STANDARD 9: ASSESSMENT OF LEARNING OUTCOMES · 2015-11-10 · STANDARD 9: ASSESSMENT OF LEARNING...

ACEJMC Standard 9 9-1

STANDARD 9: ASSESSMENT OF LEARNING OUTCOMES

COM student award winners at

Eastern States Communication Association L-R Top: Sarah Horton, Meg Stookey, Amanda King


STANDARD 9: ASSESSMENT OF LEARNING OUTCOMES

Highlights

The ACEJMC professional values and competences are reflected in the Nido R. Qubein School of Communication’s (NQSC’s) Values and Competencies. These standards guide all faculty in preparing their syllabi and teaching their courses. The NQSC has also developed an assessment matrix that matches COM course descriptions with these values and competencies so that we can visualize how they are addressed and reinforced throughout each COM sequence. (See Standard 2, item 3)

The NQSC’s formal assessment plan for learning outcomes (APPENDIX

9.1) uses the following direct and indirect measures: a LinkedIn-based student portfolio; a written competency exam measuring the cognitive learning conditions of first and fourth year cohorts; evaluations of interns by site supervisors and faculty; exit surveys of graduating seniors; program review and production critiques by communication professionals in the Dean’s Advisory Council; input from currently enrolled students in the Student Advisory Board; and an alumni survey.

The NQSC utilizes communication professionals for some assessment. The Dean’s Advisory Council assists with course assessment by evaluating random samples of student work and by auditing faculty instruction; the NQSC uses the Council’s feedback to assess the relevance of the curriculum and the quality of student work expressed in students’ LinkedIn based electronic portfolios. Also, internship supervisors evaluate student performance based on the competencies.

The NQSC is committed to the development, implementation and on-

going data driven assessment of learning. The School collects and stores quantitative and qualitative data relevant to these competency outcomes and compiles these data in an assessment report (APPENDIX 9.2) provided to faculty and discussed in the annual faculty retreat. This information has guided the formative and summative reviews of the


effectiveness of the NQSC’s curriculum and its execution in delivering related student services. Subsequent changes implemented to address real and perceived program weaknesses are ongoing.


STANDARD 9: ASSESSMENT OF LEARNING OUTCOMES 1. Provide a copy of unit’s written plan for assessment of student learning outcomes. This plan must include the date of its adoption and of implementation of its components. The Nido R. Qubein School of Communication’s (NQSC/School) comprehensive plan for the assessment of learning outcomes is designed to determine if the program is meeting identified learning objectives at the conclusion of the curriculum (summative assessment), and to facilitate any necessary revision of the School’s curricular, service, and programmatic elements to better meet the defined learning objectives (formative assessment). In 2012, the faculty mapped all COM courses to correlate with these competencies in order to see where defined learning was supposed to take place. A comprehensive assessment plan was finalized in spring/summer 2014 and approved by the faculty in fall 2014. The assessment data is presented for three areas under ACEJMC review: Electronic Media Production, Journalism, and Strategic Communication. Data for this report, collected in the fall of 2014, is the School’s first formal assessment since adopting the new assessment plan. The assessment plan is included as APPENDIX 9.1.

NQSC Assessment Timeline The NQSC has experienced explosive growth since its inception in 2007. The first few years of the program were focused on curriculum development and faculty hiring. From the start of the program, however, assessment has been included. In Spring 2010, the first graduating class of students (N = 20) that had all of the major classes in NQSC completed a satisfaction survey (n = 12). These results were the start of the assessment feedback process that has continued each year. The provost authorized the NQSC to seek accreditation at the beginning of spring 2013. Prior to that, and in the next few semesters, the NQSC tested and evaluated a variety of assessment activities before finalizing its ACEJMC


assessment plan in summer 2014 (approved by faculty in the beginning of the fall 2014 semester). The final assessment plan includes four direct and four indirect measures (some assessment measured were discontinued because they yielded little data for assessment: reviews of teaching evaluations (See APPENDIX 9.13); observations of classes; re-evaluations of student assignments, etc. These are not included in the assessment report). Since the provost’s approval in January 2013, the School has conducted 22 separate assessment activities. Table 9.1 is a timeline that includes all NQSC development and assessment activity relevant to accreditation. The self-study includes assessment information through summer 2015, but assessment continues and is noted on the timeline.


TABLE 9.1: THE NQSC DEVELOPMENT AND ASSESSMENT TIMELINE

NQSC DEVELOPMENT AND ACCREDITATION EVENTS

YEAR NUMBER OF

UNDERGRADS

NQSC ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES

Fall 2007 N = 13

The Nido R. Qubein School of Communication established

1 new faculty member starts

Fall 2008 N = 205

NQSC building grand opening

5 sequences established: Electronic Media Production, Game and Interactive Media Design, Journalism, Media and Popular Culture Studies, Strategic Communication

4 new faculty members start

Fall 2009 N = 295

NQSC building grand opening

2 faculty members hired

Spring 2010

ASSESSMENT: Graduating student exit survey

Fall 2010 N = 485



Spring 2011

The MA program in Strategic Communication began operation


Trevor Brown visits for ACEJMC accreditation pre-visit

NQSC develops SACS learning outcomes

First graduating class of students who had been in the NQSC for four years

Fall 2011 N = 578

3 new faculty members start; 1 faculty member left

Faculty develop NQSC values and competencies that align with ACEJMC’s values and competencies

Spring 2012

Faculty map all courses onto the NQSC ACEJMC competencies and values grid


Fall 2012 N = 604

Faculty vote about pursuing ACEJMC accreditation

3 New faculty members start


Spring 2013

Provost approves the NQSC ACEJMC accreditation process


Sports Management minor acquired (from School of Business)

ASSESSMENT: Internship supervisor evaluations

Fall 2013 N = 594

3 new faculty members start; 3 faculty member left

ASSESSMENT: Student advisory board reviews the Noel Levitz student satisfaction survey and provides feedback

Event Management Minor established


ASSESSMENT: Faculty evaluation of internship presentations

Spring 2014

First Dean’s Advisory Board meeting

ASSESSMENT Dean’s Advisory Board reviews and provides feedback on student media, including newscast

Visit to the ACEJMC meeting in Washington DC




Summer 2014

Formal ACEJMC assessment plan developed


Fall 2014

N = 629


ASSESSMENT: Dean’s advisory board

Formal ACEJMC accreditation assessment plan approved by faculty

ASSESSMENT: Competency pre/post exams in COM 1110 and 3390



Spring 2015

Visit to the ACEJMC meeting in Chicago

ASSESSMENT Dean’s Advisory Board (a) interviews students, evaluates their LinkedIn pages, and assesses their professional preparation

ASSESSMENT: Competency post exams in COM 3390



Summer 2015

ASSESSMENT: Advisory board’s evaluation of students’ LinkedIn portfolios

ASSESSMENT: Alumni survey sent to graduates from 2011-2014


Fall 2015

N = 669

4 new faculty hired ASSESSMENT: Competency pre/post exams in COM 1110 and 3390

Sport Communication major sequence established

Event and Sport Management major established sequence

ACEJMC Self-Study due


ASSESSMENT Dean’s Advisory Board (a) interviews students, evaluates their LinkedIn pages, and assesses their professional preparation

Spring 2015

ACEJMC Site Visit

2. Provide the unit’s definition of goals for learning that students must achieve. If this definition is incorporated into the plan for assessment, a page reference will suffice.

