Chabot College
Program Review Report
2014 -2015
Year 2 of
Program Review Cycle
“You are in the same cycle as last year!”
Submitted on Nov. 1, 2013
Contact: Jason Ames, Veronica
Martinez, & christine warda
Final Forms, 1/18/13
Table of Contents
Divisions/Programs remain in the same cycle year for 2013-2014
___ Year 1
Section 1: Where We’ve Been
Section 2: Where We Are Now
Section 3: The Difference We Hope to Make
__x_ Year 2
Section A: What Progress Have We Made?
Section B: What Changes Do We Suggest?
___ Year 3
Section A: What Have We Accomplished?
Section B: What’s Next?
Required Appendices:
A: Budget History
B1: Course Learning Outcomes Assessment Schedule
B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
C: Program Learning Outcomes
D: A Few Questions
E: New Initiatives
F1: New Faculty Requests
F2: Classified Staffing Requests
F3: FTEF Requests
F4: Academic Learning Support Requests
F5: Supplies and Services Requests
F6: Conference/Travel Requests
F7: Technology and Other Equipment Requests
F8: Facilities
__x__ YEAR TWO
A. What Progress Have We Made?
Complete Appendices A (Budget History), B1 and B2 (CLO's), C (PLO's), and D (A few questions) prior to
writing your narrative. You should also review your most recent success, equity, course sequence,
and enrollment data at http://www.chabotcollege.edu/ProgramReview/Data2013.cfm.
In year one, you established goals and action plans for program improvement. This section asks
you to reflect on the progress you have made toward those goals. This analysis will be used by
the PRBC and Budget Committee to assess progress toward achievement of our Strategic Plan
and to inform future budget decisions. It will also be used by the SLOAC and Basic Skills
committees as input to their priority-setting process. In your narrative of two or less pages,
address the following questions:





What were your year one Program Review goals?
Did you achieve those goals? Specifically describe your progress on the goals you set for
student learning, program learning, and Strategic Plan achievement.
What are you most proud of?
What challenges did you face that may have prevented achieving your goals?
Cite relevant data in your narrative (e.g., efficiency, persistence, success, FT/PT faculty
ratios, CLO/PLO assessment results, external accreditation demands, etc.).
In our Year One Program Review (YOPR), we created action plans for the following goals: hire 2
more faculty members; develop Website with Virtual Lab; Lab Development & Curriculum; the
Speak Easy; Forensics Program Development & Funding; a Media Kit; and updating Curriculum.
We’ve also asked for several years to be moved into the School of Arts/Humanities (now with
Social Science division). We have had some success, some delays, and some lacking support.
We have worked tirelessly (actually we’re often tired) on our Lab and Forensics programs. We
believe that our perseverance is what has led to numerous awards and higher success rates for
our Program. Currently, COMM averages over 100% enrollment and about 70% success.
Students who use our lab (where tutors work with students in Social Sciences and Business
classes, as well) succeed at a much higher rate than students who do not visit the lab. We will
continue to promote our lab to adjunct faculty (who teach almost ¾ of our classes). We will also
try to have the lab open more hours than our current schedule. In addition, we need tutors of
more courses in our area (specifically Persuasion, Interpersonal/Intercultural, and Group
courses). In addition, we need a better way of ‘capturing WSCH’ with our forensics and lab
students. This will demonstrate the amount of time students in Communication Studies actually
spend working/studying/rehearsing in our area. Now that we have an Assistant Coach for the
Forensics program, a newly approved tutor training courses: COMM 70A and 70B, and ongoing
facilities, we can have even greater student success in our area. Further, our AA-T pathway is
becoming very popular. Communication Studies is a versatile AA degree for many of our
1
transfer students. Continuing to offer courses beyond those in the ‘golden four,’ will be
essential to our degree program’s growth.
As we look to other goals on our YOPR : two new hires, website development, and the Speak
Easy, we don’t see much movement. We haven’t had a ‘new’ hire since 2004 and have not
replaced Patti Keeling-Haines’ position. Also, we would like to see a webmaster on Chabot’s
campus to assist with our website and Virtual Lab. In addition, The Speak Easy is a project
focusing on development of staff, faculty and administration public speaking skills. We would
love support in bringing this training back to the campus. We know it is needed. As for our
Media Kit, it is being developed and we are planning to visit a Counseling division meeting in
the future to promote our degree and discuss our future scheduling. Of course, we have to
finalize changes to our course offerings (no longer offering 2B & 30) and develop several
certificates prior to promoting ourselves.
We believe, with administrative and collegial support in hiring additional faculty and developing
accurate WSCH collection, we will have a better load ratio. We will have greater coordination
with our lab, the ability to grow our AA-T program/pathway, as well as, the data to generate
further revenue and research. In addition, we will be able to divvy the load better to
coordinate, mentor, and evaluate adjunct faculty, thus increasing conversations about learning
outcomes and accreditation standards.
Finally, we are most proud of our students and alumni. Each day, we encourage and are witness
to outstanding efforts by them to overcome major fear and anxiety of public speaking; to try
out new conflict management strategies; to appreciate spoken word, storytelling, and dramatic
readings; to relate to people with empathy; to become more mindful listeners; to share
vulnerable and personal information; and to develop communities within our classrooms.
Former students come by to share their successes with speeches in other classes, promotions
at work and within organizations, and their continued dedication to complete their educational
goals. We are a relatively young faculty and now have students reaching graduate school. It is
amazing to hear their stories and we admire their perseverance. Fortunately, our Forensics
alumni come by to visit and mentor our team members. We’re exploring how they might be
inspirational to more of our current students.
2
B. What Changes Do We Suggest?
Review the Strategic Plan goal and key strategies at
http://www.chabotcollege.edu/prbc/StrategicPlan/SPforPR.pdfprior to completing your
narrative. Please complete Appendices E (New Initiatives) and F1-8 (Resources Requested) to
further detail your narrative. Limit your narrative to two pages, and be very specific about
what you hope to achieve, why, and how.
