Annual Program Review Update
*Be sure to include information from all three campuses.
Program/Discipline: __ Speech_ _______________
Date: __October 15, 2007________
Trends and Relevant Data
1.
Has there been any change in the status of your program or area? (Have you shifted departments? Have new degrees or certificates been created by your program? Have you added or deleted courses? Have activities in other programs impacted your area or program? For example, a new nursing program could cause greater demand for life-science courses.) If not, skip to #2.
Note: curricular changes should be addressed under 12-14.
The last time that Speech underwent program review was during the
1995-96 academic year. At that time, the following recommendations were made:
1.
In order to replace the full-time faculty member retiring in
1996 and in an effort to improve the gender balance and ethnic
2.
diversity of the speech program, the Policy Development
Council and the Academic Senate should consider the appointment of an additional full-time faculty member in speech as a high priority in the next hiring cycle.
The program should consider expanding course offerings
3.
during the summer.
Faculty teaching speech at all three campuses should share syllabi and coordinate their courses to ensure consistency.
In reviewing the ’95-’96 program review documents, it is remarkable that faculty staffing levels have remained fairly constant over the last decade. In ’95-’96 there were two full-time and four part-time speech faculty members serving the District at the Eureka campus with one part-time faculty member at both the Del Norte and Mendocino Coast campuses. While the numbers have stayed the same, the players are different. Since the last program review both of the former full-time speech professors have retired. In 1998, Professor Kerry Mayer was hired to replace Professor Dean Boyd. After the retirement of
Professor Jerry Emmons in 1999 the department appointed a tenuretrack faculty member in his place. Unfortunately, that appointee resigned her position in 2003. After two unsuccessful faculty searches,
Assistant Professor Dave Chimovitz was appointed in 2006. In terms of associate faculty, there are only two part-time faculty members who were teaching for us in 1996 who are teaching for us today. While there is more gender balance in the program’s full- and part-time faculty at this point, there is still little ethnic diversity among speech

faculty.
While no new degrees or certificates have been created by our department, as a result of the program review process, we have inactivated one course (SPCH 399, ESL Accent Reduction) due to the fact that it has not been offered in over 15 years nor do we plan to offer it any time in the future. Full-time speech department faculty members, in consultation with our associate faculty colleagues, are also in the process of updating all of our active course outlines. To date, we have secured Curriculum Committee approval for course outline updates submitted for the two courses most frequently offered by the Speech Department – Speech 1, Public Speaking and Speech 7,
Interpersonal Communication.
2.
Have there been any significant changes in enrollment, retention, success rates, or student demographics that impact your discipline? If so, please include data sheets (Excel or Word format) showing these changes.
While section offerings for speech have remained fairly constant over the last three years, we were asked to reduce section numbers during the Spring ’06 semester from 16 sections offered during Fall ‘05 to 14 in S’06. This resulted in a loss of 23 enrollments at census, but we did show a 6.1% increase in our section fill rate from F’05 to S’06.
Data provided by the Institutional Research Office and summarized in the Program Review, Annual Review, Fall 2007 data sheet indicates that there has been a 6.9% drop in retention rates in speech classes from the ’05-’06 academic year to the ’06-‘07 academic year as well as a 8.5% drop in student success rate (as indicated by a course grade of
A, B, C, or CR) over that same time period. A goal of the speech faculty should be to attempt to understand the causes for these declines and to mitigate for them if reasonable and appropriate.
3.
Occupational programs must review the update of their labor-market data, some of it provided by Institutional Research, to illustrate that their program: a. Meets a documented labor market demand, b. Does not represent duplication of other training programs (in the region), and c. Is of demonstrated effectiveness as measured by the employment and completion success of its students.
Not applicable.
Other Resources
4.
Do you have needs (professional development, library resources, and so forth) not previously required by the discipline or not previously addressed in budget or equipment considerations? Please describe.

