Program Review and Assessment: TP 4/02/07
Minnesota State University
Assessment of Student Learning
Department and Program Report
Please enter the appropriate information concerning your student
learning assessment activities for this year.
Academic Year of Report: 2006-2007 College or Support Area:
Arts and Humanities Department or Program: Speech Communication –
Bachelor of Arts/Bachelor of Science
Check here if your assessment report covers all undergraduate
degree programs: [ ]
Check here if your assessment report covers all graduate degree
programs: [ ]
1. What student learning
outcomes were assessed this year, and why?
In answering this question, please identify the specific student
learning outcomes you assessed this year, reasons for assessing these outcomes,
with the outcomes written in clear, measurable terms, and note how the outcomes
are linked to department, college and university mission and goals.
|
Student
Learning Outcome |
University
Goal |
College
Goal |
Method
of Assessment |
Assessment
Date |
Standard
of Mastery |
Persons
(Courses) responsible |
|
Students will: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LO 2 apply communication theories and principles
to construct appropriate messages in a variety of settings. |
MSU 1: engaged and inclusive
learning community; MSU 2: prepared for careers and for life-long learning Dept goal 3 |
A&H 1: offer quality undergraduate and graduate programs;
A&H 2: acquire disciplined habits of critical thinking and creative
expression; A&H 4: engage in meaningful practice |
Portfolio reflection and artifact #1, 2 and 4 |
2006-7 |
See rubric below |
SP 485 Instructor and student |
|
Student
assignments/activities/critique sheets or presentations demonstrate that
students are able to organize and present competent individual public
speeches, taking into consideration the needs and expectations of the
audience and the occasion, to take part in group communication activities and
demonstrate effective group communication skills, and to demonstrate
effective interpersonal communication skills. |
|
|
2 |
Student
assignments/activities/critique sheets or presentations demonstrate that
students are able to organize and present competent individual public
speeches, to take part in group communication activities, and to demonstrate
interpersonal communication skills. |
|
1 |
Student
assignments/activities/critique sheets or presentations demonstrate that
students are able to organize and present individual public speeches, to take
part in group communication activities, and to engage in interpersonal
communication. |
Level of
Mastery: 100% of assessed population meets or exceeds level 1; 75% of
assessed population meets or exceeds level 2.
2. How were they assessed?
In answering these questions, please concisely describe the
specific methods used in assessing student learning. Please also specify the
population assessed, when the assessment took place, and the standard of
mastery (criterion) against which you will compare your assessment results. If
appropriate, please list survey or questionnaire response rate from total
population.
All seniors majoring in Speech Communication (with the
exception of BST majors) must complete SPEE 485 senior seminar. In Spring of
2007 (date of assessment), 16 students (population assessed) completed SPEE
485. As part of that class, all students complete a portfolio that documents
student learning in the major. For 2006-2007, the Speech Communication
Department’s assessment plan indicated that we would assess student ability to
“apply communication theories and principles to construct appropriate
messages in a variety of settings.” To assess this, artifacts 1, 2 and 4 were
assessed (presentations, relational communication, and diversity communication).
Student artifacts were evaluated based on the above rubric
3. What was learned?
In answering this question, please report results in specific
qualitative or quantitative terms, with the results linked to the outcomes you
assessed, and compared to the standard of mastery (criterion) you noted above.
Please also include a concise interpretation or analysis of the results.
|
Score |
Criteria |
Artifact 1 Presentation |
Artifact 2 Relational |
Artifact 4 Diversity |
|
3 |
Student assignments/activities/critique sheets or presentations
demonstrate that students are able to organize and present competent
individual public speeches, taking into consideration the needs and
expectations of the audience and the occasion, to take part in group
communication activities and demonstrate effective group communication
skills, and to demonstrate effective interpersonal communication skills. |
6 (43%) |
7 (47%) |
2 (13%) |
|
2 |
Student assignments/activities/critique sheets or presentations
demonstrate that students are able to organize and present competent
individual public speeches, to take part in group communication activities,
and to demonstrate interpersonal communication skills. |
6 (43%) |
7 (47%) |
10 (67%) |
|
1 |
Student assignments/activities/critique sheets or presentations
demonstrate that students are able to organize and present individual public
speeches, to take part in group communication activities, and to engage in
interpersonal communication. |
2 (14%) |
1 (6%) |
3 (20%) |
|
|
|
N=14** |
N=15* |
N=15* |
**One student’s portfolio was inaccessible; one
additional student did not have this artifact in the portfolio
*One student’s portfolio was inaccessible
Level of Mastery:
Presentation (1)—86% met or exceeded level 2; 100% met
or exceeded level 1—LOM met.
Relational (2)—84% met or exceeded level 2; 100% met or
exceeded level 1—LOM met.
Diversity (4)—80% met or exceeded level 2; 100% met or
exceeded level 1—LOM met.
Student ability to utilize communication theories and
principles to construct appropriate messages is acceptable.
4. What will the department
or program do as a result of that information?
In answering this question, please note specific changes to your
program as they affect student learning, and as they are related to results
from the assessment process. If no changes are planned, please describe why no
changes are needed.
While LOM was met for all artifacts and the Learning
Outcome as a whole, the department would like to see more students at Level 3.
The department has made curricular changes to enhance instruction in
communication theory and research methods, as well as presentation skills.
5. What did the department
or program do in response to the feedback from last year's assessment report?
In answering this question, please describe any changes that have
been made to improve student learning based on previous assessment results.
Please also discuss any changes you have made to your assessment plan or
assessment methods.
As noted above, curricular changes have already been
made. The department will continue to monitor student performance. The
department will need to update its assessment plan to match changes made to the
student portfolio requirements.
6. Questions or suggestions
concerning Assessment of Student Learning at Minnesota State University,
Mankato: Who will be responsible for evaluating and
reporting on these assessment reports?