Given your experiences and student achievement results over the past year, what changes do
you suggest to your course/program improvement plan? What new initiatives might you begin to
support the achievement of our Strategic Plan goal? Do you have new ideas to improve student
learning? What are your specific, measurable goals? How will you achieve them? Would any of these
require collaboration with other disciplines or areas of the college? How will make that collaboration
occur?
In a very unsurprising way, our Program Review is all about resources and the lack thereof. We
have successfully navigated tough times and have come out of them in a favorable position,
although we still need help. Being a discipline that has a “bottleneck” we’ve had to make a
number of tough decisions over the last year . We are comfortable with the amount of classes
that have been added back into our discipline and with the decisions we’ve made in order to
alleviate the “bottlenecks” in a thoughtful way. We believe access to our classes, specifically the
Oral Communication requirement, is as good as it could be given the climate. We have done
this while maintaining the integrity of our discipline as a whole; specifically, we are not just a
“speech factory”, where we “just” teach speeches (although a critical part of our program). We
maintained diversity in our course offerings, which reflects the diversity of our discipline. For
instance, we’ve added not only Comm. 1, but also Comm. 20 and 46. All of these classes meet
the Oral Comm. Requirement, but adding variable classes enables us to give students options
in how they achieve this requirement. Also, our addition of Comm. 50 year round allows
students Comm. Studies AA-T majors to achieve their Ed. Goal since COMM50 is a required
course for the major.
We are asking for help in two strategic areas: 1) the Communication Lab, and 2) an increase in
faculty members in our discipline. The Communication Lab is vital to a student’s success in
classes. Our research shows that students who go to the Comm. Lab are dramatically better
suited to pass Comm. Classes. It helps in a number of different and effective ways. However,
the Comm. Lab is understaffed, underfunded, and under-resourced and it needs more support
in order for us to support our students achieving their Ed. Goal. More resources will improve
student learning not only within our discipline, but also campus wide. There are more
justifications elaborated on later in this document.
We also believe that we are due a new Full Time Faculty member. A new faculty member has
not been hired since 2004, when Jason Ames was hired. Veronica Martinez was hired as a
replacement for the retired Dave Arovola and christine warda was hired as a replacement for
Terry Petersen. Patti Keeling-Haines has retired and we were not given a replacement for her.
Additionally, Jason is the only new hire this department has received since Terry Petersen in the
early 1990’s. This means it has now been nearly 20 years with only 1 new hire. Our FT to PT
ratio is nearly 1:3 and it is starting to adversely affect our ability to facilitate student learning. It
3
has become very difficult to evaluate adjuncts, review courses/course material, keep up to date
with new trends, develop new curriculum, complete Program Reviews and SLO’s, and attend
conferences. Health Communication is a growing field and we know we can do so much more
with technology and on-line learning but we simply do not have the time or resources. The lack
of FT faculty is leading to the burnout of 3 young, talented, and popular instructors. Finally,
disciplines of a similar WSCH to FTE ratio have more full timers than we do and we’re kind of
jealous about it.
Finally, we believe our new ideas will benefit the school as a whole, while helping to assist
students in achieving their Ed. Goal. First, we are advocating for hosting a “Great Debate”
program. This is discussed below, but the idea is to coordinate multiple disciplines on campus,
community members, and the Chabot Forensics team to debate about an idea that is important
to the school/community. This would give students a first-hand look at how government
operates and how public speaking/argumentation/performance interact with policy.
This activity would require much collaboration with a number of different groups campus wide.
An obvious first place to start would be any law/policy based classes. This would include
Business Law (Hi Jan!), the Law and Democracy groups, Political Science, and History. Also, we
would clearly outreach to other disciplines on campus depending on the topic. Again, however,
this is dependent on resources as we currently do not have the faculty power to facilitate this
program.
4
Appendix A: Budget History and Impact
Audience: Budget Committee, PRBC, and Administrators
Purpose: This analysis describes your history of budget requests from the previous two years and
the impacts of funds received and needs that were not met. This history of documented need
can both support your narrative in Section A and provide additional information for Budget
Committee recommendations.
Instructions: Please provide the requested information, and fully explain the impact of the budget
decisions.
Category
Classified Staffing (# of positions)
Supplies & Services
Technology/Equipment
Other (Forensics)
TOTAL
2012-13
Budget
Requested
12,000
12,000
2012-13
Budget
Received
8,000
8,000
2013-14
Budget
Requested
Tutor funds
0
2345.68
12,000
14345.68
2013-14
Budget
Received
Tutor funds
100
0
8,000
8100.00
1. How has your investment of the budget monies you did receive improved student learning? When
you requested the funding, you provided a rationale. In this section, assess if the anticipated
positive impacts you projected have, in fact, been realized.
Hey Jason!
I hope you are well! I just finished my two week Winter class, which went well. Actually, it ended on a great note
following the presentation that my group gave for our final project. I truly believe that my success during the
presentation was a direct impact of having such an amazing debate coach and is a testament to all the hard work
that you put in with helping me organize my thoughts and perfect my structure for speech. The class was small,
only about 12 people. Instead of a written final, we (groups of 3) had to give a final presentation of our own
research study that was conducted outside the classroom. On a quick side note, I was under a lot of pressure,
because the professor that taught the course (who btw is apparently one of the toughest in the department and
can be harsh, yet good) is the same professor who's lab I'm currently working under; and the Graduate TA for the
course, is the one who I am an RA for. So, doing well and asking the right questions, etc, etc, was well..kindasorta
important, just a little ya know, and I sure as heck was nervous about it and was wondering what the heck did I get
myself into!!!! Anyways, so the day of the presentation, all the graduate student were there, many lab members,
the professors and a few other important people. I did the introduction and the methods section of the
presentation and a bit of the conclusion. You taught me that practice makes perfect (considering how many times
we had to cut the speech to get it under time and practicing it over and over and over again until it was just right),
and so I practiced several times and I attempted to slow down,(since all the nerves make me talk even faster than
normal). I could see a great deal of impressed audience members as I delivered my speech and I even got a lot of
laughs as I added a bit of humor into the presentation. During the Q&A rounds, which I feared the most, we
surprisingly did really well. As I answered questions from the lab manager and a 2nd year Graduate student (who
btw, said she was going to make us cry because she was going to ask us tough questions), the professor said, "Now
that's a graduate level answer."At the end of the day, the Graduate students said they were thoroughly impressed,
and that they saw a lot of my "shy" nature fade away and more of my personality shine through. My graduate TA
Billy, the same person that I'm an RA for, said that a lot of his fellow graduate students spoke afterwards and told
him that he has one heck of an RA, and he personally told me that I made him look good as I presented well. To top
it off, the professor himself at the end said, "I'm truly impressed Akanksha, you did really well, you are just so
natural up there." This was and is all thanks to you and your awesome coaching skills. I was quite nervous as I was
going to present, but somehow after a couple of minutes, my nerves calmed down and I worked my way through it
5
all. All of the hours practicing and gaining confidence in my speaking ability while having a coach that put in a lot of
time and effort and showed a great deal of compassion for his students definitely made a world difference for me
during my presentation. I already knew it before, and had no doubt, but just reiterate, those practices, long hauling
tournaments were well worth it for sure! Great coach, + tournaments, allowed for my communication/presenting
skills to literally speak for themselves, leaving a lasting impression on everyone else. Thank you so much Jason!
