Speech Communication Department
Assessment Report
2000-2001
Assessment Schedule:
|
Year |
BA/BS |
BST |
MA/MS |
GEN ED |
|
2000-2001 |
LO 1 |
LO 1 |
LO 1 |
|
|
2001-2002 |
LO 2 |
LO 2 |
LO 2 |
LO 1 |
|
2002-2003 |
LO 3 |
LO 3 |
LO 3 |
|
|
2003-2004 |
LO 4 |
LO 4 |
LO 4 |
|
|
2004-2005 |
LO 5 |
LO 1 |
LO 1 |
|
Additional Assessments:
Starting in 2001-2002 and every four years following, the Department will conduct a survey of alumni from the previous five years.
Starting in 2003-2004 and every four years following, the Department will conduct a survey of employers of speech communication graduates from the previous two years.
BA/BS Report:
LO 1: Demonstrate knowledge of basic theories, principles,
concepts, and development of the field of communication.
Method of assessment: Unless otherwise noted, all assessment measures were
collected in a student portfolio:
Assessment Population: Students completing SPEE 485 Senior Seminar. Fall 2000: 8;
Spring 2001: 10
Assessment Rubric:
Learning Outcome 1: Demonstrate
knowledge of basic theories, principles, concepts, and development of the field
of communication.
|
1 |
Student activities and/or assignments demonstrate knowledge of basic theories/concepts/skills, or the ability to use that knowledge. This knowledge is demonstrated through activities and/or assignments that show students are able to define key theories and concepts, or are able to utilize basic skills. |
|
2 |
Student activities and/or assignments demonstrate knowledge of basic theories/concepts/skills, as well as the ability to use that knowledge. This knowledge is demonstrated through activities and/or assignments that show students are able to define key theories and concepts, and are able to utilize basic skills. |
|
3 |
Student activities and/or assignments demonstrate knowledge of basic theories/concepts/skills, as well as the ability to use that knowledge. This knowledge is demonstrated through activities and/or assignments that show students are able to define key theories and concepts, are able to utilize basic skills, and are able to analyze and evaluate these theories and concepts. |
|
4 |
Student activities and/or assignments demonstrate knowledge of basic theories/concepts/skills and their development in the communication discipline, as well as the ability to use that knowledge. This knowledge is demonstrated through activities and/or assignments that show students are able to define key theories and concepts, are able to utilize basic skills, and are able to analyze and evaluate these theories and concepts, including showing how these concepts have developed over time. |
Level of Mastery: 90% of assessed population meets or exceeds level 2; 75% of assessed population meets or exceeds level 3.
Results: Evaluation of portfolio assignments indicated that 90 percent of the assessed population met level 2; 50 percent of the assessed population met level 3; 30 percent of the assessed population met level 4.
Discussion: The department met one goal, but did not meet the goal for level 3. The department has learned from these results that students are not very comfortable with moving away from the text in order to analyze or critique theory and concept. Students have trouble seeing the connection between theory and application. The department has developed a new required course in communication theory. Part of the purpose of this course is to improve student use and analysis of theories and concepts in communication.
________________________________________________________________________
BST Report:
LO 1: Students demonstrate content knowledge sufficient to teach
public communication.
Method of assessment: Response and Reflection logs (404); Philosophy and
Rationale of Teaching (404); Unit Plan (404); Learning Activities (404);
Philosophy and Rationale of Forensics Statement (430); Description of 13 MSHSL
Categories (430); Possible Interpretation Topics (430); Possible PA topics
(430); Teaching/Coaching Presentations (430); Group Presentations (430);
Scheduling and Tabbing (430); Judging (430); and Clinical Experience (430)
Assessment Population: All students in SPEE 404 (Fall 2000—17 students) and
SPEE 430 (Spring 2001—16 students).
Assessment Rubric:
Learning Outcome 1: Students
demonstrate content knowledge sufficient to teach public communication.
