CWU COMM Review, P. 1
Program Review Report
Department of Communication
Central Washington University
Conducted by:
Scott R. Olson, Ph.D.
Professor of Communication
Provost and Vice President of Academic and Student Affairs
Minnesota State University, Mankato
April 2009
CWU COMM Review, P. 2
ALIGNMENT WITH BEST PRACTICES
Mission and Vision: The Department of Communication has a mission, a vision, and value
consistent with and supportive of those of Central Washington University.

Mission: The faculty has a strong sense of the mission of the department, college,
and university. They see their work as connected to that mission. The commitment
to students and to the classroom is strongly evident. The department mission
statement makes reference to preparation for “advanced professional studies” but not
other forms of graduate education.

Vision: The department envisions appropriate growth in relevance to the
professions it serves, in quality of its programs and facilities, and in quantity of the
students it serves. The department’s vision for this growth is consistent with and
supportive of the overall university vision of expanding services online and at the
six university Centers. The department is clearly “on board” with this vision and
eager to realize it if resources permit. While the department does have a vision, it
does not appear to have an articulated vision statement, and may wish to codify one.

Values: The department has a values statement in which it declares support for
hands-on experiential learning, a strong reputation, diversity and global
perspectives, small classes, and interdisciplinary approaches. The department
clearly also values critical thinking and professional preparation, though these are
not articulated in the values statement. These are all consistent with the values of
the University.

Strategy: The department has a clear strategic plan (what it refers to as “Goals for
the future”) that point a clear and appropriate path forward. Key goals in the plan
are (1) increasing visibility, (2) expanding to the Centers, (3) developing a Masters
degree, (4) securing additional resources for scholarship, and (5) developing study
abroad. Goals 1, 2, and 5 are well underway and have been or soon will be realized,
and the department plans further commitment to each. Goal 3 is a longer-term
objective, and will present some challenges to the department in terms of capacity,
CWU COMM Review, P. 3
audience, and focus (more on that later in this report). Goal 4 has shown less
progress, but grant activity has been strengthening. The plan is very appropriate for
the department and for the university.
Curriculum: The Department of Communication offers curricula appropriate to the
disciplines it serves, and is undergoing a curriculum innovation that will further tie its
programs to the students it serves. Given the reduced number of core courses in the new
curriculum, caution will need to be exercised to assure that the department remains
coherent as a whole. Finding two or three key focus areas that permeate the entire
curriculum will help retain coherence.

Innovation: The department has shown a willingness to innovate and modify the
curriculum to keep it aligned with industry trends and technological innovations.
The new curriculum has been in development for four years. New students will
follow the new curriculum beginning Fall 2009.

“Bookends”: The major programs within the department have appropriate bookend
courses, i.e. coherent entry and exit points for students. For example, the portfolio
assessment provides a logical capstone experience for students to reflect on what
they have accomplished and how it fits together.

Coherence: The communication core has been reduced in size, which means that
students in the different communication majors will henceforth have fewer courses
in common. This carries with it both opportunities and threats. The primary
opportunity is that each track will be able to focus more thoroughly on the needs of
students studying within it, increasing the “relevance” of each major program. The
primary threat is that the department risks becoming a loose confederation of
similarly themed but otherwise disconnected programs. There remains a powerful
case for preparing generalists in communication who can move between the norms
of journalism, public relations, and organizational communication with ease, and the
faculty spoke with pride about this point. Therefore, it is recommended that the
department choose two or three signature areas of excellence and focus that will
permeate all the majors and minors within the program, and perhaps appear in some
CWU COMM Review, P. 4
way or another in every course, as a way of connecting the students and faculty with
each other. These foci would of course emanate from key strengths and interests
already demonstrated by the department and clearly relevant to all students. The
three that seem immediately to suggest themselves by virtue of the interests and
capabilities of the faculty are:
o Convergence
o First Amendment
o Globalization and Diversity
Others may be appropriate, but these three could clearly be woven into the learning
outcomes of every program within the department, and potentially at least one of
them could be woven into every course. These would then become markers of
excellence that assure CWU its place in the national conversation about
communication education, and would prepare students well for their professions or
future study. Now that the ethics component has been pushed into the core, efforts
should be made to assure that profession-related ethics are being infused in the upperdivision courses.

Advisory Boards: A student media board is in the process of being formed, which is
commendable. The formation of an industry advisory board and of a student advisory
board is also encouraged. The student advisory board could be comprised of the
leadership of the student clubs and media. This could be a single departmental
advisory board, or three separate advisory boards linked to communication studies,
journalism, and public relations. This would further enhance the relevance of the
programs and curriculum and also form useful bonds that can serve faculty research
and student opportunities.

