Speech 100—Fundamentals of Oral Communication

Student Learning Outcomes (SLO)
After successfully completing this course, students will be able to:

  1. Demonstrate understanding of the impact communication has on our daily lives, appreciating its complexity and coping with how perception affects it;

  2. Identify and demonstrate proficiency in the use of skills necessary for competent interpersonal communication;

  3. Identify and demonstrate the ability to utilize the factors necessary for effective group communication;

  4. Present effective informative and persuasive public presentations; and

  5. Demonstrate a global perspective by identifying examples of communication behaviors that vary between cultures and explain the importance of recognizing and valuing diversity.

Measures
The instrument used to measure student progress with these outcomes was a 50-item objective exam (multiple choice, true and false).  After the first year, the test was reduced to 35 items with approximately five (5) questions per outcome.  The shorter version provided the same amount of useful information as the longer version.  Throughout this assessment period, we used a common rubric for grading speeches.  In Fall of 2004 we began collecting and recording the data from the persuasive speech rubric. This process is fairly labor-intensive, so we are now working on an electronic means of collecting the data.

Results
The following tables display the data results from Spring 2002 - 05 with a brief explanation at the end of each table about our evolving process and changes and enhancements to the course based on the data.  The tables are arranged in descending order by years (2006, 2005, 2004, 2003).

Results of Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes for
Speech 100: Fundamentals of Oral Communication
Fall 2005- Spring 2006

Outcomes

Fall
2005
N = pre-421/post-358


Winter
2006
N =

Spring
2006
N = 

    Percent Correct
    Traditional
N=399/342
Hybrid
N = 22/16
Trad
N=
Hybrid
N = 21
 

 

 

Pre

Post Pre Post

Post

Post

1.

Demonstrate understanding of the impact communication has on our daily lives, appreciating its complexity and coping with how perception affects it
 

44 74
(+30)
69 89
(+20)
  94  

2.

Identify and demonstrate proficiency in the use of skills necessary for competent interpersonal communication
 

62 83
(+21)
75 86
(+11)
  95  

2.

Identify and demonstrate the ability to utilize the factors necessary for effective group communication
 

30 63
(+33)
31 66
(+35)
  65  

4.

Present effective informative and persuasive public presentations
 

54 79
(+25)
53 86
(+33)
  94  

5.

Demonstrate a global perspective by identifying examples of communication behaviors that vary between cultures and explain the importance of recognizing and valuing diversity

42 73
(+31)
43 81
(+38)
  87  

 

Persuasive Speech Scores using
Common Rubric

%

     

 

Content

83      

 

Delivery

84      

Information Literacy

80  
 

 

 

 

Results of Assessment of SLOs for Speech 100
Fall 2004- Spring 2005

Outcomes

Fall
2004
N = 315

Winter
2005
N =
206

Spring
2005
N = 267

    Percent Correct

 

 

Post

Post

Post

1.

Demonstrate understanding of the impact communication has on our daily lives, appreciating its complexity and coping with how perception affects it

80

82

83

2.

Identify and demonstrate proficiency in the use of skills necessary for competent interpersonal communication

82

84

84

2.

Identify and demonstrate the ability to utilize the factors necessary for effective group communication

57

65

61

4.

Present effective informative and persuasive public presentations

79

78

82

5.

Demonstrate a global perspective by identifying examples of communication behaviors that vary between cultures and explain the importance of recognizing and valuing diversity

69*

66

70

 

Persuasive Speech Scores using Common Rubric

 

 

 

 

Content

78

77

78

 

Delivery

75

77

78

Information Literacy

79

75

78
N=(226)

**At the beginning of Spring quarter, faculty were given an information sheet identifying the concepts that most students were having difficulty with based on the assessment results.  Textbook chapters focusing on those concepts was also provided. (Example: "reflected appraisal"; "fundamental attribution error" in chapter 2).  No other information was given. Faculty could address the need in whatever way they chose.  As indicated above there was a marked difference in SLO #5 with an increase from 66% to 70% correct.
*
After Spring of 2004, we decided to strengthen our assessment of cultural communication. We rewrote the five questions to make them application questions, which were substantially more difficult, and more focused on what we teach in the course. We are assuming this accounts for the lower score on outcome five and we will add emphasis to the more difficult application of cultural communication in our classroom exercises/activities.

Also, information literacy has been an important campus wide focus, so we included a measurement for that.  In processing the rubric scores, it was apparent faculty are widely diverse in their interpretation of information literacy and also speech delivery components.  We will use consensus building sessions among speech faculty during the next two quarters to develop more consistency in grading.

 

Results of Assessment of SLOs for Speech 100
Fall 2003- Spring 2004

Outcomes

Fall
2003
N = 156

Winter
2004
N =
310

Spring
2004
N = 290

    Percent Correct

 

 

Post

Post

Post

1.

Demonstrate understanding of the impact communication has on our daily lives, appreciating its complexity and coping with how perception affects it

77

81

73

2.

Identify and demonstrate proficiency in the use of skills necessary for competent interpersonal communication

80

82

80

3.

Identify and demonstrate the ability to utilize the factors necessary for effective group communication

55

63

58

4.

Present effective informative and persuasive public presentations

77

78

75

5.

Demonstrate a global perspective by identifying examples of communication behaviors that vary between cultures and explain the importance of recognizing and valuing diversity

76

83

71

 

 

Persuasive Speech Scores using Common Rubric

 

 

 

 

Content
N=220

82

 

 

 

Delivery
N=220

75

In spring of 2004 we began collecting data from the common persuasive speech rubric.  Although the rubric contains a variety of categories (introduction, body, conclusion, language, sources, etc.) we collapsed the data into two categories - content and delivery.  At some point we will separate all of the dimensions, but currently it is too labor intensive to do that.

 

Results of Assessment of SLOs for Speech 100
Spring 2002 - Spring 2003

Outcomes

Spring 2002

Fall
2002*
N = 350

Winter 2003
N = 245

Spring
2003
N = 182

    Percent Correct

 

 

Pre/test

Post/test

Post

Post

Post

1.

Demonstrate understanding of the impact communication has on our daily lives, appreciating its complexity and coping with how perception affects it

50.14

67.13

73

71

77

2.

Identify and demonstrate proficiency in the use of skills necessary for competent interpersonal communication

54.62

67.62

79

81

79

3.

Identify and demonstrate the ability to utilize the factors necessary for effective group communication

29.56

44.11

42

48

55

4.

Present effective informative and persuasive public presentations

48.22

55.28

72

75

79

5.

Demonstrate a global perspective by identifying examples of communication behaviors that vary between cultures and explain the importance of recognizing and valuing diversity

49.62

65.0

74

77

78

Group communication was the lowest score.  To address this problem we created a common rubric for assessing the dimensions of group communication.  This would assure we were evaluating the same elements.  We used it in three ways: 1) faculty assessment of student discussions; 2) the group's self-assessment after a group activity/exercise; and 3) student self-assessment.  Without additional work, simply the rubric, the scores improved.  We would like additional growth and will create specific exercises to address this.

We discontinued the pre-test after two quarters because we discovered students entered with almost identical scores for the five outcomes on each pre-test.  We were mostly interested in what they knew when they finished the course.