Presidential Address - National Communication Association

P r es i den t i a l Addres s
Back To Our Future:
T H E P R E S E N C E O F O U R PA S T ( s ) , T H E E C H O E S O F OU R F U T U R E
K a t h l e e n J. T u r n e r , P h. D.
Davidson College
National Communication Association
100th Annual Convent ion I November 22, 2014 I Chicago, Illinois
P r e s i den t i a l Addres s
Back To Our Future:
T H E P R E S E N C E O F O U R PA S T (s), T H E E C H O E S O F OU R F U T U R E
K a t h l e e n J. T u r n e r , Ph. D.
Davidson College
National Communication Association
100th Annual Convent ion I November 22, 2014 I Chicago, Illinois
SPONSORed by
© 2014 National Communication Association. All rights reserved.
All NCA Publication Program materials are reviewed within the spirit of academic freedom, promoting
the free exchange of ideas. The contents of this publication are the responsibility of its authors and do not
necessarily reflect the official policies or positions of the National Communication Association, its members,
its officers, or its staff.
Brief portions of this publication may be copied and quoted without further permission, with the understanding
that appropriate citations of the source will accompany any excerpts. A limited number of copies of brief excerpts
may be made for scholarly or classroom use if:
1.the materials are distributed without charge, or no fees above the actual duplication costs
are charged;
2.the materials are reproductions, photocopies, or copies made by similar processes,
and not reprints or republications;
3.the copies are used within a reasonable time after reproduction; and
4.the materials include the full bibliographic citation, and the following is also clearly
displayed on all copies: ‘‘Copyright by the National Communication Association
Reproduced by permission of the publisher.’’
This permission does not extend to situations in which:
1.extensive amounts of material are reproduced or stored in an electronic or
similar data retrieval system;
2.a fee above actual duplicating costs is charged, or if there exists a reasonable
expectation of profit; or
3.the material is reproduced or reprinted for other than scholarly or educational purposes.
In such cases, permission must be obtained prior to reproduction and generally a reasonable fee will be assessed.
Requests for permission to reproduce should be addressed to the NCA Director of External Affairs and Publications.
National Communication Association
1765 N Street, NW
Washington, DC, 20036
www.natcom.org
Kathleen J. Turner (BA, University of Kansas, Speech Communication and English, Phi Beta Kappa;
MA, Ph.D., Purdue University) is Professor and Chair of Communication Studies and Director of Oral
Communication at Davidson College. A rhetorical analyst, Dr. Turner studies Communication as a process of
social influence, particularly concerning media, politics, popular culture, and women’s issues. Dr. Turner is the
author of Lyndon Johnson’s Dual War: Vietnam and the Press, the first book in the field of Communication to be
published by the University of Chicago Press (1985). She is the editor of Doing Rhetorical History: Concepts
and Cases (University of Alabama Press, 1998), and coauthor of Communication Centers: A Theory-Based
Guide to Training and Management (Lexington, 2014). She received the Ecroyd Award for Outstanding
Teaching in Higher Education from NCA, the Osborn Teacher-Scholar Award from SSCA, the SGA Teaching
Award from the Davidson College Student Government, and the Welch Award for Service from the Carolinas
Communication Association. She is President of the National Communication Association.
I
1
I
Hello, NCA!
T
hanks, Nancy, for that wonderful introduction. As Lyndon Johnson would have said, I wish my parents
were here; my daddy would like it; my mama would believe it! The gracious comments are especially
meaningful coming from Dr. Kidd: The longer I’ve been able to work with her, the more I admire her intelligence,
sensitivity, and savvy.
I am also grateful for my amazing mother, Anne Alexander; when I told her I was
running for the NCA leadership, she said, “Why?!” My response: “Because that’s
how you raised me!” In addition, my phenomenal husband, Ray Sprague, gives
me two incredible gifts: he takes me seriously, but he won’t let me take myself too
seriously. Thanks also to Trevor Parry-Giles (any time you see “National Office”
on the slides, that means Trevor provided them), and to John, Jason, Alphonso,
and the terrific Hilton staff for making this presentation possible.
And there are many, many colleagues I should thank—SO many that if I expressed
my gratitude to everyone who had played a role in getting me to this point, we’d
still be here in November of 2015! So, I hope you know who you are, and how
very much I appreciate you!
W
hen I entered the University of Kansas in 1970, I knew I was going to be a language arts secondary
education major. I had always known I wanted to teach (despite occasional side trips into ballet and
architecture); I loved debate and extemp in high school; and our life-long family fascination with language took
root in the discovery of general semantics.