Over the years, speech department faculty members have amassed a collection of various professionally-produced video tapes to supplement classroom instruction in our Speech 7 and Speech 1 courses. Additionally, we have recorded on our own a variety of political speeches for use in the Speech 1 course. None of these tapes currently meet the ADA closed-captioning requirement. Ideally, the department would be provided a budget to enable us to upgrade our video collection to the more efficient DVD format and to come into compliance with ADA requirements for closed captioning. (Please see itemized replacement costs under #10 below.)
5.
Does your discipline need additional support from Student Services beyond that previously provided?
In light of the demographic of our student population in terms of the numbers of students who come to CR under-prepared to engage in college-level coursework, we must rely on Student Services personnel to provide adequate counseling of these students. Frequently we see students in both our Interpersonal Communication and Public
Speaking courses who do not meet the recommended preparation of eligibility for English 1A. Due to the rigorous writing, research, and critical analysis components of these courses, the likelihood that under-prepared students will succeed in these courses is low
(particularly in the highly theoretical Speech 7 course). It is our belief that students who are unable to read and write at the collegiate level should be counseled against enrolling in theses courses until they have achieved college-level skills. Speech faculty would be more than willing to work with counselors, advisors, and other student services professionals to ensure that adequate and appropriate advising regarding speech offerings is made available to our students.
Like other college departments that serve large numbers of transfer students, the Speech department would benefit from the hiring of an articulation officer to serve the District’s articulation needs.
Human Resource Needs
6.
Complete the Faculty Employment Grids below (please list full- and part-time faculty numbers in separate rows):
Faculty Load Distribution in the Program
Discipline
Name
(e.g., Math,
English,
Total
Teaching
Load for fall
2006 term
% of Total
Teaching
Load by Full-
Time Faculty
% of Total
Teaching Load
Taught by Part-
Time Faculty
Changes from fall 2005
Explanations and
Additional
Information (e.g., retirement,

Accounting)
Speech 68 26.7% 73.3% Total TLUs in program reduced by
4 (from 72 in F’05 to
68 in F’06).
All TLUs taught by
Part-time faculty in
F’05 (see note next column). reassignment, etc.)
During the ’05-
06 academic year, the only full-time faculty member in the discipline was on sabbatical. This necessitated all sections within the department be taught by associate faculty members.
Faculty Load Distribution in the Program
Discipline
Name
(e.g., Math,
English,
Accounting)
Total
Teaching
Load for spring 2007 term
Speech 72
% of Total
Teaching
Load by Full-
Time Faculty
37.5%
% of Total
Teaching Load
Taught by Part-
Time Faculty
62.5%
Changes from spring 2006
Total TLUs in program increased by 9 (from
63 in S’06 to 72 in
S’07). All
TLUs taught by part-time faculty in
S’06 (see note next column).
Explanations and
Additional
Information (e.g., retirement, reassignment, etc.)
During the ’05-
06 academic year, the only full-time faculty member in the discipline was on sabbatical. This necessitated all sections within the department be taught by associate faculty members.
Do you need more full-time faculty? Associate faculty? If yes, explain why and be sure to include data sheets justifying the need.
The speech department is always looking for qualified associate faculty members. This has become increasingly difficulty over the last few years, especially since Humboldt State University discontinued their graduate program in Communication and is no longer producing Masters’ prepared graduates eager to teach part-time. This

problem is exacerbated at the branch campus locations where the
District is served by only one associate faculty member in speech at both the Del Norte and Mendocino Coast campuses. An additional constraint regarding the availability of qualified associate faculty members in speech is the fact that CR shares associate faculty members with HSU (where the pay is generally greater). Currently, two of the four part-time faculty members teaching for CR at the
Eureka Campus also teach at HSU. Additionally, our “part-time” faculty member at the Arcata Instructional Site is a tenured professor of Communication at HSU (and HSU’s current department chair).
The limited number of associate faculty qualified and available to teach for CR creates challenges to the department in terms of being able to increase speech offerings even when we have student demand for additional sections. While we have been able to offer speech courses at our Klamath-Trinity site (primarily in the summer), it is difficult to secure faculty members to teach there and meeting student needs at this remote location continues to be a challenge to the department. This is also a challenge at our Del Norte and Mendocino
Coast sites where we have had long-serving associate faculty members who may, conceivably, at some point wish to scale back their teaching loads or retire completely. The problem of appointing associate faculty members at the branch campuses is further exacerbated by the fact that there is no full-time faculty member in Speech at either
Del Norte or Mendocino and we must rely on a lead faculty member in a related discipline (English, for example) to schedule, appoint, and evaluate our associate faculty members at those sites.
7.
Complete the Staff Employment Grid below (please list full- and part-time staff numbers in separate rows:
Staff Employed in the Program
Assignment Full-time
(e.g., Math,
English)
(classified) staff
(give number)
Part-time staff (give number)
Gains over
Prior
Year
Speech 2
D.
Chimovitz
(Eka)
K. Mayer
(Eka)
6
-
-
-
G. Beadle (Eka)
S. Dobie (Eka)
L. Hee-Chorley
(MC)
R. MacKinney
(Eka)
A. Reitzel
NA
Losses over Prior
Year (give reason: retirement, reassignment, health, etc.)
The speech department lost two long-time associate faculty members last year. One relocated for a job out of the area and the