In 2011 the NQSC faculty identified 12 professional values and competencies closely paralleling the ACEJMC’s values and competencies that form the basis for our teaching objectives and subsequent assessments: The Nido R. Qubein School of Communication VALUES:

Expression – Appreciating the principles and constraints on the exercise of free expression in a democratic society

Integrity – Maintaining a commitment to honesty, accountability, and professional ethics


Excellence – Performing high-quality work in a capable, efficient, and appropriate manner

Accuracy – Communicating fairly, without distortions or conflicts of interest, and in recognition of subjectivities

Diversity – Encouraging creative and independent ways of thinking and mindfulness about cultural differences and multiple perspectives

Curiosity – Acquiring new skills and knowledge and continuously pursuing education and innovation

Awareness – Understanding the history, role, context and reality of the process of communication

The Nido R. Qubein School of Communication emphasizes the following COMPETENCIES:

Analytical thinking – Extracting from various areas the knowledge required to formulate realistic responses to complex problems

Communication skills – Developing the ability to present, listen to, and exchange written, oral, aural, and visual information in forms appropriate for the audience, purpose, and context

Interpretation of converging information – Linking data, knowledge, and insight for strategic decision-making and presentation of information through media

Technological development – Using technology in ways that add value to the communication professions

Integration of theory and practice – Understanding how communication theory informs both research and best practices

The NQSC’s faculty is committed to using competencies to organize and assess what students learn as they pursue a BA degree in Communication; while not a guarantee that all students will learn at similar pace or depth, this approach provides markers for faculty to determine if graduates are acquiring the skills and knowledge necessary to assume entry-level positions as competent and ethical journalists, media producers, and strategic communicators or to be admitted to quality graduate/professional programs.


3. Describe the collection and reporting of data from both direct and indirect assessment measures and how the unit used its analysis of the data to improve curriculum, instruction, etc. Provide copies of any end-of-year assessment reports. If there are multiple reports from the six-year period, summarize the findings and make the reports available in the appendices or in the workroom. The NQSC’s assessment strategy centers around eight direct and indirect measures:

Direct measures involve direct faculty and professional assessment of student performance. Four direct measures were built into the assessment plan:

(a) Evaluation of student LinkedIn portfolios

(b) Cognitive competency exams of first and fourth year cohorts

(c) Internship site supervisor evaluations

(d) Faculty analysis of student presentations about their internships

Indirect measures involve data analysis, outside evaluation or self-evaluation by students and alumni. Three indirect measures were built into the assessment plan:

(a) Satisfaction surveys of graduating seniors

(b) Reviews by the Dean’s Advisory Council

(c) Input from the Student Advisory Board

(d) Alumni survey


DIRECT MEASURES Much of the direct assessment information was collected in the fall 2014 and spring 2015. Three assessment committee members—Dr. Virginia McDermott (chair), Dr. Vern Biaett, and Dr. Sojung Kim—worked on the data entry, analysis, and compilation of the results. The databases were entered into Excel and SPSS programs for analysis. Drs. McDermott and Kim, both of whom have advanced training in statistics, analyzed the quantitative data. Dr. McDermott compiled the final report.

Direct Measure 1: Assessment of LinkedIn Student Portfolios (Compiled in fall 2014 and spring 2015, and evaluated in summer 2015): To assess NQSC students’ writing and production proficiency and their professional self-presentation, 9 members of the Dean’s Advisory Board each reviewed two randomly selected graduating students’ LinkedIn profiles (n = 18). As of spring 2015, a LinkedIn profile with at least one writing sample and one production piece is a requirement for graduating seniors. Advisory board members used a rubric developed by the assessment committee that measures the portfolio’s presentation, especially the quality of writing, and level of graphic/video production (APPENDIX 9.3). The evaluators used a five-point scale (1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree) to evaluate students’ LinkedIn profiles and supplemental material on six criteria. Portfolios were randomly selected and represented a range of students: GPA: M = 2.99; Range: 2.16-3.81 Gender: 50% males; 50% female The Dean’s Advisory Council members’ evaluation were overall positive, though the amateur quality of some production pieces were noted:


Table 9.2: Advisory Council Members’ Evaluations of Electronic Portfolio

CRITERIA AVERAGE*

Initial appearance of LinkedIn page 4.06

Writing is clear, organized, and accurate 4.12

Writing is appropriate for the intended audience

3.88

Context for the student’s work samples is clear 3.67

Production materials meet expectations 3.46

Would interview the student for an entry-level job in your organization

3.93

*Does not reflect those students who did not have a writing or production piece included.

There was no correlation between students’ GPA and the evaluation of the LinkedIn profile (computed as a composite score of the six criteria) (r = .2; p = .42). In fact, the student in the group with the highest GPA (3.81) had an incomplete profile and subsequently received the lowest evaluation. The feedback for students with completed profiles was very positive:

[Name] does an excellent job of showing how his education is responsible for and is the motivation for his professional goals. I get a very clear picture of what [name] has done at HPU and how he plans to use that plus his experience to find success in the field of TV and production. The only piece of advice I could offer is that some statements run just a little long. I'd also be interested in some more explanation of his creative motivation on some project accomplishments. I believe he has a very unique creative mind that should be a little more front and center. Well done!


Even if the student did not have all the required components but had taken time to add other elements that demonstrate experience and skills, the evaluation was fairly positive:

I did not find a resume, writing samples or production work on (name’s) LinkedIn page. The summary section was lacking. I liked that he had some results from personality profiles but those were given without explanation. It would have been helpful for those who are unfamiliar with Gallup Strengths Finder and Myers-Briggs (which he shortened to MBTI) to have some explanation as to what these mean. The items listed under each of his jobs did not use grammatically correct parallel construction. Fortunately, based on the profile, [name] appears to be outgoing and well thought of by those that meet him. For that reason, I would interview him.

Though the advisory feedback about the completed profiles was quite positive, a few students had incomplete profiles and could not be fully evaluated.

Response to direct measure 1: Assessment of LinkedIn Portfolios

Starting spring 2016, a final check of each student’s LinkedIn profile is required for graduation and will ensure that each student includes a writing sample and production piece in the profile. The School has added a course to show in the transcript to assure it doesn’t get overlooked.

Starting spring 2016, the guidelines for developing the LinkedIn profile will require a summary statement about each project to contextualize the piece.

Starting fall 2015, Strategic Communication and Journalism faculty are required to integrate more media production elements into their curricula, so students should have more high quality production options for their portfolio.


Direct Measure 2: Competency Exam (Fall 2014) The competency exam is based on a comprehensive exam used at the University of New Mexico and was revised by the HPU faculty. In the fall of 2014, the School assessed students’ basic knowledge about the five key competency areas in the NQSC—analytical thinking, communication skills, interpretation of converging information, technological development, and integration of theory and practice (See APPENDIX 9.4). In fall 2014, students’ competency was assessed at two different points in the programs. One group (subsequently noted as “pretest”) completed the exam in the first two weeks of COM 1110—Introduction to Human Communication, usually the first course taken by all communication majors and prerequisite to most 2000 or higher level COM courses. The other group (subsequently noted as “posttest”) took the exam in the last two weeks of COM 3390—Communication Law and Ethics course (now renumbered COM 4450), also required of all COM majors. Even though this class was listed as a 3000-level junior-level class, the course is typically populated with seniors since limited sections of this class are offered and student registration is based on student credit totals; priority registration is given to students with the most completed academic credit. To the School’s knowledge, no students were simultaneously enrolled in both COM 1110 and COM 3390. The goal of this competency exam simply was to determine if students learned more about their chosen subject areas after they had taken communication courses in the NQSC than they knew when they started the program and, if they did not, to identify particular areas of weakness. Instructors were responsible for distributing and collecting paper copies of the exams. The NQSC Assessment Committee graded the exams, computed an item analysis, compared the scores in COM 1110 to the scores in COM 3390, and analyzed any statistical variations among the communication sequences.


