running head: a bizarre application of apa - …personal.tcu.edu/pking/program review/sp… ·...

SPCO Review 2002-2003 1

Department of Speech Communication Academic Program Review

Prepared by

Chris R. Sawyer, Chair (SPCO)


Brief History of the Department of Speech Communication

1878-1924: The Inception and Early Development

According to Yancy Boyd Fleming's (1972) thesis, A History

of the Department of Speech Communication at Texas Christian

University, speech education began in 1878, while TCU was still

known as Add-Ran College. In that year, Add-Ran College offered

an area of study in Forensics and Composition that included

courses in debate, elocution, and rhetoric. In 1884, these

studies were offered under the newly formed School of Modern

Languages and Elocution. In 1895, speech course work was the

mainstay of the School of Elocution, renamed six years later the

School of Oratory and Dramatic Art. The School of Oratory and

Dramatic Art became part of the School of Fine Arts in 1908.

Following a reorganization of the University, the program was

renamed the School of Expression (1920) and was moved to the

recently formed unit named for TCU predecessor, Add-Ran College.

The following year, the program was renamed the Department of the

Spoken Word. Three years later it was called the Department of

Public Speaking.

Despite its numerous name changes during its early

development, the department closely followed the national trends

in speech education. Irrespective of its name, the Department's

faculty members were graduates of the most prestigious schools of

expression, oratory, and public speaking of the day. A cursory


examination of TCU's early speech curriculum suggests the

influence of many notable educators of the period including

Emerson, Cumnock, Hammill, Curry, and Powers. Consequently, the

Department quickly developed a reputation as a leader in the

field and sustained growth in course offerings, enrollment, and

faculty.

1924-1974: From Elocution to Speech Communication

1924-1952. Following World War I, speech educators in the

United States embraced the growing popularity of collegiate

theatrical productions and the study of new communication

technologies, such as radio. Consequently, the department was

renamed the Department of Speech and Drama in 1945. Following its

return to the School of Fine Arts in 1947, the Department

expanded its curriculum to include divisions of radio-television,

speech pathology, and theatre. Furthermore, the University

received national recognition for its Summer School of

Expression, a program in voice and diction training, story

telling, public reading, and oratory. This program offered in

conjunction with the prestigious Curry School of Expression in

Boston.

1952-1962. The rise of intercollegiate debate competitions

and increased demand for high school speech courses prompted the

Department to offer more courses in argumentation, debate, and

advanced public speaking. Moreover, coursework aimed at teaching


of speech, drama, and radio in the public schools was added.

Departmental achievements of the period included the permanent

establishment of radio station KTCU on campus and the prominence

of a successful intercollegiate debate program that received

national attention. Course offerings in all areas were popular

and led to the creation of a Division of Radio and Television in

1954. To reflect these changes, the Department was renamed

Speech-Theatre-Radio-Television. Growth in the department's

theatre division culminated in the separation of this program

into the Department of Theatre Arts in 1960.

1962-1974. In 1962, George T. Tade became chair of the

Department with the stated intent of revising its mission and

course offerings. Under Tade's leadership, the Department

overhauled its curriculum to reflect the prevailing educational

trends of the time. Reorganized into three divisions, Public

Speaking, Radio-Television-Film, and Communication Pathology, the

Department offered a Master of Arts in Teaching, a Master of

Science in Speech Pathology, and a program in deaf education. Two

of these divisions eventually grew into the Departments of Radio-

Television and Film and the Department of Communication Sciences

and Disorders. In 1970, the name of the Department was changed to

its current designation, Department of Speech Communication.


1974-Present: From Rhetoric to Social Science

George Tade became Dean for the College School of Fine Arts

and Communication and hired Ralph R. Behnke as his replacement in

1974. For nearly one hundred years, the Department had

continually revised and expanded its curriculum to reflect the

most current trends in the field. By 1974, social science methods

had begun to permeate the study of human communication. Behnke's

training, which was in psychophysiology, reflected the leading

edge of this new research orientation. Under his direction the

Department discontinued its intercollegiate debate program,

revised its undergraduate and graduate course offerings to

reflect the social science perspective, and hired faculty who

were trained in the social science tradition.