But a funny thing happened on the way through that first year: I discovered communication. What a deliciously
wide and wonderful world opened up! And I discovered that you didn’t have to be a pointy-headed intellectual
to be a professor; you could just love sharing the discovery of insights, old and new.
So as a freshman, I decided to become a double major in Speech Communication and English, and to go
on to a Ph.D. in Communication. (Yes, I know: Some of you are thinking “how precocious”; others are thinking
“what a nerd”; I would just note that they aren’t mutually exclusive).
I never looked back. By my junior year (in 1972), I was destined for Chicago to attend the convention of the
Speech Communication Association. At that time, it was held between Christmas and New Year’s, so I had
to study for finals before I could go. And the guys who lived in the apartment upstairs convinced me to take a
break to go sledding.
Unfortunately, the break turned out to be more literal than figurative. On my second attempt at navigating
Mount Oread, I ran into a telephone pole. The dark side of non-verbal communication resulted in a concussion,
several broken ribs, and a damaged right arm.
So I headed to my very first convention in the Palmer House with my arm in a bright turquoise sling (courtesy
of my mother), with foam padding as protection, and heavy doses of painkillers. I looked quite awful—so awful
that I’m not even going to show you a picture of me! But I couldn’t wait to see, hear, and maybe even meet
The Great People Who Authored My Textbooks and Readings.
By the second day of the convention, I was having such a good time that only later did I realize I had
completely forgotten my painkillers. And I’ve been hooked on NCA ever since!
I
2
I
Now, despite my eagerness at that first convention, I have to confess that I was totally clueless about how we
began. If Michael J. Fox were here in his incarnation of Marty McFly, we might climb into a DeLorean and fly
away. But he isn’t here—and besides, we have a much more powerful vehicle with which to cross time and space:
communication. So, join me as we go back to our future!
1914
B
y this point in our centennial convention, I’d be really surprised if you hadn’t heard at least one version
of our origin story. In this very city in 1914, 17 brave forebears rejected their lowly status as the red-haired
stepchildren of English to form what is now the National Communication Association. Let me set the stage.
(Hey, indulge me—I love rhetorical history!)
Our civilly disobedient 17 would have been among the very elite few with advanced schooling: According to
the Commissioner of Education in 1914, although 91% of American children attended elementary school, fewer
than 7% attended secondary school, and fewer than 2% went to college.1
Our feisty 17 wouldn’t have flown to Chicago; passenger airlines were just barely getting started. Nor were they
likely to have driven; the average automobile cost $500, while the average wage was a mere $577 a year.2
No, most of them took a train (and yes, Ted Sheckels, I can hear you smiling).
On the way, our forebears wouldn’t have checked e-mail or texted on their cell phones, nor would they have
snapped open their laptops to make last-minute changes to their convention papers (or, in dire cases, to start
them). No, they probably would have opened a newspaper or magazine to read about the success of the
first transcontinental telephone line between New York City and San Francisco, or efforts to expand women’s
suffrage beyond 11 states and the territory of Alaska, or the war breaking out in Europe (we weren’t yet at
the point of counting them); and they probably would have skimmed the ads for products like Polarine and
Pond’s vanishing cream.
They probably would not have read about how three Howard University students had founded the Phi Beta
Sigma fraternity to encourage “Brotherhood, Scholarship, and Service,” and they certainly wouldn’t have read
about female members of the U.S. House and Senate; there were none.
Once they arrived in the Windy City (yes, that particular moniker had been popularized a half century before),
our savvy 17 might have checked out the skyscrapers that turned the horizontal prairie into the vertical city.
They might have splurged at the Boulevard Café for the “Table d’Hôte consisting of Shell Oysters, Fish, Choice
of Fowl, Filet of Beef, Fresh Vegetables, Strawberries, Cheese and Coffee, … [and a] full pint [of the] best
California Claret”—all for an outrageous 75¢.3
Clearly, though, the focal point of this trip for our sassy 17 would have been the convention of the National
Council of Teachers of English. Among those attending that convention just might have been the instructor of
the “Oral Rhetoric” course that my Granddaddy Turner took at the University of Kansas in 1909 or so.