Best,
Akanksha
*************************************************************************************
Background: Last year, Kelsey Paiz was on the National team. One of her events was Communication
Analysis, where students take a communication artifact and apply a communication theory to the
artifact in order to discern the rhetorical implications and/or applications of that artifact. She
transferred to Sacramento State, where she is now a Communication major. I received this e-mail from
her:
Hi Jason,
So I was just reading through my syllabus for one of my classes this semester, and there was a page called
"Assignment Structure" that notes the following:
1. Interesting Introduction (inclu. message or artifact being analyzed, research question and contribution to larger
theory) 2. Describe Artifact 3. Describe Method of Analysis (Unit of Analysis) 4. Report Findings 5. Conclusions
So basically what I'm saying is: Thank you.
Our Lab and Forensics Programs continue to be highly regarded even with low budgets. We have been
able to serve hundreds of students in the lab, thanks to our great tutors and tutor coordinator, Veronica
Martinez.
2. What has been the impact of not receiving some of your requested funding? How has student
learning been impacted, or safety compromised, or enrollment or retention negatively impacted?
As with most disciplines, our budget is trending downwards. This impacts our Forensics program,
Communication Lab, and overall instruction/staffing. In the last 3 years, the budget for the Forensics
team has decreased from over $12,000 in 2008-09 to a little over $8,000 in 2013-14. This hurts the
program, but it also affects the discipline as well. First, it makes travel to tournaments more difficult.
This season, the team has been unable to travel to any tournaments outside the Northern California
region (except for the National Tournament), hurting the team’s National competitiveness. It also
affects the education of the Forensics student, as their exposure to speeches, arguments, performances,
and critiques of their own material is limited. Forensics students make up a good number of our
Communication Studies majors, taking numerous Comm. classes from different instructors. Forensics
students also present speeches to COMM classes, and to the College as a whole. This year we have put
together a compilation of videos of past Forensics competitions and performances in order to show
them to COMM students as examples of required speeches, serving a much needed service to the
student population at large. This year we have put on our semi-annual “Speak Up” which had over 100
students fill the Little Theater. Finally in February of 2012 we hosted the Northern California Forensics
Association Spring Championship tournament, making the school thousands of dollars (maintenance
costs, etc) while exposing our campus to the best and brightest speakers in the nation.
However, the team is financially on the brink. ANY further cuts to the team will most likely result in a
6
restriction of tournaments, a restriction of students attending tournaments, and, almost assuredly, an
elimination of the National Tournament from our schedule. We will be limited to only regional and
State tournaments. This would effectively destroy the Forensics team as it has been known for over 30
years. Thus, we ask for an increase in the budget from its current state back to its previous state of
$12,000 a year. With this rate, the team will be able to travel to one or two tournaments outside of our
region, enabling us to better prepare competitively but to also better educate students in the Forensics
class and better serve our campus as a whole.
The Communication Lab is also in need of better funding. Veronica Martinez has been essential and
brilliantly creative in finding funding for the lab, but this funding is temporary through Title III grants.
She has also written curriculum that enables us to staff the lab through units instead of financial
compensation, but once the grant money runs out, we may not be able to staff “Lab Leads”, who are
currently paid. The Communication Lab needs a permanent funding source, and one that is not reliant
on grants or the WRAC/Building 100 project, as we are often an afterthought in that project.
We still struggle with providing practice space for public speaking students and are unsure if the Building
100 renovation will be adequate for our needs.
The Communication Lab is also in need of more supplies, equipment, and pedagogical materials which
also need a permanent funding source. The supplies budget is minimal at best, despite a great need for
funding. There is currently only one computer in the lab, limiting the ability for students coming to the
lab to receive support for research elements of the speech. Additionally, there is no current mode for
students to practice power point presentations. This is because we do not have a projector or screen in
the performance space. Power Point presentations, and/or the simple use of presentation aids, are vital
to the education of a public speaker. This program has been a great success, as it serves the campus.
94% of students who visit the Comm. Lab pass their Comm. Studies class and students who visit the lab
have a higher success rate than students who don’t visit the lab. This is a successful program and we
need support to reach its enormous capabilities and to enable us to serve more students more often.
7
Appendix B1: Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Reporting Schedule
I.
Course-Level Student Learning Outcomes & Assessment Reporting
(CLO-Closing the Loop).
A. Check One of the Following:

No CLO-CTL forms were completed during this PR year. No Appendix B2 needs to be
submitted with this Year’s Program Review. Note: All courses must be assessed once
at least once every three years.
x Yes, CLO-CTL were completed for one or more courses during the current Year’s
Program Review. Complete Appendix B2 (CLO-CTL Form) for each course assessed this
year and include in this Program Review.
B. Calendar Instructions:
List all courses considered in this program review and indicate which year each course Closing
The Loop form was submitted in Program Review by marking submitted in the correct column.
Course
This Year’s Program
Review
*CTL forms must be
included with this PR.
*List one course per line.
Add more rows as
needed.