This infusion of new talent and philosophy benefited the

Department's new mission, which placed a premium on scholarly

productivity in support of teaching. After moving to the recently

completed Moudy Building in 1981-82, the Department rapidly

adopted the use of new technologies in the communication

classroom. For example, during the 1980's the Department was

among the first in the nation to use microcomputers to grade

speech assignments and interactive video to provide real-time

advice from instructors during student performances. Moreover,

the Department became well known in the discipline for its

research productivity in areas such as speech anxiety,


instructional technology, and interpersonal communication.

Following the reorganization of TCU during the 1999-2000 academic

year, the Department of Speech Communication became a charter

member of the newly formed College of Communication.

Assessment Plan

Mission Statement

To enhance the quality of human life through the discovery

and teaching of effective and ethical human communication

processes leading to enriched personal and professional lives.

Program Competencies

At the conclusion of the Speech Communication program,

students are expected to demonstrate the knowledge and

ability to execute effective communication skills in

personal and professional settings.

The acquired knowledge and skill will guide responsible

decision-making and behavior in leadership environments

around the world.

Intended Outcomes

Students will demonstrate knowledge and skills reflecting

an understanding of theory associated with Speech

Communication.

Students will demonstrate knowledge and skills reflecting

an understanding of research associated with Speech

Communication.


Students will demonstrate knowledge and skills required

to communicate effectively.

Action Steps

During the 2001-2002 academic year, the Department generated

initial items for a test designed to assess student knowledge of

communication theories. All faculty members submitted items

pertinent to their subject areas and courses. After removing

redundant and defective items, 66 of the original 88 items were

used in the initial field test. Establishing a cut score for this

initial version of the test followed a "contrasting groups"

method (Cizek, 2001). Specifically, two groups were given

equivalent forms of the proposed exit exam. The first group

consisted of students enrolled in SPCO 10123 Basic Speech

Communication. The second group was drawn from a junior level

class. This method of standard setting compares the performance

of subjects who do not possess the trait of interest (i.e.,

students in the basic course) with those that do (in this case,

SPCO students). In last year's standard setting study, some

students in the SPCO sample did not have sufficient training to

adequately represent the trait of interest (achievement in the

field of SPCO). Consequently, the contrast between the two groups

would not permit establishing an acceptable cut-score.

Consequently, the Department is taking the following steps to

improve the test.


Method of Assessment

During the spring semester of 2003, senior Speech

Communication majors will take a test of their knowledge of

theory and research associated with Speech Communication as

reflected by scores on an exit examination as coordinated by the

department administration. The exit exam consists of multiple-

choice exam items generated by the faculty-as-a-whole reflecting

a collective agreement of theory and research associated with the

field that Speech Communication majors should understand.

Following individual review of the scores, faculty will meet as a

whole, discuss the results, and generate a report identifying

those areas meriting improvement in addition to those areas of

strength.

Senior SPCO major with GPA of 3.00 or greater will define

the SPCO group. Subjects for this group have been identified.

Moreover, students enrolled in SPCO 10123 during spring 2003 will

serve as the other contrast group. Last, test items will be

selected for the final version of the exit exam based on the

predictive value model. Specifically, items will make the final

version of the exam that yield a high number of true positive and

true negatives and low numbers of false positives and false

negatives. Likewise, the cut score for the final version of the

exit exam will also be based on the predictive value model

(Glaros & Kline, 1988).


