SJSU Annual Program Assessment Form
Academic Year 2013-2014
Department:
Communication Studies
Program:
B.A. Program
College:
Social Sciences
Website:
www.sjsu.edu/comm
_ Check here if your website addresses the University Learning Goals.
Program Accreditation:
Contact Person and Email:
Date of Report:
Not Applicable
Shawn Spano, shawn.spano@sjsu.edu
June 1, 2014
Part A
1. List of Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs)
There are six B.A. Program PLOs total, organized into three broad categories: Foundations,
Inquiry, and Practice (see below). Department faculty developed and refined these PLOs over a
series of faculty meetings, beginning in 2008 and continuing through AY 2013-14. Most recently,
faculty developed assessable outcomes for each of the PLOs, indicating criteria for increasing
levels of mastery.
PLO CATEGORY 1: FOUNDATIONS are theoretical and conceptual frameworks for understanding
and evaluating communication.
Foundations PLO 1: Understanding Communication Theories
Demonstrate an understanding of the major theories that have shaped the field of
communication, including historical developments, ethical issues and current trends.
PLO1, Assessable Outcome 1: Students can explain the major theories that have shaped a
specific area of communication studies.
 Beginning: Name a minimum of three major theories in a specific area of communication
studies.
 Developing: State and explain key concepts and principles of the theories.
 Accomplished: Describe and explain the historical context of theories and their relationships
to contemporary research.
 Exemplary: Articulate key accomplishments of those theories, their impact for that area of
the field and suggest an agenda for future research.
PLO 1, Assessable Outcome 2: Students can provide a comprehensive analysis of at least one
communication theory.
 Beginning: Identify theory author(s) and foundational principles of a major theory of
communication.
 Developing: Articulate theory method and application.
1


Accomplished: Explain rationale for the theory within the field and the broader social
context.
Exemplary: Evaluate theory impact and propose insightful expansion and alternative uses.
Foundations PLO 2: Critiquing Communication Theories:
Demonstrate the ability to discuss the strengths and limitations of theoretical perspectives on
communication.
PLO 2, Assessable Outcome 1: Students can demonstrate their understanding of the process and
responsibility of scholarly critique.
 Beginning: Students can identify the elements of scholarly critique appropriate to that
particular course.
 Developing: Student can explain the elements of scholarly critique
 Accomplished: Students can articulate the need for and purposes of scholarly critique
 Exemplary: Students can contextualize scholarly critiques with a larger disciplinary
conversation
PLO 2, Assessable Outcome 2: Students can present a comparative analysis and critique of at
least two major communication theories.
 Beginning: Students can identify fundamental differences between theoretical perspectives
 Developing: Students can explain specific similarities and differences between theoretical
perspectives
 Accomplished: Students can use two or more theoretical perspectives to engage and
investigate a specific site of communication or communication event
 Exemplary: Students can articulate the implications of a comparative analysis and critique
for the study of communication and future theoretical development.
PLO CATEGORY 2: INQUIRY includes research methods that generate and evaluate new
knowledge about communication.
Inquiry PLO3: Research Methods
Demonstrate an understanding of methods of communication research and analysis such as
rhetorical, critical, interpretive, performative and social scientific approaches and their ethical
implications.
PLO 3, Assessable Outcome 1: Students can articulate key methodological concepts and their
ethical implications in published communication research.
 Beginning: Name a minimum of two key methodological concepts from at least two
research methods.
 Developing: Explain, compare, and contrast the key methodological concepts and
resulting ethical implications from at least two different research methods.
2


Accomplished: Describe and explain the nature (kind, scope) of knowledge and the
ethical stakes produced by those research methods in our discipline.
Exemplary: Articulate a strategic usage of two paradigmatically different research
methods in the pursuit of specific research goals. Identify the ethical rationale for
engaging in such research.
PLO 3, Assessable Outcome 2: Students can explain the rationale underlying practices and
procedures of communication research.
