Annual Assessment Report to the College 2009-2010
College: Mike Curb College of Arts, Media, and Communication
Department: Journalism
Program: Master’s Degree, Mass Communication
Note: Please submit report to your department chair or program coordinator and to the
Associate Dean of your College by September 30, 2010. You may submit a separate report for
each program which conducted assessment activities.
Liaison: Linda Bowen, associate professor
1. Overview of Annual Assessment Project(s)
1a. Assessment Process Overview: Provide a brief overview of the intended plan to assess the
program this year. Is assessment under the oversight of one person or a committee?
We assessed two classes, MCOM 600 Seminar in Research Methods and Journalism 585 Theory
of Mass Communication. The assessment of the Graduate Program is done independently of
the department Assessment Committee’s work and, instead, is assigned to the Graduate
Coordinator who works with the Graduate Studies Committee to carry out this task.
1b. Implementation and Modifications: Did the actual assessment process deviate from what
was intended? If so, please describe any modification to your assessment process and why it
occurred.
With the increased emphasis on online learning, hybrid classes, etc., we tested one of our
learning objectives on an online discussion. We hoped this would give us a preliminary sense of
how to assess online classes.
2. Student Learning Outcome Assessment Project: Answer questions according to the
individual SLO assessed this year. If you assessed an additional SLO, report in the next chart
below.
2a. Which Student Learning Outcome was measured this year?
SLO 1: Identify and explain seminal works and key concepts in the field of mass communication
1
with a focus on critical and cultural theories as applied to journalism.
SLO 2: Appraise and evaluate the practices of mass communication in society with a focus on
economic structures, cultural practices and international connections as applied to the practice
of journalism.
2b. What assessment instrument(s) were used to measure this SLO?
A 3-point rubric for SLO 1; and a 4-point rubric for SLO 2.
2c. Describe the participants sampled to assess this SLO: discuss sample/participant and
population size for this SLO. For example, what type of students, which courses, how decisions
were made to include certain participants.
For the first measure, three literature reviews from the core Research Methods class were
randomly selected. For the second SLO, we examined student contributions to a Moodle
discussion board. These participants were purposively selected by the professor who taught
the class.
2d. Describe the assessment design methodology: For example, was this SLO assessed
longitudinally (same students at different points) or was a cross-sectional comparison used
(comparing freshmen with seniors)? If so, describe the assessment points used.
Learning Outcome 1: Identify and explain seminal works and key concepts in the field of mass
communication with a focus on critical and cultural theories as applied to journalism.
This was assessed through an examination of student research papers across four indicators:
Explanation of methodology; Sampling; Application of method to media content; Academic
form/tone of paper. These were measured on a four-point scale. 1= poor, 2 = fair, 3 = good, 4 =
excellent.
Learning Outcome 2: Appraise and evaluate the practices of mass communication in society
with a focus on economic structures, cultural practices and international connections as applied
to the practice of journalism.
Because one of our graduate seminars is employing Moodle discussions as a key
communication tool, the Graduate Studies Committee decided to assess these online
discussions. In this way, we both performed an assessment, but also started a baseline for
considering the assessment of online content. The discussions were assessed across four
indicators: Logic; Engagement of other students; Supporting evidence beyond opinion. These
2
were measured on a three-point scale. 1 = poor, 2 satisfactory, 3= excellent.
2e. Assessment Results & Analysis of this SLO: Provide a summary of how the data were
analyzed and highlight important findings from the data collected.
Students were rated either satisfactory, good or excellent in all categories. Across both
measures, students were weakest in providing enough evidence for their arguments whether
an online discussion or written analysis of media content.
2f. Use of Assessment Results of this SLO: Think about all the different ways the results were or
will be used. For example, to recommend changes to course content/topics covered, course
sequence, addition/deletion of courses in program, student support services, revisions to
program SLO’s, assessment instruments, academic programmatic changes, assessment plan
changes, etc. Please provide a clear and detailed description of how the assessment results
were or will be used.
This fall we have restructured the research methods assignment so that students turn in their
work in stages (sampling, methodology) earlier and will have more time to concentrate on
analysis. In the other seminar, students will be encouraged to provide additional content
beyond opinions in their Moodle discussions.
3. How do your assessment activities connect with your department’s strategic plan?
We are in the midst of a curriculum overhaul at the undergraduate and graduate levels. In
particular, we are interested in the ways that online work by students at both levels could be
effectively evaluated. The research methods class is being re-evaluated as well as we seek to
get students through the program faster, and thus need to make sure they are producing wellevidenced work from their earliest assignments.
4. Overall, if this year’s program assessment evidence indicates that new resources are
needed in order to improve and support student learning, please discuss here.
Last spring, we received a glowing review by outside evaluators who praised the high quality of
our student’s work, particularly the theses and thesis projects. We are trying to work within the
budget constraints to maintain that quality.
3
5. Other information, assessment or reflective activities not captured above.
N/A
6. Has someone in your program completed, submitted or published a manuscript which
uses or describes assessment activities in your program? Please provide citation or
discuss.
N/A
4