Student Recruitment, Retention, and Placement

Graduate Recruitment Efforts

Recruitment of graduate students for the Department's Master

of Science program, Communication in Human Relations, follows a

two-pronged strategy of "outreach" to students from similar

programs at other institutions in the region and in-reach to

well-qualified TCU SPCO majors. A summary of this plan, which was

adopted by the Department during the 1999-2000 academic year,

appears in Appendix A. Outreach efforts include department web

pages, distributing brochures on the graduate program, and

creating a CD-ROM containing a recruitment video. All inquiries

are followed by the mailings of graduate application and

recruitment materials, such as the CR-ROM. Serious candidates are

invited to campus for tours of TCU facilities, meetings with

faculty and to interview current graduate students. Promotional

materials used in recruiting graduate students are included the

supporting materials for this program review.

While these efforts have generated numerous inquiries from

prospective students, a substantial number of these prospects

seem to be comparison shoppers, looking for the best financial

offers from institutions. Although the value of tuition waivers

is emphasized during the recruitment of graduate students, the

level of departmental support in the form of stipends, usually

about $4,000 annually, does not compare favorably with those


offered by some state supported institutions. The University of

Texas at Austin and Texas A&M, College Station, award stipends of

$10,000 to $12,000 annually to graduate students. Second-tier

institutions in the state also offer more money in stipends than

the Department is currently allocated. For example, Southwest

Texas State University awards $8,000 for Master degree students

in speech communication.

The Department has been able to counter this financial

disadvantage, in part, by focusing its recruiting efforts on

students who have a connection to the Dallas-Fort Worth

metroplex. For example, prospective students who have family in

the area or whose spouses have job offers in Dallas or Fort Worth

tend to show greater interest in attending the program than those

students who do not. Moreover, students who accept an invitation

for a campus visit are also more likely to follow-through on

admission efforts than those who do not.

In-reach recruiting efforts have been somewhat effective.

Beginning their junior year, SPCO majors with high cumulative

GPAs are considered prospects for the program and they are

encouraged to consider attending graduate school. For example,

each semester, the Department Chair and the Director of Graduate

Studies for the Department, send letters to all SPCO majors and

minors who earned a GPA of 3.0 or better in the previous academic

term. Subsequently, the students' faculty advisors or the


Department's Director of Graduate Studies will contact these

students to gauge their interest in pursuing admission to the

graduate program. Since the spring term of 2000, which marks the

inception of this strategy, enrollment in the SPCO graduate

program has risen from 5 full-time graduate students to 12 with a

proportionate increase in part-time enrollment, as well.

Faculty and Teaching/Research Quality

According to its own policies documents (Department of

Speech Communication Policies and Documents, revised 1996) the

Department upholds the teacher/scholar model of the professorate.

Accordingly, while teaching is considered the primary component

of the faculty member's role in the Department, scholarly

achievement must complement effective teaching. Evidence that

SPCO faculty member strives for excellence in both areas is

obvious from a review of Faculty Annual Reports. Faculty members

have been nominated and/or have received awards for teaching

excellence at the College, University, state and regional levels.

These awards and nominations include those for Chancellor's Award

for Teaching Excellence, the Deans Award for Teaching Excellence,

and the Minnie Stevens Piper Professor.

Traditionally, the Department has used two standards for

assessing progress toward this goal. Effectiveness in credit hour

production was set as a departmental average of 225 credit hours

for full-time faculty. Evidence of instructional quality is


indicated when an instructor's overall score on the Student

Perceptions of Teaching (SPOT) evaluation approaches 4.0.

Consequently, a departmental average of 4.0 or greater represents

a high level of instructional quality. In accordance with

University policies, Student Perceptions of Teaching (SPOT)

evaluations were conducted in both fall and spring semesters for

all faculty. However, a pilot version of the new SPOT using a

different scaling system was tested in the spring. These results

are not currently available. However, the SPCO weighted average

of SPOT evaluations for fall 2001was 4.25 on a five point scale,

slightly higher than the College average of 4.22. Based on these

data, the Department achieved its 2001-2002 teaching

effectiveness goal.