 Beginning: Name the key processes and procedures of at least two research methods
 Developing: State and explain the decisions that need to be made when navigating those
key processes and procedures of at least two research methods
 Accomplished: By drawing on scholarly literature, justify and defend the key processes and
procedures of at least two research methods.
 Exemplary: Troubleshoot the methodological and ethical challenges embedded in the key
processes and procedures of at least two paradigmatically different research methods.
Inquiry PLO 4: Research Application and Critique
Develop and apply analytical skills and ethical practices for understanding, conducting, and
evaluating communication research studies.
PLO 4, Assessable Outcome 1: Students can write a critique of published communication
research, including an examination of the study’s ethical practices.
 Beginning: Be able to locate appropriate peer-reviewed sources in communication studies
and summarize the results.
 Developing: Be able to identify strengths and limitations, both theoretical and
methodological, in appropriate peer-reviewed sources.
 Accomplished: Be able to synthesize patterns in research studies and explain gaps in the
literature to create research questions.
 Exemplary: Be able to do all this in a compelling, novel, and ethical way.
PLO 4, Assessable Outcome 2: Students can write an original research proposal.
 Beginning: Students can explain the parts of a proposal and how they contribute to its
effectiveness.
 Developing: Students can identify research questions that emerge from the literature
review and the appropriate methods for addressing those questions.
 Accomplished: Students can identify the strengths and limitations and ethical implications
of their chosen research method for their proposed study.
 Exemplary: Students articulate how their proposal responds to relevant disciplinary
questions in a novel manner.
3
PLO CATEGORY 3: PRACTICE is the use of communication skills and the application of theoretical
frameworks and research methods in specific contexts.
Practice PLO 5: Communication Competence: Demonstrate the ability to communicate
competently and in a theoretically informed manner in a variety of contexts.
PLO 5, Assessable Outcome 1: Students can effectively create and implement communication
strategies in a contextually appropriate manner:
 Beginning: Plan the application of and demonstrate implementation of course-specific
communication strategies in a satisfactory manner.
 Developing: Plan the application of and demonstrate implementation of course-specific
communication strategies in a polished, professional, and competent manner.
 Accomplished: Demonstrate through practice an understanding of the nuances of the
course-specific context, and adapt their performance to that context.
 Exemplary: Demonstrate through practice an understanding of the nuances of the coursespecific context, reflecting on the strengths and weaknesses of their performances and
improving their performances accordingly.
Practice PLO 6: Social Responsibility: Demonstrate social responsibility, ethical awareness, and
community engagement.
PLO 6, Assessable Outcome 1: Students can engage in communication practices designed to
produce positive community outcomes and can articulate the ethics that underwrite those
practices.
 Beginning: Students can identify how a communication practice can lead to a positive
community outcome and can begin to articulate the ethical implications of that practice.
 Developing: Students can attempt to enact communication practices designed to produce
positive community outcomes, and can express the ethical implications of those practices.
 Accomplished: Students can engage in multiple communication practices, demonstrate how
they produce positive community outcomes, and can articulate the ethical strengths and
weaknesses of those practices.
 Exemplary: Students can adapt and revise multiple communication practices to different
community contexts to produce a range of positive community outcomes, and can
articulate the different ethical strengths and weaknesses of those practices.
4
2. Map of PLOs to University Learning Goals (ULGs)
The map above was created by Professor Gao Ge (former Department Curriculum and
Assessment Chair) in collaboration with Professor Hillary Nixon (College Assessment Facilitator)
and the College of Social Sciences Assessment Committee.
