. This course incorporates papers specifically assigned to engage student skills and abilities in computer use and offers training in computer technology for those students whose skills and abilities are deficient. The components of this rubric are: Evidence of Mastery of the Use of Microsoft Word and Evidence of Mastery of Online Research Skills (including electronic databases as well as the internet generally). The Communication Studies faculty met as a committee of the whold to develop consensus on the rubric and its components and to construct a Likert-type rating scale to use as a holistic measure. The resulting numeric scale is as follows: 1=fails to meet the goal; 2=minimally meets the goal; 3=satisfactorily meets the goal; 4=meets the goal in an exemplary fashion; 5=exceeds expectations in meeting the goal. 1 = serious deficiencies in both components. 2 = moderate deficiency in no more than one component. 3 = no deficiency in either component. 4 = superior handling of both components. 5 = near flawless handling of both components.
Criterion
Computer Literacy
An average grade of 3 is the criterion for satisfying the target outcome. This average will be taken over all student papers and all reviewers (faculty committee).
Finding
Computer Literacy
The objective of computer literacy is new for this year. The finding is that students averaged 3,8 in the assessment of their computer skills.
Action
Computer Literacy
Since our students scored well above the expected criterion level, the faculty will maintain the expected criterion for next year.