Valencia College
Voter Eligibility List for Curriculum Changes
2011 - 2012
DISCIPLINE OR PROGRAM: SPEECH
Curriculum Committee No.
1112-015
(to be assigned by Committee Assistant)
Name of Program or Course: General Education for AA/AS/AAS Degree(s)
SPECIAL VOTE: Add SPC 1017 as a General Education Option to SPC 1608
Type of Change
Program:
Course:
___Addition
___Addition
X Modification
___Modification
___Deletion
___Deletion
ACADEMIC ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSED CHANGE
Listed below are the names of each full-time faculty member, dean and director associated with the specified
discipline or program for the current academic year. It is the responsibility of the initiator to request a response
from each eligible voter (Yes, No, Abstain).
NAME
VOTE
NAME
VOTE
1. Michele McArdle
Yes
19. Lisa Schellpfeffer
Yes
2. Jenni Campbell
No
20. John Creighton
Yes
3. Della Paul
Yes
21. Tina Tan
Yes
4. Elizabeth Renn
Yes
22.
Patrick Bartee
5. Kim Long
Yes
23.
Courtney Lewis
6. Linda Anthon
Yes
24.
April Raneri
7. Katie Shephard
Yes
25.
8. Ron Colburn
No*
26.
9. Oscar Cuan
No*
27.
10. Suzette Dohany
Yes*
28.
11. Donna French
No
29.
12. William Gombash
30.
13. Mayra Holzer
Yes*
31.
14. Deidre Holmes DuBois
No
32.
15. Michele Lima
Yes
33.
16. Beth Perrell
Yes
34.
17. Kathleen Perri
Abstain*
35.
18. Edie Gaythwaite
Yes
36.
*Indicates a comment (below)
Mayra Holzer
I believe that this course offers a practical option for a variety of majors that require strong
interpersonal communication skills, such as Nursing. The course contributes significantly to the
General Education Outcome: Communication Skills: Engage in effective interpersonal, oral,
written communication. It not only focuses on interpersonal communication skills, but on oral
communication skills as well (including presentation of speeches). In fact, SPC1608 significantly
contributes to the oral portion, but SPC1017 contributes to both: interpersonal and oral.
Therefore, I think it contributes to General Education Outcome in a more comprehensive manner
than SPC1608 does.
Also, many other departments offer students options to satisfy the Gen Ed Requirement (Science,
Humanities, etc). in a variety of courses, yet speech currently offers no option- students can only
take SPC1608.
The common course outline recently approved for SPC1017 is strategically planned to equip
students with valuable communication skills in a variety of contexts, including speeches.
Therefore, I strongly recommend the adoption of this course as an option to SPC1608.
Suzette Dohany
21st Century Skills
If you look at the skills for the 21st Century that Karen presented at the October Curriculum
Committee meeting, and you compare the Learning Outcomes from both SPC 1608 and SPC
1017 it is hard to argue that one is more important than the other. I think this has become an
argument of personal preference amongst Speech faculty which is unfortunate because the
student’s best interest has been overlooked.
Student Choice based on Needs and the Advising Model
We are one of the few Colleges or Universities that does not offer various communication
courses as options for our students – thus preventing them from exploring the many facets of
communications by insisting that Public Speaking is the only option for them.
One outcome of the Big A to the Big S advising model is that students grow and take on more
responsibility for their own learning and decision-making. If there are more options for them, it
will force them early on to educate themselves about their choices. There are many courses that
students have options to take at the beginning of their education: social science, humanities,
science. Communication is the only area that dictates all 9 credits for AA degree seeking
students. All other areas of the AA degree offer options. For some students, Interpersonal
Communication is the better course in order to help them reach their personal, educational &
career goals.
THE COURSE
If you look at the General Education Outcomes for Communication: Interpersonal, Oral and
Written are equal. At this time we have no way of assessing Interpersonal Communication.
Several of us have our Masters in Interpersonal Communication and can attest to the real world
applications and skills that students will be able to work on in this course.
An interpersonal component is already embedded in 1608, but it is quite limited because we need
time to sufficiently and effectively address the specific learning outcomes of the speech course.
