2014 PROGRAM PLAN
Communication Studies Department
I. BACKGROUND, EVALUATION, AND ANALYSIS
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Communication Studies department teaches human communication across three levels: one-toone (interpersonal, listening, intercultural, health communication), one-to-few (small group, listening,
intercultural), and one-to-many (public speaking, argumentation/persuasion). Courses currently
offered in the department include:
Comm 1 - Public Speaking (online and standard)
Comm 2 - Small Group Communication
Comm 4 - Argumentation & Persuasion
Comm 6 - Listening
Comm 7 - Interpersonal Communication
Comm 8 - Communication Activities (online)
Comm 10 - Communication Process
Comm 12 - Intercultural Communication
Comm 14 - Health Communication
The importance of Communication Studies to the college mission can be ascertained from the
following (in no particular order):
 Communication (listening, speaking, and conversing) is the first core competency for Cabrillo
College's General Education program.
 Communication Studies courses satisfy requirements for the A.A. or A. S. degree in Area A
(Comm 1, 2, 4, & 10), D (Comm 7 & 12), E (Comm 7, 12, and 14), and the Multicultural
Studies Requirement (Comm 12).
 An AA-T degree in the discipline has also been recently approved.
 The Communication Studies program is essential to a transfer education (Comm 4).
 Comm 1, 2, & 10 are the only courses that satisfy the CSU GE “Oral Communication”
requirement. (Comm 6 is a co-requisite for Comm 1 and Comm 2).
Currently, the Communication Studies program has 4 full-time instructors and 8 adjuncts. Spring 2014
showed 136.37 FTES, an all-time record for the program. Duplicated enrollments (body count) were
1,874 (3-26-14), also a record. The latest figures from the Fact Book shows 210 Communication
Studies majors, by far a record, with almost as many min ors.
RELATIONSHIPS
Programs that depend on Communication Studies for core and specific elective requirements include:
Nursing, Dental Hygiene
Bilingual/Bicultural Studies
Computer and Information Systems
Engineering Technology
Human Services
Journalism
Medical Assistant
Public Safety
Additionally, Communication Studies faculty members have established numerous campus-wide
connections. Comm 14 (Health Communication) was created in collaboration with Allied Health
2
programs. Faculty members represent the department in the following ways (not an exhaustive list):
membership on College Planning Council, Faculty Senate, CCFT Council, Academy for College
Excellence, bookstore committee, student success steering committee, and accreditation self-study
committee.
COSTS
The Communication Studies program expenditures amount to only 2.124% of college expenditures
while generating 2.571% of college income (PRO 2013 Program Planning Stats). Since 2008,
program expenditures have increased 8.5% but program income has increased 20.8% (PRO).
Academic
Year
Percent
of
College
Income
Percent
of
College
Expense
Income
Expense
Ratio
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2.128%
2.232%
2.234%
2.394%
2.571%
1.957%
1.973%
1.912%
2.019%
2.124%
1.09
1.13
1.17
1.19
1.21
Cost Effectiveness
Generation
Expenditure
Generation
Expenditure
0.000%
1.000%
2.000%
3.000%
WSCH/FTES (load--efficiency indicator) was 571 for spring 2013 (PRO 2013 Fact Book). That is
about the college average. The state average for the Communication Studies discipline stays
consistently around 450 (Chancellor’s Office).
The Communication Studies load is exceptionally high considering the number of courses offered
that require student performances. For example, Comm 1 (Public Speaking) has a capacity of 30
students per section. Each student is required to perform 5 speeches. Adding a mere 5 students to a
single section increases the number of speeches that must be evaluated in class by the instructor by
25. Considering a full load for a full-time instructor is 5 sections, adding 5 students to each section
would require listening to and evaluating an additional 125 student speeches for that single
instructor. The department has instituted ways to increase average load without overloading
performance-oriented courses. Comm 6 (Listening) and Comm 8 (Communication Activities) are
3
two prime ways load has been increased because these courses can be expanded significantly beyond
the 30 student capacity without compromising instructional quality. Also, Comm 4, 7, 10, & 12,
which are less performance-based classes, typically enroll 35-40 students per section.
STUDENT SUCCESS
Communication Studies courses provide essential skills for success in the job market. “Job Outlook
2013,” a website that publishes results of an annual survey of hundreds of employers from across the
nation, ranks “ability to verbally communicate with persons inside and outside the organization” as
the most important candidate skill/quality in employers’ estimation. The same report concludes:
“The ideal candidate is a good communicator who can make decisions and solve problems while
working effectively in a team” (p. 31). This describes the essence of the Communication Studies
program at Cabrillo College.