A hallmark of achievement for the Department is its

cumulative research record since 1974. SPCO faculty members often

receive Top Paper awards from regional, national, and

international communication associations. Moreover, for each five

year period, the active and prolific scholars in communication

studies are compared and ranked. According to this measure of

research productivity, four of the current faculty rank in the

upper 1% of this elite group. One faculty member, Dr. Ralph R.

Behnke, is currently in the top ten among all active and prolific

scholars in the field. Dr. Behnke was the 2001-2002 recipient of

the Chancellor's Award for Excellence in Research and Creative


Activity and was recently honored at the Spotlight Scholar for

the Southern States Communication Association.

Faculty Data

There are six tenure-track and one non tenure-track faculty

in the Department. Evidence of their academic credentials along

with a profile of their individual workloads is available in

supporting materials submitted with this program review. However,

the following recent information is illustrative of the

productivity of SPCO faculty. A total of 42 regular class

sections were taught by faculty during 2001-2002, not including

summer sessions. Total credit hour production for the fall

semester 2001 was 2697 and 2593 for spring, 2002 (12th day class

reports). FTE for SPCO faculty was 8.25. Therefore, credit hour

production for the fall and spring semesters was 314.30 and

286.29, respectively. Student demand for SPCO courses was strong.

Enrollment ran 106% of capacity for fall 2001, and 110% of

capacity for spring 2002.

Resources

The Department of Speech Communication has been housed on

the third floor of the Moudy Building, south since the 1981-1982

academic year. At that time, the Department enjoyed state-of-the-

art facilities and equipment. Although a dedicated revenue stream

was created to purchase new equipment for all departments located

in Moudy, classrooms, laboratories, and office spaces degraded


with time. In 2000, a survey of facilities and other resources

needed to revitalize the campus was conducted. The SPCO response

to this survey is included with this program review. Many of the

deficiencies listed in the 2000 document were addressed in the

extensive remodeling of the third floor of Moudy South that took

place in 2001 and 2002. These improvements include improvements

of SPCO laboratories, graduate student offices, and all existing

classrooms. Currently, the facilities on the third floor of

Moudy, South are adequate to meet the current demands placed on

the Department.

Community Involvement

SPCO faculty members use their talents and training to

benefit both the campus and larger community. Two SPCO faculty

members routinely conduct conflict resolution and mediation

services for the University. Others conduct training workshops,

supervise internships and offer pro bono consultation with area

educators and business leaders.

Summary and Future Plans

The Department has begun to assess its effectiveness

relative to its mission statement. While plans to improve the

current exit test of continue, subsequent assessment strategies

should be developed to determine the extent to which SPCO majors

acquire the communication skills described in the Department's

mission statement. Presuming the successful revision of the


current knowledge-based exit test, developing a skills assessment

instrument should begin during be the 2003-2004 academic year.

The Department should expand course offerings in two vital

areas, intercultural communication and communication via emerging

technologies. During the previous two years, the Department

requested additional faculty lines to address these needs. Both

positions are critical to the Department's ability to address the

global community aspect of the University's Mission. Moreover,

these new faculty lines will enable the Department to meet the

current level of student demand for our courses.

The SPCO graduate program grew from five full-time students

in 2000-2001 to twelve in 2001-2002. Despite this growth, the

level of financial assistance in the form of graduate stipends

remains woefully below that of our regional competitors.

Specifically, other Texas institutions offer $8,000-$12,000 per

year in graduate stipends while our current stipend is

approximately $4,000. Graduate students work as lab assistants in

SPCO 10123, a course that meets UCR requirements for oral

communication competence. The forthcoming SACS Institutional

Self-Study combined with TCU's new core curriculum will likely

increase demand for SPCO 10123 in the coming years. Most of the

current SPCO graduate students will graduate by spring 2003,

making recruitment for the program crucial. The current situation

makes attracting high quality graduate students difficult and


crucial. Increasing money for stipends will enable the Department

to attract and retain high quality graduate students.

