strategic plan/unit plan

INSTRUCTIONS

All unit planning needs to be submitted according to the planning calendar which is shown on the Academic Calendar and on the Planning Calendar on the Institutional Research, Planning and Assessment web page under Planning. The form shown on the next page is taken directly from A Guide to Planning and Assessment 3rd Edition. It is available as a published and bound document in every chair, director, dean, and vice presidential office on campus, and it is also available on the web at http://www.montevallo.edu/irpa/UniversityPlanning/default.shtm. Instructions for filling out each section of the unit plan are shown on pages 14 through 17 of the Guide.

In the Assessment Outcomes section (VII) and the Planning section (X) please note that more than two outcomes are acceptable and up to five goals per year are acceptable. The number of outcomes and goals acceptable for a department or office is dependent on the ability of the unit to adequately perform the actions necessary to support them. All goals must be linked to the University plan and/or to the internal or external environment of the unit as shown in sections VIII and IX. The Institutional Plan 2003-2004 to 2007-2008 is available on the web at:

http://www.montevallo.edu/irpa/UniversityPlanning/default.shtm

Editorial guidelines for unit plans are shown on pages 44-45 in Appendix B of A Guide to Planning and Assessment 3rd Edition.

Please note that all plans must be submitted on both a 3.5 inch diskette and in paper form. It is extremely important that both media are sent forward.

If you have problems with the format, these instructions or planning and assessment in general, please contact the Office of Institutional Research, Planning and Assessment or e-mail Denise Watts. We will be happy to assist you.



UNIT PLAN AND DEPARTMENT SELF-STUDY2007-2008 to 2011-2012

Communication Science and Disorders

I. MISSION

The Mission of the CSD Department is to educate professionals in the disciplines of Speech-Language Pathology and Education of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, providing services to individuals with communicative disorders.

II. DEPARTMENT DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS

The Department of Communication Science and Disorders is located within the College of Arts and Sciences. There are two majors within the Department—Speech-Language Pathology and Education of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing.

Major Programs

The Department offers four-year BS degree programs in SLP and DHH and a two-year MS degree program in SLP. Following is a listing of student enrollment in the various areas over the past four years and for this current year [based on Spring term enrollment]:

Undergraduate Graduate

Academic Year SLP DHH SLP

2002-2003 78 40 33

2003-2004 81 40 30

2004-2005 77 32 32

2005-2006 76 28 31

2006-2007 62 19 33

Minor Programs

The Department offers one academic minor in the area of Deaf Studies. This minor is available to students in all academic disciplines across the University. The department has no record of the number of students who select Deaf Studies as their minor, although a majority of SLP majors choose the Deaf Studies minor.

Program Curricula.

The undergraduate curriculum for the SLP major represents a selection of basic sciences courses along with an assortment of courses in normal and disordered speech, language, and hearing processes, for a total of 42 semester hours credit. The accrediting agency for our graduate program requires master’s graduates to have several undergraduate courses in those specified areas. There is no accreditation at the undergraduate level. The BS program in SLP is pre-professional, preparing students for graduate school.

The undergraduate curriculum for the DHH major meets joint requirements from 2 different accrediting agencies—the Alabama State Department of Education and NCATE. Courses are directed toward preparation of educators of the deaf at all public school levels—P-12. Courses include several levels of sign language, methods for teaching academic subjects to DHH students, auditory strategies for teaching expressive communication, and methods for teaching language and literacy to DHH students. DHH majors also take the required professional education courses through the College of Education for their Class B teacher certification with endorsement in Hearing Impaired.

The graduate curriculum in SLP is primarily prescribed by the accrediting agency to meet requirements for graduates to obtain ASHA certification and the state license [which is a requirement to practice in most states]. Courses represent a wide range of speech and language disorders. Students take basic neurophysiology and a course in professional issues. A research methods course is also required, including a requirement for a major research paper. ASHA also requires graduates to have courses representing disorders that impact on the full life span from pediatrics to geriatrics. SLP master’s graduates may obtain a teaching certificate if they choose to work in the public schools. So the curriculum must also meet SDE requirements. SLP master’s graduates are prepared to work in a variety of educational, clinical, hospital or private practice settings.