The critical need to teach students these important skills is underlined in a 2013 study by the
Workforce Solutions Group at St. Louis Community College that found: more than 60% of
employers say applicants lack “communication and interpersonal skills,” an increase of almost 10%
in just two years. Another recent study by staffing company Adecco concludes: “44% of respondents
cited soft skills, such as communication, critical thinking, creativity and collaboration, as the area
with the biggest gaps” in student graduates’ preparation for the workplace. Senior Vice President at
Adecco, Janette Marx, observes, “It’s interesting to see how the definition of the skills gap has
evolved from being so heavily focused on technical and computer skills to ‘soft’ skills related to
communication and creativity” (Source: Adecco Group: http://www.adeccousa.com/articles/Lack-ofSoft-Skills).
Comm 1
Comm 2
Comm 4
Comm 7
Comm 10
Comm 12
Comm 14
Collaboration
Creativity
Critical Thinking
Public Speaking
Problem Solving
Interpersonal
Communication
Teamwork
The Communication Studies department strives to meet this critical need for improvement in these
essential job skills so our students can be successful in acquiring, maintaining, and advancing their
careers. Consider the courses taught in the program and how closely they match critical skills
employers’ desire in job applicants:
4
As measures of student success in Communication Studies courses at Cabrillo College,
consider two comparisons (PRO).
1. College average vs. Communication Studies average completion rate (2013; PRO 2013
Fact Book):
Academic
Year
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
Communication Studies
Course Completion
Fall
Spring
89.1% 87.5%
89.8% 88.4%
88.8% 90.0%
89.0% 90.8%
90.7% 91.5%
College Wide
Course Completion
Fall
Spring
85.7% 84.6%
85.3% 84.6%
85.8% 86.3%
86.7% 86.6%
88.1% 86.5%
College average completion---86.02%.
Communication Studies average completion rate--- 89.5%
Both the college and the department show improvement in this five-year period, with
communication studies 3.5% higher on average. This is significant considering the fear
students have of giving speeches in front of their peers. National surveys attest to this fear
among adults. The high completion rate is again a tribute to the outstanding instructors in the
department who are exceptional in their ability to make students feel comfortable in an
anxiety-producing situation.
2. College average vs. Communication Studies average success rate (PRO 2012-2013 Fact
Book).
Communication Studies
Course Success
Academic
Year
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
Fall
80.4%
79.1%
80.1%
81.3%
82.3%
Spring
79.4%
79.3%
81.6%
82.2%
83.1%
College Wide
Course Success
Fall
68.5%
69.6%
70.9%
71.9%
72.2%
Spring
68.9%
70.6%
71.9%
72.9%
72.3%
College average success rate ---70.9.5%.
Communication Studies average success rate--- 80.8.7%
5
This is significant considering the fear students have of giving speeches in front of their
peers. National surveys attest to this fear among adults. The high success rate is again a
tribute to the outstanding instructors in the department who are exceptional in their ability to
make students feel comfortable in an anxiety-producing situation.
The department has consistently improved both completion and success rates.
In the 2008 plan, the completion rate for the program was 84.76% and the success rate was 75.22%.
In addition, students can earn the Communication Studies Award by completing 10 units of program
courses with at least a 3.0 GPA in those courses. This award validates students’ knowledge and skills
in those areas most desired by employers (see previously cited studies). Anecdotal evidence from past
students testify to the significant assistance this award provides for students seeking jobs in a variety
of careers and professions. Currently, almost 150 students annually earn this award, a thirtyfold
increase since 2000, the first year the award was offered.
Finally, there were 58 Communication Studies majors who graduated in the 2012/2013 year
(PRO 2013 Fact Book) compared to 3-5 graduates a decade ago. With record numbers of
majors in the pipeline, this graduation rate should only increase in the future.
All of the Communication Studies courses mesh closely with the CORE FOUR Comprehensive
College Competencies, especially and most obviously the first of the Core Four--Communication.
Student success in the job market and in interpersonal relationships is dependent largely on learning
these core competencies.
STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES
The department has assessed Comm 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, and 14. Unfortunately, every member of
the department was confused about various aspects of assessment of SLOs. Members of the
department all thought that assessments of SLOs had been completed sufficiently. Clearly, the
department has not completed everything that is required in this regard. Consequently, going
forward, the program chair will prepare a schedule for assessing individual courses and the Core 4.
