Pub Date : 2023-03-03DOI: 10.1080/03634523.2023.2178663
Sherwyn P. Morreale, Melissa A. Broeckelman-Post, L. Anderson, Victoria A. Ledford, J. Westwick
ABSTRACT The results of this study argue that communication, and specifically oral communication education, is critical to students’ future personal and professional success. Similar to three earlier studies, thematic analysis of 2,155 articles, identified in academic and popular press publications extending from 2016 to 2020, provides support for the centrality of the communication discipline’s content and pedagogy. These results reinforce the importance of communication to promoting health communication; growing individually and in relation to others; enriching the educational enterprise; enhancing organizational processes; being a responsible community member locally, nationally, internationally, and globally; and addressing crises, safety, risk, security, and science communication. Subthemes are identified in each of these six thematic categories, and the results are compared with those of the three earlier iterations of this study and in light of major shifts in the sociopolitical and cultural environment in the U.S. and the globe since the last iteration.
{"title":"The importance, significance, and relevance of communication: a fourth study of the criticality of the discipline’s content and pedagogy","authors":"Sherwyn P. Morreale, Melissa A. Broeckelman-Post, L. Anderson, Victoria A. Ledford, J. Westwick","doi":"10.1080/03634523.2023.2178663","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2023.2178663","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The results of this study argue that communication, and specifically oral communication education, is critical to students’ future personal and professional success. Similar to three earlier studies, thematic analysis of 2,155 articles, identified in academic and popular press publications extending from 2016 to 2020, provides support for the centrality of the communication discipline’s content and pedagogy. These results reinforce the importance of communication to promoting health communication; growing individually and in relation to others; enriching the educational enterprise; enhancing organizational processes; being a responsible community member locally, nationally, internationally, and globally; and addressing crises, safety, risk, security, and science communication. Subthemes are identified in each of these six thematic categories, and the results are compared with those of the three earlier iterations of this study and in light of major shifts in the sociopolitical and cultural environment in the U.S. and the globe since the last iteration.","PeriodicalId":47722,"journal":{"name":"COMMUNICATION EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2023-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42003129","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-01DOI: 10.1080/03634523.2023.2181366
Sherwyn P. Morreale, S. Myers, Tiffany R. Wang, J. Westwick
ABSTRACT Continuing a tradition dating back to 1968, this tenth study in a longitudinal series of surveys of the basic communication course has two goals: (a) to provide descriptive information about the basic course contemporarily and over time and (b) to propose a framework for interpreting the impact of the extraordinary national and international events of 2020, on higher education in general and the basic communication course in particular. A survey, which retained questions about trends identified in the past nine studies conducted on the basic communication course from 1956 to 2016, was updated to include additional questions on topics of contemporary concern. National distribution of the survey instrument resulted in a total of 160 respondents (26 from two-year schools, 134 from four-year schools). This study reports and discusses data across six categories: (a) general description of the course and enrollment patterns; (b) course instruction, training, and administration problems; (c) standardization and grading; (d) course content and pedagogy; (e) media, technology, and online teaching; and (f) contemporary challenges and issues facing the basic course. Reflections based on trends in the data, and recommendations for future scholarship about the course based on the results and current challenges in higher education, are offered.
{"title":"Study X of the basic communication course at two- and four-year U.S. colleges and universities: revisiting trends and considering new challenges","authors":"Sherwyn P. Morreale, S. Myers, Tiffany R. Wang, J. Westwick","doi":"10.1080/03634523.2023.2181366","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2023.2181366","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Continuing a tradition dating back to 1968, this tenth study in a longitudinal series of surveys of the basic communication course has two goals: (a) to provide descriptive information about the basic course contemporarily and over time and (b) to propose a framework for interpreting the impact of the extraordinary national and international events of 2020, on higher education in general and the basic communication course in particular. A survey, which retained questions about trends identified in the past nine studies conducted on the basic communication course from 1956 to 2016, was updated to include additional questions on topics of contemporary concern. National distribution of the survey instrument resulted in a total of 160 respondents (26 from two-year schools, 134 from four-year schools). This study reports and discusses data across six categories: (a) general description of the course and enrollment patterns; (b) course instruction, training, and administration problems; (c) standardization and grading; (d) course content and pedagogy; (e) media, technology, and online teaching; and (f) contemporary challenges and issues facing the basic course. Reflections based on trends in the data, and recommendations for future scholarship about the course based on the results and current challenges in higher education, are offered.","PeriodicalId":47722,"journal":{"name":"COMMUNICATION EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45406543","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-10DOI: 10.1080/03634523.2023.2169315
Patric R. Spence, Renee Kaufmann, Kenneth A. Lachlan, Xialing Lin, Stephen A. Spates
ABSTRACT Previous research applied an affordance approach to the literature in instruction and pedagogy. Because of the continued trend in online instruction and course management, there exists a need to study the impact of technological affordances and communication in learning management systems. The current study replicates and extends research investigating the responses of undergraduate students to discussion comments on a course management page, in which the presence or absence of peer identity and the helper heuristic of fellow students were manipulated. Results suggest that the act of being helpful (through the helper heuristic) positively impacted source credibility, perceptions of an assignment-related message, and computer-mediated competence. Findings for student rapport and task attraction did not replicate. Furthermore, identity cues continue to be unrelated to the variables of interest. Findings are discussed in terms of both theoretical and instructional relevance.