General Education Courses

All undergraduate students take the same basic general education curriculum that was approved by the University General Education Committee. The department also had input into the Alabama Articulation and General Studies Committee deliberations on their proposed core curriculum requirements—especially in the Area Five courses that may be discipline-related. All matters of curriculum revision for undergraduate or graduate courses undergo a rigorous review within the faculty and, if approved, are forwarded to the college CEPC for approval.

All planning and assessment processes in the Department represent the combined efforts of the Chair and the entire faculty. The Chair provides copies

of the previous year’s Unit Plan to the faculty for their review during spring and fall planning meetings. At that time all faculty review unit goals and assessment outcomes for the current year, to make sure they are on track for completion. Faculty also update (or revise) goals for the next four years of the five-year planning cycle, including selecting goals for the new fifth year in the cycle.

The budgets are as follows:

2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007

Student Employment 6323 6,323 6,323

Materials and Supplies 24,846 24,846 24,846

Travel 4878 4878 4878

III. FACULTY / STAFF

The Department currently has eight full-time tenured or tenure-track faculty members [six in SLP and two in DHH]. We have a full-time clinical staff position-Clinical Coordinator. One full-time faculty member is a full professor, one is an associate professor, three are an assistant professor, and three are instructors. Two instructors are working toward the doctoral degree. One full professor in Audiology retired and we no longer have an Audiology clinic. We have hired an adjunct instructor to teach the 2 undergraduate courses in Audiology. The new standards for graduate students in speech-language pathology require that MS SLP students only participate in audiology activities that are in the SLP scope of practice: hearing rehabillitation, pure tone screening and tympanometry. Our Clinical Coordinator will coordinate such audiology activities along with off campus Audiology supervisors.

The department has hired a new Chair for summer II 2007. Dr. Marlene Salas-Provance, who is bilingual Hispanic, is head of ASHA’s multicultural special interest division, and brings expertise in cleft palate as well.

The Department operates a Speech and Hearing Center to provide clinical practicum opportunities for graduate SLP students.

Qualifications

See credentials noted above. The faculty is active in research and faculty development, including publications in refereed journals, presentations at professional conferences, and a variety of continuing education activities that include attendance at conferences and a variety of approved video activities. The department offers the annual Loretta G. Brown Symposium each fall. The department anticipates having a nationally known speaker for that occasion each year.

Workload

The typical teaching load for faculty is 12 semester hours. Most departmental courses are taught only one semester per year—fall or spring. A few heavy enrollment courses– CSD 101, 205, 253, 385 - are taught both terms each year. Clinical practicum courses in SLP and DHH are also offered in both regular terms. The summer course offerings in CSD are limited to graduate SLP courses, including summer clinical practicum and one DHH course. The DHH faculty typically teach four courses each regular semester. The coordinator of the DHH program teaches one summer II course and is able to plan for placements in the fall. The SLP faculty typically teach two academic courses plus two units of supervision. Occasionally the SLP load is three academic courses plus one unit of supervision, or one academic course and 3 units of supervision.

DHH practicum is all in the public schools in the second semester of the junior year and in the first semester of the senir year. The senior-level DHH students also do an off-campus student teaching assignment supervised by the University DHH faculty.

The MS SLP students do a part-time off campus placement in the fall of the second year that is coordianted by the Clinical Coordinator. Then they have a full-time off-campus externship—split between medical settings and public schools—during their final spring semester. Two SLP faculty members are responsible for this off-campus practicum supervision.

Education and Development

Faculty has also been active in state and national professional organizations. SLP faculty members have served as officers in the state speech and hearing association, members of the state licensing board, representatives to the national Legislative Council of ASHA, members of ASHA committees, and members of state advisory boards. The Chair is now a site visitor for the Council of Academic Accreditation of ASHA. DHH faculty have served as members of the Alabama Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, the national Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, the National Association for the Deaf, the American Association for Home-Based Early Interventionists, Council for Education of the Deaf, and the Association of College Educators of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. Faculty activity within the University community has included participation in a number of University Committees, including Justice Council, Revision of the General Education Curriculum, Scholarships and Awards, Assessment, Concert and Lecture Series, and TEP. The Chair now serves as Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences.