Basic demographics The data were collected in eight COM 1110 sections (“pretest”) and almost 200 students (n = 199) completed the exam. Of those, 131 identified as communication majors. Among those were 23 electronic media, nine game and interactive media, 28 journalism, seven media & popular culture studies, and 59 strategic communication students. The majority of the students were in their first-year (n = 137), but classes also included 44 sophomores, 11 juniors, and seven seniors. The male/female ratio (39.2%/60.3%) was consistent with the university ratio. Because the committee wanted to compare the competency of students at the start of the program to that of students at the end of the program, it excluded juniors and seniors so a total of 181 students were included in the analysis. (Also, almost all the juniors and seniors were non-communication majors, so these would be irrelevant to our assessment.) The exam was also given to 48 students in the COM 3390 class (“posttest”). Among those 48 were 12 electronic media, three game & interactive media, four journalism, two media and popular culture studies, and 27 strategic communication students. Forty students were seniors; the rest were juniors. Approximately 60% of the students were female. (Information on gender is included to identify sample representation and as an intellectual curiosity).

Comparison of overall pretest and posttest results Several interesting and informative patterns were revealed when comparing the results of the exams. First, the overall scores among the seniors (M = 13.52) were significantly higher than the scores of first-year students (M = 11.44) (t (222)= -3.35; p = .001) (see figure 1). The four years of communication education at High Point University seem to positively contribute to students’ understanding about several aspects of communication practices. In particular, the mean scores of technology development, integration of theory and practice, and interpretation of converging information categories were significantly higher among the seniors than among the first-year students. These results may be an indicator that the NQSC’s current curriculum is effectively delivering these particular objectives to its majors. Of course, this learning gain may be representative of factors not directly related to the NQSC’s instruction. For example, it’s possible that students picked up this material in other courses, from self-instruction, from work/internship experience, or simply scored better because of enhanced reading skills or personal maturity.


Figure 9.1. An overall mean score comparison between the pretest and posttest (pretest=COM 1110/First-year students; posttest=COM 3390/Seniors)

The results also revealed areas for improvement. For example, the mean scores of analytical thinking and communication categories did not significantly differ between the pretest and posttest, suggesting the NQSC could increase its focus on these areas going forward. Also, although students in COM 3390 scored significantly higher than students in COM 1110, the seniors did not score particularly well, suggesting additional areas that may need to be enhanced.

11.4413.52

0

5

10

15

20

25

pretest posttest

pretest posttest


Figure 9.2. Mean score comparison of pretest and posttest on each competency

Comparison of pretest and posttest results for each sequence The committee also conducted separate analyses for the five sequences. (The two newest sequences in the NQSC—sport communication and sports and events management—had not yet started). Electronic media students improved their technology development skills significantly from the first-years (n = 23; M = 12.43) to the seniors (n = 12; M = 13.67). There were no meaningful differences among electronic media students on other learning objective categories, though seniors scored lower on communication skills and converging information than did the first-years (see figure 9.3).

2.51 2.49 2.51

1.87

2.05

2.632.5

3.02

2.31

3.02

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

Analytical Thinking Communication skills Converginginformation

Technologicaldevelopment

Integration of theoryand practice

Pretest

Posttest


Figure 9.3. Electronic media sequence mean scores by different learning outcomes

For students in the journalism sequence, only the mean scores of the integration of theory and practice category were significantly higher for students in the Communication Law and Ethics class (n = 4; M = 13.5) than among the Human Communication classes (n = 28; M = 12.46) (see figure 4). Though the differences in the other competency areas weren’t significant, they are not good because seniors actually scored lower on three competency areas: analytical thinking, communication skills, and technological development. Figure 9.4. Journalism sequence mean scores by different learning outcomes

For the strategic communication students, only the mean scores of the integration of theory and practice and the interpretation of converging

11.95

2.45 2.60 2.79 2.10 2.10

13.67

2.5 2.33 2.67 3.25 2.92

0

3

6

9

12

15

18

21

24

overall score analytical communication converging technology integration

pretest posttest

12.46

2.79 2.79 2.71 2.04 2.14

13.5

2.25 2.5 3.251.75

3.75

0

5

10

15

20

25


pretest posttest


information categories were significantly higher among the seniors than among the first-years (see figure 9.5). Figure 9.5. Strategic communication sequence mean scores by different learning outcomes

Comparison of seniors in the three sequences When comparing different sequences in the NQSC, the seniors were comparable in overall score and scores on four of the five competencies. Seniors in the electronic media sequence performed significantly better than students in the other sequences on the technology development questions (see figure 9.6 for details). The seniors across all the sequences performed poorly on analytical thinking and communication skills.

11.65

2.60 2.53 2.55 1.80 2.18

13.63

2.65 2.64 3.122.04 3.04

0

5

10

15

20

25


pretest posttest


Figure 9.6. Mean scores by different sequences on technology development learning outcome

Response to direct measure 2: Competency exams Based on the results of the competency exams, the following actions have been taken for each competency area Analytical thinking – The School defines this as “Extracting from various areas the knowledge required to formulate realistic responses to complex problems.” Actions taken:

Student Success Program. HPU implemented this program in 2013. All first-year students are required to participate in a structured program that introduces students to learning skills. They are also assigned a Success Coach, an individual adviser who monitors all aspects of their advisees’ lives, both academic and personal. While this is not directly correlated to analytical thinking, many HPU students could not learn effectively as they were dealing with time management and personal issues that interfered with any type of advanced cognitive processing. In two years of operation, the

13.67

2.5 2.332.67

3.252.91

13.5

2.25 2.5

3.25

1.75

3.75

13.63

2.65 2.643.11

2.04

3.04

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Overall Score Analytical Thinking Communicationskills

Converginginformation

Technologicaldevelopment

Integration oftheory and practice

ELM

Journalism

Strat Com


university has seen positive results, particularly with first-year retention, as at least 4% fewer students are leaving the university. (In fall 2015, the NQSC has the highest retention rate for student transition from first-year students to sophomores with 86% retention. The Media Fellows first-year to sophomore retention rate was 100%).

Comquest (Sophomore Professional Community program): The NQSC is serving as a prototype for a new sophomore student program called Comquest. Students who have academic difficulty often indicate that they have not integrated to a community, and this lack of integration becomes especially apparent in their second year. Starting in the fall 2015, all sophomore introductory courses in each of the communication sequences will have a common directed reading, in-class discussion, and short writings on what it means to be part of a professional community. Sophomore classes will also feature professional speakers who will discuss what it means to be a professional and how they have to survey the environment to make reasoned choices in their professional careers. This concerted focus on professionalism at the sophomore level is not predicted to have any immediate impact on first-year learning but it will influence, the administration believes, student interest in understanding the value of analytical thinking to functioning as a professional in the community they are preparing to enter.