{"title":"Extending the understanding of online discussions: a replication of online students’ perceptions of identity and helper heuristics","authors":"Patric R. Spence, Renee Kaufmann, Kenneth A. Lachlan, Xialing Lin, Stephen A. Spates","doi":"10.1080/03634523.2023.2169315","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2023.2169315","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Previous research applied an affordance approach to the literature in instruction and pedagogy. Because of the continued trend in online instruction and course management, there exists a need to study the impact of technological affordances and communication in learning management systems. The current study replicates and extends research investigating the responses of undergraduate students to discussion comments on a course management page, in which the presence or absence of peer identity and the helper heuristic of fellow students were manipulated. Results suggest that the act of being helpful (through the helper heuristic) positively impacted source credibility, perceptions of an assignment-related message, and computer-mediated competence. Findings for student rapport and task attraction did not replicate. Furthermore, identity cues continue to be unrelated to the variables of interest. Findings are discussed in terms of both theoretical and instructional relevance.","PeriodicalId":47722,"journal":{"name":"COMMUNICATION EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2023-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47589439","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-26DOI: 10.1080/03634523.2023.2169727
Jessalyn I. Vallade, Adam Tristan, Renee Kaufmann
ABSTRACT Instructor (mis)behavior research has traditionally been empirically dominated by White student samples, limiting the voice of underrepresented student populations. The present study extends scholarship on instructor (mis)behaviors by magnifying the voices of students of color with an intersectional lens. Utilizing surveys, participants (N = 154) provided open-ended descriptions of instructor (mis)behaviors and quantitative ratings of (mis)behavior severity, instructor blame, and motivation to retaliate against or avoid their instructor. Results revealed students of color experienced prejudice/bias more frequently than previously reported in instructional research, and female students of color reported prejudice/bias more frequently than their male counterparts. Significant differences emerged for male and female students of color regarding evaluations of and reactions to instructor (mis)behavior, highlighting the importance of intersectionality and social identity in our understanding of student experiences. Finally, we reflect on how instructors and researchers can challenge the status quo and question knowledge claims made based on typical convenience samples.
