Assessment Plan

Assessment Plan

Department of Journalism and Mass Communications
Washington and Lee University

Adopted June 2004
Revised January 2005, December 2005, April 2006, November 2009, September 2011, October 2016, October 2017, August 2025

History and Background

Since the Department of Journalism and Mass Communications’ inception, our emphasis on professional preparation, coupled with the university’s size and institutional commitment to personal attention and superior undergraduate teaching, have led us to stress assessment organically. Assessment has been embedded in all we do. Before accrediting bodies adopted standards requiring assessment and divided measures into direct and indirect categories, we relied on daily face-to-face contact with current students in addition to tests, exams and assignments to measure whether we were doing what we set out to do.

We also stayed in frequent contact with graduates, their employers, and our friends in the industry to judge the effectiveness of our curriculum and the preparedness of individual alumni. (For example, feedback from broadcast employers in the early 1990s about our graduates’ preparation caused us to substantially revise the broadcast journalism sequence to include more field reporting from regular beats. It also guided a search for a new faculty member.) Professional visitors to campus have always been numerous and frequent. In addition, internships have been a critical part of our program for at least 45 years, and have been required of all professional-sequence majors for at least 30. Intern evaluations have constituted a critical element of assessment at both the individual and the program level.  

In the 1990s and 2000s, assessment standards adopted by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges and the Accrediting Council for Education in Journalism and Mass Communications gave us the opportunity to assess our assessment. As a result, we determined that we needed — at the institutional and unit level — to systematize, document and expand our assessment measures.

The department, spurred by adoption by ACEJMC of new standards, including assessment, adopted its first written assessment plan in June 2004 and revised it in January 2005; an update was finished in December 2005, and revised in April 2006. The plan was revised in 2009, 2011, 2016, 2017 and most recently 2025.

Each revision of the plan reflected what we learned from the growing list of ACEJMC-approved plans at re-accredited units and from our own experience with the measurements we were using.

Each draft and revision reflects the faculty’s concern for keeping what has worked for decades, for reflecting our program and institutional goals and character, for adopting appropriate new measures that will facilitate data collection and reporting, and for balancing measurement and data so that our primary and ultimate focus on students remains.

Data from several assessment measures are examined each year at the faculty’s retreat before fall term. The faculty agrees on any steps that should be taken to address problems that are highlighted by the assessment data and the curriculum is revised. Future assessments are monitored ensure that the changes accomplished the intended goal.

Guiding principles

1. The university’s institutional vision and mission.
   1. To provide a liberal arts education that develops students’ capacity to think freely, critically, and humanely and to conduct themselves with honor, integrity, and civility.
   2. To prepare graduates for lifelong learning, personal achievement, responsible leadership, service to others, and engaged citizenship in a global and diverse society (https://www.wlu.edu/about-w-l/mission-and-vision)
      
      
2. Maintaining the strengths of our traditional assessment measures, including rigorous examination and evaluation of student work on an individual basis, face-to-face feedback from students, and frequent contact with alumni, employers and intern supervisors.
   
   
3. Outcome measurement that focuses on both our professional journalism and strategic communication sequences.
   
   
4. The vision articulated in the unit’s mission statement and strategic plan:
   1. A curriculum that is responsive to the needs of practitioners and audiences in today’s converged media environment.
   2. A continued focus on promoting democratic self-determination by providing audiences with information that will empower them to make informed decisions.
   3. A focus on individual and professional ethics to inform audiences truthfully, in a clear and appropriate context. 
   4. A commitment to keep up with changing media technology while maintaining a strong emphasis on fundamental journalistic skills and principles.                     

Goals of the assessment plan

1. To measure our success in fulfilling university graduation requirements.
   
   
2. To measure our success in meeting our mission statement and strategic plan.
   
   
3. To evaluate the quality of our students’ preparation for professional careers in mass media, incorporating skills identified in surveys conducted by professional organizations and our own surveys of employers.
   
   
4. To incorporate the 10 professional values and competencies identified by the Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communications (ACEJMC).
   
   
5. To assess student learning at different cognitive levels, including awareness (familiarity with specific information and concepts), understanding (assimilation and comprehension of information and concepts) and application (competency in applying information, concepts and skills to the accomplishment of assigned tasks). 

Student learning objectives

Graduates of the department should be able to:

1. Use their liberal arts education to ensure that they remain lifelong learners.
   
   
2. Apply the principles and laws of freedom of speech and press, in a global context, and for the United States.
   
   
3. Demonstrate an understanding of the multicultural history and role of professionals and institutions in shaping communications.
   
   
4. Demonstrate culturally proficient communication that empowers those traditionally disenfranchised in society, especially as grounded in race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation and ability, domestically and globally, across communication and media contexts.
   
   
5. Present images and information effectively and creatively, using appropriate tools and technologies.
   
   
6. Write correctly and clearly in forms and styles appropriate for the communications professions, audiences and purposes they serve.
   
   
7. Demonstrate an understanding of professional ethical principles and work ethically in pursuit of truth, accuracy, fairness and service to all people and communities.
   