-
(Arc/KT)
J. Stafford (DN)
Do you need more full-time staff? Part-time staff? If yes, explain why and be sure to include data sheets justifying the need.
Please see the answer to question #6 above for a detailed response to our need for additional associate faculty members in speech.
8.
If necessary, to clarify your needs, please comment on current available staff and distribution of FTE's for contract and part-time faculty. Describe strengths and weaknesses of faculty/staff as appropriate to program's current status or future development.
NA
Facilities
9.
Comment on facilities the program uses, their current adequacy, and any immediate needs. Have your discipline’s facilities needs changed? If so, how?
Please provide a data-based justification for any request that requires new or additional facilities construction, renovation, remodeling or repairs.
While the speech department currently teaches all of our classes in one classroom on the Eureka campus, it is not particularly well-suited to teaching speech (particularly the public speaking courses which make up the bulk of our offerings). The room is traditionally wired with overhead banks of fluorescent lights that do not allow for other failed to meet the equivalency to minimum qualifications as we transitioned from singlecourse equivalencies to discipline equivalencies.
Luckily, we were able to secure the services of a new associate faculty member, so our net loss in part-time faculty members is one.

targeted dimming. This becomes particularly problematic when students and/or faculty are using multi-media presentation aids. Our choice at that point is to either compromise the clarity of our projected information or to lecture/speak to an audience shrouded in darkness. While the room is equipped with a multi-media cart and built-in overhead projection system, it is not portable. This makes the system cumbersome to use during formal presentations (the speaker must move from multi-media cart in the corner of the room to the stage area in the center of the room), and it is not indicative of what students would normally experience in most professional settings.
Additionally, the software on the computer connected to the projector is not as current as that which is currently being used by our students.
This creates compatibility problems when students bring multi-media presentations to school on portable storage devices intending to use them on the classroom equipment.
In light of the impending construction of a new academic building on the Eureka campus, speech faculty are eager to consult with the appropriate facilities planning group to provide input regarding the unique classroom needs of our discipline and about how those needs might best be accounted for in the new building.
Both the Mendocino Coast and Del Norte campus locations have recently begun classroom renovations and technological upgrades which should serve our speech associates well. Classrooms available for public speaking courses at the Arcata Instructional Site, however, are woefully inadequate. They are poorly designed in terms of the location of technologies, they are severely cramped, and they are illsuited to formal presentations. As our department offers full courses at the Arcata site during the Fall, Spring, and Summer sessions, it would be helpful for students and faculty alike to be able to move into a more suitable classroom space at that site.
Equipment
10.
Have your discipline’s equipment needs changed? If so, how? Is equipment in need of repair outside of your current budget? Please provide a data-based justification for any request that requires a new or additional budget allotment.
Our discipline’s equipment needs have changed drastically since our last program review cycle. In the last decade, presentation technologies have evolved from transparency overheads and paper posters to highly sophisticated, wireless electronic presentation systems able to incorporate both user-generated and web-based content. Unfortunately, the equipment that faculty members in our discipline have access to has failed to adequately keep pace with the equipment available in most private and/or business settings. As such,

we have generated a list of equipment would move the discipline forward in terms of being able to teach students with the equipment they will be using in the “real” world. A detailed equipment list (to outfit one classroom) follows:
Presentation Easels
(for use with small group work in both the Interpersonal
Communication course as well as the Group Decision Making course)
Quartet 200E Duramax Easel
4 @ $214 = $ 856
Interactive Panel
(for wireless projection of computer- generated content)
Polyvision CL17 Walk and Talk
1 @ $6427 = $6,427
Laptop Computer
(for use with interactive panel)
Sony VAIO FZ140E
Balt 27508
Samsonite Tripod 8802
1 @ $1260 = $1,260
Floor Lectern
(compatible with interactive panel and laptop computer system)
1 @ $200 = $ 200
Digital Camcorder
(for digital recording of student presentations for analysis; additional use by Interpersonal Communication and Group Decision Making courses for interaction analysis purposes)
JVC Everio-G GZM130US
Hard Disk Camcorder 1 @ $415 = $ 415
Camcorder Tripod
(for use with digital camcorder)
1 @ $40 = $ 40