COMM 1
Last Year’s Program
Review
2-Years Prior
*Note: These courses
must be assessed in the
next PR year.
x
COMM 2
x
COMM 3
x
COMM 6
x
COMM 10
x
COMM 11
x
COMM 20
x
COMM 46
x
COMM 48
COMM 50
x
x
COMM 70 A/B
x
8
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course-Level Assessment Reflections.
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
COMM 50
Spring 2013
1
1
100%
Fall 2013
Jason, Veronica, christine
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported in this
Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student Learning Outcomes
Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
70% - 3 or 4
60% - 3 or 4
80% - 3 or 4
86% - 3 or 4
(CLO) 3: Practice collaborative group decision-making.
70% - 3 or 4
79% - 3 or 4
(CLO) 4: Adopt an ethical perspective when presenting
original ideas and/or incorporating the ideas of others
80% - 3 or 4
97% - 3 or 4
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1: Recognize, define, and apply the principles of
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
communication theory.
(CLO) 2: Listen to, evaluate, and respond appropriately to
the ideas of others.
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
9
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
A. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Slightly lower
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
This is a new course; only the second semester being offered. We are rotating the
teaching of this course, so we have been working together on the types of assignments
we should be using to develop our students’ understanding of key theories and concepts.
We will continue to work together to find consistency and success in this area.
B. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Above target
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
Continue to model appropriate listening and encouraging students to engage one
another in respectful, critical listening exercises and speaking opportunities.
10
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Above target
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
Continue to assign and facilitate group projects.
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Above target
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
Continue to require work with required sources and to demonstrate appropriate ways of
incorporating research into their work.
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
11
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
1. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
None yet. One of our colleagues still has to teach the course. We offer it once a year and
rotate teaching, so it is imperative all try it to see what insights we might have.
2. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
We are creating a Gender communication course based on conversations in this class.
3. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
12
Appendix C: Program Learning Outcomes
Considering your feedback, findings, and/or information that has arisen from the course level
discussions, please reflect on each of your Program Level Outcomes.
Program: ____COMM AA-T__

PLO #1: Pursue and evaluate knowledge through the skills of inquiry research and critical
thinking.

PLO #2: Demonstrate effective skills in written and spoken communication.

PLO #3:

PLO #4:
What questions or investigations arose as a result of these reflections or discussions?
Are two PLOs enough? Do each of our classes promote these ideas?
What program-level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
Yes. These ideas inform our curriculum.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of
students completing your program?
Find new ways to assess, as the elumen data-gathering is not producing insightful conversations.
Think about using qualitative inquiry and methodology to assess, including focus groups and
interviews with students.
Program: ___SPEECH COMM AA__
 PLO #1: Pursue and evaluate knowledge through the skills of inquiry research and critical
thinking.

PLO #2: Demonstrate effective skills in written and spoken communication.

PLO #3:

PLO #4:

13
What questions or investigations arose as a result of these reflections or discussions?
What is the need for both AA degrees? What is the difference of this to the AA-T?
What program-level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
See above.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of
students completing your program?
See above.
14
Appendix D: A Few Questions
Please answer the following questions with "yes" or "no". For any questions answered "no",
please provide an explanation. No explanation is required for "yes" answers :-)
1. Have all of your course outlines been updated within the past five years? Yes
2. Have all of your courses been offered within the past five years? If no, why should those
courses remain in our college catalog? Yes (those that have not are being archived in Fall 2013)
3. Do all of your courses have the required number of CLOs completed, with corresponding
rubrics? If no, identify the CLO work you still need to complete, and your timeline for
completing that work this semester COMM 70 A & B still need CLOs
4. Have you assessed all of your courses and completed "closing the loop" forms for all of your
courses within the past three years? If no, identify which courses still require this work, and
your timeline for completing that work this semester. Yes, except new courses.
5. Have you developed and assessed PLOs for all of your programs? If no, identify programs which
still require this work, and your timeline to complete that work this semester. Yes
6. If you have course sequences, is success in the first course a good predictor of success in the
subsequent course(s)? N/A
Does successful completion of College-level Math and/or English correlate positively with
success in your courses? If not, explain why you think this may be. We are still waiting for data
to support hypothesis that completion of ENGL 1A is still recommended for COMM courses.
15
Appendix E: Proposal for New Initiatives (Complete for each new initiative)
Audience: Deans/Unit Administrators, PRBC, Foundation, Grants Committee, College Budget Committee
Purpose: A “New Initiative” is a new project or expansion of a current project that supports our Strategic Plan. The project will require the support
of additional and/or outside funding. The information you provide will facilitate and focus the research and development process for finding both
internal and external funding.
How does your initiative address the college's Strategic Plan goal, or significantly improve student learning?
Our initiative is to produce and offer the Great Debate for students in Fall 2014. We believe Public Sphere Pedagogy helps students
understand how their class work translates to community participation and engagement. It gives meaning to work done inside the classroom.
In addition, it is modeled after Chico State’s First Year Experience program, which seeks to create a stronger level of confidence and
persistence in participating students.
What is your specific goal and measurable outcome?
Have a majority of COMM students participate in the event and see higher levels of persistence and success data compared to students who
don’t participate.
What is your action plan to achieve your goal?
Coordinate with CIN! and Law & Democracy Project
Target
Completion
Date
Dec. 2014
Required Budget (Split out
personnel, supplies, other
categories)
3 CAH
Coordinate with the City and Community Partners
Dec. 2014
3 CAH
Activity (brief description)
How will you manage the personnel needs?
New Hires:
Faculty # of positions
Classified staff # of positions
Reassigning existing employee(s) to the project; employee(s) current workload will be:
Covered by overload or part-time employee(s)
Covered by hiring temporary replacement(s)
Other, explain
16
At the end of the project period, the proposed project will:
Be completed (onetime only effort)
Require additional funding to continue and/or institutionalize the project
here
(obtained by/from):need help
Will the proposed project require facility modifications, additional space, or program relocation?
No
Yes, explain:
Will the proposed project involve subcontractors, collaborative partners, or cooperative agreements?
No
Yes, explain: Requires collaboration with other faculty members.
Do you know of any grant funding sources that would meet the needs of the proposed project?