Relevance: The department faculty has done a good job of staying close to the
professions and infusing relevance into coursework and projects. Students note this
and are proud of it, citing it as one of the best things about the CWU Department of
Communication. Both students and alumni/ae (via the survey) report an interest in
more opportunities to learn about professionalism, e.g. how to dress for a job
interview, meal etiquette, career management, entrepreneurship, resume and cover
CWU COMM Review, P. 5
letter support, and so on. Therefore, it is suggested that with the help of the new
student advisory board, the department seek curricular and/or extracurricular
intercession points to help students with their professional skill development.

Diversity: The department displays tremendous commitment to diversity in its
staffing and curriculum. This should be highly valued by the institution. One
program that deserves exceptional support and acclaim is the Bridges program,
which makes the dream of higher education a reality for many central
Washingtonians who would not otherwise have had this success. This has many
positive effects, but worthy of special notation is the good will it generates for the
university throughout the region, the certain influx of new students to CWU, and the
enhanced retention of current CWU students who serve as Bridges mentors. There
are 50 paid mentors and 200 volunteers, who are CWU students, and 8,000-10,000
high school students in the program. A simple cost/benefit analysis would reveal
that the program has added substantial resources to CWU’s bottom line, but
unfortunately the federal grant funds are reaching their end. Therefore, it is
recommended that the institution find a way to provide a level of ongoing support for
Bridges as it seeks further grant funding.

Technology: The department invests in and uses appropriate technology, both in
support of pedagogy, and as the subject matter of courses. The department faculty
knows what they need, and have had some success in acquiring it through summer
surplus dollars, but the process for seeking institutional funding for equipment is
not clear to the department. Students report that they are gaining strong skills in
technology. CWU’s student media make use of cutting edge innovations, such as
Twitter. One concern is limited access to a Mac lab and to high-quality color
printers that are essential to the public relations students. Students must use a lab
in the Department of Art that provides limited and (apparently) grudging access.
The new building affords the opportunity to have both a convergence lab and a
media and advertising design lab. There are some plans for investing in one highquality color printer using summer surplus dollars. The new 315 courses will
CWU COMM Review, P. 6
assure that particular technologies are taught in advance of the courses that require
fluency in them.

Sequencing and Scheduling: Time and materials to do a thorough review of course
scheduling were simply not available in the scope of this work, but the department
may want to look at how courses are scheduled, course sequencing, and/or the
advising materials provided to students. Some students reported difficulty in having
classes they want or need scheduled at the same time as other classes they want or
need. Some of this is certainly attributable to poor planning on the part of students
and to an “I want it now” attitude among many college students today, but in the
interest of the student-centeredness that is otherwise so evident in the department,
this perception of some of the students needs at least to be considered. The new
student advisory board would be a good place to have some conversations to assess
whether the perceptions are substantial or not.

General Education: The department does not participate in general education in a
substantial way, though it is looking at ways to expand its offerings. Given that
employers (all across the nation, so presumably in Washington state, too)
overwhelmingly identify communication skills as a major requirement of the college
graduates they employ, it was surprising to this reviewer to see that CWU had no
public speaking course required in general education, nor any sort of “speaking
across the curriculum” requirement. Apparently this is for economic rather than
pedagogical or philosophical reasons. There is no doubt that a public speaking
course takes enormous staffing, but handled well it call be a “cash cow” in terms of
low cost student credit hour generation: high quality speaking courses can be
offered by graduate teaching assistants at a low cost per FTE. This reviewer
suggests that the Dean and Provost examine the programs at Ball State University and
at Minnesota State University, Mankato as two examples of how this might be done. It
goes without saying that such G.A.s could be an offshoot of a communication
Masters program.

Expansion: In addition to planning a potential Masters degree, the department is
considering reviving the Advertising Minor. This could be another program very
CWU COMM Review, P. 7
popular with CWU students, but it would of course require additional resources in
order to be done well. PR and advertising are not the same thing, and at least one
dedicated advertising faculty member is suggested if the department is serious about
having a high-quality minor.
Co-curriculum: The Department of Communication hosts excellent student media,
supports it well, and integrates it into the educational experience in a way clear to and
appreciated by the students.