Although some success in advancement efforts was achieved

during the 2001-2002 academic year, additional funds are needed

to upgrade the presentation technology in the Mercer Boardroom.

Assistance from the university advancement office will be

solicited in the next academic year to this end. Moreover, the

Department should begin the process of naming its first Philip J.

and Cheryl C. Burgiéres Distinguished Professor in the near

future.

The Department and College approved a name change from

Speech Communication to Communication Studies. Enacting this name

change was postponed by senior level administrators until the

permanent Dean for the College was named. The Department still

believes that the change will improve its image on campus and

looks forward for this new designation.

References

Cizek, G. J. (2001). Setting performance standards:

Concepts, methods, and perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence

Erlbaum.

Fleming, Y. B. (1972). A history of the Department of Speech

Communication at Texas Christian University. Graduate thesis.

Fort Worth, Texas: Texas Christian University.


Glaros, A. G., & Kline, R. B. (1988). Understanding the

accuracy of tests with cutting scores: The sensitivity,

specificity, and predictive value model. Journal of Clinical

Psychology. 44, 1013-1023.


Appendix A: Graduate Student Recruitment Strategies

The following recruitment strategies for the graduate

program address two target groups, speech communication

majors/minors trained here at TCU and those applying from other

institutions.

In-reach: Increasing the Number of TCU Candidates

Traditionally, the Department of Speech Communication has

enjoyed considerable success in attracting suitable candidates

for graduate study from its own undergraduate majors.

Departmental faculty and leadership have identified increasing

the number and quality of majors in the program as a goal for the

graduate program. Combined with invigorated efforts to promote

graduate studies as a viable option for TCU SPCO graduates will

improve the effectiveness of in-reach activities.

One such strategy involves recruiting majors directly from

the basic course. This fall term, students who had distinguished

themselves during lab activities in the SPCO 10123 were given

special recognition for their achievements in on the final class

day. A list of these students has been provided to Dr. Powers who

will send them a follow-up letter of congratulations. All

students receiving a letter grade of “A” or “B” will receive a

letter from the basic course director congratulating them on

their achievement and inviting them to take courses in the

department in the future. The letter will also advise them that


continued academic success in SPCO course is a qualification for

admission to Sigma Pi Chi honor fraternity.

Secondly, the following proposed strategies are designed to

motivate SPCO majors to consider graduate studies upon completion

of their undergraduate programs. Although this list does not

preclude the development of other recruitment ideas, the in-reach

program should:

Enhance the profile of SPCO graduate students by:

Recognizing the achievements of current TCU graduate

students, such as convention papers, publications, or

special honors, at Sigma Pi Chi meetings.

Posting recent publications of graduate students on the

Graduate Publication Display Board.

Encouraging graduate students to speak with SPCO majors

about the benefits of graduate training.

Inviting SPCO majors and minors to attend a “brown bag”

program in which the best work of graduate students is

presented or discussed.

Publicize the TCU SPCO graduate program by:

Maintaining the Graduate Program of the Department Web

Page.

Distributing Graduate Program material each semester in

undergraduate SPCO classes.


Displaying graduate student posters and brochures in

lobby.

Developing program support from successful alumni.

Holding annual information gatherings, perhaps via Sigma

Pi Chi, to talk with undergraduates about graduate

programs.

Explore innovative recruitment strategies such as:

Considering the implementation of a 3/2 program for SPCO.

Recognizing SPCO majors through special events such as

the end-of-semester Sigma Pi Chi meeting or a special

After Dinner Speech/Departmental Roast.

Identifying high performing majors by their junior year

and making this information available to SPCO faculty.

Promoting undergraduate student involvement in scholarly

activities (e.g. SSCA Undergraduate Honors Program)

Contacting parents of prospective graduate students about

the value of graduate school and the steps involved with

admission.