No
Yes, list potential funding sources:
How does your initiative address the college's Strategic Plan goal, or significantly improve student learning?
Participate in CTE – Career, GE, and other Pathways conversations and support other disciplines with COMM courses.
What is your specific goal and measurable outcome?
Assist colleagues with basic skills development for other programs – higher completion rates across varied disciplines.
What is your action plan to achieve your goal?
Attend conferences/meetings
Target
Completion
Date
2014
Required Budget (Split out
personnel, supplies, other
categories)
unsure
Develop curriculum
2014
Time - CAH
Activity (brief description)
17
How will you manage the personnel needs?
New Hires:
Faculty # of positions 1-2 Classified staff # of positions
Reassigning existing employee(s) to the project; employee(s) current workload will be:
Covered by overload or part-time employee(s)
Covered by hiring temporary replacement(s)
Other, explain
At the end of the project period, the proposed project will:
Be completed (onetime only effort)
Require additional funding to continue and/or institutionalize the project
(obtained by/from):
Will the proposed project require facility modifications, additional space, or program relocation?
No
Yes, explain:
Will the proposed project involve subcontractors, collaborative partners, or cooperative agreements?
No
Yes, explain:
Do you know of any grant funding sources that would meet the needs of the proposed project?
No
Yes, list potential funding sources: HIP, HIS grants
How does your initiative address the college's Strategic Plan goal, or significantly improve student learning?
Counseling and General “Media Tour”
What is your specific goal and measurable outcome?
Describe and provide materials to campus personnel to have a better understanding of our program and degrees/certificates.
What is your action plan to achieve your goal?
Activity (brief description)
Produce media materials
Target
Completion
Date
2014
18
Required Budget (Split out
personnel, supplies, other
categories)
Supplies/Copies
Meet with different groups to present and answer questions
2014
Time
How will you manage the personnel needs?
New Hires:
Faculty # of positions
Classified staff # of positions
Reassigning existing employee(s) to the project; employee(s) current workload will be:
Covered by overload or part-time employee(s)
Covered by hiring temporary replacement(s)
Other, explain
At the end of the project period, the proposed project will:
Be completed (onetime only effort)
Require additional funding to continue and/or institutionalize the project
Will the proposed project require facility modifications, additional space, or program relocation?
No
Yes, explain: We would still like to move to School of the Arts.
Will the proposed project involve subcontractors, collaborative partners, or cooperative agreements?
No
Yes, explain:
Do you know of any grant funding sources that would meet the needs of the proposed project?
No
Yes, list potential funding sources:
19
(obtained by/from):
Appendix F1: Full-Time Faculty/Adjunct Staffing Request(s) [Acct. Category 1000]
Audience: Faculty Prioritization Committee and Administrators
Purpose: Providing explanation and justification for new and replacement positions for full-time faculty and adjuncts
Instructions: Please justify the need for your request. Discuss anticipated improvements in student learning and contribution to the Strategic Plan
goal. Cite evidence and data to support your request, including enrollment management data (EM Summary by Term) for the most recent three
years, student success and retention data , and any other pertinent information. Data is available at
http://www.chabotcollege.edu/ProgramReview/Data2013.cfm.
1. Number of new faculty requested in this discipline: __2_
PLEASE LIST IN RANK
ORDER
STAFFING REQUESTS (1000) FACULTY
Position
Replacement
Faculty
New Faculty
Description
To replace
Patti KeelingHaines
Growth
Position to
accommodate
increased
workload and
pathways
discussions
Faculty (1000)
Program/Unit
Division/Area
Communication
Studies
Language Arts/SOTA?
Communication
Studies
Language Arts/SOTA?
Rationale for your proposal. Please use the enrollment management data. Data that will strengthen your rationale include FTES trends over
the last 5 years, FT/PT faculty ratios, recent retirements in your division, total number of full time and part-time faculty in the division, total
number of students served by your division, FTEF in your division, CLO and PLO assessment results and external accreditation demands.
20
1. We have been asking for a new hire since 2004 to accommodate the size of our program and commitment to serving the majority of students
on this campus. We have been asking to replace Patti Keeling-Haines position, as well. We were dismayed to discover, however, that we are
ranked lower than other disciplines for this replacement position in last year’s Program Review. Some could interpret the rankings as allowing
another discipline to receive multiple replacement positions before we receive one. Some have even argued that disciplines who have more
recent retirees than we do should receive those positions before we receive one. To do this would be at best unfair and at worst destructive to
our program and morale. Additionally, cuts in faculty to our program our more proportionally detrimental than cuts to other programs. When
we lost Patti Keeling-Haines to retirement that was 25% of our department. However, when 2 English Faculty retire that is still only 10% of their
department. This should be taken into account when reinstating Full-Time retirees.
2. Currently (Fall 2013), we have 38 sections. 12 are taught by Full-Time Faculty. That translates to 32% - 68% split of FT/PT ratio. This impacts
our ability to complete SLOs, PT faculty evaluations, and participate in campus-wide dialogues on pathways and basic skills.
3. Our majors have increased dramatically since we began offering our AA-T. In fact, since Fall 2010, we have seen almost a 200% increase –
from 17 majors to 49 declared in Fall 2013. (Although the data on the IR website does not indicate if the majors are for our Speech Comm AA or
our Communication Studies AA-T.) Our COMM 50 section, capstone/intro course required for our AA-T, has filled each semester for the last
three (30 students each semester) and we anticipate this pathway to continue to grow.
4. As a “bottleneck” area, and a program that meets 2 of the Golden Four general education classes, we are truly unable to accommodate the
number of students that the campus and the State seeks to move forward. From Fall 2010 to Spring 2013, we were able to accommodate
approx. 5400 students. Since there are approx. 9000 GE/Transfer students currently at Chabot, we do not see how we can serve these students
in three years, even if we hire these two positions.
5. Our full-time faculty are strong participants in campus-wide dialogue and shared governance. Jason has been an active member of Faculty
Senate and is now stepping over to be an Accreditation Lead. christine has stepped into the Staff Development and Center for Teaching and
Learning Coordinator role. Veronica works with the Learning Connection and teaches tutors in all disciplines. We appreciate being active in
campus discourse, but our program is not sustainable without full-time faculty leadership. We may have to step back further to ensure our
program continues to grow and thrive.