Student media: CWU should be proud of its high quality student media. The media
have editorial autonomy, which is critical for student preparation and success.
Students report that even when some of their reporting is critical, they feel free to
report as they see fit. The weekly editorial meeting of all the Observer staff was
inclusive and impressive. Its design is clean and readable and it has a solid mix of
reporting, columns, and sports – it does a great service to the CWU community. The
formation of a Student Media Board is an excellent step, and the charter is
appropriate. It is curious that the student radio station is not a part of the Student
Media Board, because connection to that board would further enhance the relevance
of the station, its connection to the overall CWU experience, and its ability to
promote CWU. Therefore, it is recommended that the administration consider adding
the student radio station to the Student Media Board. This will more closely align the
radio station with the academic mission of the institution.

Student clubs: There are an appropriate number of student clubs, including a
chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists and a chapter of the Public
Relations Student Society of America. I had the opportunity to participate in an SPJ
meeting, and the club appeared to have enthusiastic and participatory members and
leadership. Other clubs include PRSSA, NBS, the Motion Picture Club, and Lambda Pi
Eta, all of whom are very active judging from posters and flyers available in the
department offices and throughout Bouillon Hall.
CWU COMM Review, P. 8
Assessment and Accountability: The Department of Communication demonstrates an
excellent assessment plan that leads to program improvements.

Assessment: The department is doing an excellent job of assessment with the
resources available to it. A complete discussion of learning outcomes and the
portfolio assessment project will be discussed below. A lack of good institutional
data hampers the ability of the department to do its work and improve
performance. Alumni/ae survey data is apparently hard to secure, as is direct
contact with the alumni/ae. Career Services data is also hard for the department to
get in the form it wants. Other forms of data are likewise hard to get. It is
recommended that the university review the data needs of its departments and find a
way to provide more of the information that is needed for program analysis and
improvement. Letter grades from courses are used to evaluate whether each
learning outcome was met, exceeded, or not met. This can work passably so long as
each course is careful about following the learning outcomes and using classroom
evaluation measures that correspond. The department has 100% participation in
the portfolio assessment, which is commendable.

Accreditation: None of the department’s programs are currently accredited.
Accreditation would not be available for Communication Studies in any case because
the national organizations (the National Communication Association and the
International Communication Association) do not offer accreditation. Accreditation
for Journalism is available through ACEJMC, the accreditation arm of the Association
for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication. Nevertheless, this
accreditation is not recommended for CWU for two reasons: the central
administration does not consider accreditation a major priority for accreditable
programs, and the department does not have particular interest in pursuing
accreditation.

Accountability: Accountability has not been a major issue at CWU, at least not yet.
The university is encouraged to be a part of the national conversation about the
Voluntary System of Accountability (College Portrait). The student media do have
conversations about their own accountability to the constituencies they serve. The
CWU COMM Review, P. 9
department has a vision for the Observer to be a 12-month operation. The
department does have some accountability measures in place that are perhaps not
widely reported but that nonetheless bespeak a strong commitment to students,
such as the requirement that members of the faculty achieve a 3.75 score on the
standardized student evaluations of teaching. This is a fact that many students and
family members would find a compelling reason to study in CWU’s communication
department.

Portfolio: The use of portfolios is excellent. The content of the portfolios is robust,
students are reflexive about their work, and the department uses the findings to
improve its curriculum and student services. The department may wish to consider
using online portfolios in the future, which may prove more professionally useful to
students, and also easier for all to use. There are many sites that provide free
portfolios for educational purposes; one example is
http://www.efoliominnesota.com/.
Scholarship: The Department of Communication is still in the process of working with the
administration to find common ground on defining what scholarly achievements should be
acceptable for promotion and tenure; common ground must be found before the planning
for a Masters degree can proceed.

Focus: Every member of the faculty is engaged in some form of scholarly or creative
activity, and judging from the CVs, this work is for the most part appropriate to the
disciplines and mission-appropriate to institutions like CWU (more on this in the
addendum). This having been said, the scholarship may not be sufficient in every
area being considered for a Masters degree focus to warrant all members of the
faculty being awarded full Graduate Faculty status. Therefore, should the
department, college, and university wish to pursue a Masters degree, it is
recommended that the department define its focus area soon and then commit to
achieving rich scholarship in areas appropriate to that degree sufficient to meet
university Grad Faculty status standards and national norms for Masters-granting
departments in the communication disciplines.
CWU COMM Review, P. 10

Reputation: The department and its programs appear to be well known in the
central Washington region, thanks in large measure to the Bridges program.
Statewide reputation was more difficult to assess. Some members of the
department faculty are known nationally, and the department is encouraged to
further engage the national discussions going on in each of its disciplines.