Our forebears were acutely aware that the number of institutions of higher learning offering a major in our
subject was zero. And graduate work? Forget about it! 4 And they felt like second- or third-class citizens in English
departments, where they chafed against what Mary Catherine Bateson has called “extremely tweeded minds.” 5
It’s appropriate that they met in Chicago, home of architect Daniel Burnham, who enthused, “Make no little
plans; they have no magic to stir men’s blood.”6
I
3
I
Those great plans did take a bit to “stir men’s blood”: On Friday, November 27th, 1914, the motion “that a
National Association of Academic Teachers of Public Speaking be organized” enjoyed vigorous debate—only
to be tabled by a vote of 18 to 16. Not until the next day would “17 men, representing 13 different institutions,
vote unanimously to establish our Association”7—and you will note that those institutions were both private and
public, both teaching and research.8 (There’s some speculation that the diminution of voters by half resulted
from unseasonably mild weather in Chicago that Saturday morning—rather like the balmy temperatures we’ve
experienced this week!—drawing some of those who might have stayed with the English folks out of the hotel.) 9
And so, 1915 welcomed the first convention of the National Association of Academic Teachers of Public
Speaking (or NAATPS, which rolls trippingly off the tongue!). Now, these rebels met at the same time and
in the same place as the National Council of Teachers of English; and the entire group adjourned to the
NCTE’s sessions on public speaking one afternoon10 —so it wasn’t exactly a clean break! Nonetheless, a
hearty 60 members attended our first convention, paying dues of $2.00 and a convention fee of $1.00. Fully
16 individuals appeared on the program, and “the treasurer reported a deficit of $508.69, with loans from
members amounting to $479.” 11
Those were our beginnings.
2014
W
■
■
■
e’ve come a long way since 1914, and we’ve had a lot of adventures in the process:
We had all of five general sessions and four periods of special sessions (that was 1933).
Fifty-two institutions granted advanced degrees to 450 candidates (that was 1948, our
Silver Anniversary).12
Lionel Crocker taught seven classes a semester at Denison while serving as President in 1952.13
The wives of officers hosted a reception for the wives of faculty—a practice that Bobby Patton
discovered continued into the 1970s!
■
Mike and Susie Osborn covered their walls with butcher paper and used color-coded cards
■ to schedule the 1987 convention (those of us who have served as primary program planners
more recently say, thank you, Michelle Randall and NCA Convention Central!)
We aren’t quite at the 10,000 members predicted by President Andrew Weaver in 1927, 14 but the numbers
are still pretty impressive! This year NCA boasts almost 8,000 members; nearly 5,400 people appear on
our program in almost 1,200 sessions,15 and they represent more institutions than anybody has time to count.
We’ve come a long way from being some $500 in debt, and we have membership benefits that our forebears
could not even have imagined—such as total electronic access to all 11 NCA journals for every member.
(I think our original 17 would be busting their buttons at having 11 journals, but probably scratching their
heads at the electronic access!)
I
4
I
Why?
S
o that begs the question: Why? Why are we so strong? What has NCA inherited from our past(s) that we
can take to our future?
I posit that we are so strong because we study the process that makes us human. As Isocrates noted, oh so long
ago, it is through communication that we establish, change, and maintain societies, as well as our own roles
within them. The very act of communication isn’t added on afterward; it’s generative, so it is a fundamental way
of thinking and an essential way of knowing the world.
To paraphrase Michael Calvin McGee, we might study speeches or family communication or nonverbal
communication or any of the subjects addressed by our now 48 divisions, six sections, and six caucuses—but
what we’re really studying are “human lives.”16
To illustrate the point: My beloved undergraduate advisor, Wil Linkugel, was a baseball fanatic. He talked
about the three umpires. The first says, “I call them as they are.” The second says, “I call them as I see them.”
The third says, “Whatever I call them—that’s what they are.” We in Communication understand the third umpire;
we understand that whatever we call them, that’s what they are. And we also understand Marshall McLuhan’s
point that he’s not sure who discovered water, but he’s pretty sure it wasn’t the fish. We are the fish in the water
of communication, and that is both the challenge and the joy of studying it.
As a community of communication enthusiasts, we derive joy and strength from so many sources.17 One source
is seeing our students suddenly understand “oh, that’s why that Russian student used language so differently,”
or “gee, maybe I can handle disputes with my roommates more effectively,” or “rats—my friends won’t watch
programs with me anymore because I’m constantly analyzing the content” (to which I respond, yes!!). It’s such a
joy to see those students get bitten by the communication bug. Another is watching faculty in other departments
who, by having our graduate students in their courses, learn something new not only about our discipline but
also about their own. Yet another is how our members, inside of the Academy and out, help communities engage
in collaborative decision-making, improve political literacy, give voice to the voiceless, and help leaders of
nonprofit organizations become eloquent in service of the causes they so cherish. That’s communication.