Communication law debate: For the last two years, the NQSC has hosted a panel during Communication Week where faculty debate controversial communication legal decisions from various viewpoints. Written feedback from Communication Week assessments suggest that this is a highlight to many students as they see that their faculty can have differing and interesting takes on one issue and that there are many ways to look at complex problems. (The NQSC has secured external funding from a national organization to expand this program in 2016.)

Diversity panel during Communication Week: In spring 2014, the NQSC introduced the diversity panel to Communication Week. This panel featured four communication professionals discussing the impact of their biological sex/race/age on the career trajectory and how they manage some of the challenges. More than 100 students attended. The School will continue to feature this panel in future Communication Week events, and it will use


these discussions to continue the conversation about the value of diversity in the communication industry.

Starting fall 2015, the competency exam will be refined. Questions that more than 50% of first-year students answered correctly will be modified to be more challenging. Questions that fewer than 50% of seniors answered will be noted and instructors will commit extra time in class to covering those topics while ensuring that they do not teach to the test.

Communication skills – “Developing the ability to present, listen to, and exchange written, oral, aural, and visual information in forms appropriate for the audience, purpose, and context

Actions taken:

The Assessment Committee developed, tested, and refined grammar and punctuation worksheets and quizzes. These quizzes are a mandatory part of the COM 1110 curriculum and are available to all faculty for their classes.

The School hired a full-time coordinator for COM 1110/1111 to oversee three defined tasks related to accreditation: (a) enhance the public speaking component of 1110 and ensure that students are competent presenters; (b) begin to integrate some technology training in 1110; and (c) to integrate and enhance this foundational material into relevant upper-level COM courses.

Starting in fall 2015, seniors now develop and deliver a public presentation in capstone classes. They are graded on their performance and expected to deliver a professional quality presentation.

Starting in spring 2014, students completing internships have been required to do a public presentation to faculty summarizing their experiences. This is evaluated not only in terms of what they learned during the internship experience but also for presentation skill.


The NQSC secured funding to develop one-credit persuasive speaking modules to start in fall 2015. These modules focus on developing a mastery of speaking skills, and allow students to complete assignments and speeches multiple times to ensure skill development.

Interpretation of converging information – “Linking data, knowledge, and insight for strategic decision-making and presentation of information through media.” Actions taken: Beginning in fall 2015, students in the capstone course of each sequences

were required to complete an online module about basic research principles. The module includes an online exam. A faculty member developed the module in spring/summer 2015, and the module was implemented in fall 2015.

Beginning in fall 2016, the research methods module will be implemented in

the following foundation sequence courses: COM 2204 Media and Popular Culture (Media & Popular Culture Studies; COM 2241 Electronic Media History and Development (Electronic Media); COM 2225 Foundations of Strategic Communication (Strategic Communication); COM 2243 Convergent Journalism 1 (Journalism); COM 2252 Theory and Design of Games (Game and Interactive Media Design).

Technological development – “Using technology in ways that add value to the communication professions”. Action taken: The NQSC purchased a membership to Lynda.com. Faculty in strategic

communication and journalism began training on InDesign and Photoshop in spring 2014. These faculty have also identified other production applications that they can integrate into their courses.

The NQSC now requires production assignments in all relevant upper-level journalism and strategic communication courses and does not rely on skills training to be delivered in just COM 1111. Regardless of age or


previous professional experience, all faculty are now required to be competent in the software standards prevalent in their industries and merit pay evaluation and tenure consideration will include this factor.

Integration of theory and practice—“Understanding how communication theory informs both research and best practices.” Action Taken: The posttest indicated that integration of theory and practice is one of

the strengths of the program. We will continue emphasizing these elements in our courses. We have also opened graduate student thesis defenses to the public and invite undergraduates to attend. All theses presentations require the students to address how theory informed their choices. In spring 2015, 16 undergraduate students attended at least one defense. The NQSC will use social media and class announcements to continue to promote this to the undergraduates.

As mentioned above, the law panel debate during Communication Week enhances students’ ability to see how different theoretical backgrounds can help frame a complex issue.

Most of all COM classes bring in professionals for guest lectures. This provides a practical application formulated on our theoretical platform.

Direct Measure 3: Internship Supervisor Evaluations (Spring 2013, 2014, & 2015) From spring 2013 to spring 2015, 101 NQSC students completed approved internships for credit. To qualify for an internship, students must have junior standing, a 2.3 overall and 2.5 major GPA, and apply to the NQSC internship coordinator.

The internship site supervisor completes a written evaluation of the student’s performance and preparation. The survey used for this evaluation was developed by the career and professional services staff and is included in APPENDIX 9.5. The School internship coordinator shares these evaluations with


the dean. (Since we average about 15-20 interns per semester, sharing information more broadly with the faculty would violate FERPA confidentiality.) Overall, the internship supervisors’ evaluations (evaluated on a five-point scale) were very positive. Table 9.3: Internship Supervisors’ Evaluations

ABILITY TO LEARN

Asks pertinent and purposeful questions 4.31

Seeks out and utilizes appropriate resources 4.35

Accepts responsibility for mistakes and learns from experiences

4.34

READING/WRITING/COMPUTATION SKILLS

Reads/comprehends/follows written materials 4.43

Communicates ideas and concepts clearly in writing 4.16

Works with mathematical procedures appropriate to the job 4.17

LISTENING AND ORAL COMMUNICATION SKILLS

Listens to others in an active and attentive manner 4.40

Effectively participates in meetings or group settings 4.42

Demonstrates effective verbal communication skills 4.71

CREATIVE THINKING AND PROBLEM SOLVING SKILLS

Breaks down complex tasks/problems into manageable pieces 4.23

Brainstorms/develops options and ideas 4.30

Demonstrates an analytical capacity 4.06

PROFESSIONAL AND CAREER DEVELOPMENT SKILLS

Exhibits self-motivated approach to work 4.44

Demonstrates ability to set appropriate priorities/goals 4.33


Exhibits professional behavior and attitude 4.49

INTERPERSONAL AND TEAMWORK SKILLS

Manages and resolves conflict in an effective manner 4.36

Supports and contributes to a team atmosphere 4.47

Demonstrates assertive yet appropriate behavior 4.27

ORGANIZATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS SKILLS

Seeks to understand and support organization's mission/goals 4.48

Fits in with the norms and expectations of the organization 4.46

Works within appropriate authority and decision-making channels

4.40

BASIC WORK HABITS

Reports to work as scheduled and on time 4.50

Exhibits a positive and constructive attitude 4.64

Dress and appearance are appropriate for this organization 4.61

CHARACTER ATTRIBUTES

Brings a sense of values and integrity to the job 4.57

Behaves in an ethical manner 4.63

Respects the diversity of co-workers 4.56

STUDENT’S OVERALL PERFORMANCE DURING THE INTERNSHIP EXPERIENCE

4.48

There was no significant correlation between students’ GPA and the internship supervisor’s evaluation (based on a composite score of all evaluation criteria) (r = .145; p = .149). This could be because all students in internships must have at least a 2.5 major GPA.


Most of the internship supervisors (n = 88) provided qualitative comments about the interns. Of those comments, 85 were positive and only three were negative. (Of the internship supervisors who did not comment, only one had evaluated the intern negatively). The responses indicate that the interns are professional, hard-working, prepared, and pleasant.