Necessary forms will be completed. Departmental meetings to discuss the SLO assessments will
continue as previously, but new assessments for the Core 4 will generate additional meetings and
discussions among faculty.
Assessments, however, did take place. The assessment tools used vary. Pre-tests/post-tests were used
for Comm 4 and 10. A pre-test, given before course material covered, composed of general questions
(no technical questions or technical terminology included) relevant to course content was conducted.
Scores on post-tests (given after course material was covered) were then compared to pre-test scores
with impressive results. For example:
COMM 4 (Argumentation and Persuasion):
Pre-test (first day of class) scores (N = 32):
Mean: 53.2% (23 Fs)
Post-test (aggregate scores on all exams throughout term; N = 33):
6
Mean: 70.2% (4 Fs)
80%
25
60%
20
40%
Pre-Test
15
Pre-Test
Post-Test
10
Post-Test
20%
5
0%
0
Failing Grades
Mean
NOTE: Comm 4 is an extremely difficult class, the most challenging of any course in the
department. These results clearly demonstrate that significant student learning occurs from taking
Comm 4. Students learn critical thinking skills and can demonstrate their use in class (e.g., People’s
Court and Mock Trial presentations). SLO assessed: Demonstrate the means and methods for
critically analyzing attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors. These results also underline that the current
structure and pedagogical approaches to the course are exactly as they should be, and they require
little if any adjustments.
Comm 10 (Communication Process):
Pre-test (first day of class) (N = 32):
Mean: 52.75% (20 Fs)
Post-test (aggregate scores on all exams throughout term; N = 35):
Mean: 77.05% (1 F)
80%
20
60%
15
Pre-Test
Pre-Test
40%
Post-Test
20%
10
Post-Test
5
0%
0
Mean
Failing Grades
Again, significant student learning demonstrably occurs in Comm 10. Students learn a broad range
of communication skills (SLO: Demonstrate knowledge needed for communication competence in
areas such as language use, nonverbal communication, . . .) . The assessment results encourage a
continuation of the current approach to the course, both structurally and pedagogically.
7
Pre-test/post-test assessments were also conducted in Comm 7 (Interpersonal Communication) in a
slightly different format: students completed a “Where I am Now, Part 1” paper and later a “Where I
Am Now, Part 2” paper.
Comm 7 (Interpersonal Communication):
Pre-test (Part 1 paper):
Mean: 70.1%
Post-test (Part 2 paper)
Mean: 87.9%
100%
80%
60%
40%
Part 1 Paper Pre-Test
Part 2 Paper Post-Test
Significant student learning demonstrably
20%
occurs in Comm 7. Students learn what erodes
0%
interpersonal relationships and what sustains
Mean
them in their myriad complexity. SLO
assessed: Understand and apply essential
concepts in interpersonal communication. Little if any adjustments in the approach to the class are
required.
Other courses also used pretest/post-tests with similar results:
Comm 6 (Listening): SLO assessed: Identify and assess listening habits and skills in yourself and
others.
Comm 8 (Communication Activities): SLO assessed: Analyze and apply communication skills.
Different assessment procedures were used in various classes:
Comm 1 (Public Speaking): A “professionalism project” self-assessment tool was used.
SLO assessed: Critically analyze and assess one’s own work and the work of others.
Comm 2 (Small Group Communication): A graded case study feedback response assignment was
used to assess students; SLO assessed: Ability to construct useful peer feedback.
Students were asked to write out specific feedback for a small group case study. They were to
use the guidelines we had learned and practiced throughout the semester. Fifty students were
given the assignment and 48 completed it. A 4-point scoring rubric was used. 38 out of 48 got 4
pts (79%); 8 got 3 pts. (17%); less than 4% got 1 or 2 pts.
Comm 14 (Health Communication): A “self-care reflection, plan and presentation” paper and
speech, were used as assessment tools. SLO assessed: Design a plan for self-care.
14 students finished the semester (first time the course was offered).
All students completed the self-care project which included a portfolio and essay and a short
presentation. Out of 35 points possible, 12 received 35 points and 3 received between 32-33.
A second assessment was done on another SLO the following year: Utilize principles and
methods of organizational communication to complete a cultural analysis of a health care
8
organization. The assignment was a small group research project that included background
research, field work, and a 30-minute presentation. Eighteen students completed the project.
