1. Proposal to Remove Oral Communication from USP

2. The importance of oral communication
At this point, there is widespread agreement on the importance of oral communication skills
In principle, all UK students should have such training
In fact, in principle, it would be better to have more training – for example, both public speaking and interpersonal communication
So why are we proposing to remove oral communication from USP?

3. Three major reasons
With current resources, it is not possible to meet course demand
Attempting to meet the demand for oral communication drains resources from the teaching and research missions of the Department of Communication
Oral communication still will be offered for programs that need it and demand will be able to be met

4. A brief history
Oral communication skills requirement has been a part of USP since its inception in 1988
Five options
COM 181, 252, 281, 287
TA 225
Rule change in 1997 permitted alternate paths
Approximately 16 identified
Nine of these include COM 199

5. Baselines and assumptions
Originally, planning was based on a first year class of 2,600-2,700 students
Curricula were designed to provide oral communication skills
COM 181 – basic public speaking
COM 252 – interpersonal communication
COM 281 – small group communication
COM 287 – persuasive speaking
Class size was set at 22

6. Changing times First year class size began increasing in 2000-01
, approximately 2,700
and , approximately 3,000
and , approximately 3,700
We began scheduling more classes
through average sections: 89/year
: 126/year
: 138/year
We also increased class size, from 22 to 25, then to 28-30

7. Impact on resources New lecturer lines (S.I. #18)
Initial request
5.5 lines requested, 3 approved, less than 1 funded
Current status
Have received recurring funds for 4.2 lecturers
Devoting TA and other dept. resources
Evening/Weekend Growth, Distance Learning

8. How many students do we serve now?
, with present resources:
77 sections funded with recurring dollars
Lecturers
Teaching Assistants
32 funded by EWC and Distance Learning
19 sections funded by Provost with non-recurring
10 sections funded by COM
Total of 138 sections; 3,587 students

9. How many can we serve next year?
, with projected resources:
55 sections funded with recurring dollars
Lecturers
Teaching Assistants
32 funded by EWC and Distance Learning
19 sections funded by Provost with non-recurring
8 sections funded by COM
Total: 114 sections; ~2,964 students

10. The difference? 24 fewer sections offered/year
~600 fewer students served/year

11. Demand for oral communication

12. Projections for backlog

13. What would it take to serve 4,000?
Assume a need to serve 90% of student body
TA 225
Alternate paths
Would need 144 sections/year

14. Implications for lecturer lines
SACS is opposed to reliance on PTI’s
They also take issue with over-reliance on TA’s
We would need 18 lecturers to cover the courses
Recurring dollars for lecturer salary and benefits would total ~$596,700.00
Also need funds for equipment, materials

15. What if we had the money? There is a lack of qualified personnel
Local pool is fully tapped
Extremely difficult to attract qualified applicants
Low salary
Year-to-year contracts
Insufficient classroom space
No office space

16. Can’t we revise the curriculum?
What about large lecture?
We tried that
It simply did not work
Still required extensive instructional support for “recitation” sections
Classroom climate negatively impacted
What about COM 199 for everybody?
We developed COM 199 for a subset of programs
Due to demand, sequencing fails
Students tell us they do not get enough practice

17. Can’t each program teach its own?
Presentational assignments certainly are appropriate in classes across programs
However, skills are not being taught
Further, instructors lack training in teaching skills, and they understandably wish to focus on their own discipline
SACS assessment issues cannot be ignored

18. Additional considerations
The four year graduation contract will require students’ home departments to pay tuition for unavailable classes
Of UK’s benchmarks, only 3 of 17 responding to a survey required oral communication
There is a negative impact on the Department of Communication’s teaching and research missions

19. Competing demands
The Department of Communication has three instructional missions
Oral communication
Undergraduate majors (numbers are increasing again)
Graduate students (doubled this year)

20. The Department of Communication has a strong research mission
One of the top funded social science units
$4.5 million in FY 03
More than $35 million over past 20 years
Health behavior research
HIV/AIDS prevention
Substance abuse prevention
Physician-patient communication

21. Reallocation of resources
Funds we currently are spending to support oral communication could be reallocated
Additional courses for majors could be offered
Various research initiatives could be sponsored
Graduate students could be better supported
Wethington awards (new to “Lexington” campus) must be covered (~$26K this year)
TAs could be reassigned to support faculty

22. So what are we to do?
It is time to remove the oral communication requirement from USP
There will be no “leftover” resources; rather, we will have the resources needed to meet demand for programs that will continue to require oral communication
We will be able to maintain curricular integrity
We will be able to better serve our teaching and research missions

23. Concluding thoughts
In a perfect world, every student would have easy access to all required classes
Those classes would including training in all oral communication skills – public speaking, interpersonal, small group
Boundless resources – money, space, and personnel – would make this possible

24. In a perfect world, faculty would have boundless time and energy
To teach and advise
To write grant proposals, conduct research and publish
To engage in endless service

25. Unfortunately, our resources are limited and it is a zero-sum game
We all have been doing more with less for several years now
We are at the point now that it is impossible to complete the oral communication mission for the entire University
We ask for your help to face this reality