First-year Seminar syllabus share

In 2013, a few communication colleagues were tapped to teach our college's inaugural First-year Seminar (FYS) course. With student learning objectives (SLOs) handed down from the university, we began to craft a course to meet those objectives. So, on the road between Stephenville, Texas, and Norman, Okla., Dr. Lora Helvie-Mason (author of Communication & Higher Education blog) and I developed activities and assignments to help students make the transition from high school to university, in a mandatory one-hour course.

Through weekly reflective writings, a collaborative original research project and presentation, required attendance at campus events, readings (Tina Seelig's inGenius: A Crash Course on Creativity), and a predetermined financial literacy module, the course came together. In our first semester, we were a bit ambitious, but wanted to hold the line of academic rigor. Here is the original syllabus, and you can see how it has adapted based on student feedback and faculty reflection to the 2016 syllabus.

One of our challenges was catering to the many and varied majors in our college, from criminal justice to geography to fine arts to social work to communication studies. We created choices where possible, to allow students to tailor projects to their interests. In the syllabus file, you can see the reflective writing prompts, which gave students some room for major and career exploration as well as multicultural exposure.

The collaborative original research project and presentation was something we tried, in order to tackle multiple SLOs. Students followed activists on Twitter for a mixed methods research paper with an oral conference-style presentation. Lora and I chronicled this project for our own teaching and learning research endeavors. Two journal articles will be published. One explains the project details and the other looked at student perceptions of their learning.

• Helvie-Mason, L., Maben, S. K. (in press). Twitter-vism: Student Narratives and Perceptions of Learning from an Undergraduate Research Experience on Twitter Activism. Teaching Journalism & Mass Communication. aejmc.us/spig/journal/
• Maben, S. K., Helvie-Mason, L. (in press). When Twitter Meets Undergraduate Research:  A First-year Seminar Project. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 29(1). www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/

I applaud anyone who teaches FYS/FYE courses. They are rewarding, and the challenge to incorporate so much into a one-hour course is a stimulating curricular exercise for a prof. My contribution was for one semester, and I'm excited to think that many of my FYS'rs are getting ready to graduate! Lora and I are following up with our first cohort to see what FYS course elements stuck with them, and what mattered most to their successful transition to college.  Stay tuned for those results!

Poster Session

What to do with an old poster from a conference poster session? I offer the following options.

Option A: Let your kid color on it, dance on it, or ultimately destroy it.

Option B: Hang it in your office. You can present again and again.

Option C: Share it on your blog. Below is a poster presentation for the 2016 Southwest Symposium of SWECJMC.

Download the pdf

Research Update: Social Media Training

Thank you to all of the advisers and students who participated in our survey asking about social media training at student-run communication organizations. A full report will be published in the Spring 2017 issue of Southwestern Mass Communication Journal. Until then, Kay Colley and I wanted to share this slideshow with you: #NotAllBaptismByFire slides.

SWECJMC Recap

Here's a Storify about the Southwest Symposium for SWECJMC, held at Arkansas State University Mid-South Campus in West Memphis, Ark.: https://storify.com/SarahMaben/southwest-symposium#publicize

Check out Dr. Ronald Sitton's Twitter feed for an awesome recap of #SWECJMC.

Kay Colley and I present at #SWECJMC.

Me and Cessna Winslow

Why regional conferences still matter

As I prepare for the Southwest Symposium at Arkansas State University's Mid South Campus, I was thinking about the benefits of regional conferences:

• Real connections — the smaller size means you run across people enough to really delve into conversations and potential research partnerships. You will likely even make friends.
• Manageable — not having to jump between two massive conference centers means you can also recharge your battery, and focus on what the handful of concurrent sessions have to offer.
• Leadership opportunities — volunteers are needed, welcomed and valued. That's not to say they aren't at large international conferences, but breaking into the leadership track is much easier.
• Cost-effective travel — locations are typically nearer, or at least cheaper options to where the big conferences annually host. Also, the conference fees are less expensive.
• New prof and grad student friendly — most of the time attendees are there to truly support and improve work, not tear it down. Grad students, academic veterans and newbies co-mingle for a nice mix of experiences and opinions.

At least these have been my experiences at the Southwest Education Council for Journalism and Mass Communication (SWECJMC). Check it out for yourself: http://swecjmc.wp.txstate.edu/. Or connect to the Facebook page for updates on deadlines: https://www.facebook.com/swecjmc/.

Dealing with rejection

Sting. It still stings a bit, OK sometimes a LOT. Academic rejection. It's that paper you were sure was awesome, or a panel that had a zingy title and great speakers. I had no idea how much rejection would be part of the process.

How do I deal?

1. Pity party. I take a day or two to feel sorry for myself, get mad at reviewers, or whatever else I need to feel. The key is to limit the time and amount of energy devoted to said pity party.
2. Reread the reviews. After I have taken a bit of time to get over the initial sting, I hold my breath and really digest the reviews. That initial read is always clouded by the REJECTION. 
3. Reread the manuscript. Yup, now I typically start to see what the reviewers see. 
4. Decision time. The manuscript is not tied up anywhere. I research other potential outlets and develop a plan. I reframe the paper entirely, reach out to a co-author who could help add something to the work, or retire the poor dear. 
5. Act. I try not to let too much dust settle. I want to get the work back into the pipeline. Revamp, rework and revise, and try again.
6. Hope. After submission, I hope for the best, and begin work on the next project.

How do you deal?

Week 4 Evaluations = Real-time Feedback

Student evaluations can be informative, but generally only help the next semester's students. Since I started teaching in 1999, I've used the "week 4" evaluation. I've used index cards and online survey tools like SurveyMonkey.

For index cards, I ask two questions. Students do not write their names on the cards. On one side, they report about something they've liked so far about class. On the other side, I ask them to suggest one thing they would like changed. I tease that I can't change things like our scheduled day to meet.

For the online survey, I typically program a whopping three questions: the same two from above and "Is there anything else you would like to add?" If I have access to a learning management system, I link it from there and ask students to log-in during class. If we're not in a computer lab, I use the announcement feature to force out the survey invitation. In an accelerated summer semester, you might employ this tactic at the end of week 2.

Brace yourselves for the results, but generally students like that you're even asking. I look for themes and try to make changes where possible. I also tell students that I'm making the changes based on their feedback. Who doesn't like to think they've made a difference? I have found that I can always implement something they have suggested.