Depth: The department believes that while expectations for scholarly achievement
were in the process of being “ramped up,” they are now being “dialed down” to
previous levels. It would be very helpful for there to be clear articulations of what,
exactly, the expectations are. There are questions about whether the guidelines will
need to be changed, or whether they will be reinterpreted in the future.
Pedagogy: Teaching and learning are priorities for the department and students respond
positively to the way classes are handled.

Engagement: Nearly every course has some engagement component, however small,
and some courses have large engagement components, such as service learning or
the production of media that is actually consumed by on- and off-campus audiences.
Additionally, there are co-curricular activities that strongly engage students in the
issues of their field.

Learning Outcomes: The department has comprehensive learning outcomes that
cover the scope of the curriculum well. Most are very well written, of the “doing” or
“demonstrating” type, meaning that they are easily assessable, and that students
know precisely what is expected. Some are of the “knowing” or “understanding”
type, meaning that they are harder to assess and understand. Compare, for example,
Journalism learning outcome goal #3 (“to know in depth a journalism
specialization” – subjective and difficult to assess) to goal #4 (“will be able to work
as a team to produce media product” – objective and easily assessable). The
department may wish to review the learning outcomes to see if all outcomes can be
stated in measurable terms.

Student assessment: Classroom evaluation of student performance is linked to the
learning outcomes of the program.
CWU COMM Review, P. 11

Technology: The department has a goal that every course will be offered in at least
two “modalities,” meaning that in addition to offering the course as a conventional
on-campus face-to-face course, each course will also be available online, or offcampus, or on the weekend, or in some other modality. This greatly increases
access for students and further enhances the university’s ability to grow. It was not
clear that the university has a strategic plan for the development of online and offcampus programs. If it does not, it is recommended that the university develop such a
plan, and do so inclusively.

Off-Campus “Centers”: The department is eager to participate in the university
Centers and is actively pursuing an expanded presence there, including the hiring of
faculty members who might spend most or all of their time at these Centers. The
department is planning a wise mix of on site, ITV, hybrid, and online courses to
serve students across the state. This is all in keeping with the university’s wise
strategic vision, and should be supported to the extent possible. The department is in
the process of exploring its first articulation agreement, in this case with Shoreline
Community College in Seattle, as a means of enhancing departmental offerings at
that Center.

Online: The department is also working on online courses, and plans to offer every
course in at least two modalities. Development of these online courses should also
be encouraged – they have significant growth potential.
Resources: Though the Department of Communication can manage with its current
facilities, it cannot grow in size or quality without an expansion and improvement of space.
Plans are in place for a new Communication building that will allow growth.

Offices: Department offices are tight and cramped, a problem exacerbated by the
growth of the program. The addition of the new building will relieve this problem,
but in the meantime other short-term relief solutions need to be considered.

Classrooms: Classrooms seemed appropriate for the most part, though apparently
communication classes are scattered across the university, making it difficult for
students and faculty to get from one to the other, especially if they are sequential.
CWU COMM Review, P. 12
This reviewer was not able to learn enough about classroom assignment processes
to make any recommendations for improvement, but it did strike me as unusual that
any one program might find itself all over the campus in the course of a day.

Labs: The television studio is functional and appropriate, with a new lighting grid
and fairly new control room equipment, but the department is looking forward to a
new home. A new Convergence Lab to be shared by journalism and FVS students is
on the docket for summer construction, and in fact some of the new equipment had
just arrived and had the production faculty fairly excited. The renovation described
for this space is, to some extent, a makeshift solution that must rely on the space
available in Bouillon. Efforts are underway to make the space open and available to
student media, too. It is suggested that a careful plan be developed for digital
production space in the new building, and that some thought be put into whether
the convergence lab ought to be a separate lab from an FVS film and video editing
facility. Based on passionate comments from students, it is recommended that efforts
be made to secure for the department a Mac lab with flexible hours and a high quality
(~$3,500) color printer.

Budgets: Transparency of the budget and the budgeting process appears to be a
major campus concern that interferes with planning and with
faculty/administration relations. There is widespread hope among the faculty that
the new President and relatively new Provost will transform this for the better.
Some members of the faculty feel that Enrollment Management is controlled more
by Student Affairs than by Academic Affairs, though this review was not able to
learn enough to comment on this.

Professional Development: Professional development funds for faculty members
appear to be adequate, though by no means exceptional. Individual faculty
members are assured $700, or $1,000 if they are presenting at a conference.
Additional funds are available for international travel, or from the department
central budget or the Dean. There is a perception among the faculty that internal
grants overwhelmingly fund the sciences and seem not be available to the
humanities.
CWU COMM Review, P. 13
Citizenship: The Department of Communication is committed to promoting on- and offcampus citizenship in the best possible sense.