There was a significant difference in grades for the group portion and individual portion. Out of
4 groups, 1 received an A and the other 3 received Bs. The total grades for individuals (that
included research documentation and evaluations) were 2 A’s, 3 B’s, 6 C’s, 3 D’s and 4 F’s. The
analysis revealed a need to concentrate more attention on the individual portions of the project
rather than overemphasizing the presentation portion.
Departmental meetings of all full-time and adjunct instructors have occurred during every flex week
to discuss assessment results of all program courses. Additional meetings have also taken place at
least once per term to discuss and brainstorm more effective ways to bolster student success in
program courses. These meetings have been a regular occurrence for at least the last 15 years. These
meetings resulted in several changes consistent with the program direction that has been so
successful:
1. Duplication of class materials (videos, activities, assignments, etc.) were substantially
reduced by better coordination and communication among faculty teaching multiple
sections of the same course (especially Comm 1 and 6).
2. New activities, assignments, and innovative approaches to ignite student learning were
shared and instituted by several instructors. For example, the “Marshmallow Challenge”
activity on creative group problem solving was adopted by several instructors after a
demonstration. Several “Daily Show” video clips on use of statistics and logical fallacies
were also shared and used broadly by instructors. Several instructors are using thematic
instruction in their courses and have shared ideas. Two have incorporated strategies
from ACE training to increase student engagement. Several instructors have also shared
their use of mindful communication practices and concepts into their instruction.
3. Broad discussions regarding social media and their influence on interpersonal, small
group, intercultural communication, and public speaking occurred. There has been
increased discussion about the influence of social media on communication across a
broad range of situations and environments in most of the program’s courses.
4. Improved use of limited technology available in all classrooms has been a recurring
subject for discussion, and some changes have been instituted while others await
assistance from IT (see later discussion for specifics).
Assessments have also been conducted for the Core 4. Obviously, any assessment used in any of the
Communication Studies courses addresses assessment of communication, the first Core competency.
Critical thinking is assessed directly with the pre-test/post-test used in Comm 4 (Argumentation and
Persuasion) previously described. Global awareness is assessed in Comm 12 (Intercultural
Communication) using an “intercultural interview” activity which included 18 questions and a threepage summary. Finally, personal responsibility was assessed in Comm 2 (Small Group
Communication) by having students in their project groups complete an assessment of each group
member and assigning a score for participation, cooperation, teamwork, task orientation and other
measures of personal responsibility. These student assessments were incorporated into the overall
9
grade for each student (e.g., participation). More assessments, however, need to be conducted. This
is but a first step in the process.
Overarching Needs. In all department meetings several things are mentioned that would benefit the
entire program. The first is an additional full-time position. The consistently large waiting lists
demonstrate the need for more sections. However, even if additional sections are not added, we need
the full-time position because we often have difficulty staffing the classes we offer with adjuncts.
We recruit for the lecturer pool annually, but still do not have an acceptable number of candidates to
add to the pool. Contract faculty often take overloads beyond what they would prefer in order to
maintain the current number of sections. Although faculty have been willing to do this, it is not a
sustainable practice.
The second need is for a facility that accommodates the specific architectural, design and technology
requirements of our courses. Communication courses use a wide variety of teaching modes: lecture,
small group activities, triad/practices, role plays, and presentations. Faculty need to model what we
know from our discipline—that the environment, including furniture and its arrangement, has a
powerful effect on the success of communication interactions. Instructors have to be able to easily
rearrange desks, chairs, and tables in spaces large enough to accommodate the activities. Students
and teachers often complain that it is difficult to hear one another when having discussions because
the rooms are so small and the soundproofing poor. The technology needs are also fairly specific
because we film student group and individual speeches. Our students deserve to have state of the art
presentation technology to be well-prepared for their careers in an increasingly sophisticated “tech”
work world.
RESULTS OF INSTRUCTIONAL PLANNING, FALL 2012 STUDENT SURVEY
Students are well satisfied with instructors and course offerings. Consider answers to the
following survey questions (N = 134):
Q: “Do you plan to take any more classes in this department?”
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Yes
Undecided No or No
Response
These results mean a lot of repeat business for the program beyond GE requirements.
Q: “Would you recommend classes in this department to other students?”
10
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Yes
No or No Response
This graph indicates instructional effectiveness.