Instructional Video Upgrade (see list below) =
Gender and Communication:
Male-Female Differences in Language and Non-verbal Behavior 1 @ $295
$1,985
(for replacing non-captioned VHS tapes with
ADA-compliant DVD-formatted materials)
A World of Gestures 1 @ $295
A World of Differences: Understanding
Cross-Cultural Communication
Proxemics
1 @ $295
Personal Space: Exploring Human
1 @ $295
Can You See The Color Gray?
Frontline: A Class Divided
1 @ $250
1 @ 200
Frontline: The Merchants of Cool
1 @ $60
The Interpersonal Perception Task
1 @ $295
Expandable Portfolio
(for safe storage of traditional presentation aids)
X-Port (37x49x6) 1 @ $200 = $ 200
TOTAL = $11,383
Learning Outcomes Assessment Update
11.
How has your area or program been engaged in student learning outcomes assessment? a. Summarize your results.
As a result of recent course outline updating efforts, Student Learning
Outcomes have been written at the course level for all of our current

speech offerings. This was a collaborative effort among both full- and part-time faculty members in speech from across the District.
What did your program learn from these results that enabled you to b. improve teaching and learning in the discipline?
Since the curricular changes that include SLOs have just been approved by the curriculum committee, the department has not had an opportunity to formally assess the impact that “official” SLOs will have on teaching and learning. Additionally, full-time faculty members will be meeting with all part-time instructors in the discipline to discuss how best to assess the impact that formalizing
SLOs at the course level has had on our teaching and on student learning.
How have part-time faculty been made aware of the need to assess SLOs? c.
Associate faculty members from across the district have been included in discussions regarding curricular changes to incorporate SLOs.
Recently revised course outlines will be presented to all faculty members scheduled to teach those courses for the upcoming semester as soon as the course revisions are approved by the Board of Trustees.
Additionally, at the start of each semester, full- and part-time faculty members in the discipline meet to discuss our individual teaching methods, our collective goals, and desired outcomes for students. We will continue those regular meetings and will emphasize the need to assess SLOs as defined in our updated course outlines at our meeting prior to the spring ’08 semester.
Curriculum Update
(Reminder: Send updated course outlines to the Curriculum Committee.)
12.
Identify curricular revisions, program innovations, and new initiatives undertaken in the last year.
All speech curriculum will have been updated as of November ’07.
Course capacity for the Public Speaking course (SPCH 1) has been reduced from 30 to a more manageable 28. While this is still above
Humboldt State University’s course cap of 25, we believe it is a reasonable change, especially in light of the compression of our semester from an 18-week long term to our current 16-week term.
Additionally, the Journalism 5, Introduction to Mass
Communications, course was recently rewritten by one of our fulltime speech instructors and was approved to be cross-listed in the discipline of Speech which will enable faculty members in Speech to teach the course if necessary.

This semester, a full-time faculty member in Speech is working with a full-time faculty member in Digital Media to offer a pair courses that link a public speaking course with a digital media literacy course.
Both faculty members are meeting regularly to assess the efficacy of the linking.
Since the last program review of Speech, the department has increased the frequency with which it offers the Honors Public
Speaking course due to student demand. The course now is offered annually each Fall semester instead of every other year as was the case in the past. This change has allowed the honors’ section to enroll a more reasonable number of students (typically between 15 and 20 each time it is offered) and, subsequently, to be able to innovate in those courses with new pedagogy (e.g. problem-based learning, formal debate, etc.).
Finally, the department has expanded course offerings during the summer sessions to include Speech courses not only on the Eureka campus but at the Arcata Instructional site and the Klamath-Trinity site as well.
13.
Identify curricular revisions, program innovations, and new initiatives planned for the next year.
Upon the end-of-semester assessment of the initial linked speech/digital media courses, faculty members will determine whether or not this pairing is a viable one for our students or if we should explore alternate linkages.
Full-time faculty members will also be continuing discussions regarding writing curriculum for new courses in Speech. Of particular interest is the creation of a course in Intercultural
Communication. Full-time faculty members have also begun, and will continue, preliminary discussions regarding the appropriateness of offering Speech courses in the online format.
14.
Complete the grid below
Course Year Course Outline
Last Updated
September, 2007
Year Next Update
Expected
2012 Speech 1, Public
Speaking
Speech 7,
Interpersonal
Communication
October, 2007 2012

Speech 6, Group
Decision Making
September, 1989 Update currently in progress.
Expected completion by
11/30/07.
Not applicable. Speech 399, ESL
Accent Reduction
Inactivated,
September 2007
Goals and Plans
15.
If you have recently undergone a comprehensive review, attach your Quality
Improvement Plan if applicable.
Not applicable.
16.
If you do not have a QIP, what goals and plans does your area have for the coming year?
Goals for the discipline over the next year include:
•
Explore data re: retention & student success rates with an eye toward understanding and mitigation, if appropriate
•
Assess efficacy of linked SPCH/DM course
•
Determine process for assessing the impact of incorporating formalized SLOs on teaching and student learning
•
Provide orientation to associate faculty on course-level SLOs
•
Determine departmental direction on adding new curriculum
•
Continue departmental discussions regarding the viability of on-line courses in the discipline