Organized, skilled writer, takes direction well, goes the extra mile

Went above and beyond, took initiative, professional, adaptable, excellent com skills

Most prepared we've ever seen

Standout, impressive, exemplary work ethic and character

Went above and beyond, took initiative, professional, adaptable, excellent com skills

For the three negative comments, the issue appears to be initiative and work ethic:

Struggled with professionalism, accuracy and attention to detail, lack of desire to apply herself

Didn't take initiative or problem solve on her own

Disappointed in his effort

Response to direct measure 3: Internship supervisor evaluations Continue to enforce criteria for internships

Direct Measure 4: Faculty Evaluations of Internship Presentations (Fall 2013 – Spring 2015)

All students who have completed an internship for credit must prepare a five-minute presentation to faculty about their on-site duties, learning outcomes, and how their courses prepared them for the internship. The NQSC’s administration and the faculty use aspects of this process to note areas of curriculum improvement.


After the fall 2014 semester internship presentations, the dean discussed the presentations with the internship coordinator and faculty in attendance and compiled notes about the presentations. These were then discussed at a School faculty meeting. The resulting “Impressions of Internship Presentations” below suggests that students were prepared for internships (in terms of software training) but lacked “soft” people skills, which may be considered difficult to model in an academic environment. It was also evident that presentation skills were weak. The dean met with the COM internship coordinator to discuss specifics of the internship presentations and at the NQSC faculty meeting discussed the importance of reintroducing presentation guidelines in upper-level classes to supplement and reinforce material previously taught in COM 1110.

Sample comments about the students’ presentation style include (full comments available in APPENDIX 9.6):

Students tried to pack too much information into each presentation. Template can be shortened (e.g. it is not necessary for students to present a slide on what their goals for the internship were).

Don’t read slides and certainly do not include complete sentences and paragraphs on slides.

We need to reintroduce PowerPoint presentation guidelines in upper-level classes. We only do it in COM 1110 but our upper-class students need to have this reinforced.

At some of these student internship presentations in 2012 and 2013, faculty took note that strategic communication students were expected to be proficient in Excel when they started their internships; yet, it was apparent after discussions among the NQSC’s administrators that the School didn’t teach Excel in any of its classes and, indeed, many faculty were only casually familiar with the software.

Similarly, journalism students’ internship presentations often suggested that they weren’t exposed to many of the programs and apps they were expected to know at their internship placements. An analysis of this issue by the NQSC’s administration suggested the problem was that most of journalism faculty came from print-oriented careers and had not worked in the contemporary journalism industry.


In fall 2015, approximately 20 faculty members attended the internship presentations and provided written feedback (See APPENDIX 9.7) about the skills the students mentioned they needed. These observations were consistent with other assessment measure that identified weaknesses in students’ research and numeracy skills, their need for more advanced public speaking skills, and their desire for more training in various production software. The assessment committee reviewed all the faculty comments and noted the following topics in need to development:

Experience working with clients—more real world experience in class More Excel More research methods More technology training, specifically infographics More public speaking training

Response to direct measure 4: Faculty evaluations of internship presentations

Redesign COM 3385—Applied Research in Strategic Communication so that student projects were completed in Excel, rather than SPSS, to provide a more research focused package. Faculty in other sequences are now required to employ Excel as appropriate. For example, students in Electronic Media Production courses are now expected to develop production budgets in Excel.

The Department of Journalism and Strategic Communication began regular training in journalism-related software at faculty meetings and retreats and the department has now made it mandatory for all journalism classes to incorporate video and other new media projects in their syllabi. Previously, students were simply given the option of turning in a print-based writing assignment or an electronic assignment.

As previously discussed, the NQSC hired a full-time coordinator for COM 1110/1111 to ensure communication skills development in our introductory 1110 course and to integrate this foundational material into relevant upper-level COM courses.


INDIRECT MEASURES Indirect Measure 1: Student Satisfaction Surveys (Spring 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015) Surveys were administered to every graduating student. Overall, the students had positive evaluations of the NQSC, especially the School’s facilities and equipment, learning how to identify a target audience, learning how to make strategic decisions, and learning how to function well in teams. The greatest dissatisfaction expressed in these surveys was related to advising and the advising process. The table below displays how graduating students from the last four years evaluated the advising and curriculum. A summary of qualitative comments can be found in APPENDIX 9.8.

Table 9.4: Student Satisfaction Survey

GRADUATION YEAR

2012 n = 27

2013 n = 47

2014 n=39

2015 n=60

Seven-point scale

The courses that made up your sequence's courses (i.e., Electronic Media Production, Strategic Communication, Game and Interactive Media Design, Media and Popular Culture Studies, Journalism) provided a thorough basis for future application development.

5.69 6.00 5.61 5.46


The instructors in the School presented the information in a clear and thorough way.

5.53 5.87 5.55 5.51

The instructors in the School worked hard to help you develop your maximum potential.

5.46 5.91 5.82 5.70

The School's equipment (facilities, hardware, software) provided support for your work in your sequence's courses.

6.27 6.21 5.53 6.02

The courses that made up the curriculum in your sequence provided a thorough supplement for future application and development.

5.54 5.91 5.34 5.32

Seven-point scale

Five-point scale

You found it easy and convenient to see your adviser.

6.03 5.74 4.31 4.2

Your adviser gave you accurate information.

5.73 5.51 4.00 4.00

Your adviser gave you the kind of support and/or advice you needed and wanted.

5.61 5.32 3.89 3.96

Five-point scale

I am able to identify and describe target audiences for a specific communicative purpose if asked to.

4.27 4.45 4.29 4.35

4.08 4.36 4.23 4.06


I have learned, given a specific target audience, how to make strategic decisions about how to most effectively communicate to achieve persuasive and/or informative objectives.

I have learned how to function effectively in small group/team contexts.

4.29 4.60 4.26 4.42

I have learned how to effectively present messages in (depending on my emphasis) oral, written, electronic media or computer forms to a variety of audiences.

4.12 4.55 4.40 4.40

I have learned to collect, interpret, and present information to achieve a communicative purpose.

4.08 4.43 4.37 4.25

I have learned to conduct formal research appropriate to my field.

3.73 4.14 4.14 3.92

I have been exposed to discussion of the various ethical problems unique to my field.

4.27 4.11 4.00 4.10

Response to indirect measure 1: Student Satisfaction Survey

HPU has modified the advising process for first-year students. First-year students now have Success Coaches housed in the Office of Academic Services who assist them transition to HPU by not only helping with class scheduling but also in dealing with personal and emotional considerations that were often outside the capabilities and training of the academic faculty. This has also taken a great burden from COM faculty


whereby their average number of advisees shrank from 40 to 20. It has also improved freshman to sophomore retention by 3-4%.

The NQSC has modified its advising paperwork to more clearly reflect graduation requirements. These documents are included under Standard 6, item 2. Relatedly, the University Registrar has automated much of the student transcript making it much easier for a student, and the faculty, to identify remaining requirements. And registration can now be completed online and with a smartphone.

Starting fall 2015, the School is separating the mentoring and scheduling components of advising. Previously, faculty were considered course and schedule advisers, available to ensure students took the right classes. The School’s administration believes that faculty should be academic and career mentors and scheduling should be more of an automated process designed to eliminate mistakes and ensure degree completion if followed accordingly. The standard will now be group scheduling. This will increase the number of eyes reviewing the student transcript so as to minimize human error. Advisers can get to know and counsel students in how to achieve success in their chosen careers rather than trying to fix earlier scheduling mistakes.