Marie Hochmuth Nichols pointed out that Communication “has persisted because [we have] … always evaluated
the new idea or word in terms of … [our] ancient, contemporary, and everlasting needs to communicate and work
with other[s] … in a changing society.”
1914, 2014 … now let’s take a look at the echoes of our future…
2114
I
’m sure you will be shocked—shocked!—to hear that I predict the National Communication Association
will be alive and well and wonderful in 2114, and that we’ll celebrate our bicentennial right back here
in Chicago. I predict—I fervently hope— that we will continue to move forward in three interrelated areas:
demographic diversity, intellectual diversity, and social impact.
I
5
I
First, demographic diversity: In 2114, we will be a richly diverse organization, and it may even be noteworthy
when a white person is elected to our leadership. Let’s hope that our members look back on the Task Force
I’ve appointed on Inclusivity in the Discipline, chaired by Brenda J. Allen, and think, “how quaint!”
It’s not exactly going far out on a limb to predict that NCA will be more demographically diverse; the United
States has already passed the point at which the majority of births are babies of color.18 In 2000, my dear
friend and mentor Ray McKerrow urged us to “color outside the lines,” to “transgress prohibitions, cross borders,
[and] … challenge and re-draw boundaries” as a way of “drawing connections between and among disparate
groupings [and] re-conceptualizing conventional strategies.”19 Today those lines are still pretty clear; our students
don’t leave our classes two or three weeks into the semester and all of a sudden realize (in my case), “Oh my
gosh—Dr. Turner’s white! And I think she might be a woman!”
But by 2114, our whole categories for demographic classification certainly will have changed, and perhaps will
have dissolved. Think of, for example, Native Americans’ concept of “two-spirited people” who embody crossgender roles,20 and Tiger Woods’ self-descriptor “Cablinasian” to describe his Caucasian, Black, American Indian,
and Asian ancestry.21 Given our understanding of the power of language, changing the labels that we use to
define and categorize people could broaden the ways in which we understand one another.
That richer demographic diversity will be critical to our intellectual diversity. We will study communication “of
the people, by the people, and for the people— all of the people,” in all their delicious depth and difference,
in all of their compelling complexity and commonality. As I’ve said elsewhere, “claims of a full and robust
understanding of … [communication] processes ring hollow if we study only select folks in particular settings
pursuing similar goals.” 22 We need to cherish what Marsha Houston and Julia Wood call “nourishing curiosity
toward … differences.” 23
And those differences can’t just be demographic. In a presidential address entitled “Unity in Diversity,” Wilbur E.
Gilman asked, “With the increasing diversification of our interests, can we preserve our unity and function as a
team?”24 Sound familiar? Well, this was back in 1951, before even I was born! Now, like Anita Taylor in 1981, I
“don’t wish to reawaken all those self-examination orgies.” 25 Whether we see NCA as an umbrella, a constellation,
a tossed salad, or whatever other metaphor,26 we will use our communicative expertise to find ways to leverage
the breadth of our discipline. Rather than fretting about the range of subjects and methodologies and theories, we
can embrace that range as vibrant evidence that we are rich and robust, that it is (as one author posits) “a sign of
the profession’s vitality—its openness to outside ideas, and its willingness to allow a thousand flowers to bloom.” 27
We can embrace Mike Osborn’s contention that “Our identity is uncertain and must be uncertain because of the
nature of the subject matter we have chosen to engage.” 28 And if nothing else, we can be happy in knowing
that we’re fulfilling the prediction of James O’Neill in the Association’s first presidential address: “he felt sure we
should be spared the blight of unanimity for some time to come.” 29
And because of our demographic and intellectual diversity, we will have greater social impact. In 1943,
President Robert West posited that “We will progress farther along the way toward a good life for all … if we
spread our knowledge as widely as possible rather than hold it for a small, intellectual aristocracy.” 30 In 2114,
we’ll be spreading the wealth around, from foundations and government agencies to health organizations and
nonprofit associations—It’s a great way to demonstrate and test the value of our theoretical conceptions, as we
tackle society’s pragmatic problems and challenges.
What’s more, we will have a gazillion Kathleen Hall Jamiesons. Now, that may at first glance be a scary thought,
but bear with me: our members will be sought after by the media (in whatever future forms they may take) for their
insightful, incisive observations on the human condition (and they will be identified as Communication scholars!);
and the Newseums of the future will eagerly seek our panels on issues of public concern. As Michael Sproule
observed, our “history is one of integrating inquiry and instruction,” 31 and I would add, so too will be our future.
