copyright by phoebe inzer proctor hollis 1977
Post on 18-Dec-2021
0 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
SPEECH COMMUNICATION CURRICULUM OF THE FUTURE; A DELPHI PROFILE
by
PHOEBE INZER PROCTOR HOLLIS, A.B., M.A.
A DISSERTATION
IN
EDUCATION
Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Texas Tech University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
the Degree of
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
Approved
Accepted
August, 1977
- - " - /
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I wish to express my appreciation to the members of my committee
for their cooperation and assistance given to me during this study.
My gratitude is extended to the chairman of my committee, Dr. Dayton
Y. Roberts, for his guidance in preparing this dissertation and to
Dr. William J. Jordan for his constant support and advice. Apprecia-
tion and thanks are extended also to Dr. Joe D. Cornett and Dr. Robert
H. Ewalt for their help and suggestions.
Above all, I am extremely grateful and deeply indebted to Dr.
Owen L. Caskey for his enduring patience and understanding throughout
this research and for his positive encouragement and guidance in com-
pleting the study.
11
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii
LIST OF TABLES ^
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION 1
Statement of the Problem 2 Purpose of the Study 3 Research Questions 3 Hypotheses 4 Definition of Terms 5 Assumptions 6 Research Design 6 Summary 7
II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 9
The Nature of Futurism 9 The Impact of Change on Higher Education 15 The Impact of Change on Speech Communication Curriculum 22
--— The Delphi Technique: A Futuristic Method of Inquiry J^
Summary 33
III. DESIGN OF THE STUDY 41
Population 41 Instrumentation 41 Procedure 56 Analysis of the Data 59
IV. RESULTS 61
Population 61 Individual Variables 61 Institutional Variables 64 Program Variables 64 Analysis of Data 65 Scientific-Humanistic Orientation Scale 95 Scientific-Humanistic Orientation Comparison 98 Summary 126
V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 127
Consensus on Speech Communication Direction 135 Conclusions I37
• » • 1 1 1
Speech Communication Curriculum of the Future 139
Recommendations for Future Study 1^1
APPENDICES
- A. Questionnaire No. 1 1 3
B. Questionnaire No. 2 1 6 C. The High Priority Problem Areas as Perceived
by the Panel of Judges 150 D. Round I Instrument 1^2 E. Round II Instrument 15°
LIST OF REFERENCES 164
IV
LIST OF TABLES
1. Descriptive Data - Percentages of Individual, Institutional, and Program Variables 63
2. Delphi Questionnaire Results in Percentages of Responses 66
3. Significant Differences Between Individual, Institutional, and Program Subgroups on Delphi Statements - Differences in Per-centage Distributions 72
4. Scientific-Humanistic Scale Score Distribution 97
5. Scientific-Humanistic Orientation Scale 99
6. Scientific-Humanistic Score Comparison by Group 104
7. One-Way Analysis of Variance - Scientific-
Humanistic Scale by Degree of Respondent 108
8. One-Way Analysis of Variance - Scientific-Humanistic Scale by Years Since Highest Degree 110
9. One-Way Analysis of Variance - Scientific-Humanistic Scale by SCA Regional Membership 112
10. One-Way Analysis of Variance - Scientific-Humanistic Scale by Speech Degree Offered 114
11. One-Way Analysis of Variance - Scientific-Humanistic Scale by Speech Communication Faculty Size 116
12. Multiple Classification Analysis of Variance -Scientific-Humanistic Scale 118
13. Scientific-Humanistic Orientation of Respondents by Criterion Variables in Percentages 120
14. Responses to Delphi Statements Based on Humanistic or Scientific Orientation 123
V
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
In the late sixties many sectors of society expressed concern
about the powerful phenomena of the knowledge explosion and the tech-
nical revolution, the drive for innovation and change, and the adapta-
tion to the accelerating rate of change. Business and professional
groups, including educational institutions, developed a greater appre-
ciation for the necessity of studying and planning for the future. In
so doing, educators realized that the future world would be completely
different from what was presently known. Oppenheimer stated the posi-
tion as follows:
In an important sense this world of ours is a new world, in which the unit of knowledge, the nature of human communities, the order of society, the order of ideas, the very notions of society and culture have changed and will not return to what they have been in the past. What is new is new not because it has never been there before, but because it has changed in quality. One thing that is new is the prevalence of newness, the changing scale and scope of change itself, so that the world alters as we walk in it, so that the years of man's life measure not some small growth or rearrangement or moderation of what he learned in childhood, but a great upheaval. What is new is that in one generation our knowledge of the natural world engulfs, upsets, and complements all knowledge of the natural world before (14:183).