Reactions to these tactics and additional ideas relating

to enhancing the profile of the graduate program with our

qualified undergraduates will be greatly appreciated

Outreach: Cultivating Feeder Schools

As an overall strategy, institutions in this region are

classified according to distance from TCU (less or more than 2


hours driving time) and type of course offerings (undergraduate

only or graduate program). Classifications have been prioritized

and appropriate strategies will be planned for each. Personnel,

especially speech communication faculty members, will be

identified at each school. We will ask these key individuals for

referrals to our graduate program. In addition, dossiers on each

school will be compiled that will include an analysis of their

course offerings and key personnel. The following is a cursory

analysis of targeted institutions.

Priority 1 Schools. Several area institutions have been

identified that are within two hours driving time of Fort Worth,

offer speech communication courses as defined by official

transfer guides, but do not offer graduate programs in speech

communication.

Abilene Christian University, Abilene

Austin College, Sherman

Dallas Baptist University, Dallas

Hardin Simmons University, Abilene

McMurry University, Abilene

Midwestern State University, Witchita Falls

Tarleton State University, Stephenville

Texas Wesleyan University, Fort Worth

Texas Woman’s University, Denton

University of Dallas, Dallas


University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington

University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas

Priority 2 Schools. These schools are located within two

hours driving time from Fort Worth, offer speech communication

courses as defined by official transfer guides, and offer

graduate instruction in speech communication. This list includes:

Baylor University

University of North Texas, Denton

Priority 3 Schools. These institutions are located more than

two hours driving time from Fort Worth, offer speech

communication courses as defined by official transfer guides, but

do not have a graduate program in speech communication. A partial

list of these institutions includes:

Angelo State University, San Angelo

Concordia University, Austin

East Texas Baptist University, Marshall

Houston Baptist University, Houston

Houston-Tillotson University, Austin

Sam Houston State University, Hunstville

Southwestern University, Georgetown

Texas A & M at Commerce, Commerce

Texas A & M International University, Edinburgh

Texas A & M at Corpus Christi

Texas Lutheran College, Sequin


Trinity University, San Antonio

University of Saint Thomas, Houston

University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso

University of Texas at San Antonio

University of Texas at Tyler, Tyler

West Texas A & M University, Canyon

Priority 4 Schools. These institutions are located more than

two hours driving time from Fort Worth, offer speech

communication courses as defined by official transfer guides, and

have a speech communication graduate program. This list includes:

Southwest Texas State University, San Marcos

Stephen F. Austin State University, Nacogdoches

Texas A & M University, College Station

Texas Technological University, Lubbock

University of Houston, Houston

University of Texas, Austin

Recommendations for Priority 1 and 2 Institutions

Identify key personnel, especially faculty, at each

Priority 1 and 2 institution and cultivate interpersonal

relationships with them.

Send recruiting brochures and posters to each contact

person. In the case of Priority 2 schools, request the

same materials from them and indicate that we will post

their materials in our department.


Request graduate student referrals from Priority 1 and 2

institutions by direct contact (on-campus visits, phone

calls, and e-mail) with key personnel and interested

student groups and individual students at those

institutions.

Send recruiting brochures and applications to all

referrals.

Use follow-up phone calls to invite referral to visit the

campus and to view the departmental web site.

Recommendations for Priority 3 & 4 Institutions

Identify a contact person in the department or

administrative staff of each institution.

Send recruiting brochures and posters to each contact

person. In the case of Priority 4 schools, request the

same materials from them and indicate that we will post

their materials in our department.

Use occasional phone calls and e-mail to ask about

potential graduate students and/or to tell them about

some of our students who plan to leave TCU for graduate

studies.

Send recruiting brochures and applications to all

referrals.

Use follow-up phone calls to invite referral to visit the

campus and to view the departmental web site.


In addition, more general efforts would include the

following:

Hosting a hospitality room at TSCA.

Distributing brochures at all conventions attended by

faculty

Mailing Posters/Brochures to viable institutions

Packaging videos for distribution to student who inquiry

about the program.

Utilizing alumni and graduate students to follow-up on

high priority graduate student candidates.