Two of the CSD faculty members have completed doctoral degrees in spring 2007, and one is completing dissertation. One will be completing classwork in summer 2007. The Alabama Board of Examiners in Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology require that persons in these areas complete 12 hours of continuing

education each year. ASHA now has mandatory continuing education as well. SLP faculty members attend national and regional continuing education events such as the ASHA Convention, the Southeastern Clinical Educators meeting, the Council of Academic Program meeting, the national Council for Exceptional Children meeting, the American Educators meeting, and a variety of other workshops. DHH faculty with teacher certification and working as interpreters also have required continuing education. One DHH faculty member has participated in a number of Auditory Verbal Therapy Training modules. DHH faculty have attended the convention for the American Instructors of the Deaf.

Other:

All courses conduct student evaluations every semester—including the two summer terms. The department uses the standard approved evaluation forms recommended and approved by the University [separate forms for undergraduate and graduate courses]. The faculty have ample opportunities for direct feedback from their students regarding the quality of their teaching [including course preparation and course presentation]. Students are encouraged to include written narrative supplements to the bubble forms, for their own separate comments. The course evaluation results are provided to the faculty members and used by the Chair as part of the overall annual faculty evaluation process. They are also considered in tenure and promotion decisions.

IV. CURRICULAR REVIEW / SERVICES REVIEW AND DELIVERY

Advising

Every student participates in individual advising sessions during the designated advising and pre-registration period. All teaching faculty except the Clinical Coordinator participate in the academic advising process. Systematic curriculum check sheets have been prepared for all majors, showing required courses in general education, the academic major and, in the case of DHH, the professional education courses. Undergraduate SLP students’ choice of a minor dictates the required courses to complete the minor. The graduate SLP curriculum for the MS degree has no elective courses, so the primary role of the advisor is to guide students through the proper course sequence over the two years of the program. All graduate students are required to participate in practicum concurrent with their academic course load.

During the two departmental planning meetings the advising process is reviewed, including reviewing the entire check sheet of courses and special requirements for course prerequisites. Advisors monitor students’ progress through core curriculum, major, and minor courses. Faculty advisors are also available to assist students in dealing with other academic matters. Faculty has an average advising load of 20 students in SLP and 10 students in DHH, which appears to be quite manageable during the designated advising period. New students are assigned to a faculty advisor by the

department chair, who reviews all new students each term, including new freshmen and transfer students. The Chair advises all graduate SLP students.

Design of the curriculum

The undergraduate curriculum for the SLP major represents a selection of basic sciences courses along with an assortment of courses in normal and disordered speech, language, and hearing processes, for a total of 42 semester hours credit. The accrediting agency for our graduate program requires master’s graduates to have several undergraduate courses in those specified areas. There is no accreditation at the undergraduate level. The BS program in SLP is pre-professional, preparing students for graduate school.

The undergraduate curriculum for the DHH major meets joint requirements from 2 different accrediting agencies—the Alabama State Department of Education and NCATE. Courses are directed toward preparation of educators of the deaf at all public school levels—P-12. Courses include several levels of sign language, methods for teaching academic subjects to DHH students, auditory strategies for teaching expressive communication, and methods for teaching language and literacy to DHH students. DHH majors also take the required professional education courses through the College of Education for their Class B teacher certification with endorsement in Hearing Impaired.

The graduate curriculum in SLP is primarily prescribed by the accrediting agency to meet requirements for graduates to obtain ASHA certification and the state license [which is a requirement to practice in most states]. Courses represent a wide range of speech and language disorders. Students take basic neurophysiology and a course in professional issues. A research methods course is also required, including a requirement for a major research paper. ASHA also requires graduates to have courses representing disorders that impact on the full life span from pediatrics to geriatrics. SLP master’s graduates who meet the state approved program may obtain the Class A teaching certificate if they choose to work in the public schools. So the curriculum must also meet SDE requirements. SLP master’s graduates are prepared to work in a variety of educational, clinical, hospital or private practice settings. Many graduates work in rehabilitation centers, nursing homes, physician’s offices, and even in the home health-care practices.

The state of Alabama is reportedly working toward funding of a bachelors level program in Interpreting. DHH faculty have completed a proposal for such a program and we are awaiting the RFP for the program. Our university and department would be an ideal site for this program as we have the only DHH program in the state.

Evaluation of the currency of the curriculum

Course Offerings

The Department offers undergraduate courses in SLP and DHH, and graduate courses in SLP. Both SLP and DHH students take some of the undergraduate courses. A complete listing of courses is in the University Bulletin. Each year the department reviews curriculum to determine needed revisions.