{"title":"Highlighting the intersectional experiences of students of color: a mixed methods examination of instructor (mis)behavior","authors":"Jessalyn I. Vallade, Adam Tristan, Renee Kaufmann","doi":"10.1080/03634523.2023.2169727","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2023.2169727","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Instructor (mis)behavior research has traditionally been empirically dominated by White student samples, limiting the voice of underrepresented student populations. The present study extends scholarship on instructor (mis)behaviors by magnifying the voices of students of color with an intersectional lens. Utilizing surveys, participants (N = 154) provided open-ended descriptions of instructor (mis)behaviors and quantitative ratings of (mis)behavior severity, instructor blame, and motivation to retaliate against or avoid their instructor. Results revealed students of color experienced prejudice/bias more frequently than previously reported in instructional research, and female students of color reported prejudice/bias more frequently than their male counterparts. Significant differences emerged for male and female students of color regarding evaluations of and reactions to instructor (mis)behavior, highlighting the importance of intersectionality and social identity in our understanding of student experiences. Finally, we reflect on how instructors and researchers can challenge the status quo and question knowledge claims made based on typical convenience samples.","PeriodicalId":47722,"journal":{"name":"COMMUNICATION EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43809441","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/03634523.2022.2137220
San Bolkan, Darrin J. Griffin
Consultants operate as translators who cull relevant literature to produce lessons as these pertain to skills, strategies, and ideas that practitioners can apply in professional contexts (Waldeck, 2016). Having said that, our impression is that contributors to Communication Education are well positioned to provide practical advice about communicating with others, though this might not seem apparent at first. As such, we believe that our charge as communication professionals is to reframe how we think about what we know and to convince others that our scholarly focus includes more than just studying the basics of how people talk to each other. Our first charge as communication professionals is to reframe our own understanding of what we do. At its core, the topics published in Communication Education center on processes of human learning, including understanding how people pay attention, organize complex information, and retain knowledge for use (Mayer, 2021). Thus, instead of seeing ourselves as researchers who focus on students’ classroom experiences, we might also envision ourselves as scholars who investigate how best to facilitate human information processing and recall. From this perspective, conclusions generated from our research apply to just about any professional endeavor. Don’t believe us? Try speaking in public without knowing what it takes to capture a person’s attention, try negotiating a business deal without understanding how to be clear when communicating your needs, or try inspiring a workforce without understanding how different types of motivation influence effort. The fundamental idea in each of these examples is studied in the context of instructional communication, and although we typically focus on learning interventions, these notions are valuable beyond the classroom. Our second charge as communication professionals is twofold and includes helping others understand that our scholarly focus includes more than the basics of communicating with others and convincing organizations that they stand to benefit from our work. Regarding the former, we are often surprised that the details of what we research are entirely new to the people we interact with—even for the educators and trainers with whom we collaborate. Most people know little about the nuance in what we study, and so they fail to comprehend how the knowledge we have generated can be helpful in their professional endeavors. For instance, many professional speakers are familiar with the importance of clarity, but they are unaware that the concept is multidimensional and manifests through a core set of specific behaviors (Bolkan, 2017). Relatedly, though most professional educators have thought about what they are going to teach from the
{"title":"Communication consulting and outreach","authors":"San Bolkan, Darrin J. Griffin","doi":"10.1080/03634523.2022.2137220","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2022.2137220","url":null,"abstract":"Consultants operate as translators who cull relevant literature to produce lessons as these pertain to skills, strategies, and ideas that practitioners can apply in professional contexts (Waldeck, 2016). Having said that, our impression is that contributors to Communication Education are well positioned to provide practical advice about communicating with others, though this might not seem apparent at first. As such, we believe that our charge as communication professionals is to reframe how we think about what we know and to convince others that our scholarly focus includes more than just studying the basics of how people talk to each other. Our first charge as communication professionals is to reframe our own understanding of what we do. At its core, the topics published in Communication Education center on processes of human learning, including understanding how people pay attention, organize complex information, and retain knowledge for use (Mayer, 2021). Thus, instead of seeing ourselves as researchers who focus on students’ classroom experiences, we might also envision ourselves as scholars who investigate how best to facilitate human information processing and recall. From this perspective, conclusions generated from our research apply to just about any professional endeavor. Don’t believe us? Try speaking in public without knowing what it takes to capture a person’s attention, try negotiating a business deal without understanding how to be clear when communicating your needs, or try inspiring a workforce without understanding how different types of motivation influence effort. The fundamental idea in each of these examples is studied in the context of instructional communication, and although