3. Alignment – Matrix of PLOs to Courses
Core Course that Introduces
Students to all the PLOs
COMM 101C Junior Seminar:
Theorizing Communication
[Required for all Majors]
COMM 198: Applied Activity
on Communication
[Required for all Majors]
Core Course for Summative
Assessment of all PLOs
COMM 199C Senior Seminar:
Synthesis and Application
[Required for all Majors]
Foundation Courses that
Support PLOs 1 and 2
[Majors select two from list]
Inquiry Courses that
Support PLOs 3 and 4
[Majors select two from list]
Practice Courses that
Support PLOs 5 and 6
[Majors select two from list]
COMM 110F Interpersonal
Comm
COMM 122F Performance
Studies
COMM 130F Social
Movements Comm
COMM 133F Ethical Problems
in Comm
COMM 144F Organizational
Comm
COMM 123I Performance of
Ethnodrama
COMM 145I Rhetorical and
Cultural Criticism
COMM 150I Inquiry in
Organizational Comm
COMM 151I New Media/New
Methods
COMM 152I Comm in World
Cultures
COMM 105P Comm, Self
and Society
COMM 111P Interviewing
COMM 114P Business and
Professional Speaking
COMM 115P Comm and
Conflict
COMM 116P Mediation:
Theory and Practice
COMM 120P Persuasive and
5
COMM 146F Comm and the
Environment
COMM 149F Rhetoric and
Public Life
COMM 160F Language,
Meaning and Culture
COMM 161F Comm and
Culture
COMM 164F Comm and Global
Organizations
COMM 170F Persuasion
COMM 171F Visual Comm
COMM 172F Multicultural
Comm
COMM 173F Intercultural
Comm and Global
Understanding
COMM 175F Nonverbal Comm
COMM 181F New Media/New
World
COMM 155I Quantitative Comm
Inquiry
COMM 156I Qualitative Comm
Inquiry
COMM 169I The Media:
Response and Criticism
Presentation Skills
COMM 121P Performance
as Practice
COMM 124P Training and
Development
COMM 125P Ensemble
Performance
COMM 131P New
Media/You Media
COMM 140P Argumentation
and Debate
COMM 141P Small Group
Comm
COMM 147P Argumentation
and Persuasion in Courts of
Law
COMM 176P Gender and
Comm
COMM 182P Comm in the
Classroom
4. Planning – Assessment Schedule
PLO
Foundations PLO 1: Understanding Communication Theories
Demonstrate an understanding of the major theories that have
shaped the field of communication, including historical
developments, ethical issues and current trends.
Foundations PLO 2: Critiquing Communication Theories:
Demonstrate the ability to discuss the strengths and limitations of
theoretical perspectives on communication.
When will this PLO be assessed?
We will assess all six PLOs
In AY 2014-2015
Inquiry PLO3: Research Methods
Demonstrate an understanding of methods of communication
research and analysis such as rhetorical, critical, interpretive,
performative and social scientific approaches and their ethical
implications.
Inquiry PLO 4: Research Application and Critique
Develop and apply analytical skills and ethical practices for
understanding, conducting, and evaluating communication research
studies.
Practice PLO 5: Communication Competence: Demonstrate the
ability to communicate competently and in a theoretically informed
manner in a variety of contexts.
Practice PLO 6: Social Responsibility: Demonstrate social
responsibility, ethical awareness, and community engagement.
6
Practice PLO 5: Communication Competence: Demonstrate the
ability to communicate competently and in a theoretically informed
manner in a variety of contexts.
Practice PLO 6: Social Responsibility: Demonstrate social
responsibility, ethical awareness, and community engagement.
Foundations PLO 1: Understanding Communication Theories
Demonstrate an understanding of the major theories that have
shaped the field of communication, including historical
developments, ethical issues and current trends.
AY 2015-2016
Foundations PLO 2: Critiquing Communication Theories:
Demonstrate the ability to discuss the strengths and limitations of
theoretical perspectives on communication.
Inquiry PLO3: Research Methods
Demonstrate an understanding of methods of communication
research and analysis such as rhetorical, critical, interpretive,
performative and social scientific approaches and their ethical
implications.
AY 2016-2017
Inquiry PLO 4: Research Application and Critique
Develop and apply analytical skills and ethical practices for
understanding, conducting, and evaluating communication research
studies.
