Department: Speech Communication
Program: Department
Degree Awarded: BA/BS/BST/MA/MS/MFA
Check
here if your assessment report covers all undergraduate degree programs: YES
Check
here if your assessment report covers all graduate degree programs: YES
Additional
Assessment: Addresses all program/degrees in Department
1. What
learning outcomes were assessed this year and why?
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.
Survey
Outcome: utilize knowledge of communication theories and principles to
construct appropriate messages in a variety of settings.
2. How
were they (was it) assessed?
A
survey was sent to the current employers of speech communication graduates from
the previous two years. The survey was designed to determine the alums’
abilities to utilize knowledge of communication theories and principles in a
variety of settings.
a. What methods were used?
A
survey was developed which used the assessment rubric below.
b. Who was assessed?
Employers of speech communication
graduates from the previous two years
(n = 24) were surveyed.
c. When was it assessed?
A
survey was conducted during the 2003-2004 academic year
3. What was learned?
Survey Outcome: Utilize
knowledge of communication theories and principles to construct appropriate
messages in a variety of settings.
|
1 |
In their place of employment
graduates demonstrate the ability to organize and present individual public
speeches, to take part in group communication activities, and to engage in
interpersonal communication. |
23 |
|
2 |
In their place of employment
graduates demonstrate the ability to organize and present competent
individual public speeches, to take part in group communication activities,
and to demonstrate interpersonal communication skills. |
20 |
|
3 |
In their place of employment
graduates demonstrate the ability 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. |
18 |
The survey also indicates:
71% of all graduates have
achieved mastery in Interpersonal Communication.
67% of all graduates have achieved
mastery in Public Speaking and Listening.
80% of all graduates have achieved
mastery in Interviewing Skills
80% of all graduates have achieved
mastery in Small Group Communication
Results indicate one alum from the
program has not demonstrated clear competence in communication practices and
principles. 23 have demonstrated basic competency; 20 have demonstrated
above-average competency, and a significant majority (18 of 24 ) have
demonstrated strong competency in communication practices and principles in the
workplace.
4. What will the department do as a result of that
information?
The
department will evaluate current course practices and assignments to determine
how we might strengthen workplace communication practices in our alums.
5. How did the department make use of the feedback from last
year’s assessment report?
Not applicable. The survey
is an added assessment measure not employed in previous assessment reports.
Department: Speech Communication
Program: Undergraduate Degree Awarded: BA/BS
Check
here if your assessment report covers all undergraduate degree programs: NO
Check
here if your assessment report covers all graduate degree programs: NO
1. What
learning outcomes were assessed this year and why?
Learning Outcome 4:
Demonstrate an awareness of how our communication influences others and how the
communication of others influences us. This was on the departmental assessment schedule for 2003-04.This learning outcome
is linked to departmental goal #1: To offer quality undergraduate and graduate
programs that require students to master the basic concepts and practices of
the field, to begin to explore the many areas of study within the field, and to
master a specialized area of study.
2. How
were they (was it) assessed?
All
speech communication students in the BA/BS program must complete SPEE 485,
Senior Seminar. As part of this course, students complete an electronic
portfolio documenting student performance and reflecting on that performance.
The portfolio asks students to complete an exit interview and write reflection
statements in specific areas. The Speech Communication Department Long Range
Planning and Assessment Committee reviewed the artifacts for students in SPEE
485 in spring 2004. The competencies include:
demonstrate
comprehension of a basic theory, principle or concept in communication.
demonstrate
knowledge of the development of field of communication.
demonstrate
advanced knowledge of a communication theory, principle or concept.
demonstrate
individual public speaking ability.
demonstrate
group communication ability.
demonstrate
effective listening skills.
demonstrate
critical and/or reflective thinking and responding.
demonstrate
critical analysis of an interpersonal, group, organizational, or public
communication event.
pre and
post test scores in the PRCA
pre and
post test scores on the WTC (Willingness to Communicate) survey
demonstrate
the ability to complete a research project
demonstrate
the ability to present research orally
a. What methods were used?
The
artifacts and self-reflection statements associated with each competency were
assessed using the assessment rubric below.
b. Who was assessed?
All
students in SPEE 485 for fall 2003 and spring 2004 (n=18).
c. When was it assessed?
Spring
semester 2004
3. What was learned?
|
|
Outcome |
Met
Outcome |
|
1 |
Portfolio reflection statements and exit interview demonstrate
students are aware of the influence his or her communication has on others. |
18 |
|
2 |
Portfolio reflection statements and exit interview demonstrate
are aware of the influence his/her communication has on others, and how the
communication of others influence them. |
17 |
Student
performance is developmental; students meeting the second level demonstrate
acceptable performance on the first level.
Level
of Mastery: 100% of assessed population meets or exceeds level 1; 80% of
assessed population meets or exceeds level 2.
Level
of mastery was met for level 1; LOM was met for level 2.
4. What will the department do as a result of that
information?
The Department is satisfied with the
results of the assessment and will continue to emphasize content designed to
satisfy the learning outcomes.
Regarding artifacts needed to
demonstrate advanced knowledge of a communication theory, principle or concept, it is noted
that this group of students had some difficulty finding artifacts emphasizing
speech communication theory. Most students
were able to document theory through application or reflection but were lacking
advanced theoretical knowledge. The
department is urged to redesign course work to include demonstration of
advanced theoretical knowledge while still supply students with the
opportunities to apply and reflect on their use of theory.
5. How did the department make use of the feedback from last
year’s assessment report?
Feedback from last year noted that the outcome was met, so no major changes were needed.
