SPCH 20 Assessment Report

SLO 1:
Many students demonstrate an understanding of theoretical principles of interpersonal
communication and an ability to apply those principles. Although nearly 70 % of students are
satisfactorily or expertly applying theoretical concepts to interpersonal communication, 30% of
students do not demonstrate proficiency. Often these students will define a theory but neglect to
connect theory to real world instances of interpersonal communication. Students who do make
these connections, conceptualize how their learning is useful beyond the walls of the classroom
in their own personal lives and relationships. The 50% of students who are satisfactorily
achieving this SLO discuss theory and personal experiences separately and dont clearly
synthesize ideas from the course with personal experience. One solution could be organizational,
as many speeches have students define several concepts before beginning to apply those
concepts. Student explanations and applications of theory and course concepts should be more
closely tied. A number of students share cautionary tales about missteps theyve made in
communicating with others, and they claim--rightfully so--that a particular course concept would
have helped them better navigate the complexities of a relationship. Yet these students are
sometimes not specific about the ways in which the concept/skill would have improved the
communication. We recommend that assignments be designed to push students to reflect more
specifically on how negative experiences could be better navigated with the theory/key concept
in mind.
SLO 2/3:
70 % of students satisfactorily or well met these SLOs. Self-concept is addressed
frequently in students work. And students also demonstrate in journal assignments an
understanding of how verbal and nonverbal communication function within particular contexts.
We recommend that that although these concepts may be addressed in isolation early on in the
semester, that students should also be encouraged to make connections to previously covered
course content. This networked thinking about these significant aspects of interpersonal
communication will help students to demonstrate a more sophisticated and nuanced
understanding of the aspects that affect interpersonal relationships.
SLO 4/5:
Students explore communication and different types of relationships in a variety of
contexts in both their journals and speeches. Journals are designed to encourage students to
explore various contexts whereas speeches seem to let students choose a context to investigate
communication practices. We feel that this element of choice is fine because students are
exposed to communication in other contexts through their peers speeches and they explore
diverse contexts through their journal writing.
SLO 6:
75 % of students are able to effectively identify and utilize interpersonal skills,
understanding how to utilize these skills in building and maintaining relationships. Students
scoring a needs improvement score demonstrate an understanding of the skill but do not
demonstrate an understanding of how/when those skills are useful. The recommendations below
for SLO 7 address this need to both define and explain the utility of skills in various contexts.

SLO 7:
In analyzing 12 speeches, we found that in most cases students were applying
communication principles and theories to their understanding of relationships and
communication. However, 3 of the 12 speeches (25%) contained little to no application of course
concepts. Two speeches addressed topics beyond the scope of interpersonal communication:
drunk driving and stem cell research. We recommend that SPCH 20 instructors ensure that all
speech assignments are crafted in a way that better guides students to address course
appropriate topics. A list of interpersonal topics appropriate for speeches might help, but
moreover students should be required to define and apply a minimum or 2-3 interpersonal
principles.
Although students technically satisfy this SLO by simply construct[ing] and present[ing]
speeches, SPCH 20 fulfills the CSU Oral Communication competency requirement, and the
speeches observed palpably lacked elements of effective speech making that would be addressed
in a Public Speaking course. 9 Speeches (75%) were missing an introduction and/or conclusion,
which also made the organizational system of the speech unclear. Instead, speeches frequently
had narrative style. In delivery, 4 speeches (33%) made ineffective use of inflections/tone
modulation, gestures, and/or eye contact. We recommend that either the Course SLOs should
also include the demonstration of effective verbal and nonverbal behaviors or that the Oral
Communication not be fulfilled by this course.