With regard to the MS SLP graduate program, ASHA has new standards for the Certificate of Clinical Competence which reflect a shift from process standards, such as number of course hours and clinic hours, to outcome measures-both formative and summative. The graduate program has worked for the past several years to review the program and develop and implement necessary changes to meet the new standards. Courses have learning outcomes linked the the new standards, the program has a Knowledge and Skills Acquisition form, and a Clinical Skills Inventory to facilitate formative and summative assessment.

Courses represent a wide range of speech and language disorders, covering the nine areas prescribed by ASHA's new standards. In addition to the nine disorder areas, ASHA requires knowledge and skills in research and professional issues, and the program includes these courses. SLP master’s graduates who meet the state approved program may obtain a teaching certificate if they choose to work in the public schools. So the curriculum must also meet SDE requirements.

Course Changes

In the undergraduate curriculums we have added a course in Deaf Culture and have reduced the Audiology courses from 3 to 2. Hearing science will be incorporated into Introduction to Audiology and the second course will remain as Aural Rehabilitation. We have also added a 3-hour required course in medical speech-language pathology for the SLP undergraduate students and have changed CSD 464 to a 3-hour senior seminar. In the SLP graduate program we have dropped the diagnostics class and added several seminars.

V. TEACHING METHODS AND STRATEGIES / SERVICE DELIVERY

The faculty utilizes a variety of teaching methods, including traditional lecture, collaborative instruction, and varied audio-visual and computer-based aids (including use of multi-media). The department has laptop computers and computer projectors, which allow faculty to utilize Power Point and the Internet in both of the classrooms. A significant portion of the curricula in all areas involves the blending of theory with practical, clinical hands-on applications. The clinical methods courses include the preparation of sample treatment plans and practice administration of various diagnostic tests. Students in the DHH courses prepare sample lesson plans in a variety of academic subjects—such as they might teach to DHH 4th grade arithmetic students or 10th grade science students. The DHH students also participate in the video lab for improving their sign language skills.

All faculty prepare individual syllabi for the students that describe the course content and learning outcomes, the assessment procedures, class attendance policies,

disability accommodations, and any other specific information necessary for students’ full participation in the course. Faculty are expected to review and up-date their syllabi annually, to ensure the currency of the course content. The Chair retains copies of all course syllabi each semester in the departmental office.

VI. PHYSICAL FACILITIES

The Department is housed within the George C. Wallace Speech and Hearing Center. The DHH faculty moved into the center in fall, 2002, as space became available when the Chilton County Preschool was discontinued. The Center space includes clinical [i.e., diagnostic and treatment] rooms, faculty offices, the departmental office, a computer lab, a couple of small conference rooms, and three waiting room areas for family members of clients. All faculty offices are equipped with a computer and printer.

The departmental office includes a copying machine, a fax machine, and a computer with printer.The computer lab was updated in 2004, with 5 new computers and all new furnishings.

There are a number of storage rooms (or closets) on both levels of the Center. These are used to store client and student records, diagnostic and treatment materials, and janitorial supplies. Finally, on the lower floor of the main building is a student lounge that was rennovated in fall, 2005. There is a graduate student work room on the 2nd floor-this room also became available with the discontinuation of the preschool.

On the lower floor of the main building is the large classroom, which will accommodate 70-75 students. The room is furnished with two large-screen TVs with connected VCR, overhead and standard slide projectors, and a pull-down 6' projection screen. Also the classroom now has a laptop computer and projector. Adjacent to the classroom is the Speech Science Lab with seating to accommodate 25 students. Room 111, downstairs, which was the classroom for the residential children, is now an additional small classroom for approximately 20 students. This classroom now has a laptop computer and projector. An old audiology suite has been converted to a room that will likely become the new computer lab thus allowing the larger previos computer lab to become another classroom.Center facilities are considered adequate for current department needs.

The department has a Hatch Computer Learning Center, a Speech Viewer II, a Visipitch, Sonaspeech and a number of computers for clinical activities. Also the department has acquired another computer for photoediting and clinical activities.

VII ASSESSMENT 2007-2008 TO 2011-2012

ASSESSMENT OUTCOMES BY YEAR

2007-2008Outcome 1: The MS SLP program will internally verify each of the reaccredidation standards in preparation for the fall 2008 site visit.

Assessment Procedure: Utilization of the CAA standards.

Administration of the Assessment Procedure: Faculty will work through the standards and determine evidence of verification.