we typically focus on learning interventions, these notions are valuable beyond the classroom. Our second charge as communication professionals is twofold and includes helping others understand that our scholarly focus includes more than the basics of communicating with others and convincing organizations that they stand to benefit from our work. Regarding the former, we are often surprised that the details of what we research are entirely new to the people we interact with—even for the educators and trainers with whom we collaborate. Most people know little about the nuance in what we study, and so they fail to comprehend how the knowledge we have generated can be helpful in their professional endeavors. For instance, many professional speakers are familiar with the importance of clarity, but they are unaware that the concept is multidimensional and manifests through a core set of specific behaviors (Bolkan, 2017). Relatedly, though most professional educators have thought about what they are going to teach from the","PeriodicalId":47722,"journal":{"name":"COMMUNICATION EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42286332","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/03634523.2022.2137219
Zac D. Johnson
Instructional communication researchers have long argued for the application of our work to extend beyond the classroom (see Kearney, 2008). While applying our work outside of higher education is important, the opportunity to solve problems, translate research, facilitate change, and evaluate programs may be as simple as walking across campus. As scholars of communication and instruction, we reside at the nexus of communication studies, pedagogy, and educational psychology (Mottet & Beebe, 2006). We have explored, at length, issues related to classroom instruction across contexts to better understand not only how learning occurs but what environments, relationships, and practices best support the facilitation of that learning (Myers et al., 2016). Certainly, our work can translate beyond the classroom and academia at large. However, instructional communication researchers can make a meaningful impact in our own institutions if we just work to engage more thoroughly with wider audiences within our campus communities. Specifically, our outreach to enhance higher education should focus on two specific areas: student retention and faculty development. First, our work must reach beyond learning and begin speaking more directly to issues of persistence and retention. Across a lifetime, a college degree can lead to increased earning potential, social mobility, and other benefits (Andrade et al., 2022), and yet, many students still fail to achieve degree completion (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2020). Instructional communication has largely overlooked persistence as an outcome of interest; this, despite the importance of persistence in student success, its prevalence in related disciplines, its integration into the administration of higher education, and even its fiscal significance to an institution (see Cueso, 2010). Given that many retention frameworks and best practices involve the importance of relationships, a key component of communication research at large, we are well suited to speak to and address these issues within the academy. Therefore, instructional communication researchers should work with colleges and universities to explore best practices related to retention at a variety of levels including student-to-student (e.g., mentoring programs, support facilitation), student-to-teacher (e.g., teaching students in first-year experience courses how to talk to and engage with instructors), teacher-to-student (e.g., working with teachers to identify and engage with students in danger of early departure), and even teacher-to-teacher and teacher-to-administrator (e.g., working to create programs that engage various stakeholders from across the academy to support student persistence
教学交流研究人员长期以来一直主张将我们的工作应用到课堂之外（见Kearney，2008）。虽然将我们的工作应用于高等教育之外很重要，但解决问题、翻译研究、促进变革和评估项目的机会可能就像走进校园一样简单。作为传播和教学的学者，我们生活在传播研究、教育学和教育心理学的关系中（Motte&Beebe，2006）。我们深入探讨了与课堂教学相关的问题，以更好地了解学习是如何发生的，以及什么环境、关系和实践最有助于促进学习（Myers et al.，2016）。当然，我们的工作可以超越课堂和学术界。然而，如果我们努力更彻底地与校园社区内更广泛的受众接触，教学传播研究人员可以在我们自己的机构中产生有意义的影响。具体而言，我们加强高等教育的外联活动应侧重于两个特定领域：学生保留和教师发展。首先，我们的工作必须超越学习，开始更直接地谈论坚持和保留的问题。在一生中，大学学位可以增加收入潜力、社会流动性和其他福利（Andrade et al.，2022），然而，许多学生仍然无法完成学位学业（国家教育统计中心[NCES]，2020）。教学交流在很大程度上忽视了作为兴趣结果的持久性；尽管坚持对学生成功的重要性，它在相关学科中的普遍性，它融入高等教育管理，甚至它对一个机构的财政意义（见Cueso，2010）。鉴于许多保留框架和最佳实践都涉及关系的重要性，而关系是整个传播研究的关键组成部分，我们非常适合在学院内讨论和解决这些问题。因此，教学沟通研究人员应与学院和大学合作，探索与保留相关的各种层面的最佳实践，包括学生对学生（例如，辅导计划、支持促进）、学生对教师（例如，在一年级体验课程中教学生如何与导师交谈和互动），教师对学生（例如，与教师合作，识别并接触有提前离开危险的学生），甚至教师对教师和教师对管理者（例如，致力于创建项目，让整个学院的各种利益相关者参与进来，以支持学生的坚持
{"title":"Outreach within: applying instructional communication to the landscape of higher education","authors":"Zac D. Johnson","doi":"10.1080/03634523.2022.2137219","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2022.2137219","url":null,"abstract":"Instructional communication researchers have long argued for the application of our work to extend beyond the classroom (see Kearney, 2008). While applying our work outside of higher education is important, the opportunity to solve problems, translate research, facilitate change, and evaluate programs may be as simple as walking across campus. As scholars of communication and instruction, we reside at the nexus of communication studies, pedagogy, and educational psychology (Mottet & Beebe, 2006). We have explored, at length, issues related to classroom instruction across contexts to better understand not only how learning occurs but what environments, relationships, and practices best support the facilitation of that learning (Myers et al., 2016). Certainly, our work can translate beyond the classroom and academia at large. However, instructional communication researchers can make a meaningful impact in our own institutions if we just work to engage more thoroughly with wider audiences within our campus communities. Specifically, our outreach to enhance higher education should focus on two specific areas: student retention and faculty development. First, our work must reach beyond learning and begin speaking more directly to issues of persistence and retention. Across a lifetime, a college degree can lead to increased earning potential, social mobility, and other benefits (Andrade et al., 2022), and yet, many