I
6
I
Now in 2114, as Tom Socha suggested, we may be having our exciting, exhilarating, exhausting conventions via
holograms 32 — but they’re going to continue to be places where ideas are born, nurtured, and set free to inspire
the birth of more ideas. Our research, our teaching, our service, our professional work—all serve to pay it forward.
We will continue to attract “strong, heart-driven, joyful, … compassionate, … genuine … human beings,” because
we study the most exciting aspect of human existence.33
Conclusion: Back to Our Future
S
o why look at the presence of our past(s) to identify the echoes of our future? We could use the reasoning
of historian David McCullough: “Learning about history is an antidote to the hubris of the present, the idea
that everything in our lives is the ultimate.” 34 But I prefer the perspective of Eric King Watts’ grandfather (that’s a
photograph of Eric, not his grandfather!). Eric says that for his grandfather, “history was never simply behind him; it
walked beside him and, once in a while, raced out in front to alert him about what may lurk around the next bend
in the road … and he would school me on how to hear the wisdom of my ancestors whistling through the winds of
time.”35 History isn’t some musty, dusty relic of the past; our constructions of history live in all of us. We stand on
the shoulders of those who have gone before us, and we lift those who will follow.
I’ve had quite a few adventures serving as a grand pooh-bah of NCA. Personally, it’s included perfecting my
queenly wave (oops—not that one; here we go!). For your own instruction in this regard, please see me after this
session, and I’ll pass along the techniques I learned from a former Miss North Carolina! And it includes making
my YouTube debut in “Happy at Hope.” Watch it and you’ll be able to see why Scott Myers and I won the
sobriquet of “cutest couple.”
More importantly, I feel happier than a Slinky on an escalator because I’ve been able to learn so much about
our members, our accomplishments, and our organization. You can, too! Attend a conference session with student
leaders or an undergraduate honors conference, and you’ll see we’re in good hands. Participate in discussions
about the proposed bylaws among thoughtful, concerned, committed groups of members who care deeply about
the organization and its future. Meet the wonderful people in our profession, from Shahani Waas, who wrote her
master’s thesis on the benefits of public speaking for elementary school students, to Richard Johnson, known as
“RJ,” a longtime life member of NCA who still relishes the intellectual exchange of our conventions. See that span,
and you’ll know the continuity of communication that binds us together.
Forty-some years ago, as I wandered around that convention so star-struck (and so banged up!), little could I
imagine that I would have the honor of serving as the president of NCA during our centennial year—and you
know, I’m still gob-smacked to be here now.
So don’t be shy. Somewhere out there are the leaders of the National Communication Association for 2039, our
quasquicentennial (125 years). Join the joy, and you, too, will be hooked on NCA! Here’s to our next 100 years!
I
7
I
Notes
1
http://books.google.com/books?id=ZK80AQAAMAAJ&pg=PR5&lpg=PR5&dq=Annual+
Report+of+the+Commissioner+of+Education+1914&source=bl&ots=Xv19E31-oW&sig=MDLckfr
pqNFTN6CIZhPa46I_9ak&hl=en&sa=X&ei=gEhVVMqkOouGyQSkz4CADg&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=Annual%20Report%20of%20the%20Commissioner%20of%20
Education%201914&f=false.
2 http://centennial.transportation.org/1914.html. AASHTO: American Association of State Highway
and Transportation Officials.
3
Jan Whitaker, “Restaurant-ing Through History,” http://restaurant-ingthroughhistory.com/
restaurant-prices/.
4 A
ndrew Thomas Weaver, “Seventeen Who Made History: The Founders of the Association,”
The Quarterly Journal of Speech, 45:2 (1959), p. 196.
5 Mary Catherine Bateson, Composing a Life (New York: Plume, 1990), p. 97.
6 E
rik Larson, The Devil in the White City: Murder, Magic, and Madness at the Fair that Changed
America (NY: Vintage Books, 2003), 26; quoting Paul Starrett, Changing the Skyline
(Whittlesey House, 1938), p. 311.
7 Weaver, “Seventeen,” p. 195.
8 Thanks to Judy C. Pearson for noting the range of institutional types represented in
“The Flow of the River,” Spectra, January 2004, p. 4.