To learn to live with change, to influence change so that it becomes
social progress, to humanize the institutions and the environment
would appear high on the list of future priorities.
The element of change is a potent force that permeates society
in various ways, with one of the most observable occurring in educa-
tional institutions. The educational environment within institutions
of higher learning receives the full impact of social change which
creates difficulties for educational planning (41). The educational
decisions made today will have reverberations which will be felt for
the next several decades. Consequently, it would be wise for curricu-
lum designers to anticipate that the future of education will depend
largely upon the interplay among the political future, the economic
future, and the social future. The resolution of both present and
future educational problems will hinge as much upon external conditions
as upon internal ones (10). Society and its educational institutions
are constantly changing at a rate which necessitates the curriculum of
any field of study to adapt, change, and assist the student to exist
in a world now largely dominated by technology.
In the field of Speech Communication, the impact of change may be
observed in ways that command recognition and attention. With communi-
cation being essential for contemporary living, it appears logical to
conclude that societal changes will affect communication abilities.
Therefore, the need for the present study arises from the fact that »
the element of change has permeated the very core of the Speech Com-
munication discipline. There exists a lack of agreement regarding the
future of the academic discipline of Speech Communication as a field
of study. The discipline, at this time, has not defined clearly its
objectives or goals in relationship to the total academic environment
as reflected by the Speech Communication curriculum (4).
Statement of the Problem
Many issues and trends appear within the purposes and objectives
mirrored by the present status of the Speech Communication discipline.
The issues are exemplified by divergent opinions of experts within the
field relating to the goals or objectives of the discipline and its
curriculum. This study concerned the problem of establishing consen-
sus from Speech Communication administrators regarding future Speech
Communication instructional objectives.
Purpose of the Study
This descriptive study was designed to investigate major issues
existing within the discipline of Speech Communication and their im-
plications for the Speech Communication curriculum. To date there has
not been a systematic investigation to evaluate the attitudes of the
profession in relation to positions to be taken on the issues or to
the future curriculum goals of the discipline. With the possibility
that ignoring the existing issues may well leave the discipline un-
prepared to meet the demands in the future, the principal purpose of
the present study was to reach a consensus of attitudes about the
future goals of the discipline concerning the curricula. The study
focused on agreement concerning instructional objectives and the major
research orientations of the administrative officers within the disci-
pline. Resolution of most of these issues should have a significant
impact on the future of the Speech Communication discipline as a pro-
fession and on its curriculum revision.
Research Questions
In order to answer the problem as stated and to fulfill the pur-
pose of the study, a number of specific questions were posed. These
questions dealt with conclusions which were supported by the collection
of data and provided the basis of the study. The research questions
which permitted these conclusions and, in turn, established the basis
for the rejection or failure to reject the hypotheses were:
1. How will the major research orientations be reflected through-
out the Speech Communication discipline?
2. To what extent does the Speech Communication administrative
leadership align with the possible major direction of the Speech Com-
munication curriculum?
3. At what future date does the Speech Communication administra-
tive leadership who concur in the desirability of elements of the
Speech Communication curriculum forecast the occurrence?
4. To what extent is the agreement with scientific or humanistic
orientations of Speech Communication administrators a function of in-
dividual, institutional and program variables?
5. To what extent is the agreement with and desirability of
possible major directions of the Speech Communication curriculum a
function of individual, institutional, and program variables?
6. To what extent do significant interactions occur between the
scientific and humanistic orientations of Speech Communication adminis-
trators and the individual, institutional and program variables?