students still fail to achieve degree completion (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2020). Instructional communication has largely overlooked persistence as an outcome of interest; this, despite the importance of persistence in student success, its prevalence in related disciplines, its integration into the administration of higher education, and even its fiscal significance to an institution (see Cueso, 2010). Given that many retention frameworks and best practices involve the importance of relationships, a key component of communication research at large, we are well suited to speak to and address these issues within the academy. Therefore, instructional communication researchers should work with colleges and universities to explore best practices related to retention at a variety of levels including student-to-student (e.g., mentoring programs, support facilitation), student-to-teacher (e.g., teaching students in first-year experience courses how to talk to and engage with instructors), teacher-to-student (e.g., working with teachers to identify and engage with students in danger of early departure), and even teacher-to-teacher and teacher-to-administrator (e.g., working to create programs that engage various stakeholders from across the academy to support student persistence","PeriodicalId":47722,"journal":{"name":"COMMUNICATION EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44293070","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/03634523.2022.2137218
Ryan J. Martinez, S. Brammer, Narissra Maria Punyanunt-Carter
As communication scholars, our interdisciplinary fi eld has contributed to the production of research that has enhanced our understanding of the complexities of human communication. The scienti fi c information gleaned from our research is essential for guiding future studies and establishing credibility in our fi eld. However, one of the most signi fi cant obstacles researchers face is communicating expert knowledge to nonspecialists in a manner that is easily apprehensible to lay audiences. They must be able to relay the fi ndings of their studies to more inclusive crowds. Communication scholars can assist in bridging this gap by developing a feeling of urgency regarding the signi fi - cance of interpreting and translating information for lay audiences and building a strong connection between research and practice.
{"title":"Bridging the gap: making communication research more accessible through translation and application","authors":"Ryan J. Martinez, S. Brammer, Narissra Maria Punyanunt-Carter","doi":"10.1080/03634523.2022.2137218","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2022.2137218","url":null,"abstract":"As communication scholars, our interdisciplinary fi eld has contributed to the production of research that has enhanced our understanding of the complexities of human communication. The scienti fi c information gleaned from our research is essential for guiding future studies and establishing credibility in our fi eld. However, one of the most signi fi cant obstacles researchers face is communicating expert knowledge to nonspecialists in a manner that is easily apprehensible to lay audiences. They must be able to relay the fi ndings of their studies to more inclusive crowds. Communication scholars can assist in bridging this gap by developing a feeling of urgency regarding the signi fi - cance of interpreting and translating information for lay audiences and building a strong connection between research and practice.","PeriodicalId":47722,"journal":{"name":"COMMUNICATION EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45460012","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/03634523.2022.2137217
Serena Miller
People within academia choose their path because they want to make positive differences in society, in their community or practice. A diversity of venues and methodological approaches should be accepted within academia, because theoretical, critical, and applied approaches toward knowledge-making can inform one another to help society make sense of its complex problems and evaluate solutions to those problems. Nontraditional scholars such as consultants, engaged scholars, and artists frequently choose to disseminate their artifacts in venues (e.g., educational videos, podcasts, reports) other than academic journals or books with the goal of connecting nonacademics with their work (Miller, 2022). Engaged scholars often prefer to form partnerships with nonprofit institutions, the government, and other institutions to enrich communities by providing realworld solutions or stimulating dialogue (Waisbord, 2020). In this essay, I argue that applied, outreach, and consulting work should fall under the umbrella of engaged scholarship. Educational researcher Ernest Boyer’s (1990) work is often cited as the catalyst for recognizing the value of engaged scholarship. Van de Ven (2007) described engaged scholarship as a “participatory form of research for obtaining the advice and perspectives of key stakeholders... to understand a complex social problem” (p. ix). Van de Ven (2007) stated engaged research should address and resolve a particular problem; moreover, scholars should not emphasize creating generalizable information, since engaged scholarship concentrates on helping community-based programs. Engaged scholarship is the application or exchange of intellectual, artistic, and professional expertise, knowledge, skills, or resources to benefit external nonacademic stakeholders that may involve collaboration between academics and nonacademics (Miller, in press). Yet colleges and universities constrain academics from doing this type of work by creating tenure and promotion guidelines that state what types of scholarship count and do not count. A complex faculty rewards structure within academia often disadvantages scholars who select paths that counter interpretations of acceptable scholarship output such as a journal article or book publication. Engaged scholars criticize tenure and promotion documents for not properly acknowledging such approaches (Van de Ven, 2007). Historically, university and departmental leadership rely on proxies such as journal outlet and productivity to assess a candidate’s performance (Saaty & Ramanujam, 1983). Long-held beliefs and norms need to be readdressed at this moment in time based on momentum supporting engaged approaches (Waisbord, 2020).