Embedded Outcomes: NCATE 2000 Candidate Performance Standard 1; MNBOT Communication Arts and Literature Standards A: 3-15; B: 3-5; C: 3-7; ISTE Category 1; NCA K-12: Standard 3
|
1 |
Student activities and/or
assignments demonstrate minimal knowledge of communication theories,
principles and processes as evidenced by routinely missing or incorrectly
using communication content knowledge. |
|
2 |
Student activities and/or
assignments demonstrate acceptable knowledge of communication theories,
principles and processes as evidenced by routine correct use of communication
content knowledge. |
|
3 |
Student activities and/or
assignments demonstrate superior knowledge of communication theories,
principles and processes as evidenced by routine correct use of communication
content knowledge as well as reflection on the strengths and weaknesses of
that knowledge, and its appropriateness to particular audiences. |
Level of Mastery: 90% of assessed population meets or exceeds level 2; 25% of assessed population meets level 3.
Results: 404: Fifteen student portfolios containing the assignments listed in the assessment methods section met Level 3 (88%); Two students met level 2 but did not meet level 3 (12%). The department met its level of mastery for this outcome for this course. 430: All students met level 3 (100%)
Discussion: The department is pleased with the results of the assessment, but would like to see all students at level 3. Though this seems a high standard for this course, students in this course are preparing for careers as secondary communication and language arts teachers. Therefore, we would like to see all students at the highest level, even acknowledging that we may never meet this goal. Based on the assessment results, no major changes are planned for the course. The instructor will work with students to help them meet the highest level. The 430 results, we believe, bear witness to added emphasis on portfolio assignments in the class. More in-class time was devoted to working on the assignments in the 430 class, which means that the course instructor was more available to work with students on completing the assignments. We do not believe that this time took away from learning in the course, as the course has been redesigned to emphasize performance on the portfolio assignments as a way to help students prepare to work with high school students who must meet the performance standards of the Minnesota Graduation Standards. High scores on the portfolio assignments are tied to mastery of the content area of communication and language arts.
MA/MS Report:
LO 1: Demonstrate professional competence in written
communication
Method of assessment: Comprehensive exams; qualifying exams; thesis or alternate
plan paper
Assessment Population: Four students completed all of the assessments by Spring
2001
Assessment Rubric:
Learning Outcome 1: Upon
completion of the graduate program in Speech Communication, all graduate
students will be able to demonstrate professional competence in written
communication.
|
1 |
Student writing in the thesis or alternate plan paper, or
in the qualifying or comprehensive exams, demonstrates that the student is
able to develop a central thesis and support that thesis with appropriate and
credible evidence and present this information in a written style that does
not hinder the audience from understanding the content and following the
organizational pattern of the communication. |
|
2 |
Student writing in the thesis or alternate plan paper, or
in the qualifying or comprehensive exams, demonstrates that the student is
able to develop a central thesis, support that thesis with appropriate and
credible evidence, defend that thesis against other interpretations by
critically analyzing evidence for and against the stated thesis, and present
all of this information in a written style with few grammatical or mechanical
errors, and in a style that does not hinder the audience from following the
organizational pattern of the communication. |
|
3 |
Student writing in the thesis or alternate plan paper, or in the qualifying or comprehensive exams, demonstrates that the student is able to develop a central thesis, support that thesis with appropriate and credible evidence, defend that thesis against other interpretations by critically analyzing evidence for and against the stated thesis and the other interpretations, and present all of this information in a written style with few if any grammatical or mechanical errors, and in a style that allows the audience to easily follow the organizational pattern of the communication. |
Level of Mastery: 100% of the assessed population meets or
exceeds level 1; 90% of the assessed population meets or exceeds level 2; 75%
of the assessed population meets or exceeds level 3.
Results: Three of the students met level 3 in their assessed work (75%); One student met level 2 but did not meet level 3 (25%).
Discussion: The department is pleased that it met its level of mastery goal for this outcome. The department would prefer to have all students at level 3. Given the results of the assessment, the department will work with graduate students to sharpen their writing skills, most notably in the use of evidence to analyze a thesis statement, and will also work with students to cut down on mechanical and grammatical errors.
Gen Ed Report:
No report will be made this year. General education assessment will begin in the fall of 2001, based on the schedule created by the General Education Committee and adopted by the university.