SJSU Annual Program Assessment Form
Academic Year 2014-2015
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, 2015
Part A
1. List of Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs)
There are five 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 2014-15, including the
development of assessable outcomes for each of the PLOs for indicating criteria for increasing
levels of mastery. During this current review cycle, we conducted a fairly major revision of the
PLOs, which included reducing the number from six to five, and altering the focus and scope of
three of the PLOs. The revised PLOs are listed here:
PLO CATEGORY 1: FOUNDATIONS are theoretical and conceptual frameworks for understanding
and evaluating communication.
Foundations PLO 1: Understanding Communication Theories
Demonstrate an understanding of at least one major theory in the field of communication.
PLO1, Assessable Outcome: Students can explain, apply, and critique a major theory that has
shaped a specific area of Communication Studies.
 Beginning: Students can describe key concepts and principles of a communication theory.
 Developing: Students can explain the purpose for a communication theory and how it can
be applied to social situations.
 Accomplished: Students can utilize a communication theory to make insightful observations
and judgments about communication.
 Exemplary: Students can evaluate the strengths and limitations of a communication theory.
PLO Category 2: INQUIRY consists of research methods that generate and evaluate new
knowledge about communication
1
Inquiry PLO 2: 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 2, Assessable Outcome: Students can explain the rationale underlying practices and
approaches in communication research and their ethical implications.
 Beginning: Students can identify the key processes of at least two approaches to
communication inquiry.
 Developing: Students can describe and compare the decisions that need to be made when
navigating key processes and applications of at least two approaches to communication
inquiry.
 Accomplished: Students can explain the nature (kind, scope) of knowledge produced by and
the ethical implications of at least two approaches to communication inquiry.
 Exemplary: Students can justify the use of a particular approach to a communication
question and articulate the ethical implications of the kind of knowledge claims it produces
Inquiry PLO 3: Research Application and Critique
Develop and apply analytical skills and ethical practices for understanding, conducting, and
evaluating communication research studies.
PLO 3, Assessable Outcome: Students can evaluate scholarly communication research and apply
it to their own communication inquiry.
 Beginning: Students can locate appropriate scholarly communication research and
summarize the results.
 Developing: Students can identify research questions that emerge from their review of
literature and appropriate approaches for addressing those questions.
 Accomplished: Students can describe the strengths and limitations as well as ethical
implications of their own communication inquiry.
 Exemplary: Students can present their research and incorporate feedback in ways that
contribute to the communication field.
PLO Category 3: PRACTICE is the use of communication skills and the application of theoretical
frameworks and research methods in specific contexts.
Practice PLO 4: Communication Competence: Demonstrate the ability to communicate
competently and in a theoretically informed manner in a variety of contexts.
2
PLO 4, Assessable Outcome: Students can effectively create and implement communication
strategies and skills in a contextually appropriate manner.
 Beginning: Students can plan the application of and demonstrate implementation of coursespecific communication strategies and skills in a satisfactory manner.
 Developing: Students can plan the application of and demonstrate implementation of
course-specific communication strategies and skills in a polished, professional, and
competent manner.
 Accomplished: Students can demonstrate through practice an understanding of the nuances
of the course-specific context, and adapt their performance to that context.
 Exemplary: Students can demonstrate an understanding of the nuances of the coursespecific context, reflecting on the strengths and weaknesses of their performances and
improving them accordingly.
Practice PLO5: Social Responsibility: Demonstrate social responsibility, ethical awareness, and
community engagement.
PLO 5, Assessable Outcome: 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.
