Speech 107: 2020-2021 – JSCC Monitoring Report SACSCOC

Intended Outcomes	Means of Assessment	Criteria for Success	Summary & Analysis of Assessment Evidence	Use of Results
SLO 1: Students will organize, develop, and support an argument in a persuasive speech presentation.	Evaluation 1: A persuasive speech presentation where a rubric is used to assess organization, use of support, and development/rhetorical strategies.	Eval 1: 70% of students will demonstrate satisfactory organization, development, and support in a persuasive speech argument. Sections IV (Use of Support) & VI (Persuasive Strategy) of Persuasive Speech Assessment Rubric	Fall 2020-Summer 2021 85% of students demonstrated effective organization, development, and support of arguments according to the persuasive speech rubric criteria. Number of Students Assessed: 433 Students assessed/26 sections Annual Summary Shelby: 250/296 (84%) Jefferson: 51/64 (80%) Clanton: 18/19 (95%) Pell City: 48/54 (89%)	Observations/Changes based on previous cycle (19-20): Previously, 89% of students demonstrated satisfactory organization, development, and support in a persuasive speech argument, and all campuses exceeded the 70% threshold. Instructors noted that students continued to need assistance with development of arguments and supporting claims in the persuasive speech. To address weak areas, instructors used sample student speech videos as examples of logical arguments, use of ethos, and pathos as support to improve learning outcomes. To enhance students’ ability to organize, develop, and support arguments in the persuasive speech, the department changed textbooks for this course for 2020-2021, selecting one that would provide more detailed analysis of arguments in example speeches as well as interactive learning exercises for reinforcement. Instructors included a discussion of organization, development, and support an argument in a sample persuasive speech, examining both Needs Improvement and Final Version student speech videos available with the new Lucas text for SPH 107. Scaffolding and opportunities for providing feedback, such as having students submit topic proposals and outline drafts during the preparation process, were further developed to improve development of arguments, as can be seen in the example syllabus. Observations/Changes based on current cycle (20-21): During this year, we observed a decrease from 89% to 85% in students’ ability to organize, develop, and support an argument in a persuasive speech presentation; however, a much larger sample was assessed-- more than twice the number of students from the previous year. For next year’s assessment, instructors will utilize interactive instructional techniques for organization, development, and support of arguments such as the Adaptive Learning Assignments in Connect. Instructors and students will also discuss speech videos for the Lucas text that specifically demonstrate use of support.
SLO 2: Students will adapt speaking to the needs of culturally diverse audiences in a persuasive speech presentation.	Evaluation 2: A persuasive speech presentation where a rubric is used to assess audience adaptation, use of language, and nonverbal communication.	Eval 2: 70% of students will demonstrate satisfactory ability to adapt speaking to the needs of culturally diverse audiences in a persuasive speech presentation. Sections I (Introduction), III (Communication Process & Audience Adaptation), V (Nonverbal Delivery) of Persuasive Speech Assessment Rubric	Fall 2020-Summer 2021 85% of students demonstrated satisfactory ability to adapt speaking to the needs of culturally diverse audiences in a persuasive speech presentation according to the persuasive speech rubric criteria. Number of Students Assessed: 497 Students assessed/27 sections Annual Summary Shelby: 303/360 (84%) Jefferson: 52/64 (81%) Clanton: 18/19 (95%) Pell City: 48/54 (89%)	Observations/Changes based on previous cycle (19-20): Previously, 90% of students assessed demonstrated satisfactory ability to adapt speaking to the needs of culturally diverse audiences in a persuasive speech presentation according to the persuasive speech rubric criteria, and all campuses exceeded 70%. Instructors cited the necessity to examine needs improvement and final version sample speeches, discussing improvement of audience adaptation and use of rhetorical strategies in the improved versions. To strengthen the ability of students to adapt to the needs of a culturally diverse audience, instructors were able to include discussion of audience adaptation and rhetorical strategies in example speeches that accompany the Lucas text (needs improvement and final version examples). Instructors were able to utilize video segments related to audience adaptation and persuasive appeals. Using interactive learning modules in McGraw-Hill’s Connect for the Lucas text, instructors were able to reinforce instruction and practice regarding audience adaptation and persuasion. Observations/Changes based on current cycle (20-21): During this year, the department observed a decrease from 90% to 85% while assessing a much larger sample of students. For next year’s assessment, instructors will utilize exercises available with the textbook resources for enhancing understanding of audience adaptation.