SJSU Annual Program Assessment Form
Academic Year 2013-2014
Electronic copy of report is due June 1, 2014. Send to Undergraduate Studies
(academicassessment@sjsu.edu), with cc: to your college’s Associate Dean and college
Assessment Facilitator. List of AFs is found at
http://www.sjsu.edu/ugs/faculty/programs/committee/index.html>
Department: Communication Studies
Program: MA Program Communication Studies
College: Social Sciences
Website: http://www.sjsu.edu/comm/ma_students/
_ Check here if your website addresses the University Learning Goals. <If so, please provide
the link.>
Program Accreditation (if any): N/A
Contact Person and Email: Matthew Spangler / matthew.spangler@sjsu.edu
Date of Report: May 30, 2014
Part A
1. List of Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs)
Faculty decided on these six PLOs in the 2008/2009 academic year.
Conceptual Foundations
Students will be able to identify, explain, and critique the major paradigms, theories, and
conceptual frameworks for understanding communication, and demonstrate an
appreciation of the significance of ethics and social responsibility as they engage in
communication.
Conceptual Foundations learning objectives:
 1) Paradigms and Theories of Communication: Students will be able to identify,
explain and critique the major paradigms and theories that have shaped the field of
communication, including their historical development and current trends.
 2) Ethics: Students will be able to articulate the ethical and social responsibilities in
communicating with others in different social contexts (i.e. interpersonal,
organizational, intercultural, mediated, and public).
Inquiry and Research
Students will be able to analyze and evaluate published research, and design and conduct
communication research studies using quantitative social science, interpretive, critical,
rhetorical, and/or performative methods.
Inquiry and Research learning objectives:
 3) Research Methods: Students will be able to interpret and critique research
methods used in published communication research studies.
 4) Research Design: Students will be able to design and conduct scholarly research
using one or more method of inquiry.
1
Professional Practice
Students will be able to demonstrate advanced competency in scholarly writing, oral
communication, and the application of conceptual foundations and research methods in
professional contexts by designing and conducting applied communication activities.
Professional Practice learning objectives:
 5) Advanced Communication Competence: Students will be able to articulate indepth understanding of conceptual foundations and research methods through
advanced scholarly writing and oral communication.
 6) Theory and Research Applications: Students will be able to design, facilitate,
and evaluate applied communication activities (i.e. presentations, workshops,
forums, trainings, group discussions, etc.) in professional contexts utilizing
conceptual foundations and research methods.
2. Map of PLOs to University Learning Goals (ULGs)
This map was created by the Curriculum Committee in the College of Social Sciences. It
was later discussed and approved by the graduate committee and faculty in the
Communication Studies Department.
PLO 1 (Paradigms and Theories of Communication) maps onto ULG 1 (Specialized
Knowledge)
PLO 2 (Ethics) maps onto ULG 5 (Social and Global Responsibilities)
PLO 3 (Research Methods) maps onto ULG 3 (Intellectual Skills)
PLO 4 (Research Design) maps onto ULG 2 (Broad Integrative Knowledge)
PLO 5 (Advanced Communication Competence) maps onto ULG 2 (Broad Integrative
Knowledge)
PLO 6 (Theory and Research Applications) maps onto ULG 4 (Applied Knowledge)
3. Alignment – Matrix of PLOs to Courses
All of the graduate level courses in the department address each of the six PLOs: (1)
theories of communication, (2) ethics, (3) research methods, (4) research design, (5)
communication competence, and (6) research applications. All six PLOs are assessed in
the culminating course – Comm 297 Writing Seminar & Exams – that all students must
take in their last semester in the program.
4. Planning – Assessment Schedule
Starting in the fall of 2014, each of the six PLOs will be assessed two times a year in
Comm 297. The course will be offered in the fall and again in the spring. In the spring
of 2015, as a graduate faculty, we will look at the assessment data from the fall 2014
semester and begin a conversation about which PLOs we might more successfully teach
in the department and what strategies we will use.
2
5. Student Experience
The PLOs are communicated to students on the department’s website and on individual
class syllabi. The ULGs are not currently communicated to students. But, starting in the
fall of 2014, we plan to list the ULGs on the department website and on individual class
syllabi.
Part B
6. Graduation Rates for Total, Non URM and URM students (per program and
degree)
7. Headcounts of program majors and new students (per program and degree)
8. SFR and average section size (per program)
9. Percentage of tenured/tenure-track instructional faculty (per department)
3
Part C
10. Closing the Loop/Recommended Actions
We have a program review starting this coming fall (2014). We anticipate the program
review will provide us with some specific recommended actions with regard to the MA
program.
11. Assessment Data
Starting in fall 2010, we created and tested a rubric for our graduate program
culminating experience that assesses students’ mastery of our SLOs at the end of their
graduate experience. Members of a student’s thesis, exam, or project committee
complete the rubric after the student’s oral defense evaluating the student in theory,
method, and written and oral communication skills. The following rubric item
corresponds to SLO4: Rate the student’s understanding and execution of stated method or
mode of analysis: 1) exceptional, 2) good, 3) adequate, 4) ineffective or lacking.
As of the fall of 2014, we had collected evaluations for 17 exams (51 evaluations), 12
theses (35 evaluations), and 6 projects (17 evaluations) with 76 responses total to the
above rubric item. Students who completed exams (rather than doing a thesis or
project) had the weakest showing of the three on this item with 7 rated as “ineffective
or lacking.” 43% rated projects “adequate” in the area of method while 27% rated
exams and theses “adequate” in the area of method.
12. Analysis
Our assessment data suggests that (1) students who complete a thesis or project tend to
have a better grasp of method than do exam takers, OR (2) that our exams do not
adequately assess students’ understanding of method OR (3) that our stronger students
self-select into a thesis or project, whereas our weaker students self-select into the
exam. In any event, we may need to revise our exam design and boost student
preparation in the area of method. When the department moved to 4 unit seminars, the
graduate program adopted the model of our undergraduate program with each seminar
featuring a 4th “unit of engagement” that students satisfied with a specific assignment.
After a review of our courses, the graduate faculty determined that a 4th unit focused
on the practice of specific research methods would better serve graduate students.
Seminars integrated with a 4th unit focused on methods begin in fall 2013. We also
made our comprehensive exam mandatory for all students beginning fall 2013 and
introduced a required research presentation as part of the exam process. These
changes are designed to provide students with continuous instruction and practice in
research methods, as well as the department’s other 5 PLOs.
13. Proposed changes and goals (if any)
4
Starting in the fall of 2014, the comprehensive exams will be the primary site for
assessing the six PLOs. We plan to assess all six PLOs each semester (so 12 PLOs per
year). All MA students will take the exams in their final semester in the program.
5