2. Statements about the alignment with the strategic plan and your student learning goals are required. Indicate here any information from
advisory committees or outside accreditation reviews that is pertinent to the proposal.
We would like to be included in conversations with CTE and Career Pathways to assist those programs with their program development and the
inclusion of Communication as a basic skill to those areas – we just lack the time to do so. We would like to participate in conversations about
thematic GE pathways, but do not have the time to do this either. We would like to maintain a solid pathway in Communication and CIN!
(Change it Now!) but we struggle to maintain coordination of these areas and remaining dynamic in the classroom. We need help. We like to
think we are rockstars and can do everything…but unfortunately, we are finding ourselves spread thin and unable to participate in the number of
dialogues that a Communication program should be involved in – as an essential component in GE/Transfer Pathways and as an asset to
specialized pathways (including our own).
21
Appendix F2: Classified Staffing Request(s) including Student Assistants [Acct. Category 2000]
Audience: Administrators, PRBC
Purpose: Providing explanation and justification for new and replacement positions for full-time and part-time regular (permanent) classified
professional positions (new, augmented and replacement positions). Remember, student assistants are not to replace Classified Professional
staff.
Instructions: Please justify the need for your request. Discuss anticipated improvements in student learning and contribution to the Strategic Plan
goal, safety, mandates, and accreditation issues. Please cite any evidence or data to support your request. If this position is categorically funded,
include and designate the funding source of new categorically-funded position where continuation is contingent upon available funding.
1. Number of positions requested: _____
STAFFING REQUESTS (2000) CLASSIFIED PROFESSIONALS
Position
Classified Professional Staff (2000)
Description
Program/Unit
STAFFING REQUESTS (2000) STUDENT ASSISTANTS
Postion
Description
Student Assistants (2000)
Program/Unit
22
PLEASE LIST IN RANK
ORDER
Division/Area
PLEASE LIST IN RANK
ORDER
Division/Area
2. Rationale for your proposal.
3. Statements about the alignment with the strategic plan and program review are required. Indicate here any information from advisory
committees or outside accreditation reviews that is pertinent to the proposal.
23
Appendix F3: FTEF Requests
Audience: Administrators, CEMC, PRBC
Purpose: To recommend changes in FTEF allocations for subsequent academic year and guide Deans and
CEMC in the allocation of FTEF to disciplines. For more information, see Article 29 (CEMC) of the Faculty
Contract.
Instructions: In the area below, please list your requested changes in course offerings (and
corresponding request in FTEF) and provide your rationale for these changes. Be sure to analyze
enrollment trends and other relevant data
athttp://www.chabotcollege.edu/ProgramReview/Data2013.cfm.
COURSE
COMM 46
CURRENT
FTEF
(2013-14)
ADDITIONAL
FTEF
NEEDED
CURRENT
SECTIONS
ADDITIONAL
SECTIONS
NEEDED
CURRENT
STUDENT #
SERVED
ADDITIONAL
STUDENT #
SERVED
1.2
.40
6
2
150
50
1. COMM 46 meets both the Oral Communication and Critical Thinking requirements. We believe that
offering more sections of this course will be beneficial to decreasing the bottlenecks of those areas.
2. This course averages 112% enrollment.
3. When looking to repeater data for COMM 1, we see that half of the students who attempt to repeat
the course, withdraw or fail. We would like to encourage COMM 46 as an alternative for students trying
to meet their Oral Communication requirement. Most of the speeches are team or group projects, and
these tend to be most helpful for high-speech anxiety students – which we feel many of the repeaters
are.
4. Now that COMM 46 is a part of the CIN program, one of our existing sections will be devoted to CIN
students, this will affect other general education students looking to complete their Oral
Communication and Critical Thinking requirements. We believe in having COMM 46 as a part of the
Social Justice Learning Community, but we would like campus/institutional support to do this.
24
Appendix F4: Academic Learning Support Requests [Acct. Category 2000]
Audience: Administrators, PRBC, Learning Connection
Purpose: Providing explanation and justification for new and replacement student assistants (tutors, learning assistants, lab assistants,
supplemental instruction, etc.).
Instructions: Please justify the need for your request. Discuss anticipated improvements in student learning and contribution to the Strategic Plan
goal. Please cite any evidence or data to support your request. If this position is categorically funded, include and designate the funding source of
new categorically-funded position where continuation is contingent upon available funding.
1. Number of positions requested: Maintain 8-12 tutors in the COMM LAB & 1-3 Paid Lead tutors
2. If you are requesting more than one position, please rank order the positions.
Position
Description
Peer advisors taking COMM 70A / 70B
1. Tutors
Peer advisors earning scholarships through Learning Connection. In
2. Lead Tutors
addition to peer advising, they perform data collection, campus
outreach, and liaison between tutors, faculty, and Learning
Connection staff.
3.
4.
3. Rationale for your proposal based on your program review conclusions. Include anticipated impact on student learning outcomes and
alignment with the strategic plan goal. Indicate if this request is for the same, more, or fewer academic learning support positions.
Communication Studies instructors have continually used student assistants in the classroom and peer advisors in the
Communication Lab.
Since 2010 the Communication Lab in Room 803 has had a steady growth of students coming to see our peer advisors. For example,
according to the College of Instructional Research, we had 287 visits in Spring 2011 and 391 visits in Fall 2011. In a study of success
rates from Fall 2009-Spring 2011 our COMM 1 students had a 94% success rate. In other words, the students who visit the Lab have
higher success rates than students who do not use the Lab. Furthermore in this same study, the withdraw rate was 0%, confirming
students stay in class when they receive support. According to the College of Instructional Research, “higher success rates mean
more students can go on to the next course rather than repeating the course and preventing others from taking it. This increases
the number of students that Chabot can serve as well as the number of students who can succeed, persist, graduate, and transfer.”
We can only further emphasize this fact as COMM 1 is a GE requirement all students must pass. In 2012, we did not see an increase
in student visits but maintained approximately 250 visits per semester despite the fact that our number of tutors declined. And in
25
Spring 2013, our numbers dramatically increased to 683 students visiting the Lab. The number of tutors also increased.
