CMR Assessment
Report—2010
Learning Goals for CMR
Majors
We do not currently have a
tenure-line faculty member assigned to this area. The Òclass of 2010Ó may have taken Communication Theory with
Professors Burke or Leroux, or with Instructor Schmidgall (no longer at
UMM). Since approaches,
assignments and even selected texts and readings differed, we did not attempt
to find conformity in student-materials to review.
We supply no data for review
of ÒCommunication.Ó Our analysis is that we need to have a
faculty member with this specialty, who can offer our program breadth, quality
and consistency.
Professor
Barbara Burke did this assessment. The details of this assessment are described
below.
Learning
Objective/Expected Outcome
In
this assessment, learning goal #2 was addressed: "The students will use a
variety of assigned theoretical approaches appropriate toÉ describe and
evaluate assigned or chosen discourse." The expected outcome was stated by
our assessment documents as: "The students will be able to choose from a
variety of methods to describe and evaluate a specific act or artifact."
Data
and Assessment
Raw
data was collected from reviewing the studentsÕ personal portfolios during the
spring senior seminar. Scholarly
journal article critique papers from CMR 3301, Media Theory, were evaluated for
this review. Data described in this study reflects the work of the "class
of 2010."
There
were six students in the CMR 4901 senior seminar who were asked to submit
portfolios. One student was
excused because he was currently enrolled in the course for which the papers
are written. Of the remaining five
people (ten papers possible) five papers were submitted. Therefore, the collected
papers serve as a sample, rather than a total representation of this cohort.
The
learning objective/expected outcome became identified as comprised by the
following specific criteria:
(1) Ability to cite sources in
proper style and format
(2) Ability to use one's own
words to describe the major issues/ arguments/ themes of the article
(3) Ability to identify and
summarize an application of a selected research method
(4) Ability to identify and describe
the relevant theory studied
(5) Ability to write a critical
discussion, evaluating the research study conducted by the journal article
author.
Each
criteria was evaluated by a 5 point scale (5= excellent, 0= fail). Each paper
was given an average score. Average scores ranged from 4.2 to 5. The
"class average" for all averaged scores-calculated to find a
"typical" paper"--was 4.6. Specific criteria averages were also
studied, to identify areas of strengths and areas needing improvement. Averages
for the Òclass of Õ10 Ó are summarized below
|
|
Citing |
Writing |
Method |
Theory ID |
Evaluation
|
CMR 3301
|
5.0 |
4.2 |
4.6 |
4.4 |
4.8 |
Analysis:
(1) Citation skill is
consistently strong, but may be explained by the new, easier-to-use library
index providing a downloadable citation the student now merely needs to past
into his/ her document.
(2) Basic writing skills seem to
have diminished slightly. It may be time to consider spending more
class time on basic writing instruction.
Student writing proficiency may also be tied to the level of integration
between this course and the Communication Theory course. At one point the two classes has a
series of comparable writing assignments (journal article critique, annotated bibliography,
research proposal.) The combination
between the courses gave students more opportunities to write these papers and
receive feedback leading to improvement.
Possibly if we are permitted to refill our previous tenure-line position
and to hire a permanent faculty member to teach the Communication area, we can
once again integrate assignments to improve student writing in the major.
(3) Student identification of
relevant media theories in research articles decreased slightly from 2009
summary levels. Success in this domain (reviewing and evaluating research
studies) may rather be more reflected in work done later in the major, e.g.,
the senior seminar capstone experience than in the reviewed materials, often
written during majorsÕ sophomore or junior years in the curriculum. The indirect assessment statements of
this cohort of graduates indicate that they feel confident that they know about
media theories.
(4) Student evaluation of
scholarly arguments increased slightly in score, from 4.7 to 4.8. Critical thinking and evaluation is
valued greatly by the discipline.
Professor
Mary Elizabeth Bezanson, completed and submitted this section May 4, 2010.
Learning
Objective/Expected Outcome
This assessment relates to Learning Goal #1: ÒStudents will develop an historical and theoretical understanding
of É rhetoricÓ and Learning Goal #2: ÒStudents
will use a variety of assigned theoretical approaches appropriate
toÉrhetoricÉto describe and evaluate assigned or chosen discourse.Ó
Data and Assessment
Embedded
Assessment from History of Rhetoric:
Classical to Modern Period
Fall
2009 Pretest n=12 Post-test n=10
Results
Survey
questions:
1. Provide a definition of Òrhetoric.Ó
Pre 0
Post
9
2. Provide the name of a classical
rhetorician. ____________________
Pre
9
Post
9
3. Name one feature of that personÕs
rhetorical theory:
Pre
0
Post
8
4. What feature of the historical context
accounted for this personÕs theory?
