Frank E. X. Dance

Speech and Thought: A Renewal.

As the oldest living editor of Communication Education (I cannot believe I just wrote those words) I would like to revisit the conceptualization and formation of the basic course in public speaking. In many ways the undergraduate course in basic public speaking is the discipline’s “bread and butter” course. The course introduces new students to the discipline, provides continuing teaching opportunities for both permanent and adjunct faculty and often supports graduate programs through its staffing by graduate assistants. This is an important course. In 1992 “Commentaries” in the J. of Applied Communication Research questioned whether or not, in the basic speech communication course, we are teaching skills or teaching thinking (Palmerton, 1992, 335–341) and whether or not we are either charged with or successful at teaching critical thinking in the basic speech communication course. (Powell, 1992, 342–347.) In July, 2000, Todd Frobish’s essay appeared in Communication Education taking to task authors of public speaking textbooks for not incorporating current research findings into their writing. In the Winter 2001 issue of the online American Communication Journal Todd Frobish hosts a series of short responses by authors of currently popular public speaking texts as to whether or not their works reflect the most up-to-date treatments of a variety of research findings concerning rhetoric that bear upon public speaking. The January, 2002 issue of Communication Education focused on the “Communication Curriculum” and in an essay by Morreale and Backlund presents overviews of “Communication” courses and competencies. I suggest that the concern evidenced in these “commentaries” with what has been and is happening in the basic course is not a result of the inherent nature or possible limitations of the subject matter but of a drifting away from the original, pre-Ramist, paradigm of speech and thought. (Lanham, 1993, Chapter 7, 154–194) The present exemplar, or model, for most basic courses focuses on public speaking skills. The course’s measure of success is the degree to which the student improves in platform abilities. The problem isn’t so much with including what is new but with accurately recalling and revitalizing tradition. I am suggesting a consideration of a different model for the basic course. The model I am recommending reviving is one of the oldest of our disciplinary paradigms. The basic course in speech communication should focus on heightening the student’s conceptual acuity by means of heightening the student’s public speaking ability. This course’s measure of success would be the degree to which the student improves in conceptual acuity through the improvement of his or her public speaking skills. The speech and thought braid has been recognized throughout history. Ptah-hotep, Lao Tzu, Confucius, Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics, St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, each spoke of the relationship between speech and thought. In contemporary times scholars continue to examine the conceptually creative and developmen-

Speech communication as a liberal arts discipline

Four propositions, and their support, which argue for the academic viability and necessity of programs in the discipline of speech communication, are set forth

Ong's voice: “I,” the oral intellect, you, and we

How does sound affect our humanity, our thought processes, and our culture? A review of the most pertinent of Walter J. Ongs book‐length works suggests that Ongs contributions to an appreciation and understanding of the role of sound in higher mental processes, and of the manner in which that role affects the human condition, may be heard as a revealing echo of that scholars very personal search for “I. “ In a search for an authors voice, the authors oral “I”; may be a valuable key.

Swift, slow, sweet, sour, adazzle, dim: What makes human communication human

To build theory and conduct research requires clarity in and among the concepts with which we are dealing. It is argued that the concern of this discipline is with the uniquely human qualities of communication and that the term “spoken language” is primitive and minimum to this disciplinary concern. “Spoken language” is coterminous with human communication although not with all communication exhibited by humans.

What Do You Mean: Presentational Speaking?

What is a presentation that is not a public speech and what is a public speech that is not a presentation? This essay considers the historical development of the usage presentational speaking for public speaking in the business setting and with business objectives, the current usage of the term, and empirical evidence concerning actual expectational differences between public speaking and presentational speaking. The author concludes that the only differences are situational or setting differences and the additional fact that management thinks that there is a real difference. How management trainers should respond to these differences is discussed in the essays conclusion.

The Tao of speech

This essay argues that the study of “speech” as an act and as a subject matter may present the characteristics of a “Tao.” A “Tao” consists of a way of life leading to an increase in humane being for the individual and for society.

Performance as content in speech communication education

Certain behavior patterns, or junctions, are uniquely related to speech communication and these junctions can only be fully actualized through performance, performance deserving of being identified as content.

Prolegomena to a primitive theory of human communication in human organizations

Although human organizations make use of human communication they do not make use of human communication theory. This essay calls for a reordering of values in the study of human communication in human organizations and offers a preliminary discourse on a primitive theory of human communication appropriate to the called‐for reordering.

Speech and Adult Education: A Nexus

more formally by Wilbur Hallenbeck: &dquo;A culture always determines the form, the content, and the scope of its organized education. Of course, some speech educators have also given recognition to this principle. Frederick Haberman leads off his interesting article entitled &dquo;Toward the Ideal Teacher of Speech&dquo; by stating: &dquo;Speech is a part of the curriculum, or not a part of it, as a locality of a nation decides on its ob-

“What and whither? The undergraduate course in business and professional speaking”

Business Speaking courses differ from courses in Professional Speaking and both courses should have academically viable and departmentally unique content and organization.