The written student comments are glowing and voluminous. The most frequent remarks
target the exceptional teacher quality. Typical comments when asked about “major strengths
of this program” include: “It has excellent teachers,” “The instructors! They are all amazing
and great,” and “I feel the teachers are awesome.” When asked for suggestions “for
improving the program” the most frequent response was “none” or “nothing.”
Most instructors in the department regularly receive the Alpha Gamma Sigma teacher
appreciation award. Some terms, every instructor in the program has received the award.
Additional instructor awards include:





Western States Communication Association 2014 “Master Teacher Award”
Western States Communication Association 2012 “Model Communication
Studies Program Award.”
California Senate Resolution #92, March 5th, 2012 recognizing “Outstanding
Educator Award”
National Communication Association 2011 “Outstanding Educator Award”
Ernest L. Boyer 2010 International Award for “Excellence in Teaching, Learning.
and Technology”
New equipment and improved technology were mentioned by several students as ways to
improve the program. This was a minority opinion, however. The “quality of media
materials” received a “satisfactory” or “excellent” from 85% of respondents, and 94%
thought “classroom facilities” were likewise satisfactory or excellent. Nevertheless,
technological adequacy is a source of some frustration for faculty in the department. We
know what we could do better in this area but we are hamstrung. Brand new, expensive
equipment sat in boxes in room 1091 for the entire fall 2013 semester despite numerous
requests from the program chair and the division dean to set up the equipment Smart room
set-ups for rooms 410 and 411 are inadequate, but some important improvements have been
made recently. More, however, needs to be done more rapidly.
11
CURRICULUM REVIEW
The entire Communication Studies faculty (full-time and adjunct) did an exhaustive review
fall/spring 2012/2013 of every course offered in the program. Course descriptions were revised.
SLOs were edited, added, and/or condensed and posted on Curricunet. The Model Program was
reviewed. A new course, Health Communication (Comm 14), was approved by the Curriculum
committee and is taught once a year mostly in concert with the Health and Wellness programs.
Working with the articulation officer, Communication Studies was officially approved for the AA-T
degree in summer 2013. There are new course proposals in the works (e.g., organizational
communication, etc.) but unless and until the department receives additional full-time faculty, there
is little reason to submit proposals for courses that cannot be taught.
II. New Directions
The Western States Communication Association chose Cabrillo College’s Communication Studies
program for the 2012 “Model Communication Studies Program Award.” This is a huge honor and
testifies to the stellar faculty in the department admirably serving the needs of students. It also
underlines that “new directions” for the department seem unwarranted, if by new directions is meant
that the program requires transformational change. It clearly does not. The program is
unquestionably on the right path. What the department has accomplished given restricted resources
is impressive. The Communication Studies program, of course, could progress further down the path
if provided substantial additional resources (full-time faculty; additional TUs, etc.).
By almost any measure, the Communication Studies department has excelled despite a decrease
recently in faculty resources from 5 full-time positions to 4 full-time positions. Demand for courses
is at record levels. All program courses that satisfy GE requirements (Comm 1, 2, 4, 7, 10, & 12) are
closed in four days once registration begins (data from last four semesters including spring 2014—
section enrollment: Web Advisor). Waiting lists fill to capacity a few days later. Registration for
Communication Studies classes is effectively over after the first week. Duplicated enrollment (body
count) is more than 3600 students per year and rising, the 4th largest of 70 programs at Cabrillo
College (2013 Fact Book; 2014 enrollment tracker data). Duplicated enrollment partly reflects a
significant surge in the number of program majors from 3-5, on average, in the 1990s to 210 students
Spring 2013, with an almost equal number of program minors. Aggregate wait lists consistently
exceed 1,000 students per year. Wait lists would double or triple if the cap were not set at 15 per
class section. The fill rate for spring 2013 was 110% (PRO 2013 Fact Book).