Pre
0
Post
8
5. Name one medieval or renaissance
rhetorician. _________________
Pre
0
Post
10
6. Name one feature of that personÕs
rhetorical theory:
Pre
0
Post
9
7. What feature of the historical context
accounted for this personÕs theory?
Pre
0
Post
8
10. Define Òliberal arts.Ó
Pre-well
rounded, basis of knowledge, knowledge of little bit of everything
Post-well
rounded, links between disciplines
11.
What is rhetoricÕs relationship to the liberal arts? Why is that important today?
Pre
1 response
Post
10 responses focusing on RÕs use at all levels, central to how all disciplines
function, importance in todayÕs world recognized in that R is used everywhere
Analysis:
Class
succeeded in:
Instilling
in students a working definition of rhetoric
Deepening
their understanding of a classical rhetorical figureÕs theory
Expanding
their knowledge of rhetorical history by giving them access to a
medieval
figure and that individualÕs theory
Developing
an understanding of the relationship between a given rhetorical
theory
and the cultural context in which fostered its development
Developing
an understanding for the importance of Rhetoric throughout human
history
with a recognition of the role Rhetoric plays in the studentÕs lives.
Class
will continue to work:
To
develop an understanding of the Òliberal artsÓ which moves beyond the notion
of
Òwell rounded.Ó
IV. Indirect Assessment
This
is the second year we have used this holistic, interpreted measurement. The following survey was administered
to the students at the end of the senior seminar course. Six of the six returned completed
forms. The data are summarized in
the respective fields.
We
directed: Please answer the following questions in regards to how well you feel
you have met the discipline goals.
Results
|
|
Strongly
disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly
agree |
|
G1: I am able to name some communication
theories |
|
|
|
50% |
50% |
|
G1: I am able to name some media theories |
|
|
|
50% |
50% |
|
G1: I can define rhetoric |
|
|
17% |
17% |
67% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G2: I know an approach to use to describe
communication experiences |
|
|
|
67% |
33% |
|
G2: I know a method to use to evaluate
media effects |
|
|
|
67% |
33% |
|
G2: I can use rhetoric to describe a
chosen piece of discourse |
|
|
17% |
33% |
50% |
|
G2: I can construct an analysis or
evaluation of observable communication interactions |
|
|
|
67% |
33% |
|
G2: I can analyze media |
|
|
|
67% |
33% |
|
G2: I can evaluate rhetoric |
|
|
17% |
50% |
33% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G3: I have learned what it takes to be an
effective communicator |
|
|
*
17% Òno answerÓ |
33% |
50% |
(*
Note: 17% = 1/6).
Analysis
The
scores suggest that the students feel the curriculum is mostly successful in
meeting the learning objectives.
The
class of 2010 represents students who have completed the 2007-2009 version of
the CMR major. Extensive revision,
with improvements and changes are in the degree requirements for the 2009-2011 version
of the major. We have designed the
ÒnewÓ major so that first year students complete three CMR classes, including
Introduction to Theories, Introduction to Public Speaking, and Interpersonal
& Groups. We recommend
the students in their sophomore and junior years focus on the electives within
the major. The senior year will
include Advanced Public speaking, and a two-course Senior Seminar sequence.
V. GenEd Assessment
The
CMR discipline began assessing our GenEds in 2010.
Learning
Objectives
For
CMR 3301 students were told:
This course carries the SS GenEd designator. The UMM catalog defines SS courses as about Human Behavior, Social Processes, and Institutions, working:
To increase studentsÕ systematic understanding of themselves as functioning humans, their individual similarities to and differences from others, their awareness of the nature and significance of their conscious experience, and the forces that shape their interactions; or to increase studentsÕ understanding of the methods of analyzing modern society or some significant legal, political, economic, religious, social, or scientific component of it.
Data and analysis
The students were directed to
write an explanation of how they thought the class fulfilled the task. Ten of the eleven enrolled students
anonymously returned the form.
Results
The responses were all
affirming that the goal was met.
Some of the offered comments
include: Òunderstanding the media is fundamental for understanding human
behavior;Ó ÒThe class strengthens critical thinking skills—It offers
various methods and theories that aid us as students to question ourselves and
our surroundings;Ó and ÒOverall this course creates a broad view of how people
can be affected by media and other aspects in the public world.Ó
Analysis
Since this is the first year
we have collected responses regarding this criterion, we have no comparative
data within the CMR discipline.
Additionally, since we do not have access to the assessment of other SS
designated courses, we cannot comment on the comparative success of our
offering.
From student responses, we
believe we are very successful with clarifying the intention of the course
within the larger assortment of Liberal Arts offerings at UMM.