2. Map of PLOs to University Learning Goals (ULGs)
B.A. Communication Studies
PLO 1 - Understanding
Communication Theories:
Demonstrate an
understanding of at least one
major theory in the field of
communication
ULG 1
(Specialized
Knowledge)
ULG 2 (Broad
Integrative
Knowledge)
ULG 3
(Intellectual
Skills)
ULG 4
(Applied
Knowledge)
ULG 5 (Social
and Global
Responsibilities)
X
3
PLO 2 - 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 - Research Application
and Critique:
Develop and apply analytical
skills and ethical practices for
understanding, conducting,
and evaluating
communication research
studies
PLO 4 - Communication
Competence: Demonstrate
the ability to communicate
competently and in a
theoretically informed
manner in a variety of
contexts
PLO5 - Social Responsibility:
Demonstrate social
responsibility, ethical
awareness, and community
engagement
X
X
X
X
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. It was modified by Shawn Spano to
accommodate the revised PLOs.
4
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
in 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 PLO 1
[Majors select two from list]
Inquiry Courses that
Support PLOs 2 and 3
[Majors select two from list]
Practice Courses that
Support PLOs 4 and 5
[Majors select two from list]
COMM 110F Interpersonal
Comm
COMM 117F Understanding
Play and Games
COMM 122F Performance
Studies
COMM 130F Social
Movements Comm
COMM 133F Ethical Problems
in Comm
COMM 144F Organizational
Comm
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 119I Researching Games
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 155I Quantitative Comm
Inquiry
COMM 156I Qualitative Comm
Inquiry
COMM 169I The Media:
Response and Criticism
COMM 105P Comm, Self
and Society
COMM 111P Interviewing
COMM 113P Games in
Everyday Life
COMM 114P Business and
Professional Speaking
COMM 115P Comm and
Conflict
COMM 116P Mediation:
Theory and Practice
COMM 120P Persuasive and
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
5
4. Planning – Assessment Schedule
PLO
PLO 1: Understanding Communication Theories:
Demonstrate an understanding of at least one major theory in the
field of communication.
PLO 2: 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.
When will this PLO be assessed?
We will assess all five PLOs
In AY 2015-16
PLO 3: Research Application and Critique:
Develop and apply analytical skills and ethical practices for
understanding, conducting, and evaluating communication research
studies.
PLO 4: Communication Competence: Demonstrate the ability to
communicate competently and in a theoretically informed manner
in a variety of contexts.
PLO5: 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 2016-2017
PLO5: Social Responsibility:
Demonstrate
socialTheories:
responsibility,
Foundations
PLO 2: Critiquing
Communication
Demonstrate
the ability
to discuss the
strengths and limitations of
ethical awareness,
and community
engagement
theoretical perspectives on communication.
6
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 2017-2018
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 2018-2019
Practice PLO 6: Social Responsibility: Demonstrate social
responsibility, ethical awareness, and community engagement.
5. Student Experience
PLOs are communicated to students in two ways. First and foremost, through their major
courses and syllabi. For example, the two main core courses (Comm 101C and Comm 199C) and
all of the F, I, P courses in the major include the PLOs on their syllabi. In the case of the core
courses, all five 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). Also, 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.). The second way we communicate the PLOs to students is through our
Department website.
We have started to incorporate student feedback into the refinement of the PLOs through an
“exit interview” assignment in Comm 199C. Specifically, we learned that students are not as
familiar with the PLOs as they should be before taking the 199C senior capstone course. We also
found that the PLOs, as originally worded, were not particularly accessible to students, in large
part because they written by faculty for faculty using academic jargon and terminology. Part of
our goal in revising the PLOs was to make them more accessible and meaningful for students
(without compromising the scholarly integrity of the outcomes).