Use of Results: Faculty will determine standards that need additional focus for verification and take necessary steps to assure verification.

Outcome 2: The MS SLP program will receive mean ratings of 3-4 (4-point scale) on the applicable items of the Graduate Student Completer survey. This survey assesses the perceived quality of the MS SLP program across a variety of parameters

Assessment Procedure: The Graduate School Completer Survey.

Administration of Assessment Procedure: Graduating students will turn in their completed survey to the graduate office. This office will disseminate the results to the Chair of the CSD department. The chair will collate the results and review the mean ratings with the faculty.

Use of Results: The faculty will review all completed surveys and mean ratings and note specific areas of student dissatisfaction. Recommendations will be considered for any necessary or appropriate changes to improve program quality.

Outcome 3: Consumers of clinical services in the Speech and Hearing Clinic will demonstrate satisfaction with diagnostic and treatment services provided by students and supervised by faculty, as evidenced by mean ratings of 4-5 on a 5 point rating scale.

Assessment Procedure: Outpatient Survey.

Administration of Assessment Procedure: The Clinical Director and faculty supervisors will construct a questionnaire that allows rating [on a 5 point scale] of the quality of diagnostic and treatment services provided to clients of the Speech and Hearing Center. The questionnaire will be administered at the end of the clinical services term.

Use of Results: The Clinical Director and faculty supervisors will review the results of the clinical services questionnaire. If evidence emerges of areas of concern, decisions will be made regarding necessary improvements in quality of care being provided. Results will be shared with student clinicians.

2008-2009

Outcome 1: Eighty percent of DHH and MS SLP graduates will indicate satisfaction with their program at the time of graduation, as indicated by mean ratings of 4-5 on a 5-point scale.

Assessment Procedure: Program evaluation survey.

Administration of Assessment Procedure: The faculty will distribute the questionnaire to all DHH and MS SLP graduating students. This questionnaire assesses the adequacy and effectiveness of the program's curriculum, the course sequence, the clinic practice experience in SLP, the academic advising process, the faculty, etc. At the end of each term, graduating students in all major areas will complete the questionnaire.

Use of Results: The faculty will review all completed program assessment questionnaires and note specific areas of student dissatisfaction. Recommendations will be considered for any necessary or appropriate changes to make the program more responsive to student needs.

Outcome 2: Eighty percent of DHH bachelors-level graduates and SLP masters-level graduates will indicate satisfaction with their preparation for entry into the profession and the "world of work" following one year of employment.

Assessment Procedure: Survey

Administration of Assessment Procedure: The Chair will collect all questionnaires returned by graduates and collate the results for review.

Use of Results: The faculty will review the questionnaire results, including a comparison with previous graduate opinions. Clear indications of graduate dissatisfaction with specific aspects of the program will lead the CSD faculty toward consideration of appropriate program changes to improve program quality and effectiveness.

Outcome 3: 80% of undergraduate and graduate students will indicate satisfaction with their individual courses in the curriculums at the time of graduation, as evidenced by mean ratings of 4-5 on a 5 point scale.

Assessment Procedure: Course survey.

Administration of Assessment Procedure: The surveys will be disseminated by advisors in spring semester of the graduating year.

Use of Results: The faculty will review the results and if there are courses that do not meet the outcome these courses will be reviewed by the curriculum committee.

2009-2010

Outcome 1: 75% of graduating seniors in BS SLP will demonstrate the ability to write a research paper with a score of 75 or better of 100.

Assessment Procedure: Research paper in CSD 475

Administration of Assessment Procedure: Students will complete the assigned paper and paper will be graded by instructor.

Use of Results: If outcome is not met faculty will analyze and discuss appropriate intervention approaches.

Outcome 2: Eighty percent of DHH bachelors-level graduates and SLP masters-level graduates will indicate satisfaction with their preparation for entry into the profession and the "world of work" following one year of employment.

Assessment Procedure: Survey

Administration of Assessment Procedure: The Chair will collect all questionnaires returned by graduates and collate the results for review.

Use of Results: The faculty will review the questionnaire results, including a comparison with previous graduate opinions. Clear indications of graduate dissatisfaction with specific aspects of the program will lead the CSD faculty toward consideration of appropriate program changes to improve program quality and effectiveness.

Outcome 3: Eighty percent of M.S. graduates will demonstrate satisfactory on-the-job performance, as determined by a mean rating of 4-5 on a 5-point scale, by their employer/supervisor, after one year of employment.