学术界人士之所以选择自己的道路，是因为他们想在社会、社区或实践中做出积极的改变。学术界应该接受各种各样的场所和方法，因为理论、批判性和应用性的知识创造方法可以相互交流，帮助社会理解其复杂问题，并评估这些问题的解决方案。顾问、参与学者和艺术家等非传统学者经常选择在学术期刊或书籍之外的场所（如教育视频、播客、报告）传播他们的作品，目的是将非学术与他们的作品联系起来（Miller，2022）。参与的学者通常更喜欢与非营利机构、政府和其他机构建立伙伴关系，通过提供现实世界的解决方案或刺激对话来丰富社区（Waisbord，2020）。在这篇文章中，我认为申请、外联和咨询工作应该属于敬业奖学金的保护伞。教育研究人员欧内斯特·博耶（Ernest Boyer，1990）的工作经常被认为是承认参与式学术价值的催化剂。Van de Ven（2007）将参与式学术描述为“一种参与式研究形式，用于获得关键利益相关者的建议和观点……以了解复杂的社会问题”（第九页）。Van de Ven（2007）指出，参与研究应解决特定问题；此外，学者们不应该强调创造可概括的信息，因为参与式学术专注于帮助基于社区的项目。学术参与是指应用或交流智力、艺术和专业知识、知识、技能或资源，以造福外部非学术利益相关者，可能涉及学术界和非学术界之间的合作（Miller，出版）。然而，学院和大学通过制定终身教职和晋升指导方针来限制学者从事这类工作，该指导方针规定了哪些类型的奖学金有效和不有效。学术界复杂的教师奖励结构往往对那些选择与可接受的学术成果（如期刊文章或图书出版物）的解释相反的途径的学者不利。积极参与的学者批评任期和晋升文件没有正确承认这种方法（Van de Ven，2007）。从历史上看，大学和系领导层依靠期刊出版量和生产力等指标来评估候选人的表现（Saaty&Ramanujam，1983）。长期持有的信念和规范需要在支持参与方法的势头的基础上，在此时此刻重新审视（Waisbord，2020）。
{"title":"A review of U.S. tenure and promotion guidelines in media and communication and their support for engaged scholarship","authors":"Serena Miller","doi":"10.1080/03634523.2022.2137217","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2022.2137217","url":null,"abstract":"People within academia choose their path because they want to make positive differences in society, in their community or practice. A diversity of venues and methodological approaches should be accepted within academia, because theoretical, critical, and applied approaches toward knowledge-making can inform one another to help society make sense of its complex problems and evaluate solutions to those problems. Nontraditional scholars such as consultants, engaged scholars, and artists frequently choose to disseminate their artifacts in venues (e.g., educational videos, podcasts, reports) other than academic journals or books with the goal of connecting nonacademics with their work (Miller, 2022). Engaged scholars often prefer to form partnerships with nonprofit institutions, the government, and other institutions to enrich communities by providing realworld solutions or stimulating dialogue (Waisbord, 2020). In this essay, I argue that applied, outreach, and consulting work should fall under the umbrella of engaged scholarship. Educational researcher Ernest Boyer’s (1990) work is often cited as the catalyst for recognizing the value of engaged scholarship. Van de Ven (2007) described engaged scholarship as a “participatory form of research for obtaining the advice and perspectives of key stakeholders... to understand a complex social problem” (p. ix). Van de Ven (2007) stated engaged research should address and resolve a particular problem; moreover, scholars should not emphasize creating generalizable information, since engaged scholarship concentrates on helping community-based programs. Engaged scholarship is the application or exchange of intellectual, artistic, and professional expertise, knowledge, skills, or resources to benefit external nonacademic stakeholders that may involve collaboration between academics and nonacademics (Miller, in press). Yet colleges and universities constrain academics from doing this type of work by creating tenure and promotion guidelines that state what types of scholarship count and do not count. A complex faculty rewards structure within academia often disadvantages scholars who select paths that counter interpretations of acceptable scholarship output such as a journal article or book publication. Engaged scholars criticize tenure and promotion documents for not properly acknowledging such approaches (Van de Ven, 2007). Historically, university and departmental leadership rely on proxies such as journal outlet and productivity to assess a candidate’s performance (Saaty & Ramanujam, 1983). Long-held beliefs and norms need to be readdressed at this moment in time based on momentum supporting engaged approaches (Waisbord, 2020).","PeriodicalId":47722,"journal":{"name":"COMMUNICATION EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49383554","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/03634523.2022.2137214