7
Part B
6. Graduation Rates for Total, Non URM and URM students (per program and degree)
Total
URM
Non-URM
All others
First-Time Freshmen
Undergraduate Transfer
New Credential
First-Time Graduate
Fall 2008 Cohort: 6-Year
Fall 2011 Cohort: 3-Year
Fall 2011 Cohort: 3-Year
Fall 2011 Cohort: 3-Year
Graduation Rate
Graduation Rate
Graduation Rate
Graduation Rate
Universit
Universit
Universit
Universit
College
College
College
College
y
y
y
y
Averag
Averag
Averag
Averag
Average
Average
Average
Average
e Grad
e Grad
e Grad
e Grad
Grad
Grad
Grad
Grad
Progra
Rate Progra
Rate Progra
Rate Progra
Rate Progra
Rate - All
Progra
Rate - All
Progra
Rate - All
Progra
Rate - All
m
All
m
All
m
All
m
All
m Grad
Students
m Grad
Students
m Grad
Students
m Grad
Students
Cohort
Studen
Cohort
Studen
Cohort
Studen
Cohort
Studen
Rate
Who
Rate
Who
Rate
Who
Rate
Who
Size
ts Who
Size
ts Who
Size
ts Who
Size
ts Who
Entered
Entered
Entered
Entered
Entere
Entere
Entere
Entere
the
the
the
the
d This
d This
d This
d This
Universit
Universit
Universit
Universit
College
College
College
College
y
y
y
y
15
46.7% 48.4% 49.7% 83
74.7% 68.1% 55.3% 0
/0
/0
8.3%
13
46.2% 51.0% 60.8%
100.0
3
66.7% 47.2% 40.7% 24
62.5% 67.5% 55.2% 0
/0
/0
12.2% 3
54.8% 65.2%
%
10
40.0% 50.3% 53.3% 49
79.6% 70.3% 54.9% 0
/0
/0
8.0%
6
33.3% 50.0% 54.2%
2
50.0% 44.1% 52.9% 10
80.0% 63.7% 56.9% 0
/0
/0
4.9%
4
25.0% 50.0% 69.4%
The “total” 6-yr graduation rate for first-time freshman was 46.7% in fall 2008, which is slightly
below the university target (51.6%) and College and University averages. The “URM” 6-yr
graduation rate for first-time freshman was 66.7% in fall, 2008, which is above the university
target (47.8%). The “Non-URM” 6-yr graduation rate for first-time freshman was 40.0% in fall,
2008, which is below the university target (53.2%).
7. Headcounts of program majors and new students (per program and degree)
Total
BA
MA
Fall 2014
New Students
Continuing Students
Total
FT AdmitNew TransfContinuingRetn.TranfReturningTrnst-Ugrd
40
133
533
4
3
3
716
23
133
518
4
2
3
683
17
15
1
33
Headcount trends in the B.A. Program for first-time freshmen and new undergraduate transfer
students have increased steadily over years. 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
683 in fall 2014.
8
8. SFR and average section size (per program)
Fall 2014
Subject College University
SFR
SFR
SFR
Lower
26.7
Division
Upper
21.8
Division
Graduate
13.1
Division
40.0
31.0
26.8
25.5
12.2
20.8
Fall 2014
Subject
College University
Headcount Headcount Headcount
per
per
per
Section
Section Section
Lower Division 27.3
41.8
35.6
Upper Division 22.4
27.4
28.0
Graduate
7.7
8.9
15.8
Division
SFR in the B.A. Program increased from 24.9 in lower division courses in fall 2009 (data not
included here) to 26.7 in fall 2014. SFR also increased in upper division courses from fall 2009
(18.3) (data not included here), to fall 2013 (21.8). Department SFR averages are below College
and University averages at both lower and upper-division levels. Department headcount in
lower and upper sections is also below College and University averages.
9. Percentage of tenured/tenure-track instructional faculty (per department)
Fall 2014
DepartmentDepartment College University
FTEF #
FTEF % FTEF % FTEF %
Tenured/Tenuretrack
Not tenure-track
Total
9.1
25%
44.9%
42.8%
27.1
36.2
75%
100%
55.1%
100.0%
57.2%
100.0%
In fall 2014 the department had a 33.5% ratio between Tenured/Probationary Faculty and
Temporary Lecturers. This ratio is substantially lower than college and university ratios,
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
According to our PLO assessment schedule from last year, we were supposed to conduct a
formal assessment of all PLO during AY 2014-15. When we looked carefully at out assessment
data, however, we found that the data and PLOs were not fully aligned enough to do rigorous
and systematic assessment. So instead we decided to conduct a fairly major revision of the
PLOs. This revision resulted in reducing the total number of PLOs from six to five, and altering
the focus and scope of three of the PLOs (see the list of revised PLOs in Part, A, number 1).