Practice PLO 5: Communication Competence: Demonstrate the
ability to communicate competently and in a theoretically informed
manner in a variety of contexts.
AY 2017-2018
Practice PLO 6: Social Responsibility: Demonstrate social
responsibility, ethical awareness, and community engagement.
5. Student Experience
PLOs are communicated to students primarily through courses and syllabi. First, the two core
courses and all of the F, I, P courses in the major include the PLOs on their syllabi. In the case of
the core courses (Comm 101C and Comm 199C), all six PLOs are included on the syllabi.
Additionally, these courses are instrumental in introducing students to all of the PLOs (101C)
and assessing how well students accomplish the PLOs in the program (199C). Second, each of
the F, I, P courses lists the PLOs for their particular area on the syllabi (i.e. F courses include the
two Foundations PLOs, I courses include the two Inquiry PLOs, etc.).
7
We have not incorporated student feedback into the development or refinement of the PLOs at
this time.
Part B
6. Graduation Rates for Total, Non URM and URM students (per program and degree)
The “total” 6-yr graduation rate for first-time freshman was 70.0% in fall 2007, which is well
above the university target (51.6%), and roughly consistent with prior fall semesters. The
“URM” 6-yr graduation rate for first-time freshman was 25.0% in fall, 2007, which is well below
the university target (47.8%). However, the graduation rates were higher in six of the previous
nine fall semesters, ranging from 33.3% to 100.0% (data not included here). The “Non-URM” 6yr graduation rate for first-time freshman was 100.0% in fall, 2007, which is well above the
university target (53.2%). This rate is higher than most of the previous nine fall semesters,
although the rate was also 100.0% in fall of 1990, 2002 and 2004 (data not included here).
7. Headcounts of program majors and new students (per program and degree)
Headcount trends in the B.A. Program for first-time freshmen have steadily increased over the
past five years, going from 26 students in fall semester 2009 (data not included here) to 45 in
fall 2013. The trends for undergraduate transfer students show a more dramatic increase, going
from 70 students in fall 2009 (data not included here) to 179 in fall 2013.
Overall, the total number of majors in the B.A. Program has increased from approximately 467
students in fall 2009 (data not included here) to 654 in fall 2013.
8
8. SFR and average section size (per program)
SFR in the B.A. Program increased from 24.9 in lower division courses in fall 2009 (data not
included here) to 28.9 in fall 2013. SFR remained essentially the same in in upper division
courses from fall 2009 (18.3) (data not included here), to fall 2013 (18.2).
9. Percentage of tenured/tenure-track instructional faculty (per department)
In fall 2013 the department had a 31.6% ratio between Tenured/Probationary Faculty and
Temporary Lecturers. This ratio is quite a bit lower than the university ratio (53.1%), indicating
that the department, on average, has fewer T/TT faculty compared to temporary lecturers than
other departments on campus.
Part C
10. Closing the Loop/Recommended Actions
Our primary assessment activity this year was developing assessable outcomes for our PLOs
(see Part A, Item #1 above). We are pleased with those efforts and the progress we made. There
are two primary actions that we will be taking next year and in subsequent years.
One action is to ensure that students have a deeper understanding of the PLOs before they take
the senior capstone, assessment course (Comm 199C). One of the ways we will accomplish this
is to provide an explicit and systematic introduction of them in the core, introduction course to
the major, Comm 101C. Another way to front load the PLOs is to integrate them more fully into
the F, I, and P courses. Currently, the PLOs function as a secondary learning goals in theses
courses, behind the more visible course-specific learning outcomes (CLOs). The linkages
between these two sets of outcomes will be made more explicit so that students can see how
the F, I, and P CLOs roll up and support the PLOs.
The second action we will be taking is to be more systematic in the collection and analyses of
program-level assessment data. As noted below, we have developed specific assignments in
Comm 199C for program level assessment, but we have not been very systematic or rigorous in
the collection and analyses of this data. In order to accomplish this we will have 199C
instructors collect a designated sample of data each semester, and have them meet to review
the data to more formally assess student learning.
