We Cannot Not Teach

Each of us in higher education is a member of at least two professions: that of our discipline, interdiscipline, or professional field (e.g., history, women's studies, accounting) as well as our profession as educator.1 Two Movements: The Scholarship of Teaching and Accountability Ernest Boyer's call for a "scholarship of teaching" re-onergized an old discussion about the importance and centrality of teaching in the academy. By linking "scholarship" and "teaching," Boyer suggested that teaching was as important and valuable as the traditional scholarship stressed in most graduate programs.2 For the last thirteen years, scholars have grappled with, explicated, and expanded Boyer's original concept to include not only scholarly teaching (teaching that is grounded in one's discipline or profession), but also the scholarship of teaching (the study of teaching and learning within and across one's discipline). 3 Parallel to and intersecting with discussions on the scholarship of teaching and learning has been a growing movement for the assessment of student-learning outcomes. Assessment is part of a larger accountability movement that grew out of the late 1960s and early 1970s due to a number of factors, including a reaction to an "intense fiscal crisis," "open education," and campus turmoil.4 The debate over accountability in general and assessment specifically centers on the need to "prove" that education is taking place, concerns over academic freedom, and the use of a business model that stresses measurement and testing to drive education. Basic questions dealing with accountability are often debated: Who should be held accountable (e.g., teachers, administrators, parents, school systems)? What does it mean to be accountable? When should accountability take place (e.g., grade level, proficiency level, every year)? What should be measured (e.g., knowledge, behavior, attitudes, values)? How should accountability be measured (e.g., tests, portfolios, exit exams)? In Journalism and Mass Communication (JMC) education, the accountability movement is most evident in the principles and guidelines of the Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communications (ACEJMC), the "agency responsible for the evaluation of professional journalism and mass communications programs in colleges and universities. "5 The principles identify professional core values and competencies that all graduates, "irrespective of their particular specialization," should "be aware of" and "be able to" do. These values and competencies include being able to: * understand and apply First Amendment principles and the law appropriate to professional practice * demonstrate an understanding of the history and role of professionals and institutions in shaping communications * demonstrate an understanding of the diversity of groups in a global society in relationship to communications * understand concepts and apply theories in the use and presentation of images and information * work ethically in pursuit of truth, accuracy, fairness, and diversity * think critically, creatively, and independently * conduct research and evaluate information by methods appropriate to the communications professions in which they work * write correctly and clearly in forms and stylos appropriate for the communications professions, audiences, and purposes they serve * evaluate their own work and that of others critically for accuracy and fairness, clarity, appropriate style, and grammatical correctness * apply basic numerical and statistical concepts * apply tools and technologies appropriate for the communications professions in which they work.6 The expectation is that programs will demonstrate that their students are learning these values and competencies. This expectation is reinforced in the "new" standards that require that "the unit regularly assesses student learning and uses results to improve curriculum and instruction. …