9
While we revised the PLOs, we also initiated a revision of the PLO assessment data to better
match the new PLOs (see Assessment data, number 11 below).
While we are pleased with this effort, it did require us to alter the assessment schedule because
we were not able to conduct a systematic assessment of the PLOs. We will do this in AY 2015-16
when the revised PLOs and revised assessment data are in place.
Another effort we initiated to close the loop and ensure that students have a deeper
understanding of the PLOs before they take the senior capstone course was to develop a PLO
assignment for Comm 101C: Junior Seminar: Theorizing Communication. Comm 101C is the
required introduction course to the major. The assignment requires students to familiarize
themselves with the PLOs, and to write paper describing how particular F, I, and P courses
address the PLOs.
11. Assessment Data
Data collected for PLO assessment is derived primarily from our senior capstone course: Comm
199C (Senior Seminar: Synthesis and Application). Specifically, students complete a portfolio
where they select a paper or assignment from one of their F, I, and P courses and reflect and
synthesize what they learned. Students write a reflection essay for each of their F, I and P
papers or assignments. We call these reflection essays “frames.” As noted above, we revised
the requirements for the portfolios and frames to align more closely to the new PLOs. Because
of these recent revisions we have not yet conducted a systematic assessment of the revised
PLOs with the revised portfolio (assessment) data.
12. Analysis
Here are the results of our informal analysis of the PLO assessment data, based on what were
able to do given that we just recently revised the PLOs. The analysis reported here is
preliminary; it is based on informal assessment and anecdotal information:
PLO
PLO 1: Understanding Communication
Theories
 Assessable Outcome 1: Students can
explain, apply, and critique a major
theory that has shaped a specific
area of Communication Studies.
Achievement Notes
This assessable outcome was recently revised;
no analysis of data has been conducted yet.
PLO2: Research Methods
 Assessable Outcome 2: Students can
explain the rationale underlying
practices and approaches in
communication research and their
ethical implications.
This assessable outcome was recently revised;
no analysis of data has been conducted yet.
10
PLO 3: Research Application and Critique
 Assessable Outcome 3: Students can
evaluate scholarly communication
research and apply it to their own
communication inquiry
PLO 4: Communication Competence
 Assessable Outcome 4: Students can
effectively create and implement
communication strategies in a
contextually appropriate manner
PLO 5: Social Responsibility
 Assessable Outcome 5: Students can
engage in communication practices
designed to produce positive
community outcomes and can
articulate the ethics that underwrite
those practices
This assessable outcome was recently revised;
no analysis of data has been conducted yet.
Overall, we believe that students are able to
achieve this assessable outcome at beginning
and developing levels, based on our informal
analysis and anecdotal information.
Our recent efforts in analyzing the assessment
data revealed that we needed to revise the
Comm 199C portfolio assignment in order assess
this outcome. Based on our informal analysis and
anecdotal information, we believe that students
are able to achieve this outcome at beginning
and developing levels, with some drop off drop
at accomplished and exemplary levels
Proposed changes and goals (if any)
We believe we have improved our PLO assessment program and structure by revising the PLOs
and assessment data. Our efforts for next year and beyond will focus on implementing the
changes, conducting a formal and systemic assessment of the PLOs, and making any further
changes based on our analyses.
Additionally, we will work to integrate the PLOs 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). We intend to make the linkages between these two
sets of outcomes more explicit so that students can see how the F, I, and P CLOs roll up and
support the PLOs.
11