Community engagement: In addition to the excellent student media, the First
Amendment Festival deserves special citation for excellence in engaging the campus
and greater community is a discussion of something the department knows well and
has to offer. It is recommended that the department explore ways to have a smallerscale version of the First Amendment Festival become a regular event that students
and citizens across the state come to look forward to. Making the Festival a regular
event is the single best step the department can making in terms of meeting its
number one strategic goal: enhancing its reputation.

Campus leadership: Department faculty members and students are leaders on
campus, including major initiatives such as institutional accreditation and
faculty/administration relations as well as special events like the First Amendment
Festival and ongoing initiatives such as student media.
Processes: Processes for decision making, especially as they relate to enrollment
management and budgeting, are not always clear to all parties, and deserve some attention.

Transparency: A major inhibiter of entrepreneurial growth of CWU programs
appears to be a lack of clarity and transparency relating to ground rules or
processes of how student credit hour generation is linked to the budget. Though the
department has secured additional resources concomitantly with its growth, the
process through which this happened was mysterious to everyone in the
department. The Dean also expressed some concern about how budgets and credit
hours are linked. Having a clear process that links these two elements will, over
time, drive institutional resources toward more productive programs and away
from less productive ones. It is clear that the Provost and AVP know how to achieve
this, and that they plan to do so. Therefore, this reviewer encourages the creation of
regular sets of SCH per FTE faculty data that are distributed transparently across
campus, along with clear general guidelines as to how resources will follow credit
CWU COMM Review, P. 14
generation. This will be immeasurably helpful to the departments most closely
aligned with the university’s vision. Though not within the purview if this review,
there seemed to be similar mystery as to how the space allocation and master
facilities planning processes occur, but the department is clearly delighted with the
results of those processes, which include a new communication building.

Civility: One of the items cited for concern in the prior program review was the
strained relationship between the department and the administration, and
apparently there were also issues of civility within the department. The members of
the faculty have worked on these issues, and have a much more positive relationship
with each other and with the administration than in the recent past. The
department chair and others have worked carefully to improve these circumstances.
Hopefully, these positive relationships will continue.
Graduate Education: At this time, the Department of Communication is in the early stages
of conversation about what graduate education, if any, might be appropriate for it. It will
need to develop a clear focus for the program, keeping in mind the target audience.

Vision for Graduate Education: The department currently has two ideas for a
possible future Masters program – Multicultural Journalism and/or Global Public
Relations. The department clearly has expertise in these two areas, and programs of
this type would be fairly unique in comprehensive universities and could potentially
attract students from outside central Washington, even perhaps from other parts of
the U.S. To this reviewer, a program in Global Public relations is the more likely of
the two to find full-paying graduate students without the need for many graduate
assistantships and potentially with some employers willing to pick up the tuition
bill; a program in Multicultural Journalism would be more likely to require graduate
assistantships, who could in turn work with the student media, the Bridges
program, and future First Amendment Festivals, if any. It is recommended that the
department define its vision for graduate education, including an assessment of its
capacities, before progressing further in any program development.
CWU COMM Review, P. 15

Capacity for Graduate Education: The University is in the process of revising its
process and expectations for Graduate Faculty status. Depending on what those
standards will be, the faculty in Communication may or may not qualify for full
graduate Faculty status. Having only Associate Graduate Faculty would severely
limit the ability to have an effective graduate program. Additionally, the department
faculty members most likely to be graduate faculty are already stretched thin, so
additional resources would really be necessary. In terms of traditional, journalbased scholarship, the department has greater depth in the Communication Studies
area than in the other areas.

