Academic Program Review 2003-2004
Executive Summary
Communication Department
The department of Communications was included in the second cycle of academic program
review for the 2003-2004 school year. Based upon feedback from the first cycle, the contents of
the self-study were modified as were some of the implementation details. The department of
communications was one of eight programs undergoing this process for this cycle. Included in
the process was the composition of a self-study document based upon the faculty’s analysis, the
visitation of an external reviewer, Dr. Gerald Baldasty, Department of Communication,
University of Washington. Dr. Baldasty read the self-study, interviewed faculty, staff,
administration, and students, and submitted his analysis.
This executive summary is based upon the departmental self-study document, external
reviewer’s report, and the dean’s response. It is intended so serve as a guide to the faculty, staff
and administration for the next several academic years as the department addresses the
recommendations and continues its record of excellence. The department faculty and college
administration will be expected to provide a summary of activities undertaken during the 20042005 academic year as a consequence of the program review. This report will be due to the
provost in October, 2005.
There are several positive, strong features to the department of communication that need
commendation.
First, the faculty in the department of Communication are actively engaging students in their
respective programs in a variety of ways. Communication students have excelled in national
competitions, hosting conferences, student government, and grant programs. Student intern
opportunities through Cooperative Education are used to extend students’ skills and knowledge.
Student work produced under the guidance of communication faculty document the quality of
instruction and programmatic quality. Students also report their satisfaction with the quality of
academic experiences which result in excellent employment opportunities for them.
The department has been working on its curriculum with the adoption of a seven class core and
specific program options. The department has a formal writing assessment instrument and
process to admit students into the department. This has been refined through the past several
years and currently is working well with students learning early if they are able to meet the
departmental standard. End of program requirements are authentic, with students creating
programmatic work portfolios that provide evidence of their skills and knowledge. Incorporated
into the curriculum is a substantial study of information technology that would be a model for
other departments.
Communication courses serve several other majors and provide elective opportunities for several
more. As such, the department provides a strong service component to the university’s
curriculum.
Recommendations are divided into two categories: curriculum and personnel.
Long-term, strategic planning needs to occur. The department must carefully assess its strengths
and weaknesses, determine a core focus and then prioritize the many possible curricular options
with attention given to the implications of each proposal. Currently the department attempts to be
a “full service” department, but as the external reviewer notes, “In truth, the department does not
do all of the things; some are covered much more fully than others.” Within the context of this
analysis, the department is encouraged to consider the relationship between the pre-professional
programs and the liberal arts study of communication.
As a part of this multi-year process, the faculty must, in terms of Dean Armstrong, “come to
terms with the level of program they can realistically deliver within their means and do so…If
programs or options are to be added to those currently offered, careful planning, staffing plans,
and resource analysis must be done.” As a part of this planning, the department needs to
scrutinize the film and video studies and advertising majors. Both of these programs have been in
the planning stages with other departments in other colleges for too long. It is anticipated that
the department will work with the faculty in other departments to finalize their curriculum
planning, move it through the university’s curriculum process and seek the approval from the
Higher Education Coordinating Board and the Northwest Council of Colleges and Universities.
It is hoped that through this analysis process, the department will be better able to communicate
its role and vision to constituencies outside of the department and therefore help to address the
sense that the hard work of the faculty and excellence of the students are not appreciated or
recognized.
At the faculty personnel level, there are several significant issues that must be immediately
addressed. First, as the external reviewer notes, “There is not enough department-wide thinking
and too much turf-related thinking.” This divisiveness is recognized by both faculty and students
and has lead to a situation where students recognize the divisions and report that faculty are
openly disrespectful of each other or other parts of the department. The consequences of these
actions are many and may contribute to the overall feeling within the department of not having
their hard work appreciated.
Because of the nature of this issue, it is expected that the dean and department chair will work
together during fall, 2004 to address the need for mediation and professional group facilitation
that helps the faculty to work together and build the kind of trust they need to work effectively.
This plan needs to address short term as well as long term activities that will help the faculty to
come together and build a departmental culture that will allow them to address their other issues.
The department also needs to more carefully define the appropriate role and expectations of
faculty research and scholarly activity. Again, the departmental faculty need to analyze how
much they are spending on their teaching and balance that expectation with the university’s
expectation for research and other scholarly activity.