Indirect Measure 2: Dean’s Advisory Council Review (2x annually since AY 2014) Minutes are taken at the Dean’s Advisory Council meetings. The dean shares Council feedback to faculty in a slightly redacted manner as some of the comments are very frank and relate to individual faculty. The dean reports back to the Council about the changes made in response to their feedback. The Council audits classes and provides written, but most often, verbal feedback on these visits; the council also meets with selected students one-on-one and critiques their work informally. (This is in addition to the direct random review of LinkedIn portfolios discussed above.)


Response to Indirect Measure 2: Dean’s Advisory Council Review

The dean regularly presents student work at Council meetings and monitors feedback. For example, the Council expressed significant “disenchantment” with the quality of our student newscasts. The dean and the chair of Journalism and Strategic Communication department performed a top-to-bottom review on why the Council thought the newscast was weak and why there also appeared to be a lack of interest in TV news, even though many students are recruited to the NQSC because of an interest in that area. The NQSC administration looked at syllabi, examined student evaluations, and watched student productions from the broadcast journalism area. The analysis suggested that the School needed to hire a faculty member with significant professional news experience rather than peripheral experience while in graduate school. The dean then secured permission to hire an artist-in-residence to supervise our news production and was fortunate to secure the services of a professional who directed the Today Show for 23 years. He began teaching in August 2015. While some problems associated with being new to the teaching industry might be anticipated, one can also assume that issues of experience and gravitas should no longer be problematic. In addition, both the dean and the chair made clear that all journalism classes must now include more video work and train students in broadcast writing style, video composition, the importance of externally acquired audio, and all classes must operate under non-negotiable production deadlines.

A second way that the NQSC is attempting to address this issue is by mandating that more than one class will have to work on developing a newscast. To this end, students in all the classes listed below will participate in our three news productions during the fall 2015 semester in the manner described.


Table 9.5: Courses that coordinate a newscast development

COM 2001-01 Video Production I Michaels MWF 10:40-11:50

COM 2001-02 Video Production I Trammell MW 12:05-1:45

Run cameras and production equipment on selected productions

COM 2011-01 Video Production II Powell MWF 3:25-4:35

Direct/TD/Edit stories on selected productions

COM 2243-01 Journalism I Eltantawy MWF 12:05-1:45

COM 2243-02 Journalism I Smith MWF 10:40-11:50

Write stories for some newscasts

COM 2246-01 Sports Reporting Hayes TTH 9:45-11:25

Write sports stories

Write and sports stories on some sports casts

COM 2262-01 Video Practicum Yount T 3:30-5:10

Production help on some productions

COM 3006-01 Sports Broadcasting McConnell TTH 11:40-1:20

Sports packages for some productions/deliver sports on some newscasts

COM 3331-01 Video Journalism Trammell TTH 1:35-3:15

Develop news packages/Deliver news

COM 4451-01 Senior Production Experience

Michaels TTH 9:45-11:25

Produce longer-form programming and newscasts.

COM 2265-01 Publicity Planning Practicum

Ritter

Promote programming throughout semester


Indirect Measure 3: Student Advisory Board Review Each year, a representative group of undergraduate students is invited to serve on the Student Advisory Board. These students are nominated by faculty from different sequences and selected by the dean to be representative of different grades, gender, and ethnicity. (Clearly, faculty only nominate our better students for the Board and a case could be made that weaker students should be represented as well.) The Board meets each semester with the dean and provides input on School policies, potential curriculum changes, and university-wide issues. As can be expected, most of the Student Advisory Board’s concerns have focused on day-to-day student issues such as access to labs, and equipment sign out procedures, etc. and not necessary on learning outcomes. This board’s input, however, has been helpful to the NQSC in providing better constituent service and by so doing, removing barriers to student learning. (For example, the School installed a card access lock on the video edit suite door because the Board complained about having to wait for campus security to open the door every time they needed access.) The Student Advisory Board’s most substantive ongoing complaint has been about the registration/advising process, especially the perception that the communication requirements were confusing, that the registration process was cumbersome and unfair, and that students’ academic progress was hindered by poor academic advising. While most of this input comes from direct conversations between the dean and the Student Board, in October 2013, the NQSC administration wanted to garner student input in a more formal manner, assuaging any concerns that students might be too intimidated by the presence of an administrator to speak freely. Accordingly, a recent graduate of the MA program was hired to conduct a focus group. Topics were determined by a campus-wide student satisfaction survey conducted by the Noel Levitz consulting firm the previous semester. The NQSC’s Assessment Committee culled the focus group topics from the Noel Levitz statistic that identifies perceptual gaps between student expectations before enrollment at HPU (See APPENDIX 9.9) and what students’ actually perceived to be delivered by the university and its programs. (Gap size is listed in last column; the larger the number, the greater the perceived discrepancy and thus the most essential to investigate.)


The following 15 topics were identified as important for students to discuss and provide guidance for why NQSC received these scores and what we could do to improve it. Table 9.6: Student advisory board discussion items from Noel-Levitz survey

Topic Importance Satisfaction Gap

My academic adviser is knowledgeable about requirements in my major

6.27 5.38 .89

I am able to register for classes I need with few conflicts

6.29 3.94 2.35

The content of the courses within my major is valuable.

6.41 5.48 .93

The instruction in my major field is excellent 6.44 5.50 .94

Nearly all the faculty are knowledgeable in their field

6.25 5.66 .59

My academic adviser is approachable 6.27 5.53 .74

Faculty are fair and unbiased in their treatment of individual students

6.23 5.09 1.14

Major requirements are clear and reasonable 6.08 4.96 1.12

My academic adviser is concerned about my success as an individual

6.11 5.24 .87

Faculty provide timely feedback about student progress in a course

6.09 4.96 1.13

Freedom of expression is protected on campus

6.13 4.61 1.52

Adjunct faculty are competent as classroom instructors

5.70 5.04 .66

My academic adviser helps me set goals to work toward

5.74 4.93 .81

Channels for expressing student complaints are readily available

5.88 4.83 1.05

There is a strong commitment to racial harmony on this campus

5.54 4.58 .96


A recent MA graduate, Matt Ritter, conducted an approximately one-hour focus group with the Student Advisory Board on 10/15/13. A full transcript of the students’ clarification on each discussion point is contained in APPENDIX 10. The following seven topics were discussed.

Class registration The number one identified discrepancy was “registering for classes.” Have trouble unless you’re honors, seniors or athletes. Not a ton of sections. I had to take courses I didn’t want to as a junior. MPC

studies has lots of courses that aren’t offered. Limited amount of sections in strategic com. MPC hasn’t grown as much. Lot of trouble getting strategic com classes. I’m trying to graduate in three

years and system won’t let me register at appropriate year.

Advisers Study abroad is a big problem. Students need to look ahead and plan

schedule accordingly. Advisers don’t help you get into classes you need. Com advisers don’t know

about other minors. Have ENG minor and that was really confusing. Have someone available to help with minors—maybe a secretary—so someone can talk about minors (e.g., a marketing professor available at a certain time to talk about the minor).

Faculty and treatment of students For most part they’re unbiased. Production classes are subjective because you

can’t always use rubrics. How do you do well in those classes: suck up to the professor. (Similar to Art.)

Feedback I hate that we’re only required to post bad grades on MyStuff at mid-term.

Should be required to post at midterm. All professors don’t use Blackboard and you don’t know how much they weight assignments.

Like the way Professor X does it. Need to be informed on how to calculate grades. (Tell you what number to divide your score by.)

Freedom of Expression We have almost no public speaking expression. Communication and Culture

won’t let anything out they don’t approve.