Trying to “merge” the two classes may result in not doing enough of either, watering down the
curriculum, and even requiring fewer student speeches in favor of more lecture or group work.
If a student takes SPC 1608 early in their college career it may help them with presentations in
subsequent classes, just like taking SPC 1017 early in their college career can better prepare
them to work in groups, which MANY courses require. Besides engaging in effective
collaborative learning, students need to communicate effectively with professors and peers,
follow directions (listening skills), engage in class discussions, and be able to effectively manage
conflict. According to National Association of Colleges & Employers, “As many as 80% of “first
job” college grads who are fired during their first year of work are let go because they don’t have
adequate interpersonal skills and cannot get along with coworkers” (NACE, 2000).The catalog
description of SPC 1017 clearly states that group communication is addressed. Students will
communicate with peers during the preparation of the projects, but each member still has to
present their portion to the entire class. In addition to the speech and the group presentation,
other activities in class (role playing, mock job interview) will allow students the opportunity to
practice their communication skills.
Online Concerns
Computer mediated communication is not going away in any industry; therefore, it should not be
avoided in an educational institution. Many organizations utilize video conferencing for teams to
meet virtually vs. the cost of bringing team members from all over the globe together for
decision making. I believe it is our responsibility as experts to take the lead in this field and help
the college figure it out, not simply dismiss it because of a personal opinion.
Besides, Valencia already teaches many courses online. For a few years, several committees,
task force groups, and faculty in general have been working diligently to explore effective online
teaching practices (Alternative Delivery Committee, Quality Matters, etc.). Faculty development
has indeed included a great deal of courses that focus solely on online learning. We already teach
many sections of SCP1608 online.
Ron Colburn
My vote has not and will not change. I believe that there has been great work done in relation to
this Interpersonal Communication Class. I also believe that it is a great class to offer but I do not
believe that this class needs to be a Gen. Ed. class and a class that substitutes for SPC 1608. My
vote is NO. I am sending this email to you Kim because I cannot seem to pull up anything out of
Atlas. Atlas is not working for me. Once again, Interpersonal Communication Class in my book
is not a Gen. ED. unless we stipulate that there must be three individual speeches completed in
this class on any subject related to any kind of interpersonal communication issues. As it stands,
that stipulation of 3 speeches in not in the interpersonal communication class so my vote is NO.
I can see more and more each day a great need for the speaking skills taught in SPC 1608 and at
this moment those same skills are not in the interpersonal communication class and to me if does
not matter what discipline that you happen to be studying for in Valencia because all student
need good speaking skills.
Kathleen Perri
My comment for abstaining. I think we need an either or option for interpersonal and public
speaking. They are both important communication skills for a student to acquire. I do not agree
with a public-speaking component in the interpersonal course. I cannot teach a student publicspeaking skills in one speech. For many students this is a skill developed over the course.
Consequently, I agree with offering both courses but do not agree with the public-speaking
requirement within an interpersonal communication course.
Oscar Cuan
My vote is that we should NOT accept SPC 1017 Interpersonal Communication as an either/or
option with SPC 1608 Fundamentals of Speech.
Here are some things to consider:
1.
We all obviously agree that if we are training students for the workplace, then they need to
be equipped with professional communication skills. We discussed the importance of
incorporating these various elements into a course to not only satisfy the needs of various
occupational fields, but also to meet Gen. Ed. Requirements. These skills include public
speaking, interpersonal communication, group communication, etc. I argue that all of these needs
can be satisfied with one speech course that incorporates all of these items through presentations,
projects, activities, etc.
2.
The issue of non-speech courses comes to mind. How many of these professors already
incorporate formal, research-based presentations into their courses? And are the minimum
requirements in the proposed interpersonal communication course enough to adequately replace
the actual focused instruction that a speaking course provides?
3.
How will students choose when given the choice? Will they mostly choose the
interpersonal course to opt out of the speech course? How will implementing this either/or option
impact other departments in the school? What about adjuncts who specialize in public speaking?
Thank you for taking my thoughts into consideration.