2009-2011 Assessment Report
Communication Studies
9/29/2011
Outcome 1
Program Level
Measurable
Criteria
Measurement
Tool
Time Frame
All sections of CMST&230 – Small Group Communication
provide comparable learning experiences and evaluation
standards.
A review of CMST&230 assignments
and class activities in all sections of
this course will demonstrate that
students experience comparable
learning activities and assessment
standards.
Faculty CMST&230
teaching portfolios which
include course syllabus,
sample assignments,
assessment rubrics and
samples of completed
work.
Fall ‘09-Winter ’10
Compile teaching
portfolios
Survey of the range of
assignments, course
expectations and
assessment tools to identify
similarities and differences
across sections.
Spring ’10 Determine next
steps. Revise course
outline as needed. Revise
course syllabi as needed.
Winter ’10 Meet to share
portfolios and discuss
range of activities, etc.
2010-2011 Activities will
depend upon our findings
in 2009-2010
Results: Five faculty created teaching portfolios for CMST&230 and in March 2010 met to share and discuss the contents of each. Each included all or some of
the following: most current syllabus, sample assignments, assessment rubrics, and samples of completed student work.
Analysis and Action: Following the March meeting, participants were asked about perceived outcomes of the activity. Three faculty responded. These faculty
noted that additional activities would enhance the consistency of student experience across sections and plan to make some changes or additions to class activities
in the future. Based on this conversation it was determined that the course outline does not need to be revised at this time. While useful on an individual level, the
value of this process at the program level is questionable.
Outcome 2
Program Level
Measurable
Criteria
Measurement
Tool
Time Frame
Course activities in all sections of CMST&230 – Small
Group Communication are tied to the course objectives.
All assignments and activities in all
sections of CMST&230 are clearly
and purposefully connected to one or
more of the course objectives.
As part of the teaching
portfolio, faculty will fill
out a matrix which shows
the connection between
student outcomes, learning
activities, and student
assessment.
Fall’09-Winter’10
Compile teaching
portfolios
Develop Matrix
Winter ’10 Meet to share
portfolios and review
matrix grids
Spring ’10 Determine next
steps. Revise course
outline as needed. Revise
course syllabi as needed.
2010-2011 Activities will
depend upon our findings
in 2009-2010.
Results: In Fall 2009, a matrix (see attachment A) was developed and applied to the CMST&230, Small Group Communication course. This matrix
determined, for each course objective, corresponding learning activities and assessment tools. Full-time faculty completed the matrix and met in March 2010 to
share and discuss results.
Analysis and Action: Following the March meeting, participants were asked about perceived outcomes of the activity. Overall, it was determined that faculty
are creating activities and assessment appropriate to the course objectives, however, some felt that they could incorporate additional activities and/or be more
explicit with students as to the connections between class assignments and course objectives. These changes will be reflected on individual faculty member’s
syllabus and/or class activities. Based on this activity, no changes to the course objectives are suggested.
Outcome 3
Student Learning Objective
Measurable
Criteria
Measurement
Tool
Time Frame
Upon completion of CMST& 230 – Small Group
Communication, students will meet “understand and apply
the principles of communication theories” (Objective A of
the course outline).
In the culminating assignment (final
exams and/or student self-evaluation
and/or portfolios) from all sections of
CMST&230, 100% of students will
score a 3.5 or higher on a Likert 1-5
scale.
Instructors will review,
assess and score
culminating assignments
using a Likert-scale rubric
developed by the
department.
Fall ‘09—Develop rubric
Su. ‘09 – Winter ‘11
Collect, review and score
culminating assignments
Spring ‘11—Meet to
discuss and analyze
scores.
Results: Four full-time faculty completed rubrics across seven sections of CMST&230 between Summer 2009-Winter 2011. A total of 133 rubrics were
completed assessing Objective A of the course outline (see attachment B for rubric). The average score was 3.08.
Analysis and Action: The department did not meet its goal of 100% of students scoring a 3.5 or higher (see Measurable Criteria above). Upon reflection, this
percentage may have been a bit idealistic, though the results still valuable. Therefore we will use the 3.08 as our benchmark for future department assessment
activities. Based on our department conversations related to outcomes 1 & 2 we are satisfied with this level of competency in students completed CMST&230.
This student learning objective is consistent across CMST courses and the department may look at whether this benchmark will be reached by students in those
classes. No other action regarding CMST&230 is required at this time.
Outcome 4
Communication CWA
Measurable
Criteria
Measurement
Tool
Time Frame
Students in CMST&230 – Small Group Communication will
demonstrate that students are able to “convey ideas and
information with clarity and control.” (Outcome A)
Student culminating assignments
(final exams and/or student selfevaluation and/or portfolios) from all
sections of CMST&230 will
demonstrate that each student meets
the following CWA objective:
A. Conveys ideas and information
with clarity and control
Instructors will review,
assess and score
culminating assignment(s)
using outcome A. of the
CWA communication
rubric.
Collect, review and score
culminating assignments
Summer 2009 through
Winter 2011.
Spring 2011—meet to
discuss and analyze
scores.
Results: Four full-time faculty completed CWA rubrics across seven sections of CMST&230 between Summer 2009-Winter 2011. A total of 133 rubrics were
completed (see attachment B for rubric). The average score of 3.25.
Analysis and Action: The average score of 3.25 indicates to the department that students have demonstrated competency for this college wide ability. Only 4%
of students demonstrated Level 1 competency therefore, the department feels no other change in curriculum or pedagogy is warranted.
Attachment A
Communication Department
2009-2011
Assessment Matrix for Outcome 2
Course Objective:
Understand and apply the principles of
communication theories in a variety of
complex family, organizational or community
settings
Analyze and implement strategies to
successfully communicate between group
members
Assess group dynamics including the roles
of group participants
Demonstrate effective conflict management,
problem solving, decision making, and
leadership skills
Identify aspects of culture which influence
the group and demonstrate communication
skills that promote intercultural
understanding
Use critical thinking and listening skills to
evaluate, participate and respond in a variety
of small group and other in-class activities
Learning Activity:
Assessment Tool:
Attachment B
Communication Department Assessment Rubric -- 2009-2011
Communication Studies 230
Outcome 3 -- Student Learning Objective A: Understand and apply principles of communication theories.
A.
Level 1
Failed to understand and
apply principles of
communication theories.
1
Level 2
Beginning to understand and
apply principles of
communication theories.
Level 3
Usually understands and
applies principles of
communication theories.
2
3
Level 4
Fully understands and applies
principles of communication
theories.
4
Student
Count:
Outcome 4 -- College Wide Ability: Communicate Effectively
A.
Level 1
Presentation of
information and ideas is
not organized and clarity
of the message is severely
impeded by language
usage errors.
1
Student
Count:
Level 2
Presentation of information
and ideas is minimally
organized and clarity of the
message is impeded by
language usage errors.
2
Level 3
Presentation of information
and ideas is organized and
clarity of the message is not
impeded by language errors.
3
Level 4
Presentation of information
and ideas is clearly conveyed,
well organized and free of
language usage errors.
4