Jennifer H. Waldeck, Melissa A. Broeckelman-Post, Joseph P. Mazer
{"title":"Editors’ introduction: the reciprocity of communication scholarship and practice: spotlight on consulting and outreach","authors":"Jennifer H. Waldeck, Melissa A. Broeckelman-Post, Joseph P. Mazer","doi":"10.1080/03634523.2022.2137214","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2022.2137214","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47722,"journal":{"name":"COMMUNICATION EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48873939","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/03634523.2022.2137216
Sara LaBelle, Johnny Capra, Amy Hellem, Cailin M. Kuchenbecker, Arielle L. Hodges, Madison K Murphy
This essay emerged out of class discussion in a Ph.D. seminar on Instructional Communication (IC). As the fi rst author and professor in this course, I have encouraged my students (the remaining authors) to connect IC to their areas of emphasis and to con-sider the myriad ways IC research could contribute to learning outcomes in these areas. In drafting their contributions to this essay, one of the student authors wrote, “ If instructional communication (IC) is de fi ned as ‘ the study of the human communication process across all learning situations independent of subject matter, grade level, or the learning environment ’ (Myers et al., 2016, p. 13), then why are so many scholars still tied to their classroom podiums? ” We present an argument for how IC scholars can build on existing research to step out from behind their podiums through consulting and outreach in fi ve distinct contexts.
这篇文章是在一个关于教学交流（IC）的博士研讨会上发表的。作为本课程的第一位作者和教授，我鼓励我的学生（其余作者）将IC与他们的重点领域联系起来，并考虑IC研究如何有助于这些领域的学习成果。在起草他们对这篇文章的贡献时，一位学生作者写道，“如果教学交流（IC）被定义为‘在所有学习情况下对人类交流过程的研究，而不依赖于主题、年级水平或学习环境’（Myers et al.，2016，p.13），那么为什么这么多学者仍然局限于他们的课堂讲台？”在五个不同的背景下，通过咨询和外联，从他们的讲台后面走出。
{"title":"The contribution of instructional communication research to teaching–learning beyond the classroom","authors":"Sara LaBelle, Johnny Capra, Amy Hellem, Cailin M. Kuchenbecker, Arielle L. Hodges, Madison K Murphy","doi":"10.1080/03634523.2022.2137216","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2022.2137216","url":null,"abstract":"This essay emerged out of class discussion in a Ph.D. seminar on Instructional Communication (IC). As the fi rst author and professor in this course, I have encouraged my students (the remaining authors) to connect IC to their areas of emphasis and to con-sider the myriad ways IC research could contribute to learning outcomes in these areas. In drafting their contributions to this essay, one of the student authors wrote, “ If instructional communication (IC) is de fi ned as ‘ the study of the human communication process across all learning situations independent of subject matter, grade level, or the learning environment ’ (Myers et al., 2016, p. 13), then why are so many scholars still tied to their classroom podiums? ” We present an argument for how IC scholars can build on existing research to step out from behind their podiums through consulting and outreach in fi ve distinct contexts.","PeriodicalId":47722,"journal":{"name":"COMMUNICATION EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46373662","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：