Department: Speech Communication
Program: Undergraduate Degree Awarded: BST
Check
here if your assessment report covers all undergraduate degree programs: NO
Check
here if your assessment report covers all graduate degree programs: NO
1. What
learning outcomes were assessed this year and why?
Learning Outcome 4: Students
demonstrate the knowledge and skills to administer extracurricular speech,
debate and theater programs. This was on the departmental assessment schedule
for 2003-04.This learning outcome is linked to departmental goal #1: To offer quality undergraduate and graduate programs that
require students to master the basic concepts and practices of the field, to
begin to explore the many areas of study within the field, and to master a
specialized area of study. This learning outcome also includes the following
embedded outcomes: NCATE
2000 Candidate Performance Standard 1; MNBOT Communication Arts and Literature
Standards A: 16; B: 6; C: 4-7; ISTE Categories 1 and 5; NCA K-12: Standards
3.17, 3.22, 3.23
2. How
were they (was it) assessed?
a. What methods were used?
All students in SPEE 4/430 Coaching Forensics Activity complete an electronic portfolio. One part of that portfolio includes the creation of descriptions of each Minnesota State High School League competitive speaking events.. In addition students in SPEE 4/530 must research and prepare a list of possible topics or selections for each forensics activity. Students also present a micro-teaching session which demonstrates their ability to assess their own performance as a teacher/coach. The students participate in a clinical experience observing and/or working at a speech or one-act play contest and assess their own ability to administer speech competitive activities. Finally, all students schedule, judge and perform in a mock classroom tournament simulating an actual high school speech contest.
b. Who was assessed?
All
students in SPEE 4/530 for spring 2004 were assessed. (n=18)
c. When was it assessed?
Spring
semester 2004
3. What was learned?
|
|
Outcome |
Met
Outcome |
|
|
1 |
Student activities and assignments demonstrate minimal ability to administer extracurricular speech activities as evidenced by a lack of or misapplication of knowledge concerning these activities, limited ability to develop and administer a speech program and run a tournament, and limited ability to direct large-group speech activities. |
18 |
|
|
2 |
Student activities and assignments demonstrate acceptable ability to administer extracurricular speech activities as evidenced by sufficient knowledge concerning these activities, acceptable ability to develop and administer a speech program and run a tournament, and acceptable ability to direct large-group speech activities. |
18 |
|
Level of Mastery: 100% of assessed population meets or exceeds level 1; 80% of assessed population meets level 2.
All students assessed met level 2 of the rubric. Assessment shows that students exceeded the level of mastery set for this outcome. The result is not surprising, as the course uses mastery learning and requires students to redo activities until they meet acceptable levels. As the course is designed to prepare future teachers, neither the course instructor nor the department believe it is acceptable to allow students NOT to meet or exceed mastery levels. Students unable to meet the requirements are provided additional help. If students are still unable to meet the requirements, they are counseled to consider another career option.
4. What will the
department do as a result of this information?
No specific changes are planned for the outcome or the course. No major changes to the course nor the assessment are planned. Any changes made to the course would have to be made in conjunction with departmental consideration, and also would have to be made in conjunction with NCATE accreditation requirements.
5. How did the department
make use of the feedback from last year’s assessment?
Feedback from last year noted that the outcome was met, so no major changes were needed.
Department: Speech Communication
Program: Graduate
Degree Awarded: MFA/MA/MS
Check
here if your assessment report covers all undergraduate degree programs: NO
Check
here if your assessment report covers all graduate degree programs: YES
1. What
learning outcomes were assessed this year and why?
Learning Outcome 4: Demonstrate mastery of communication
theories within their area of emphasis. This was on the departmental assessment
schedule for 2003-04. This learning outcome is linked to departmental goal #1: To offer quality
undergraduate and graduate programs that require students to master the basic
concepts and practices of the field, to begin to explore the many areas of study
within the field, and to master a specialized area of study.
2. How
were they (was it) assessed?
Students in SPEE 600 are required to
complete a series of assignments related to the learning outcome. The artifacts
were reviewed to determine if the learning outcome was achieved. The artifacts were assessed using the assessment rubric
below.
a. What methods were used?
The
artifacts were assessed using the assessment rubric below.
b. Who was assessed?
Graduate
students taking SPEE 600 in Fall 2003 (n=16); students completing a thesis during
academic year 2003-2004
c. When was it assessed?
Spring
semester 2004
3. What was learned?
|
|
Outcome |
Met
Outcome |
|
|
1 |
Student performance on papers
written in 600 or the student thesis will demonstrate mastery of specific
communication theories through writing that shows students are able to define
these relevant theories, compare and contrast these theories, and apply these
theories to at least one communication phenomenon. |
16 |
|
|
2 |
Student performance on papers
written in 600 or the student thesis will demonstrate mastery of specific
communication theories through writing that shows students are able to
describe the development of relevant theories in their area of emphasis,
define these relevant theories, compare and contrast these theories, defend
these theories as relevant to their area of emphasis, and apply these
theories to at least one communication phenomenon. |
10 |
|
4. What will the department do as a result of that
information?
The
Department will strive to strengthen mastery of communication theories by
specifically focusing on how to defend these theories as relevant to their area of
emphasis.
5. How
did the department make use of the feedback from last year’s assessment report?
The Department focused on two
issues emanating from last year’s results: 1) Students in the required 601
Research Methods were provided added instruction in and opportunities to
implement research methodologies; 2) Graduate faculty emphasized style
requirements in order to strengthen students’ mastery of style guidelines (MLA
and APA).