If the phrase “new directions” means altering pedagogical approaches and methodologies, then
clearly new directions have been taken. Improving pedagogy and methodologies to enhance student
learning is a continuing process that is standard operating procedure. Members of the department
regularly engage in dialogue regarding student success. There are at least 2-3 department meetings
each term, and analysis of what works and what doesn’t to achieve student success is a prime focus
of these meetings. Faculty members engage in collaborative efforts to improve classroom
performance. Resources and new ideas are shared often. The Communication Studies department is
a model of collaborative effort. Faculty members constantly adapt to new technologies and seek
better ways of improving student success. Offering online sections of Comm 1 (public speaking), for
example, has been a pedagogical challenge that led to a hybrid approach (students meet in-person for
12
presentation of speeches). Five department faculty members are involved in a 2014 student success
project pilot project, called the Faculty Consultation Network, to boost instructional collaboration
and effectiveness. We observe classes taught by each member of the network to provide content for
robust discussions on teaching and learning techniques. Ideally, the department could look forward
to a new facility specifically designed to meet the needs of the program. We have to “make do” with
small rooms, storage spaces (for the many materials that are part of our activities), poor soundproofing, furniture that is not conducive to multiple instructional modalities, and technology that
does not match the needs, or capabilities, of our students. Although a dedicated facility is a grand
desire, it is one that would greatly enhance the effectiveness of the program and student learning.
“Where is your program headed based on your SLO assessments?”
SLO assessments demonstrate significant learning occurs in all of the classes offered. Based on these
assessment data, continuation of what appears to be working extremely well seems advisable. There
are several areas that the department could focus on in the future. There is interest in piloting a social
science learning community (along with other programs). Another area that could yield benefit to
students is to find ways to identify the under-prepared or basic skills students who may need
different interventions and support to maximize their success. The department could collaborate with
other programs to discover new ways to serve this segment of our population. All of our faculty
show an interest in pedagogy—to acknowledge what works and to create a climate of continuous
improvement necessary for innovation. Finally, one of the perennial concerns from the faculty is the
lack of state of the art presentation technology that works consistently.
“Where is your program headed based on your external research?”
Without significant additional resources, tremendous demand for Communication Studies courses
cannot be satisfied. The number of full-time faculty is insufficient to expand offerings. There are not
enough available adjuncts in the department pool to cover any new courses, and covering current
offerings is a constant, time-consuming challenge. Demand for Communication Studies courses will
continue to burgeon, especially now that students must file an education plan with a specific major
indicated. All faculty in the department strongly urge students to consider becoming Communication
Studies majors. This is especially relevant given previously cited survey research identifying
communication skills as paramount to obtaining good jobs, being promoted, and achieving success.
The reality is that a huge number of students cannot gain access to Communication Studies courses
necessary to complete vital GE requirements. Students wait sometimes three or four semesters to
gain access. Some take Communication Studies classes online at other colleges. When registration
for these classes close in 4 days because capacity has been reached, disappointed, frustrated students
go elsewhere. Communication Studies has become a significant bottleneck that thwarts student
ability to complete requirements at Cabrillo College.
II. PROGRAM GOALS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Increase faculty to address the huge demand for Communication Studies
courses.
“Addition of a fifth full-time instructor who will begin teaching fall 2008 is a
major help in implementing this goal. This is a significant increase in resources for
13
the department, and it will pay handsome dividends in the future.” This is a quotation from
the 2008 Program Plan for Communication Studies. Unhappily, that fifth full-time position
has been lost to a retirement spring 2013. That position was not replaced. The most recent
faculty prioritization lists Communication Studies as 4th, next in line for a full-time position.
No other updates from this development are recorded in this program plan.)
So, Communication Studies has the 4th largest duplicated enrollment in the
college, fills GE courses faster than any other program, had 3 full-time positions in
1996-97 with 3,957 WSCH (Fact Book) and now has only 4 full-time faculty with 8,149
WSCH (PRO 2013 Fact Book), and aggregate wait lists consistently in the top three of
all programs, but fewer full-time faculty than in 2008.
WSCH
Academic
Year
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
Fall
3,876.6
4,041.6
3,842.8
3,957.3
4,012.6
Spring
4,141.0
4,038.3
3,972.9
4,130.7
4,136.4
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
1996-97
4000
1000
4 Fac
2000
3 Fac
3000
2012-13
0
WSCH vs. Full-Time Faculty
A goal cited in the 2008 Program Plan was to increase both Communication
Studies majors and minors. That goal has been achieved unequivocally. The number of
majors and minors are at record levels and growing rapidly. Faculty resources, however,
have not kept pace. The adjunct pool is almost always inadequate to meet the demand.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Restore the fifth full-time position to the department. COST: About $40,000 (cost of fulltime position minus cost of adjuncts teaching those same units). This could be funded
14
from salary savings from recent retirements. (Last minute update: This position was
approved for fall 2014 hire as of April 30, 2014.)
2. Continue to increase adjunct units to accommodate enrollment increases and provide
additional sections and courses once the fifth full-time position is restored. COST:
$1735/unit. Goal: At least enough TUs to add 20 new sections per academic year to the
program schedule (30 additional TUs per term).