Hypotheses
The problem defined by this study and the research questions
which were posed elicited data which addressed conclusions appropriate
to the results of the data gathering instrument. The analysis and
synthesis of the data were utilized to test the following hypotheses:
Null Hypothesis I: There will be no significant difference be-
tween desirable Speech Communication curriculum objectives as fore-
casted by Speech Communication administrators on the basis of the
individual variables of sex, highest degree attained, recency of degree,
Speech Communication Association membership, and participation in pro-
fessional organizations.
Null Hypothesis II: There will be no significant difference be-
tween desirable Speech Communication curriculum objectives as fore-
casted by Speech Communication administrators on the basis of the
institutional variables of institutional size, institutional support,
institutional type, and Speech Communication Association geographic
region.
Null Hypothesis III: There will be no significant difference
between desirable Speech Communication curriculum objectives as fore-
casted by Speech Communication administrators on the basis of the
program variables of organizational pattern, Speech Communication
degrees offered, and Speech Communication Full-time Equivalent faculty
size.
Null Hypothesis IV: There will be no significant difference be-
tween desirable Speech Communication curriculum objectives as fore-
casted by Speech Communication administrators identified with the
scientific and humanistic orientations.
Null Hypothesis V: There will be no significant interaction be-
tween the scientific and humanistic orientations to the Speech Com-
munication discipline as a function of the individual, institutional,
and program variables.
Defínition of Terms
"Scientific" and "humanistic" orientations are defined as the
scores which result from the responses on the questionnaire which
present options between agreeing or disagreeing with statements that
incorporate the two orientations to Speech Communication curriculum
design. In this context the "scientific" orientation becomes the
scientific research method of investigating spoken s)nnbolic interaction
while the "humanistic" orientation is defined as an orientation toward
the traditional performance areas such as oral interpretation, voice
and articulation, debate, and parliamentary procedure.
Assumptions
Inherent within this investigation and study are the assumptions
that education is not an isolated set of phenomena independent of '
other sectors of society, and that the educational system must be
capable of planning in conjunction with change that occurs in the
technological and social environments. Speech Communication as an
academic discipline will find it imperative to effect the necessary
changes and adopt an appropriate posture with regard to its place in
the educational and social structures.
Research Design
This study was descriptive in nature and employed the Delphi
Technique method of data gathering to reach a consensus of opinion,
probability, and the desirability of the elements of Speech Communica-
tion curriculum of the future. The definition of the population in
this study was the chief administrative officers of Speech Communica-
tion areas in institutions listed in The 1975-76 Speech Communication
Directory (65) which made each member of the population a potential
respondent. No sampling procedure, therefore, was necessary since the
total population, as defined, was available for survey.
In answering the problem of this study, the appropriateness of
methodology to the problem and the selection of types of analysis are
congruent. The testing of the stated hypotheses required statistical
analysis, the result of which led to conclusions of statistical sig-
nificance. The conclusions then were applied to the stated hypotheses.
Differences between Speech Communication administrators with op-
posing academic orientations as they responded to desirability of
Speech Communication curriculum objectives were tested using an analy-
sis of crossbreaks with significance tested by use of the Chi Square
statistic. Significant differences between institutional, and indi-
vidual, and program variables in appropriate combinations were tested
to determine if significant differences existed by the use of t tests
and by the application of analysis of variance statistical techniques.
When statistical differences were inferred, the t test for significant
differences and intra-group and range tests were applied in order to
determine where within the variables such differences existed. In
presenting results of the research, descriptive statistics were applied
in order to summarize characteristics of the respondents and their
responses.
Summary
With the element of change evident throughout the Speech Communi-
cation discipline, the study was designed to investigate the major
issues that exist within the discipline and their implications for the
curriculum. Chapter II will present an overview of related literature
that includes the Nature of Futurism, the Impact of Change on Higher
Education, the Impact of Change on Speech Communication Curriculum, and
8
the Delphi Technique. Chapter III presents the design of the study,
stating the sequential development of the instrument used in the study,
and Chapter IV presents the results from the questionnaire. Chapter V
includes the conclusions drawn from the study and a forecast of a
future Speech Communication curriculum founded upon the Delphi
Questionnaire.