Audience for Graduate Education: There are some discussions in the department
about whether current CWU student would or would not be a target audience of a
new Masters program. It is probable that the initial students will be “home-grown”
with an increasing number of non-CWU coming to the program over time, especially
to the extent that the program is offered at the “west side” Centers. The two
proposed areas of focus are Convergence Media and Intercultural Communication.
The department is testing the waters this year with five or six graduate students in
an individualized-studies program.
CWU COMM Review, P. 16
Key Markers of Excellence
1. Faculty dedicated to CWU students
2. Great growth potential
3. Willingness to work with administration to expand into campus Centers and online
4. Clear and comprehensive learning outcomes
5. Robust portfolio-based assessment with feedback loop to curriculum
6. Responsiveness to prior program review
7. Strategic planning
8. Grateful students and alumni/ae
9. Outstanding faculty diversity
10. Bridges program outreach
11. First Amendment Festival
12. Excellent curriculum structure
13. Focus on globalization
14. Focus on convergence
Key Opportunities for Improvement
1. Enhancement of curriculum foci across all three majors, e.g. convergence, first
amendment, and/or globalization and diversity
2. Clear and agreed-upon definition of scholarly standards for promotion and tenure
3. Website content is not consistently up-to-date or compelling
4. Faculty stretched thin
5. Insufficient access to data inhibits planning capabilities
6. Space limitations (which are being addressed in the campus facilities master plan)
CWU COMM Review, P. 17
Summary of Primary Recommendations
Recommendations to the Department of Communication:
1. Mission, Vision, and Strategy
a. The department may wish to revise its mission statement to include the way
it prepares students for “advanced studies” and not just advanced
professional studies.
b. The department has a compelling vision and is encouraged to codify it in an
articulated vision statement that can help keep it focused and help the
administration see where it is going.
c. It is recommended that the department choose two or three signature areas
of excellence and focus that will permeate all the majors and minors within
the program, and perhaps appear in some overt way in every course, perhaps
mentioned in the syllabi, perhaps written into the program learning
outcomes. Three that immediately suggest themselves are convergence, first
amendment, and globalization.
d. It is recommended that the department define its vision for graduate
education, including an assessment of its capacities, before progressing
further in any program development.
2. Processes
a. The formation of industry and student advisory boards is encouraged.
b. Given some complaints by students about class schedule conflicts, the
department may wish to consult with the student advisory to see whether
there are substantive problems in terms of scheduling and advising, or
merely unrealistic expectations from some students.
c. The department may wish to review the learning outcomes to see if all
outcomes can be stated in measurable terms.
CWU COMM Review, P. 18
3. Curriculum and co-curriculum
a. With the help of the new student advisory board, the department may wish
to develop curricular and/or extracurricular intercession points to help
students with their professional skill development, especially job seeking
skills.
b. It is recommended that the department define the focus area for a potential
Masters degree as soon as possible, and then commit to achieving rich
scholarship in areas appropriate to that degree sufficient to meet university
Grad Faculty status standards and national norms for Masters-granting
departments in the communication disciplines.
c. Now that the ethics component has been pushed into the core, efforts should
be made to assure that profession-related ethics are being infused in the
upper-division courses.
d. It is recommended that the department explore ways to have a smaller-scale
version of the First Amendment Festival become a regular event that
students and citizens across the state come to look forward to.
4. Resources
a. The institution should try to find a way to provide a level of ongoing support
for Bridges as it seeks further grant funding.
b. If the department is serious about having a high-quality Advertising Minor,
then it is recommended that it review the necessary staffing, and in all
likelihood seek at least one faculty member dedicated to advertising.
Furthermore, the department should get involved in AAC in the same way it
is currently involved in PRSA and PRSSA.
5. Assessment and Accreditation
a. The department may wish to consider using online portfolios in the future,
which may prove more professionally useful to students, and also easier for
all to use.
b. ACEJMC accreditation is not recommended at this time.
CWU COMM Review, P. 19
Recommendations to the central university Administration:
1. It is recommended that the administration consider adding the student radio station
to the Student Media Board.
2. It is recommended that the university review the data needs of its departments and
find a way to provide more of the information that is needed for program analysis
and improvement.
3. It is recommended that the Dean and Provost examine the public speaking general
education programs at Ball State University and at Minnesota State University,
Mankato to see whether they might have applicability at CWU as a means of further
enhancing the value of CWU graduates.
4. It is recommended that the central administration create a process for generating
regular sets of SCH per FTE faculty data that are distributed transparently across
campus, along with clear general guidelines as to how resources will follow credit
generation.
5. It is recommended that the central administration continue to support the
department’s expansion onto the university Centers and into the online world to the
extent possible, because these initiatives fully support the university’s strategic
vision for online and off-campus programs. A “self-support” model should be in
place (and perhaps is in place) so as to be as entrepreneurial as possible. In short, if
enrollments in a course are sufficient to cover the instructional and fixed costs of
delivering that course, the course should be funded.
6. Based on passionate comments from students, it is recommended that efforts be
made to secure for the department a Mac lab with flexible hours and a high quality
(~$3,500) color printer.
7. If it does not already have a strategic plan for the development of online and offcampus programs, it is recommended that the university develop such a plan, and
do so inclusively.
CWU COMM Review, P. 20
Appendix A
Student and Faculty Perspectives
Strengths of Department as Cited by Faculty

High quality students

Student success in securing employment

Collegiality

Faculty diversity

International initiatives

Convergence focus

First amendment focus

Availability to students

Support of students

Flexibility of majors

Cross-fertilization across major tracks
Strengths of Department as Cited by Students

