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: Control 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 committee score for student term papers during the reporting period was 4.0. The committee did note that in spite of this high average score, some of our student papers reflect a knowledge of theory but not always an understanding of it.
Action
Application Of Theory
The department plans to evaluate a larger and more diverse set of term papers (from more than one class) during the coming year to be sure that its goal is being met across the board. It also will emphasize the understanding of theory and not just knowledge of it.
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 committee score for the reporting period was 4.17. Some of the student presentations reflected overly simple topic choices.
Action
Communication Presentations
Although only a few students made presentations on overly simple topics, the faculty will redouble its efforts to insist on the highest level of student background research for presentations. Additionally, the department has just introduced an online version of one of its courses in which presentations are the focus. In the coming year, it will focus its attention on this new version in evaluating this goal.
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
Research Literacy
The average committee score for the reporting period was 4.125. A few papers reflected too narrow a focus.
Action
Student Research Literacy
Although the criterion was met during this reporting period, the faculty who assign papers involving reviews of research literature are aware that maintaining this level of success will require continued emphasis and effort. The faculty will also continue to impress upon its students the need for comprehensiveness in its reviews of literature.
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 whole 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
Inasmuch as the papers done by students having to do with understanding theory and with literature reviews both required a high level of computer literacy, both in database searches and in mastery of MSWord, the faculty did not separately assess computer literacy this year. Scores for both sets of papers were 4.00 or greater, with the criterion being 3. A few papers reflected carelessness in database searches, although this weakness was minimal.
Action
Computer Literacy
The faculty will raise the criterion for this objective from 3 to 4 and assist students who seem to lack the ability to search databases carefully.