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
To understand the futuristic theme of this study, it is essential
to assume a perspective that recognizes the existence of certain fac-
tors inherent in futuristics. Among those factors readily observable
are that the future results from the decisions of today accompanied by
forces arising from past actions, which to a large extent is philo-
sophical; that a movement is present, which emphasizes the future by
giving an opportunity for input as to the possible composition and
development of a discipline in the future; that alternative positions
and goals appear, showing that the future role of any discipline can
be affected and determined to a great degree by the present thinking
and trends proposed by the leaders within the area of study. With
these factors relevant to the study, the review of literature will be
categorized and discussed in four principal areas:
The Nature of Futurism
The Impact of Change on Higher Education
The Impact of Change on Speech Communication Curriculum
The Delphi Technique: A Futuristic Method of Inquiry
The Nature of Futurism
For centuries man has been intrigued by a desire to know more
about tomorrow. His fascination with the future has been evident
throughout history and has been illustrated by turning to astrology,
oracles, and prophecy (78). The intensity and styles of forecasting
changed with each epoch of time, but basic curiosity concerning the
10
"tomorrow" never died (47). One apparent reason for the great concern
about the future rests with the fact that the term "future" implies
"change," and the "time" yet to come relates to changes that are predi-
cated upon certain assumptions found to be evident within a culture
(47).
During the decade of the sixties, though, a more intense and
organized concern for the study of the future became apparent. This
concern was greatly stimulated by the enormous increase of technology
coupled with the knowledge explosion, a sharp increase in the rate of
social change, and the complexity of society in general (48, 49, 70).
The combination of these forces gave rise to such issues as environ-
mental preservation, population growth, inflation, food supply, and
nuclear proliferation; all of which concern many philosophers, sociol-
ogists, scientists, and the general public. These issues created
speculations regarding the development of new perspectives and methods
for approaching the future. Social scientists thus began experimenting
with various approaches for improving the understanding of future al-
ternatives. The continued efforts of interested persons spawned the
so-called discipline of futuristics (47). Cornish clarified the dis-
cipline as:
Futuristics: A field of activity that seeks to identify, analyze, and evaluate possible future changes in human life and the world. The world implies a rational (rather than mystical) approach to the future but also accepts artistic, imaginative, and experiential approaches as often useful and valid contributions (18:50).
And, as Shane noted concerning this field of study:
It is a new discipline concerned with sharpening the data and improving the processes on the basis of which policy decisions are made in various fields of human endeavor such as business, govern-ment, or education, The purpose of the discipline is to help
11 policy makers choose wisely - in terms of their purposes and values - among alternative courses of action that are open to leadership at a given time (61:1).
The development of the discipline and its new breed of experts
differ from astrologers and prophets of the past. The futurists are
almost completely uninterested in making prophecies, but rather turn
their efforts toward forecasting trends and probabilities which are
difficult "because probabilistic statements involve alternative roads
and conditions" (10:32). Futurists try to use rational methods which
in the process has enabled them to develop concepts and techniques
conducive to intelligent thinking about the future (72:vi-xvi). Under-
lying their thinking and their techniques are four basic assumptions
that guide the field of futuristics:
1. The future which actually occurs will be determined partly by history and physical reality, partly by chance, and partly by human choice. The relationships among these factors will vary according to the amount of time one is looking ahead and the nature of the choices made.
2. At any given moment, therefore, there exists a range of al-ternative futures which might come about. History and physi-cal reality determine which futures are in that range. Change and human choice will determine which one of those possible futures will actually happen.
3. True "freedom of choice" only exists when one understands the full range of options available and the possible consequences of each option.
4. The purpose of futuristics, therefore, is not to predict the future, but rather to improve our understanding of the range of alternative futures which might come about and of the role that both chance and deliberate choice might play in either achieving or avoiding any particular future (72:vi-xvi).
Nevertheless, a misconception commonly held by many individuals is that
futuristics implies the prediction of coming events, but as Kauffman
noted, "...'the future' is a zone of potentiality rather than 'that
which is going to happen'" (39:11).
12
The major task of futurists is to assemble results provided by
specialists working on complex problems and issues within specialized
fields and to provide some systematic order for study and treating of
the possibilities that are likely to arise with the future. More
specifically, Amara described futurists as "constantly identifying
possible consequences of present developments and choices" (2:4). He
further noted:
In actuality, futurists attempt to describe alternative futures; to characterize the state of knowledge or uncertainty; to provide early warning signs of change; to identify possible consequences of developments and choices; to understand underlying change processes; and to gain a greater understanding of one's time and risk preferences (2:4).
