Overview
The purpose of this course is the investigation of the role that theory plays in the study of human communication. Thus, the course is not a comprehensive survey of communication theories. Rather, it’s goal is to provide an understanding of general issues in philosophy (epistemology & theory construction) that are critical for the understanding of the manner in which theories can be and have been used to account for fundamental communicative phenomena. In addition to this theoretical knowledge, the course also teaches you the practical skills and procedure involved in constructing communication theory. Consequently, the course consists of two sections. The first section introduces philosophic arguments relevant to the role that theory in particular and science in general can play in the understanding of communication. These include inquires into the nature of perception and meaning, arguments by philosophers of science about what theories are and can be (among others: logical empiricism, perspectivism, & realism), conceptions of the structure and functions of ideal theory, and debates about the role of intentionality in explanation. During this section, the claim is made that communication theory can best be approached from the perspectivist position and six perspectives that have often been used in communication theory, along with exemplar theories, are explained and evaluated. The first section concludes with an overview of current debates within the communication discipline and a look at a critical framework that might unity various approaches to social science more generally. The second section focuses on practical issues involved in constructing communication theory. To this end, we will read to practical guides, one for quantitative theories by Shoemaker et al. and one for qualitative research, by Strauss and Corbin.
Format
This course is a graduate level seminar, that is, the focus is not on a one-sided knowledge transfer from the professor to the students. Rather, professor and students are engaged in a collaborative inquiry and discovery. Thus, I see my role as that of a facilitator of these processes rather than the final arbiter of truth (i.e., the correct reading of the material). Still, be prepared to have your ideas challenged and even sometimes finding yourself unable to defend them. That is part of growing intellectually. Given this format, we will spend most of our time discussing and critically engaging the material and less time trying to memorize it. Keep in mind, however, that to critically engage material, you first need to read and to understand it.
Expectations and Grades
For this seminar to be successful, you, the students, have to take the ultimate responsibility for your learning in the course. At a minimum you must be well prepared for class (i.e., do readings and assignments) and be willing to take and to defend intellectual positions, even at the risk that you might say something that others disagree with. This is particularly true for the parts the class depends on you, for example, when you are leading the discussion of the readings for the day or you are presenting your own research to the class. Because students in this course come from a variety of backgrounds and operate based on different assumptions, it is important that you share your insights with us and that you respect those of others.
Because participation is crucial for the success of this seminar, it accounts for 20% of your grade. Participation refers to everything that enhances the learning that takes place in the seminar: sharing insights, voicing and justifying opinions, asking pertinent questions, etc., in short, anything that makes us delve deeper into an issue and engage it more deeply. For each assigned reading, one student is responsible for leading the discussion of that reading. The number of presentations you are responsible for depends on the number of students, but combined they will account for 20% of your grade. Your term project accounts for another 40%. Five short papers reflection papers account for the remaining 20% (i.e., 4% each). The topics for the reflection papers will be given to you on the day the papers are assigned
Assignments
Project. The project for this course is developing a communication theory in a paper that follows the APA style manual (5th ed.) of not more than 25 pages of text (excluding references, tables, & figures). The theory you develop should be of interest to you and must broadly relate to communication. You will be asked to give a conference length presentation on that paper (12-15 minutes) on the last day of class. You may choose to collaborate on this assignment with one another person in the class. A 3-5 page paper proposal is due Nov. 15th. Although not graded per se, a missing or clearly inadequate proposal will negatively affect you grade for the term paper. The term paper is due Dec. 16th.
Reflection papers. Write five short papers (2-3 pages) reflecting your learning in this course. For some papers topics will be assigned to you, for others, the topic is up to you. These papers are an opportunity for you to demonstrate to me your understanding and your critical engagement of the material. These papers should NOT duplicate your presentations of the readings. Reaction papers are due on: 9/27; 10/18; 11/8; 11/29; & 12/16.
Reading presentations. For each reading (article or book chapter), one student is responsible for preparing a short hand-out summarizing the main points of the article/chapter and for leading the discussion on it. The hand out should contain a brief discussion of the theoretical background, the theoretical model and hypotheses tested, as well as description of choice findings/claims (not longer than 1 page). The discussion should focus on what you see are the important insights that you gained from the article and the questions that it raised for you.
Miscellaneous. Because of the flexible nature of seminars, it might be possible that I give you additional assignments.
Pavitt, C. (2000).
Philosophy of science and communication theory: A tool for terrorizing granulated
students.
Gerring, J. (2001). Social science methodology: A critical framework.
Shoemaker, P. J., Tankard, J. W. Jr., Lasorsa,
D. L. (2004). How to
build social science theories.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques
and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.).
Tentative Course Schedule
|
Date |
Topic |
|
|
9/6 |
Preview Course, Philosophy of Science |
Pav. 1 |
|
9/13 |
Perception, Meaning, & Empiricism |
Pav. 2-4 |
|
9/20 |
Perspectivism, Realism, & Ideal Theory |
Pav. 5-7 |
|
9/27 |
Functions of Theory in Communication Studies |
Pav. 8-10 |
|
10/4 |
Systems, Information, & Learning Theories |
Pav. 11-13 |
|
10/11 |
Cognitive Theories and Conventionalism |
Pav. 14-16 |
|
10/18 |
Debates in Communication |
Pav. 17 |
|
10/25 |
A Critical Framework for Social Science |
|
|
11/1 |
Building Scientific Communication Theory I |
Shoe. et al.1-3 |
|
11/8 |
Building Scientific Communication Theory II |
Shoe. et al. 4-6 |
|
11/15 |
Building Scientific Communication Theory III |
Shoe. et al.7-9 |
|
11/22 |
Building Qualitative Communication Theory I |
S&C 1-6 |
|
11/29 |
Building Qualitative Communication Theory II |
S&C 7-12 |
|
12/6 |
Building Qualitative Communication Theory III |
S&C 13-17 |
|
12/13 |
Student Presentations |
None |