Assessment Procedure: Survey.

Administration of Assessment Procedure: The program director will send the employee performance evaluation questionnaire to employers/supervisors of MS graduates from the previous year.

Use of results: The Chair will tabulate the questionnaire results and the SLP faculty will review those results to note identified strengths and weaknesses in MS graduates, in terms of their ability to manage the requirements of their work setting.

2010-2011

Outcome 1: 80% of SLP graduate students will indicate satisfaction with individual components of the graduate orientation, as evidenced by mean ratings of 4-5 on a 5 point scale.

Assessment Procedure: Graduate orientation survey.

Administration of Assessment Procedure: The surveys will be disseminated by faculty post the orienation.

Use of Results: The faculty will review the results and determine if there are revisions needed in orientation.

Outcome 3: 80% of undergraduate and graduate students will indicate satisfaction with their individual courses in the curriculums at the time of graduation, as evidenced by mean ratings of 4-5 on a 5 point scale.

Assessment Procedure: Course survey.

Administration of Assessment Procedure: The surveys will be disseminated by advisors in spring semester of the graduating year.

Use of Results: The faculty will review the results and if there are courses that do not meet the outcome these courses will be reviewed by the curriculum committee.

2011-2012Outcome 1: 75% of graduating seniors in BS SLP will demonstrate the ability to write a research paper with a score of 75 or better of 100.

Assessment Procedure: Research paper in CSD 475 and for DHH, CSD 376, 377, and 482.

Administration of Assessment Procedure: Students will complete the assigned paper and paper will be graded by instructor.


Outcome 2: 75% of students in DHH upper level methods courses will score at the “C” level or better on benchmark (e.g. portfolio) assignments.

Assessment Procedure: Benchmark assignments.

Administration of Assessment Procedure: Students will complete the assignments and the assignment will be graded by instructor.


VII B. USE OF PREVIOUSLY ASSESSED OUTCOMES:

2006-2007

Outcome 1: Ninety percent of students will express satisfaction with the advising process within the department

How Results were Used: Surveys were collected after each advising period and mean ratings of satisfaction were between 4.5-5.0 for all faculty (5=highly satisfied). It appears that CSD faculty are doing an excellent job of the critical activity of advising.

Outcome 2: Eighty percent of graduates will indicate satisfaction with their program at the time of graduation, as indicated by mean ratings of 4-5 on a 5-point scale.

How Results were Used: Surveys were obtained and results

VIII. EXTERNAL ANALYSIS

There are three primary areas of external influence on our various CSD programs.

Market Demand for CSD-Related Degrees

The market demand for CSD graduates is influenced by three primary factors:(1) Health-care needs for SLPs in hospitals, nursing homes, rehabilitation centers, and home health-care agencies continue to be stable. Furthermore, with people living longer there is an increase in the geriatric population, which increases the need for SLPs serving that population.

(2) All public schools have a federal mandate to provide a full range of special education services to all children, from age 3 to 21 years. There has, therefore, been no reduction in employment opportunities for SLPs and DHH teachers in the schools. In fact, there are significant increases in the number of children with several disabilities requiring SLP services, including Autism Spectrum Disorder and ADHD.

(3) DHH and SLPs can also work in early intervention with children in the birth-three age range. There is an increase in children with special needs in this age range due to several factors: due to improvements in healthcare lower birth weight infants are being saved and many of these children will need special services; due to continuing rates of poverty in this country and due to increased substance abuse (drugs and alcohol) in pregnant women there are more infants born at-risk for developmental problems.

Off-Campus Practicum Sites

Both the SLP and DHH programs depend on off-campus externship or student teaching sites to provide our students with an extended variety of practicum experiences in the diagnosis and treatment of speech and hearing problems in “real world” settings. Many decisions affecting the academic and on-campus clinical programs are influenced by the knowledge of what kinds of clinical

problems students will encounter when they go off-campus. Consequently, faculty are continually re-evaluating our off-campus sites—looking for new sites or choosing to delete current sites that no longer meet our needs.

Other University Influences

The scope and quality of programming are determined, in large measure, by the decisions of University administrators who must approve programming recommendations regarding curriculum, faculty, and facilities. The administration continues to be supportive of our programs.

