SACS Reaffirmation
| Objective | Applying Rhetorical and Communication Theory | |
| Graduates will be able to apply rhetorical and communication theory to specific communication contexts. Associated Goals: Application of Theory |
| Indicator | Student Application of Theory We will measure attainment of Goal 1 through an annual evaluation of a sample of final student term papers in 300 and 400 level courses, such as Intercultural Communication, Small Group Communication, Nonverbal Communication, Communication Theory, and Family Communication. We will use a numeric scale as follows: 1=fails to meet the goal, 2=minimally meets the goal, 3=satisfactorily meets the goal, 4=meets the goal in an exemplary fashion, 5=exceeds expectations in meeting the goal. |
| Criteria | Grade for Term Papers An average grade of 3 is the criterion for satisfying the target outcome. This average will be taken over all term papers and all reviewers (faculty committee). |
| Finding | Application of Theory Three faculty members appointed by the Chair evaluated seven term papers from an upper-level class and assigned an average score of 3.43. |
| Action | Application of Theory The faculty will repeat this evaluation in the next reporting period but will expand both the number of papers examined and courses represented. |
| Objective | Communication Presentations | |
| Graduates will be able to communicate effectively in a variety of oral communication situations. Associated Goals: Communication Presentations |
| Indicator | Student Presentations We will measure attainment of Goal 2 through an annual evaluation of a sample of recorded final student presentations given in such courses as Public Speaking, Speech for Business and the Professions, Speech for Teachers, and the like. We will use a numeric scale as follows: 1=fails to meet the goal, 2=minimally meets the goal, 3=satisfactorily meets the goal, 4=meets the goal in an exemplary fashion, 5=exceeds expectations in meeting the goal. |
| Criteria | Grade for Presentations An average grade of 3 is the criterion for satisfying the target outcome. This average will be taken over all presentations and all reviewers (faculty committee). |
| Finding | Communication Presentations Three faculty members appointed by the Chair evaluated a sample of 30 recorded speeches from two performance classes and assigned an average score of 2.67. |
| Action | Communication Presentations The faculty as a whole will discuss the reasons for not meeting the criterion and offer suggestions for improvement. Evaluation will be repeated in the next reporting period using a larger sample of presentations from a greater variety of courses. |
| Objective | Research Literacy | |
| Graduates will be able to understand, assess, and report the results of communication research. Associated Goals: Research Literacy |
| Indicator | Student Research Literacy We will measure Goal 3 with an annual evaluation of a sample of student papers involving reviews of research literature assigned in such courses as Introduction to Communication Theory and Communication Theory. We will use a numeric scale as follows: 1=fails to meet the goal, 2=minimally meets the goal, 3=satisfactorily meets the goal, 4=meets the goal in an exemplary fashion, 5=exceeds expectations in meeting the goal. |
| Criteria | Grade for Literature Reviews An average grade of 3 is the criterion for satisfying the target outcome. This average will be taken over all literature reviews and all reviewers (faculty committee). |
| Finding | Research Literacy Three faculty members appointed by the Chair evaluated a sample of 10 literature reviews from an upper-level course and assigned an average score of 3.33. |
| Action | Research Literacy The faculty will repeat this evaluation in the next reporting period but will expand both the number of papers examined and courses represented. |