9 My thanks to Trevor Parry-Giles, NCA Director of Academic and Professional Affairs, interview,
July 30, 2014. See also “More Mild Weather Due,” Chicago Daily Tribune, Nov. 28, 1914, p. 1,
http://archives.chicagotribune.com/1914/11/28/page/1/article/more-mild-weather-due.
10 Trevor Parry-Giles, interview, July 30, 2014.
11 “A Brief History of NCA,” http://www.natcom.org/historyofNCA/, and Weaver, “Seventeen,” p. 199.
12 R
upert L. Cortright, “Our Tomorrow,” The Quarterly Journal of Speech, 35:2 (1949), p. 149.
13 My thanks to Trevor Parry-Giles.
14 Andrew Thomas Weaver, “Annual Address of the President, Cincinnati 1927,” The Quarterly
Journal of Speech, 14:1 (1928), p. 128.
15 In an e-mail of November 10, 2014, Michelle Randall, NCA Director of Convention and Meetings,
reported that the 2014 convention boasts “1,121 true sessions (not including business meetings)
and 154 business meetings. There are 5,376 unique names on the program.”
16 Michael Calvin McGee, AFA-SCA Summer Conference on Argumentation, quoted by
Beverly Whitaker Long, “Both With Open Eyes,” Spectra, Feb 1986, p. 3.
17 When I say joy, I think of my dear friend and colleague Janice Hocker Rushing, for whom
joy was a guiding principle.
I
8
I
18 Jeffrey S. Passel, Gretchen Livingston, and D’Vera Cohn, “Explaining Why Minority Births
Now Outnumber White Births,” May 17, 2012, Pew Research/Social and Demographic Trends,
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/05/17/explaining-why-minority-births-now-outnumberwhite-births/.
19 Raymie E. McKerrow, “Coloring Outside the Lines: The Limits of Civility,” Spectra,
January 2001, p. 7.
20 Sandra Laframboise and Michael Anhorn, “The Way of the Two Spirited People:
Native American Concepts of Gender and Sexual Orientation,”
http://www.dancingtoeaglespiritsociety.org/twospirit.php.
21 “Cablinasian,” Urban Dictionary, http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Cablinasian.
22 Kathleen J. Turner, “Rhetorical Studies in the 21st Century: Envisioning the Possibilities.”
Southern Communication Journal, 63 (Summer 1998), p. 331.
23 Marsha Houston and Julia Wood, “Difficult Dialogues, Expanded Horizons: Communicating
Across Race and Class,” Gendered Relationships, ed. Julia Wood (Mountain View, CA:
Mayfield Press, 1996), 50-51.
24 Wilbur E. Gilman, “Unity in Diversity,” The Quarterly Journal of Speech, 38: 2 (April 1952), p. 127.
25 Anita Taylor, “1981 Presidential Address,” Spectra, 18:3 (March, 1982), p. 5.
26 “Umbrella” is a term found in, for example, Wayne Brockriede, “Presidential Message,” Spectra, 22:2
(February 1986), p. 2; Jane Blankenship, president in 1978, offered the metaphor of “constellation” in
Judy C. Pearson, “The Flow of the River,” Spectra, ( January 2004), p. 6; and
Gustav W. Friedrich suggested “Make Mine a Tossed Salad,” Spectra (December, 1989), pp. 2-5.
27 Adrian Wooldridge, Masters of Management (Harper Business 2011), reviewed by Alan Murray,
“Reworking the Workplace,” Wall Street Journal, Dec 5, 2011, A15.
28 Michael Osborn, “Our Unfinished Agenda,” Spectra, January 1989, p. 4.
29 Weaver, “Annual Address,” p. 129.
30 Robert West, “The Prospect for Speech Education,” The Quarterly Journal of Speech, [1944], p. 144.
31 Michael Sproule, “To Teach and to Serve in Communication,” Spectra, May 2007, p. 4.
32 Tom Socha, the NCA/ Hope conference, July 2014.
33 Molly Barker, “The Red Boot Coalition,” Charlotte Observer, September 9, 2014,
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2014/09/09/5163065/the-red-boot-coalition.html#.VIYt6sluow0.
34 David McCullough, “History and Knowing Who We Are,” American Heritage ( Winter 2008), p. 15.
35 Eric King Watts, “Confessions of a Thirty-Something Hip-Hop (Old) Head,” in Our Voices:
Essays in Culture, Ethnicity, and Communication, 4th ed., eds Alberto Gonzalez,
Marsha Houston, and Victoria Chen (LA: Roxbury, 2004), 194.
I
9
I