University has no public forum for students.

Faculty knowledgeable A lot have real world experience. Difference between learning something

from the textbook and real world. A lot of faculty are published. Adjunct faculty: I love them because of real world experience. I had one last

year and this summer he offered me a job. They’re not worried about tenure and are more open to class discussion. They’re very knowledgeable and provide current experience. They’re very real with you.

Racial Harmony 90% white people. Nothing we can do about that. Harmony is not an issue in the program but needs to be a stronger university

initiative. Diversity in faculty has increased since we’ve been here but it’s decreased

with students

Response to Indirect Measure 3: Student Advisory Board

The main items regarded advising/registration. In response, the NQSC has clarified the advising process in several ways: (a) The School revised advising guides to better explain the requirements for graduation. (The guides are found under the Standard 6—Student Services section.); (b) The School created an online note-taking system, allowing advisers to keep digital notes of student progress. This system predated the university-wide Starfish system currently in use; and (c) the University created a new Office for Student Success. This new system mandates that all first-year students be advised by Success Coaches. This was welcomed by COM students and faculty because it cut in half the number of advisees assigned to each COM faculty, and mitigated the need to move advisees around to different advisers in order to balance advising loads; and 4) the School was able to convince the university administration to separate the definitions of “advising” and “scheduling.” Starting in fall 2015, student scheduling will no longer be the sole responsibility of individual advisers; rather, there will be a group scheduling process for the entire School that we anticipate will eliminate many of the scheduling problems encountered under the old one-on-one system. This will also free advisers to do more mentoring and career advising.


Other areas discussed by the focus group: faculty and treatment of students, feedback, faculty knowledge, and racial harmony were all discussed but they did not present any distinct negatives that needed to be addressed, other than one or two complaints about individual faculty members. Students recognized that some issues such as lack of diversity are symptomatic of the economic structure inherent to a private university with high tuition such as HPU. The discussion about “freedom of expression” seemed to encompass a hodge-podge of items related to shortage of faculty in one sequence, to foreign languages on TV monitors in the communication building. Only one student spoke directly about administration control of student expression.

Indirect Measure 4: Alumni Survey (Summer 2015) An important measure of the effectiveness of the NQSC’s curriculum in preparing students for the profession is the students’ reflection on the curriculum. In summer 2015, the NQSC administration emailed a link to a short (8 questions) survey (see APPENDIX 9.11). Students indicated how well the curriculum developed their competency in five areas: (a) analytical thinking; (b) written and verbal communication; (c) strategic decision making and research skills; (d) technological skills; and (e) how theory should inform choices. The survey was emailed to almost 200 alumni, excluding the 2015 graduates. The survey was active for almost three weeks, and two reminders were emailed. The next table indicates the number of responses received from the graduates of each year: Year 2009 2012 2013 2014 2015* Number of responses 1 3 13 26 1 *the survey was not sent to the 2015 graduates Though there was a low response rate (n = 44), the responses were consistent (all standard deviations below 1.0; M = .79, on a five-point scale). The next table indicates the average score for the competency questions. The full results of the alumni survey are in APPENDIX 9.12.


Table 9.7: Alumni survey results

Prepared me to think analytically 4.07 Improved my written and verbal communication 4.34 Enhanced my strategic decision making and research skills

4.18

Increased my technological skills 3.95 Helped me understand how communication theory should inform professional practice

3.70

These results indicate that students feel well-prepared overall but would have liked more focus on production training and understanding of communication theory. This is more positive than other assessment indications. The comments are consistent with the assessment report, which indicates (a) a need for production skills to be integrated into journalism and strategic communication courses, and (b) the business elements of the communication field to be taught in all sequences.

Response to Indirect Measure 4: Alumni Survey The response rate for the survey was low, which indicates a need to better connect with alumni. Though we ask all graduating students to provide an alternative email address, many of the email links were inactive. The university’s alumni office is developing an alumni database, which we will be able to access in the future. In the meantime, the School has added a link to the NQSC’s webpage requesting that alumni update their contact information and leave a note. Consistent with the other assessment indicators, the NQSC is integrating production training into more classes and requiring numeracy training in more courses.


4. Describe the involvement of journalism and mass communication professionals, including alumni, in the assessment process. The NQSC utilized professionals for three of the eight measures of assessment. The full plan is included at the end of this section, but a brief summary is included here.

First, the Dean’s Advisory Council members reviewed student produced assignments in spring 2015. Council professionals evaluated student projects based on an evaluation rubric developed by the assessment committee. They also offered open-ended feedback.

Second, as described above, Council members critiqued student LinkedIn portfolios.

Third, Council members have audited COM classes and evaluated both content and faculty presentation. Some Council members submitted written evaluation forms of these encounters; others just provided verbal feedback

Fourth, COM students who do internships are evaluated by their site supervisors who submit summative assessment of their experience via a School designed rubric.

Information gathered from these methods is shared with the NQSC’s administration and non-confidential information is shared with faculty.

5. List awards won by the unit’s students in local, regional or national competitions in the past six years. 2014-15

Christina Hernandez, Mid-Atlantic N.A.M.E. Scholarship recipient ($5000) Jeremy Johnson, Pulitzer Center for Crisis Reporting Fellowship

(Problems with World Cup Construction projects in Qatar)


2013-14 “I Love HPU,” produced by COM 2001—Video Production I students,

National Broadcasting Society Undergraduate Electronic Media Honorable Mention

Britton Nagy, Pulitzer Center for Crisis Reporting Fellowship (Prison system in Norway)

2012-13 Adam Keelan, 2012 Communicator Award of Distinction, Film/Video—

Student division Rachael Lehman, “Weekly Roundup, 11.15.12,” 2013 Top Video Sports

Segment, National Broadcasting Society Undergraduate Student Electronic Media Award

Henry Molski, Pulitzer Center for Crisis Reporting Fellowship (Scottish National Election)

2011-12 Henry Molski, 2012 Society of Professional Journalists National Mark of

Excellence Award for Best Sports Feature Andrew Faust, Pulitzer Center for Crisis Reporting Fellowship (Impact of

Fast Food on Health of citizens in (Mideast) Gulf States)

2010-11 Panther Sports, produced by the COM 4441—Sport Production II class,

2011 Top Video Sports Program, National Broadcasting Society Undergraduate Student Electronic Media Award

2009-10 Andrew Tzavaras, “The Office of Admissions” video featured at the Big

South Undergraduate Research Symposium, 2010


6. List by specialty each member of the graduating class of 2012 and those graduates’ current jobs. If practical, please give a total number of “unknowns” rather than including them in the list. The NQSC graduated 71 students in 2012 and was able to sequence 54 (76%) of the students.