3. 3.Add a full-time growth position once the replacement position has been approved.
B. Greatly improve facilities.
The Communication Studies department was moved from the 800 building to the 400
building. Offices and classrooms are now adjacent to each other, which is a considerable
benefit. Nevertheless, facilities are simply inadequate. All classrooms (410, 411, and
1091/92) have only the mere beginnings of “smart rooms.” At best, these are “remedial
rooms.” Room 1091/92 had expensive equipment sitting in boxes for five months. Some of
the equipment was assembled by the chair with help from a friend. Improvements have been
made, but more needs to occur and at a faster pace. All rooms should be real “Smart Rooms.”
The Communication Studies department is a tech-heavy department.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Build a Communication Studies building with state-of-the-art facilities. This is not some
flip, fantasy request. There is talk of a new bond issue for Cabrillo College. If this comes
to fruition, part of the bond proposal should include a new building for the
Communication Studies program. A facility for Communication Studies would be an
easy sell to the community. Everyone immediately sees the value of improving students’
communication knowledge and skills. The Communication Studies program can expand
enormously if provided adequate facilities. The college is constantly concerned about
declining enrollment and “right sizing” the college. You have to invest resources where
the demand is greatest to increase enrollment. The demand for Communication Studies
classes is so great that the program could double in size if proper facilities and resources
were provided.
NOTE: Expanding the program, however, by offering classes in classrooms that do not fit
the unique needs of the discipline is not an appropriate answer. Communication Studies
requires specific room setups. All furniture must be movable and capable of multiple
formations, closets for storing equipment and materials for class activities need to be in
every classroom, electronic equipment must be available in easy-to-use formats,
sufficient sound proofing between classrooms must be installed (we make a lot of noise),
access to WiFi must be available (dead spots in our current rooms), and in some cases
adjacent discussion rooms need to be immediately available, not subject to scheduling
conflicts. A facility for a student learning center readily available to our hundreds of
majors and minors is not currently available anywhere on campus.
COST: $2.125 million ($375 per square foot for a 5,000 square foot building = $1.875
15
million. Additional $250,000+ for equipment, desks, tables, office furniture, etc. plus
installation.) This building could include:
a. A Student Learning Community facility in Communication Studies. With the huge
increase in majors and minors (Communication Award recipients), the department is
anxious to create a Student Learning Community. Communication Studies students
could meet in a central location, a Student Lounge, get to know each other, learn
together, and become an identifiable presence on campus. Currently there is no
facility for this to occur. Students have no central meeting place to work on group
projects and assignments, study for group exams, form study groups on campus, etc.
Provide a large room (capacity about 30-35 students) adjacent or close to classrooms
and offices used by Communication Studies faculty and students. There should be
circular tables and chairs for each table. There should be video equipment available,
laptop computers and projectors to develop and show PowerPoint presentations,
editing equipment for group assignments, a refrigerator for food and drinks, etc.
b. Three “smart” classrooms with a 35-40 student capacity. Increasing the number of
sections offered requires more classrooms than those currently given priority to
Communication Studies. All classrooms must be sound proof. Students repeatedly
notify instructors in the current classrooms that they cannot hear the instructors
because of noise from the adjacent room (410 and 411 are adjacent). In some cases,
the entire class must be moved outside to conduct the class without interference from
the adjacent class.
c. One “smart” classroom with a 75-student capacity with small adjacent meeting room.
Comm 6 sections often build to 60-75 students per section. Classrooms available for
such large enrollments are very limited, and most do not have movable furniture, a
necessity for numerous activities conducted in this course.
d. Decent-sized offices for all faculty (twice current-sized offices). Current offices do
not provide sufficient room for comfortable conversation with students, many of
whom are suffering anxiety about giving speeches in front of peers. There is no
appropriate office space available currently for meeting this need. Some offices are
shared, making private conversations with students awkward at best.
2. In the interim between providing a completely new building and continuing with current
facilities, major improvements need to occur in current facilities.
a. Provide at least one Smart Board for room 410 and 411.
COST: $9,000 x 2 = $18,000
b. Install central carts with Elmos that are not tethered to the wall computer unit.
COST OF CARTS and setup: $10,000. Prefer setup such as carts found in 800
building with easy access to computer, Elmos, projector, etc. A cart has been installed
in Room 411, but room 410 also needs a cart.
