CHI TIẾT NGHIÊN CỨU …

Tiêu đề

Liberal education and communication across the curriculum: A response to Anthony Fleury

Tác giả

Palmerton P.R.

Năm xuất bản

2005

Source title

Communication Education

Số trích dẫn

DOI

10.1080/03634520500076844

Liên kết

https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-33644980425&doi=10.1080%2f03634520500076844&partnerID=40&md5=d3906bd5c647196e27faa44e4bf49c1d

Tóm tắt

Anthony Fleury proposes a Communication Against the Disciplines paradigm as a counterpoint to Communication in the Disciplines approaches to teaching communication across the curriculum. Contrary to Fleury's contention, however, learning about discipline-specific communication conventions can indeed promote the goals of liberal education and citizenship. Students learn about communication as process when they compare communication conventions across disciplines and learn that each context is characterized by its own ways of privileging some communication performances and disallowing others. Communication Against the Disciplines' focus on three broad styles of communication results renders communication products more salient than processes. Moreover, the three styles Fleury identifies are not comprehensive; they neglect non-Western rhetorics, for example. Teaching communication across the curriculum should help students understand how each discipline values particular forms of communicative performance, so that students can choose how they wish to participate in those disciplines.

Từ khóa

Communication Across the Curriculum; Communication in the Disciplines

Tài liệu tham khảo

Class, Codes and Control, 2, (1973); Britton J., Language and intention, Prospect and Retrospect: Selected Essays of James Britton, Pt. II, pp. 71-145, (1982); Cazden C., Classroom Discourse: The Language of Teaching and Learning, (1988); Cronin M.W., Grice G.L., Palmerton P.R., Oral communication across the curriculum: The state of the art after twenty-five years of experience, Journal of the Association for Communication Administration, 29, pp. 66-87, (2000); Dannels D.P., Time to speak up: A theoretical framework of situated pedagogy and practice for communication across the curriculum, Communication Education, 50, pp. 144-158, (2001); Fleury A., Liberal education and communication against the disciplines, Communication Education, 54, pp. 72-79, (2005); Foucault M., The Archeology of Knowledge, (1976); Garside C., Seeing the forest through the trees: A challenge facing communication across the curriculum programs, Communication Education, 51, pp. 51-64, (2002); Mead G.H., Mind, Self, and Society, (1934); Morello J.T., Comparing speaking across the curriculum and writing across the curriculum programs, Communication Education, 49, pp. 99-113, (2000); Palmerton P.R., Teaching skills or teaching thinking?, Journal of Applied Communication Research, 20, pp. 335-341, (1992); Palmerton P.R., Speaking across the curriculum: Threat, opportunity, or both?, ACA Bulletin, 76, pp. 1-10, (1991); Palmerton P.R., Bonilla J.F., Using Faculty and Student Focus Groups to Address Issues of Race, Ethnicity, and Gender in the Classroom: Implications for Oral Communication Across the Curriculum, (1999); Palmerton P.R., Bushyhead Y., "It's Not Getting at Real":Exploring Alternative Approaches to Critical Thinking, (1994); Pearce W.B., Communication and the Human Condition, (1989); Spitzberg B., Cupach W., Interpersonal Communication Competence, (1984); Ting-Toomey S., Oetzel J.G., Managing Intercultural Conflict Effectively, (2001)