The Comm Lab is currently open Monday –Thursday from 10am-5pm (depending on staff/tutor availability). Ideally we would like to
be open approx 28 hours per week with 2 tutors working in the Lab at all times. This requires 3 things: Lab supervision by faculty,
peer advisors, and an instructor to teach the corresponding COMM 70 courses. Currently there is no pay for staff to oversee the
Lab (as in previous years). We rely on faculty to work office hours in the Lab and/or simply make themselves available. Many of our
faculty make themselves available because they know the value of the Lab but this is not ideal to ask for continued service without
compensation.
In 2011 the Learning Connection informed us there would not be enough money to fund the number of tutors needed to maintain
previously noted standards. We knew this would not be acceptable because the number of students visiting the Lab was growing.
So we brainstormed an alternative method. With the help of Title III grant money, we designed and implemented a new
experimental course, a Communication Tutor course, COMM 4902. Now students earn units instead of pay. The experimental
course has now expired and the new COMM 70A & COMM 70B courses are implemented and successful. The focus on tutoring as a
learned skill instead of a job is more accurate and many students appreciate the units. But this still requires money. Title III money
has run out for us so we need the Division to add these new courses to the budget. This becomes more imperative as we continue
to grow.
The Learning Connection continues to provide some financial support for our tutors. We use this scholarship for Lead tutors, 1-3
veteran tutors who have completed at least one semester of tutoring. It is necessary to maintain Lead tutors, 3 per semester would
be ideal, to role-model skills for new tutors, perform data collection, campus outreach, and liaison between tutors, faculty, and
Learning Connection staff.
Note: In order for the Lab to run smoothly there has to be faculty to supervise, train, write curriculum, data collection,
troubleshooting, assessment, etc. The Communication Lab needs a permanent funding source, and one that is not reliant on
grants or temporary solutions.
26
Appendix F5: Supplies & Services Requests [Acct. Category 4000 and 5000]
Audience: Administrators, Budget Committee, PRBC
Purpose: To request funding for supplies and service, and to guide the Budget Committee in allocation of funds.
Instructions: In the area below, please list both your current and requested budgets for categories 4000 and 5000 in priority order. Do NOT
include conferences and travel, which are submitted on Appendix M6. Justify your request and explain in detail any requested funds beyond
those you received this year. Please also look for opportunities to reduce spending, as funds are very limited.
Supplies Requests [Acct. Category 4000]
Instructions:
1. There should be a separate line item for supplies needed and an amount.
For items purchased in bulk, list the unit cost and provide the total in the "Amount" column.
2. Make sure you include the cost of tax and shipping for items purchased.
Priority 1: Are critical requests required to sustain a program (if not acquired, program may be in peril) or to meet mandated requirements of local,
state or federal regulations or those regulations of a accrediting body for a program.
Priority 2: Are needed requests that will enhance a program but are not so critical as to jeopardize the life of a program if not
received in the requested academic year.
Priority 3: Are requests that are enhancements, non-critical resource requests that would be nice to have and would bring additional benefit to the program.
2013-14
2014-15
Request
needed totals in all areas Request
Requested Received
Description
Amount
47.2
Vend
or
Giant
Ampl
ivox
Pres
entat
ion
Time
r
81.99
Safe
47.2
0
Timer
Lecturn
81.99
0
27
Division/Unit
Priority #1
Priority #2
COMM
Lab/Bldg
100
x
COMM
x
Priority #3
69.86
Tripods (3)
0
69.86
co
Adju
stabl
e
Podi
um
Adju
stabl
e
Tele
scopi
ng
Tripo
d
Ease
l, 38”
to
66”
High,
Alum
inum
,
Blac
k
(51E
)
Lab/Bldg
100
Comm
Lab/Bldg
100
x
Contracts and Services Requests [Acct. Category 5000]
Instructions:
1. There should be a separate line item for each contract or service.
2. Travel costs should be broken out and then totaled (e.g., airfare, mileage, hotel, etc.)
Priority 1: Are critical requests required to sustain a program (if not acquired, program may be in peril) or to meet mandated
requirements of local,
state or federal regulations or those regulations of a accrediting body for a program.
28
Priority 2: Are needed requests that will enhance a program but are not so critical as to jeopardize the life of a program if not received in
the requested academic year.
Priority 3: Are requests that are enhancements, non-critical resource requests that would be nice to have and would bring additional
benefit to the program.
augmentations only
Description
Amount
Vendor
Division/Unit
29
Priority #1
Priority #2
Priority #3
Appendix F6: Conference and Travel Requests [ Acct. Category 5000]
Audience: Staff Development Committee, Administrators, Budget Committee, PRBC
Purpose: To request funding for conference attendance, and to guide the Budget and Staff Development Committees in allocation of funds.
Instructions:Please list specific conferences/training programs, including specific information on the name of the conference and location. Note
that the Staff Development Committee currently has no budget, so this data is primarily intended to identify areas of need that could perhaps be
fulfilled on campus, and to establish a historical record of need. Your rationale should discuss student learning goals and/or connection to the
Strategic Plan goal.
Description
Western States Communication
Association Conference
National Communication
Association Annual Convention
National Association of
Communication Centers
Phi Rho Pi National Convention
Amount
$1200
Vendor
WSCA
$1500 NCA
Priority Priority Priority
Division/Dept
#1
#2
#3
Comm
Studies
Comm
Studies
x
As faculty, we often present and
attend this conference. We have
access to larger discipline
conversations, great ideas for
teaching (GIFTs), and statewide
SLO work.
X
See above. It is important for us
to meet and discuss trends,
innovations, and challenges.
$1000 NACC
Comm
Studies
X
$1000 Phi Rho Pi
Comm
Studies
X
30
Notes
See above. It is important for us
to learn more about other Comm
labs/centers so that we can be
innovative with ours.
See above. Each night of the
convention there are business
meetings to address/adjust rules
in intercollegiate forensics
competition. We want a voice
and to stay current to ensure our
students are prepared and
successful.