Table 9.8: May 2012 NQSC graduates May 2012 COM Graduates Electronic Media Graduation- 5-9-12 Games Updated: 3/8/2015 Journalism

Media and Pop Culture Strategic Communication Graduate School Non-COM position

First Name Last Name Program Job

Match of degree and job

Graduate School

Brendan Agans BA.COM.JOU

Production assistant at Root Sports Yes

Christian Bettendorf BA.COM.GIC unknown

James Bolling BA.COM.ELM Fat Loot Films producer Yes

Sebastien Bonnot BA.COM.ELM Photographer in New Orleans Yes

Montgomery Brown BA.COM.ELM unknown

Brian Canaris BA.COM.MPC Hard Knock Life LLP Founder No

Brittany Carter BA.COM.ELM unknown

Andrew Burrus Clark BA.COM.ELM

DoubleTree By Hilton Front Desk Agent No

William Condon BA.COM.ELM

Sales Consultant at Apogee Design Systems No

Sarah Conner BA.COM.STC Full-time homemaker

Audrey DeKraker BA.COM.STC

Brand Activation Association Marketing Coordinator Yes


Holly DesMeules BA.COM.STC

Public Affairs and Marketing Coordinator at NTELOS Yes

Bridget Donahue BA.COM.STC

Senior marketing campaign manager at Living Social Yes

Dana Erickson BA.COM.ELM unknown

Jennah Fahey BA.COM.STC

Marketing and Research Administrator Yes

Margaret Fanning BA.COM.JOU unknown

Erika Farr BA.COM.STC Pace University Law School NA

Pace University

Andrew Faust BA.COM.JOU

PR and Marketing Professional at Jackson Spalding Yes

University of Georgia

Rachel Feeley BA.COM.STC

Marketing and leasing associate at Blackline Retail Group Yes

Courtney Gacona BA.COM.STC

Digital Marketing Associate at TeamPeople Yes

Susanna Gaither BA.COM.ELM

Customer Service Representative at Ralph Lauren No

Skylar Galayda BA.COM.ELM unknown

Veronica Garcia BA.COM.ELM

Administrative assistant in real estate No

Tia Gebhard BA.COM.ELM Artist management Yes

Rebecca Gencarelli BA.COM.MPC

Marketing Coordinator at Jake's Franchising Yes

Rebecca Gitlin BA.COM.STC Underwriting Coordinator No

Michael Goins BA.COM.ELM TV Production Freelancer Yes

Ryan Harvey BA.COM.GIC Graphic Designer Yes


Kelsey Hinchliffe BA.COM.STC

Graduate student at University of Maryland NA

University of Maryland

Kaitlyn Hodgins BA.COM.JOU

Social Media Community Manager and Blogger Yes

Anne Hurt BA.COM.ELM unknown

Marshall Jefferson BA.COM.ELM

Sales and Marketing at Corporate Marketing Solutions Yes

Dean Judson BA.COM.STC

Sales agent at Jackson Hole Central Reservations No

Adam Keelan BA.COM.ELM

Freelance marketing and advertising Yes

Mary Kelly BA.COM.STC

PR at Proehlific Park & Proehlific Club at Forest Oaks Yes

Jane Kilgore BA.COM.STC

Public Communication Graduate Student at American University NA

American University

Skylar Marie Mabe (now Trivette) BA.COM.JOU Office manager No

Tyler MacDonald BA.COM.STC Media Assistant at V Group World Yes

Christine Marchetti BA.COM.STC Business Analyst Insurance No

Alexis Marley BA.COM.MED

Assistant to the Worship Pastor, Apex Baptist Church, Apex, NC

John Matheny BA.COM.ELM

MBI Sports Management Agency Associate Scouting Intern No

Hannah McKenna BA.COM.STC

Enterprise Rent-a-Car Position: Management Assistant No

Jasmyne McNeely BA.COM.ELM Lead Generation No


Chelsey Middlebrook BA.COM.STC

Managing director of the Silicon Valley at Betts Recruiting Yes

Jillian Montoya BA.COM.MPC Military officer no

Kimberly Muller BA.COM.MED unknown

Emma Nichols (now Dill) BA.COM.STC

Communication and sourcing specialist at Intellect Resources Yes

Henry Patterson BA.COM.MPC unknown

Jasmine Paul BA.COM.ELM Military officer No

Carlee Pett BA.COM.STC

Account executive at R&J Public Relations Yes

Lauren Pivirotto BA.COM.ELM Stitcher at Hartford Stage No

Megan Plasket BA.COM.STC

Managing logistics and supply chain for CH Robinson No

John Pyzik BA.COM.ELM unknown

Haley Randazzo BA.COM.STC

Account executive at Red Moon Marketing Yes

Christine Reinicker BA.COM.JOU

Marketing and Advertising professional Yes

Andrea Ritchie BA.COM.ELM

Technical assistant/promotions at Alpha Broadcasting Yes

Paige Rudzin BA.COM.STC

Media and customer insights at CHANEL Yes

Jessica Ryan BA.COM.STC

Administrative assistant at NJ dealers Auto Mall No

Carlton Sarcione BA.COM.ELM unknown

Kathryn Searles BA.COM.ELM Producer at WCCB Charlotte Yes


Anna Seiler BA.COM.STC

Office design assistant at Tradition Homes

Alexis Sherman BA.COM.JOU unknown

Jessica Shultz BA.COM.MPC unknown

Bridget Simon BA.COM.STC

Account coordinator at LMO advertising Yes

Caroline Stewart BA.COM.ELM Associate producer at the X-factor Yes

Justin Terrell BA.COM.STC unknown

Jessica Thornes BA.COM.STC

Social Media coordinator at Center for Innovative GYN care Yes

Celeste Villafano BA.COM.STC

Marketing and communication specialist Yes

Daniel Vivenzio BA.COM.JOU Producer at Time Warner Cable News Yes

Andrew Walker BA.COM.GIC Data abstractor at Cornerstone Health No

Jason Williams BA.COM.STC Nationwide Insurance Agent No

Kaitland Willingham BA.COM.STC

Director of Communication strategy--United Business Yes

High Point University

Lauren Young BA.COM.ELM unknown

7. Describe the program used to track graduates to assess their experience in the professions and to improve curriculum and instruction. The NQSC’s alumni base of 795 is relatively small because the school and major were only started in 2007. However, a critical mass of alumni is anticipated within the next few years. High Point University has a growing alumni network and the School is taking steps to track NQSC graduates.


Databases of alumni names, postal addresses and e-mail addresses are maintained in the NQSC; however, until two years ago employment histories were not sequenced. With prodding from the Dean’s Advisory Council and an expanded School administration, the School’s administration has made concerted efforts to improve our alumni relations. The NQSC conducted an alumni survey summer 2015 (see APPENDIX 9.12 for results) as part of the assessment and anticipate conducting this survey to alumni each year. This process will allow the School to systematically collect data from alumni to help strengthen the curriculum and instruction. In addition, Megan Garafola, a member of the Dean’s Advisory Council, is a NQSC alum and her feedback as a board member is a component of the assessment plan as well. The NQSC developed an alumni database that includes home and email addresses. The School’s website includes a link for alumni to self-register, update their contact information, and request a copy of the NQSC newsletter—Q The News—that was emailed in February 2015. This project produced by one of our practicum classes was well done but, in hindsight, too long and had too many stories. Going forward, the School is targeting four editions with only four items in each email. Rather than relying on a class to produce it, that responsibility has been assigned to Phil Watson, an assistant professor of the practice of communication. Each year, the NQSC hosts an open house during alumni weekend, and the School’s administration typically visits with 30-40 alumni during that time. In addition, the NQSC faculty also network informally with alums and professionals (e.g., meet occasionally for coffee, have lunch together, attend professional meetings, converse by telephone, etc.). All faculty members host professionals, including alums, as guest speakers in their classes each semester. A full list is available in the Standard 3—Diversity & Inclusiveness section.

Date post:	10-May-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	7 times
Download:	0 times

STANDARD 9: ASSESSMENT OF LEARNING OUTCOMES · 2015-11-10 · STANDARD 9: ASSESSMENT OF LEARNING...

Documents