IX. INTERNAL ANALYSIS

Strengths

The department continues to have a reputation for providing quality education in DHH and SLP. Our number of undergraduate students in SLP has increased and the number of applicants to the graduate program remained stable. DHH enrollment remains stable. The number of applicants to the SLP graduate program doubled this year and we increased the cohort size to 18.

Current DHH and MS SLP graduates continue to find satisfactory employment. 100 percent of DHH and MS SLP 2006 graduates were employed.

The department has been fortunate to continue to receive monies for student stipends, scholarships, and graduate assistantships. The Early Reading First grant with UAB continued through 2006 allowing for graduate student research assessments and faculty and student stipends. A new ERF grant with UAB and Vanderbilt is in the approval process for 2007-2009. Another collaboration with UAB was establihed-Project Transteam grant. Five graduate students are participating in transdisciplinary courses in early intervention. State department of Education continues to offer DHH and MS SLP stipends for students who will commit to working in the public schools in AL. The Willie Mae Gillis estate endowment will allow us to award 2 MS SLP graduate assistantships.Departmental rennovations and improvements in the facility continue.

Weaknesses

The department conducted a needs assessment and the following were identified as priorities:

SMART Classroom in SHC 100Updated supervision technologyCSL equipment or equivalentComputer lab needs 5 new Dell computers

X. GOALS FOR 2007-2008 TO 2011-2012 (Use the form on p. 17 of the Guide to Planning and Assessment at the University of Montevallo-3rd edition)

Years 2007- 2008Goal 1 (- 5):

Goal 1: Conduct a self study of the MS SLP program in preparation for reaccredidation in 2009.

University, division or college goal this unit goal will help to accomplish (or departmental issue identified in section VIII or IX that this goal will address): Institutional goal 1.

Responsible Office/Individual: Chair

Estimated Completion Date: Fall 2008

Estimated Annual Cost (if additional budgeted funds are required): None

Action Step 1-

MS SLP faculty will divide the reaccredidation report and work on assigned sections and report to faculty.


Completion Date: Fall, 2008

Goal 2: Submit a proposal for a bachelor level training program for Interpreter training.




Estimated Annual Cost (if additional budgeted funds are required): To be determined. Reportedly this program would be funded through the state.

Action Step 1-

DHH faculty have prepared a report and are awaiting the RFP.

Responsible Office/Individual: DHH faculty, Chair, and university administration.


Goal 3: Survey utilization of technology and implement plans




Estimated Annual Cost (if additional budgeted funds are required): To be determined (approximately 10-50 thousand for SMART classroom and supervision technology)

Action Step 1-

Department will conduct an analysis of the needs through the Technology committee and determine prioritized needs and a process for funding.

Responsible Office/Individual: Chair, technology committee, and faculty.


2008-2009Goal 1 (- 5):

Goal 1: Investigate serving the nontraditional student.





Action Step 1-

Department will form an ad-hoc committee to study this.



2009-2010

Goal 1: The MS SLP program will be reaccredited.



Estimated Completion Date: Spring 2009


Action Step 1-

The department will write the reaccredidation report and MS SLP faculty will work with CAA team for a successful reaccredidation.



Narrative Description of Goals for 2010-2011 and 2011-2012: The goals for the MS SLP program will relate to the results of the reaccredidation visit. Depending on the results of the RFP process, work will be underway on an Interpreter training program.

X1. ATTACHMENTS: (as needed only)

University of Montevallo

ANNUAL REPORT

Unit Name: CSD

Person Preparing Report: ArmstrongDate Submitted: 4/17/07

Progress on Planning Goals:

Goal 1: Conduct a self-study of the MS SLP program in preparation for reaccredidation in 2009.Responsible Individual: Chair and CSD facultyEstimated Completion Date: Fall, 2008Estimated Annual Cost: None

Progress to Date: The faculty reviewed the standards in spring 2007 and were assigned standards to verify. Faculty will meet in early May to present and discuss findings.

Goal 2: Submit a proposal for a bachelor level program for Interpreter training.Responsible Individual: DHH faculty, Chair, and university administrationEstimated Completion Date: Fall, 2007Estimated Annual Cost: To be determined

Progress to Date: Proposal has been written and we are awaiting the RFP.

(Add other goals as needed)

strategic plan/unit plan

Documents

additional budgeted funds

departmental issue identified

previous graduate opinions

full life span

teaching expressive communication

private practice settings

public school levelsp

slp major represents