Great faculty

Strong professional preparation

Lack of quality in one or two of the other CWU departments

Hands-on technology

Professors care about and know the students

Professional expertise of the faculty

Welcoming, open-door approach of the department chair

Problem-solving by department chair

Faculty credibility

International scope and focus
CWU COMM Review, P. 21
Challenges to the Department as Cited by Faculty

Stretched too thin

Too many opportunities for growth – not enough resources

Limited funding for technology

Administration consultation processes
Challenges to the Department as Cited by Students

Too much of one track appearing in the other tracks

Class availability and scheduling resulting in over use of course substitutions

Lab access, especially of labs not controlled by the department

Extreme variability of course content depending on who taught a section

Some repetitiveness in intro-level courses
CWU COMM Review, P. 22
Appendix B
Comments on Communication Scholarship
In addition to the program review, the administration requested some additional
comments about the nature of appropriate scholarly activity in the fields represented in the
Department of Communication. Given that each of these fields represents a nexus of the
traditional liberal arts and the applied professions, there are no simple formulas defining
what constitutes appropriate scholarship, and no standard practice across the disciplines.
This appendix represents some personal observations and suggestions and should not be
taken as authoritative.
Primary observation: The definition of what constitutes appropriate scholarship in any
field at Central Washington University needs to take into account the mission and vision of
the university. Based on this reviewer’s observation, the R1 standard at one extreme is not
appropriate, but neither is a standard that requires no scholarship at the other extreme.
Where the appropriate band exists on this continuum needs to be determined by the
university in conversation with the department. Given the special nature of these
disciplines, the university is encouraged to consider a band of activities broader than might
be applied to the traditional disciplines.
What, precisely, is the purpose of faculty scholarship at CWU? Is it to assure that a faculty
member is current in their field? Is it to spread the good name of CWU? Is it to contribute
to the body of knowledge in the field? Is it to provide research opportunities for students?
Is the “Boyer Model” followed at CWU? What, exactly, is peer review supposed to ensure?
How these questions are answered will help determine what is appropriate for the
Department of Communication.
Communication Studies
Of the three disciplines contained within the department, the faculty in
Communication Studies will have scholarship that most closely parallels other
CWU COMM Review, P. 23
scholarship in the College of Arts and Humanities. The journals in the field are
typically affiliated with the National Communication Association, the International
Communication Association, or one of the regional iterations of these associations,
and have names such as the Journal of Communication, the Quarterly Journal of
Speech, and the Journal of International and Intercultural Communication. All of
these journals are peer reviewed. Depending on their particular focus,
Communication Studies faculty may also publish in other journals in related fields.
Some of the common book publishers are SAGE, Lawrence Erlbaum, and Routledge,
though there are many others. I doubt that faculty in this field will present any
special dilemmas for P&T committees.
More resources may be found at www.natcom.org and http://www.icahdq.org/.
Journalism
Journalism is the area that may present the greatest challenge in terms of tenure
and promotion guidelines because it serves both an academic discipline and a
profession, and research within the field may be both pure and applied. Both forms
may be acceptable and still have a high quality program that meets national
standards; whether both forms will be acceptable needs to be a local decision based
on institutional mission. Even R1 institutions may tenure a person who does strictly
applied research if he or she brings in a reputation in the profession that leads to
continued thoughtful service thereto.
The Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication (AEJMC) is
the national organization that governs and accredits journalism programs and
accounts for much of the research and scholarship in the field. The AEJMC website
states that appropriate research may include “… communicating research results,
identifying research priorities, encouraging methodological development or
CWU COMM Review, P. 24
examining the application of research results among other things.”1 This suggests
that applied research, as opposed to pure research, is perfectly acceptable to the
national organization, and indeed one frequently sees research of this type at the
national AEJMC conventions.
There are “pure” journalism researchers (by which I mean research and writing
without direct professional application) as well as “applied” journalism researchers
(meaning work of use to the journalism or teaching professions). “Pure” research
might include a survey of how press attitudes evolved during the 9/11 crisis, and be
aimed primarily at other scholars. “Applied” research might be aimed at editors,
journalists, or scholastic journalism advisors (e.g. high school newspaper advisors).
Both types are potentially countable toward tenure. By analogy, Nursing and Dental
Hygiene faculty members may find themselves exclusively engaging in applied
research and using such materials toward tenure them is a matter of routine.
Examples of pure research journals in journalism and mass communication include
Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly (published by AEJMC) and Critical
Studies in Media Communication (published by NCA). Examples of applied research
journals include Journalism and Mass Communication Educator (published by
AEJMC), Quill (published by the Society of Professional Journalists, of which CWU
has a chapter), and College Media Review (published by the College Media Advisers
association).
Whether applied research publications are creditable toward tenure at CWU is a
matter for local decision making. It goes without saying that it would be best if the
acceptability of such research would be defined in advance, so that a faculty
members knows whether he or she is on the right track, rather than at the time of a
AEJMC Elected Standing Committee on Research (1984). Criteria for division evaluations.
Guidelines posted at the AEJMC website.
(http://www.aejmc.org/_officerhandbooks/head_viceheads/2administrative/division_eval
uations.pdf)
1
CWU COMM Review, P. 25
tenure decision. For benchmarking purposes, when I was Dean of the College of
Communication, Information, and Media at Ball State University, a national leader in
journalism education, I would have accepted (and welcomed) applied research
publications as creditable toward tenure. Likewise, my current institution (which is
similar to CWU in many ways) would also accept such publications. In both
instances we would have found them acceptable because applied research and
service to the professions as well as the disciplines is seen as a core to the mission of
both Ball State and Minnesota State. Whether this is also true at CWU is a matter for
local discussion and decision-making. For example, Steve Bell, a former ABC-TV
journalist, was tenured and promoted to full professor at Ball State University even
though he did no pure and traditional research, but instead because he provided
continuing service to the profession in the form of helpful and instructive applied
writing and research.
The Journalism field is quick to acknowledge the ambiguity of the research and
scholarship conundrum in a discipline that has both pure and applied aspects. An
article posted at the AEJMC website states:
The majority of those embarking on an academic career will end up with
tenure cases in the gray zone. A small percentage of those pursuing tenure
will not be able to address a fatal flaw -- for example, no funding or
publishing, abysmal teaching, etc. -- and will not be able to succeed. On the
other extreme are those who are exceptional across the board -- tremendous
research and funding, large number of articles published, teaching award
recognition, national awards, etc. -- and their tenure cases will be almost
impossible to derail. However, the majority of those beginning tenure-track
positions will end up in the gray or middle zone, and the outcome will depend
on local departmental and university conditions. To determine the likelihood
CWU COMM Review, P. 26
of success for your tenure case, actively and persistently seek honest and
constructive feedback from department leaders.2 (Emphasis added)
A further complicating factor for Journalism educators is the “practice of the craft”
as opposed to “research in the field.” Again, this must be subject to local adoption
and interpretation based on institutional mission. “Practice of the craft” would not
normally be acceptable at R1 institutions as the exclusive scholarship in a tenure
case, but might be considered in addition to other material. Some institutions with
lower research profiles might consider “practice of the craft” to be sufficient in and
of itself for tenure. In the case of a College of Arts and Humanities, which we also
have at Minnesota State, the analysis must consider analogies to how “practice of
the craft” might be treated in the Departments of Art, Music, and Theatre. Neither
Minnesota State nor Ball State would have considered “practice of the craft”
sufficient in and of itself for tenure, but it would be considered a valuable addition to
a promotion or tenure case file.
Additional guidelines on Journalism scholarship may be found at www.aejmc.org,
though no simple and clear definition can be found there or anywhere. Again,
institutional mission must define tenure standards, which should be clear to a
faculty member early on in their career and not established (or changed) at the time
of their tenure application.
Public Relations
Most Public Relations scholars will have opportunities for traditional scholarship
analogous to Communication Studies scholars. “Practice of the craft” is not usually
considered to be sufficient for tenure applications, at least not as scholarship (it may
Phinney, L. (2009, March 27). What I wish I'd known about tenure. Article posted at the
AEJMC website. (http://aejmc.org/talk/?p=2728)
2
CWU COMM Review, P. 27
be considered as service in some instances). Likewise, there is less opportunity for
applied scholarship in Public Relations, because practitioners do not typically read
the journals that faculty write in, and because there is no such thing as “scholastic
PR” at the high school level. For PR faculty on non-tenure lines, “practice of the
craft” is to be strongly encouraged, because students highly value the relevance and
credibility this allows a faculty member to bring to the classroom. This assumes
that the “practice of the craft” work does not interfere with the faculty member
teaching courses and serving the university, as it might if a faculty member has a
private PR business that interferes with his or her ability to do the primary job. An
example of an appropriate PR publication would be the Public Relations Journal
published by the Public Relations Society of America (of which CWU is a member),
an online version of which may be found at http://www.prsa.org/prjournal.
Additional resources may be found at www.prsa.org.