   
8. Apply critical thinking skills in conducting research and evaluating information by methods appropriate to the communication professions in which they work.
   
   
9. Effectively and correctly apply basic numerical and statistical concepts.
   
   
10. Critically evaluate their own work and that of others for accuracy and fairness, clarity, appropriate style and grammatical correctness.
    
    
11. Apply tools and technologies appropriate for the communications professions in which they work.

Direct measures

1. Pre-test (at the beginning of JOUR 101, potential majors’ first course in the department) and post-test (during majors’ final term in the department) of critical information covering the appropriate ACEJMC values and competencies (grammar, punctuation, spelling, media history, First Amendment and other legal principles, characteristics of diverse audiences). Implemented Spring 2004, last updated 2025.
   
   
2. Reporting, editing, producing, multimedia and design skills demonstrated in a multimedia project in the Investigative Reporting capstone course for majors in two professional sequences evaluated by professionals on the Alumni Advisory Board. Implemented Spring 2006. In recent years, both advisory board members and professionals unrelated to the university are used as evaluators. Evaluators use a common rubric developed by the department.
   
   
3. For seniors in the strategic communication major, introduced with the 2014-15 catalog, portfolios of student work are evaluated by outside professionals. The portfolios, using a website content management system of the students’ choice, address six of the 10 competencies. Evaluators use a common rubric developed by the department. Implemented 2015-16.
   
   
4. For seniors in the strategic communication major, a capstone evaluation, to complement the one for journalism majors. With the incorporation of the Leading Public Relations Campaigns course as a capstone in Winter 2026, this measure is planned to begin at that time.
   
   
5. Intern evaluations by on-site supervisors and the department’s intern coordinator, based on work output, journal, written report by student, oral presentation. Implemented about 1975. Internship supervisors are sent an evaluation form around the completion of the internship.
   
   
6. For students in the Ethics of Journalism and Media Ethics courses required of all majors in the department, A survey of journalists and communications professionals serving as Ethics Institute fellows is conducted to assess students’ critical thinking based on their discussion of ethical issues and cases throughout the Ethics Institute. Implemented Fall 2017.

Indirect measures

1. Exit survey of all graduates during spring term of their senior year, measuring how well they learned each of the ACEJMC values and competencies and their overall experience in the department. Implemented Spring 2004.
   
   
2. Exit interviews with selected graduates, identified through the exit survey of graduates. This data is collected annually by the department head but not shared directly with the faculty.
   
   
3. Annual online survey of journalism alumni one year after graduation, measuring their perceived preparedness for the profession in which they work. Implemented Fall 2005.
   
   
4. Student evaluations of internships and their preparedness based on the department’s curriculum. Administered to all students upon completion of internships. Implemented Fall 2014.
   
   
5. Student-led focus group reports focusing on the department’s climate related to cultural proficiency and sense of belonging, along with student services. Conducted every other year. Implemented 2025.
   
   
6. University annual data from graduating seniors asking them to rate curriculum, instruction and advising in their majors. Data is compared to other majors at the university. Implemented 2025.
   
   
7. University data benchmarking the unit’s program against peer institutions. Due to the fact the many liberal arts colleges do not have a journalism program, the unit is benchmarked against Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism, only among journalism majors. Implemented 2025.
   
   
8. Student journalism competitions, including Virginia Press Association, Society of Professional Journalists Region II Mark of Excellence Awards, and the Hearst Journalism Awards Program.
   
   
9. Employment data about journalism and strategic communications jobs held by graduates.

The department head will review all data during each summer and submit a narrative report to the Office of Institutional Effectiveness. Data from the following assessment measures will be presented at each department retreat before the start of fall term:

1) Internship evaluations (from the summer immediately preceding)
2) Exit surveys and interviews (immediate past class)
3) Pre and post-tests
4) Employment reports
5) Capstone assessments
6) Alumni survey
7) Competitions
8) Student focus group report (in years in which it is conducted)

Responsibility and ACEJMC Values and Competencies Covered

Where each ACEJMC value and competency is taught 

A = Awareness; U = Understanding; P = Application

Where each ACEJMC value and competency is measured

Benchmarks

Where possible, the department will measure performance against these benchmarks:

1. Post-tests: At least 75 percent of all students taking the test should get the correct answer on each question. Questions with a lower percentage of correct answers will be flagged for discussion at a faculty meeting or the fall retreat.
   
   
2. Intern evaluations: Collectively, students should be rated a 4 or above (on a 5-point scale) on all professional skills, professional values and preparation for the workplace. If the average falls below that level for any measure, it will be flagged for discussion at the fall faculty retreat/meeting and corrective measure applied.
   
   
3. Alumni survey: Collectively, alumni should rate a 6 or above (on a 7-point scale) all of the questions concerning their education at in the department. If the average falls below that level for any measure, it will be flagged for discussion at fall faculty meeting or retreat and corrective measures applied.
   
   
4. All assessment documents are reviewed at the fall faculty retreat for accolades and corrective measures when necessary.