9
11. Assessment Data
Data collected for PLO assessment is derived primarily from our senior capstone course: Comm
199C (Senior Seminar: Synthesis and Application). Specifically, two assignments are used. One is
a “course mapping activity” where students identify the specific F, I, and P courses they took,
and how they accomplished the PLOs in those courses. Second, students complete a portfolio
where they select a paper or assignment from one of their F, I, and P courses and synthesizing
what they learned. This includes describing how assignments link to the PLOs. We collected data
from these two assignments in fall 2013 and conducted an informal analysis only (see below), in
large part because we have not been very systematic in collecting data, which in turn has not
enabled us to be very rigorous in analyzing the data.
12. Analysis
Here are the results of our informal analysis of the PLO assessment data:
PLO
PLO 1: Understanding Communication
Theories
 Assessable Outcome 1: Students can
explain the major theories that have
shaped a specific area of
communication studies.
 Assessable Outcome 2: Students can
provide a comprehensive analysis of
at least one communication theory.
Achievement Notes
Students are able to achieve the two assessable
outcomes of this PLO at beginning and developing
levels. While the performance drops off at the
accomplished and exemplary levels, students still
seem to do relatively well performing at these
levels.
PLO 2: Critiquing Communication
Theories
 Assessable Outcome 1: Students can
demonstrate their understanding of
the process and responsibility of
scholarly critique.
 Assessable Outcome 2: Students can
present a comparative analysis and
critique of at least two major
communication theories.
PLO3: Research Methods
 Assessable Outcome 1: Students can
articulate key methodological
concepts and their ethical
implications in published
communication research.
 Assessable Outcome 2: Students can
Students are able to achieve the two assessable
outcomes at beginning and developing levels for
this PLO, though their performance is not as
strong as with PLO 1. Similarly, there appears to
be an even greater drop off at the accomplished
and exemplary levels for this outcome compared
to PLO 1. Overall, we are finding that students do
better understanding communication theories
(PLO 1) than critiquing them (PLO 2).
Students perform well on the two assessable
outcomes for this PLO at beginning and
developing levels, with fewer students achieving
the outcomes accomplished and exemplary levels.
10
explain the rationale underlying
practices and procedures of
communication research.
PLO 4: Research Application and Critique
 Assessable Outcome 1: Students can
write a critique of published
communication research, including an
examination of the study’s ethical
practices.
 Assessable Outcome 2: Students can
write an original research proposal.
PLO 5: Communication Competence
 Assessable Outcome 1: Students can
effectively create and implement
communication strategies in a
contextually appropriate manner
PLO 6: Social Responsibility
 Assessable Outcome 1: Students can
engage in communication practices
designed to produce positive
community outcomes and can
articulate the ethics that underwrite
those practices
Students seem to be able to achieve the two
assessable outcomes for this PLO at beginning and
developing levels, with a stronger decline in
performance at accomplished and exemplary
levels compared to PLO 3. Overall, we are finding
that students do better understanding
communication research methods compared to
applying and evaluating them.
Students do very well achieving the one
assessable outcome for this PLO at beginning and
developing levels. While performance declines at
accomplished and exemplary levels, the drop off
does not seem to be as severe compared to the
first four PLOs.
Students do very well achieving the one
assessable outcome for this PLO at beginning and
developing levels. Similar to PLO 5, the drop at
accomplished and exemplary levels is not as
severe compared to the first four PLOs. Overall,
we think students are achieving the two Practice
PLOs (#5 and #6) at higher levels compared to the
Foundations and Inquiry PLOs (#1, #2, #3, #4).
Proposed changes and goals (if any)
We believe we have an effective PLO assessment program and structure in place, so we are not
proposing any changes as this time. Our efforts for next year and beyond will focus on
improving our existing program as outlined in Item #10 above.
11