16
c. Vastly improve the sound proofing between classrooms (rooms 410, 411, and 401).
Faculty from other divisions teaching next to room 411 constantly complain about
noise emanating from room 411. Noise between rooms 410 and 411 remains a
problem, although some sound proofing was installed to help. Communication
Studies classes are inherently noisy by design.
C. Revive the “Spring Fling.”
A “Spring Fling” was instituted about 7 years ago in which students earning the
Communication Studies Award were presented their gold-embossed certificate in a ceremony
in the campus theater. In addition, the Spring Fling offered students a unique opportunity to
speak in front of a live, very large audience. This provided students with experience to apply
what they have learned in the departmental courses. The Spring Fling also helped the
department market course offerings and encourages students to become majors or minors in
Communication Studies. The number of attendees to this ceremony steadily increased to
about 250. The Spring Fling, however, incurs a financial cost (theater rental, advertising,
food, beverages, etc.). It had to be discontinued from lack of funds.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Provide a stable funding source for the Spring Fling. This could be money added
automatically to the department budget each year.
COST: $1,500 annually!
2. This is a small investment with a high reward for students. Family and friends attend,
photos with faculty are taken, and pride is felt when students receive the awards.
D. Support efforts to create interdisciplinary, transfer-level student cohorts.
1. The Student Success steering committee and the faculty subcommittee are discussing the
possibility of expanding formal learning communities (i.e., student cohorts) beyond basic
skills programs or the Allied Health programs. Having a course included that meets the
oral communication GE requirement would be important.
2. Preliminary discussions have taken place with the ACE program about having a linked
course (Comm 2 and English 1A) taught by experienced ACE instructors for students
who have completed the first semester of ACE and are transitioning to transfer-level
courses. This would not require coordination units because there would not be extra
meetings required of faculty. Spring 2015 could be a good candidate for the project since
there are more ACE cohorts in the fall semester and the need for some transition support
for these students has been documented.
3. COST: Nothing
17
RECOMMENDATIONS PRIORITIZED
Recognizing that all recommendations will not be funded, at least not immediately, the following are
the department’s top priorities in order of importance (realistically speaking):
1. Approve 5th full-time faculty position. COST: $40,000 (salary savings funding). This is a
critical need.
2. Approve a growth position. COST: $91,112
3. Continue to increase teaching units substantially to accommodate enrollment increases
and need for additional course sections. All SLOs are affected by lack of full-time
faculty. Student learning cannot take place if students cannot get access to the classes
because classes fill in 4 days.
COST: COST: $1735/unit. Goal: At least enough TUs to add 20 new sections per
academic year to the program schedule (30 additional TUs per term).
4. Soundproof rooms 410 and 411 on both sides. If students cannot hear the instructor or
their attention is distracted by loud noise from a classroom next door, learning is
significantly impacted. You cannot learn critical thinking, communication knowledge and
skills, etc. when you cannot hear the instructor or are constantly distracted. Many
students taking Communication Studies courses have learning disabilities such as
attention deficit hyperactive disorder. Noise from adjacent rooms exacerbates this
problem for these students.
5. All classrooms dedicated to Communication Studies should have usable and fully
functioning Smart Rooms. Reconfigure rooms 410 and 411 with Carts. Provide a Smart
Board for Room 410 and 411.
COST: $9,000 for each Smart Board (3 would be great for rooms 410, 411 and
1091/92)
6. Provide a stable funding source for the annual Spring Fling award ceremony for
Communication Studies majors and minors.
COST: $1500 annually
7. Build a Communication Studies building. This is actually the first priority, but since it is
dependent on typical complicated discussion and debate plus passing a bond issue, this is
listed as last.
COST: $2.125 million
April 28, 2014
Program Name Program Planning
Goals and Recommendations
1.
Description:
Approve 5th full-time faculty position
Cost
2.
Approve a growth full-time position
$91,112
3.
Smart Boards in 410 and 411 - 3 smartboards @ $9K each
$27,000
4.
Spring Fling funding source - annually
5.
Communication Studies building
$40,000
$1,500
$2,125,000
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
.
.
Cabrillo College
4/28/2014 7:41 AM
April 25, 2014
Communication Studies Program Planning
Goals and Recommendations - No Cost
1.
Description:
Soundproof between rooms 410 and 411 on both sides of each room.
Cost
unclear what will provide enough
soundproofing: yet to be
determined.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Cabrillo College
4/25/2014 11:18 AM