Northern California Forensics
Association Coaches Conference
$500 NCFA
Comm
Studies
31
x
This allows us to stay in
conversation and dialogue with
other Nor. Cal schools to ensure
we’re up to date with
requirements and other rule
changes, trends, and best
practices.
Appendix F7: Technology and Other Equipment Requests [Acct. Category 6000]
Audience: Budget Committee, Technology Committee, Administrators
Purpose: To be read and responded to by Budget Committee and to inform priorities of the Technology Committee.
Instructions: Please fill in the following as needed to justify your requests .If you're requesting classroom technology, see
http://www.chabotcollege.edu/audiovisual/Chabot%20College%20Standard.pdf for the brands/model numbers that are our current standards.
If requesting multiple pieces of equipment, please rank order those requests. Include shipping cost and taxes in your request.
Instructions:
1. For each piece of equipment, there should be a separate line item for each piece and
an amount. Please note: Equipment requests are for equipment whose unit cost exceeds $200.
Items which are less expensive should be requested as supplies. Software licenses should also be
requested as supplies.
2.
For bulk items, list the unit cost and provide the total in the "Amount" column.
Make sure you include the cost of tax and shipping for items purchased.
Priority 1: Are critical requests required to sustain a program (if not acquired, program may be
in peril) or to meet mandated requirements of local,
state or federal regulations or those regulations of a accrediting body for a program.
Priority 2: Are needed requests that will enhance a program but are not so critical as to
jeopardize the life of a program if not received in the requested academic year.
Priority 3: Are requests that are enhancements, non-critical resource requests that would be
nice to have and would bring additional benefit to the program.
Description
Laptop Computer
Desktop Computer
Copier
Amount
448
Vendor
Division/Unit
HP Turion II P540
Communication Studies - Lab
459.95 HP Intel Pentium
Canon
imageCLASS
266.05 D480
32
Priority #1
Priority #2
x
Communication Studies Lab
x
Communication Studies Lab
x
Priority #3
Desktop Monitor
Projector Screen
DVD Player
HP Energy
Efficient Essential
146.99 Series
Epson Duet Ultra
124.99 Portable
Philips PET729
Elmo Document Camera
Rolling Computer Lab
Projector
Sony Bravia VPL599.99 BW7
Communication Studies Lab
Communication Studies Lab
Communication Studies Lab
Communication Studies Lab
Building 100 - Comm
Studies Lab
Communication Studies Lab
x
x
x
x
x
x
In terms of technology, currently the Lab has one laptop for tutors to input necessary data for the Learning Connection.
We need more laptops for students to research presentation topics, draft outlines, and create visual aids.
Our Comm Lab also lacks up-to-date presentation aides for students to rehearse. In the future, we need a set-up as close to a SMART
classroom as possible; projector, screen, computer with internet access and Power Point, DVD player, CD player, and document camera. This
can be done in the remodel of Bldg 100.
We also need video-taping equipment to record student speeches. This is an essential rehearsal tool and can be a requirement for some classes.
This requires a video camera with good microphone and tripod. Currently this is part of the plan for Building 100, but it is still in planning stages.
In these plans, there will also be computer stations. We require the following programs: Word, Power Point, and a Dictionary with auditory
pronunciation and headphones.
In addition, we need multiple laptop computers for the Forensics team. Technology has become ever more necessary for Debate, as many
students use it for research both in and out of rounds. Additionally, we use google docs as a team in order to share files, teaching materials, and
for one on one coaching.
33
Appendix F8: Facilities Requests
Audience: Facilities Committee, Administrators
Purpose: To be read and responded to by Facilities Committee.
Background: Following the completion of the 2012 Chabot College Facility Master Plan, the Facilities Committee (FC) has begun the task of reprioritizing Measure B Bond budgets to better align with current needs. The FC has identified approximately $18M in budgets to be used to meet
capital improvement needs on the Chabot College campus. Discussion in the FC includes holding some funds for a year or two to be used as match
if and when the State again funds capital projects, and to fund smaller projects that will directly assist our strategic goal. The FC has determined
that although some of the college's greatest needs involving new facilities cannot be met with this limited amount of funding, there are many
smaller pressing needs that could be addressed. The kinds of projects that can be legally funded with bond dollars include the "repairing,
constructing, acquiring, equipping of classrooms, labs, sites and facilities." Do NOT use this form for equipment or supply requests.
Instructions: Please fill in the following as needed to justify your requests .If requesting more than one facilities project, please rank order your
requests.
Brief Title of Request (Project Name): New library/Learning Connection space
Building/Location: Building 100
Description of the facility project. Please be as specific as possible.
The Communication Lab is currently located in room 803. The space is an improvement from WRAC but still lacks several
criteria for a productive performance space. We need a space that has technology essential for presentations, sound proofing,
and a larger /addition space.
Mike Seaton, Senior Instructional Support, informed us that room 803 is not capable of the technology that is required for
presentation preparation. We need a set-up as close to a SMART classroom as possible. This includes a projector, screen,
computer with internet access and Power Point, DVD player, CD, player, and document camera. We also need a space that is
equipped to record speeches in a quiet, enclosed space.
In terms of soundproofing, we rehearse many dramatic performances in the Lab and instructors in the adjoining classroom
come in to our space at least once per semester, demanding we quiet down. This is not possible. In order to fully prepare for a
dramatic presentation and/or oral interpretation, our students need to project. We need a space where students can do this in
comfort and without interruption.
Individual presentation preparation is not the only activity happening in the Communication Lab. Jason Ames also uses the
space for our Intramural Speech Tournament. And groups come into rehearse group presentations regularly. In the future we
34
plan to use the space for our Speakeasy Professional Development project. We need additional enclosed space and/or a larger
space to accommodate these activities.
What educational programs or institutional purposes does this equipment support?
All Communication Studies classes and all disciplines that require a speech or group project in their classes. In addition, we
can support faculty and staff training in public speaking.
Briefly describe how your request relates specifically to meeting the Strategic Plan Goal and to enhancing student learning?
COMM is an essential component of GE/Transfer curriculum and success in our courses often leads to success in other courses, as
students gain a large amount of confidence in public speaking and communication training.
35