Thus in the attempt to describe a potential future condition, the futur-
ists consider what Toffler (69) termed as the "three P's": Possible,
Probable, and Preferable. The attempt often results in a "forecast"
which is any statement in reference to a future possibility, including
the factors related to it and the likely effect on other events. The
process of discovering such information is termed "forecasting"
(39:12). Joseph viewed forecasting as:
...a formalized and systematic methodology for determining future possibilities that allow us to move beyond "pure speculative con-jecture" about the future...It can be defined as a system of quantified estimates of changes and alternatives, or a prediction of the timing, character, and degree of change of the parameters or attributes associated with the design, evolution, or process of something according to a specified system of reasoning (36:10).
Forecasting is essential to the management of the future because
it identifies the bi-polar views among past, present, and future. The
process enables the futurists to see where ideas from the past are
heading, to identify new ideas that start trends, and to establish
their impact. The advantage of such forecasting is that it enables a
13
forecast which makes visible the desirable future opportunities. An-
other advantage of this type of forecasting is that a polarization
occurs when the forecast makes visible certain trends (36). As Joseph
noted, though, precision in forecasting is crucial but is limited by
four factors:
the data inputs used to obtain a forecast; the system of logic applied to data to obtain a forecast; diversity and multiplicity of forecasting techniques; and amount of effort expended to ob-tain a forecast (36:10).
Although forecasting may provide information about possible events
and change, the process is not self-sufficient (39). Instead, the best
possible picture of the future comes from combining the forecasting
process with various techniques used by the futurists for the purpose
of organizing and assembling the information into "alternative figures"
(39:12). Employed by the futurists are the different techniques for
identifying the alternative positions of the future. These techniques
illustrate how others think about the future, and when in use force
clarification in thinking about the future and the manner by which the
future is designed. The major tools for the formulations of futurists
environments are the Delphi Technique, the Cross-Impact Matrix, Scenario
Construction and Futures History, Value-Shift Assessment, and Futures
History Analysis Review. The function of each of these tools is mainly
pedagogical and may be defined briefly as follows:
1. The Delphi Technique elicits and refines the opinions of a group of individuals to arrive at "convergent" or "polarized" views of one or more possible future events.
2. The Cross-Impact Matrix program attempts to deal with the problem of interdependency of events.
3. Scenario Construction and Future Histories are expository and reflect methods which help a writer to clarify bis feelings about causality and to examine discrete moments in future times.
14
4. Value-Shift Assessment may be a part of a scenario or futures history or may simply attend the examination of goals by an individual planner. Presumably, a goal set in the future will be accompanied by certain value-shifts that should be predicted and studied against the goal set for the future.
5. Future History Analysis and Review, which is similar to the Program Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT), examines the array of events and activities that may cause the achievement of a goal at a moment in a long-term future (82).
Also, recognition and treatment must be considered for the great psycho-
logical jolt or trauma that accompanies any sudden upheaval or change
in both the substantive and the procedural accomodations utilized to
achieve a desired objective. Not all thinking need be a logical cause
and effect pattern, as other methods do exist. Certainly one of the
compelling features about futures thinking is that it forces considera-
tion of available options along with reconsideration of philosophical
and cultural factors; critical review of concepts about man and the
world; and consequently, of destiny and what is meant by purposes,
organizational characteristics, programs, and methodologies. Futures
thinking demands looking at objectives, methods, and values (33).
Futures planning, therefore, relies heavily on the rational study
of anticipated developments and their consequences. Its concentration
is mainly on the creation of probabilistic environments in which alter-
native consequences and possibilities are given careful consideration
and study before a choice is made. Finally, the focus of the field of
futuristics is not on reforming the past or reconciling the errors of
the present but is on conceptualizing and creating a better environment
from considering alternatives and their consequences before they are
translated into action.
15
The Impact of Change on Higher Education
Much of the literature concerning the future of education has
addressed the relationship between social change and education. Edu-
cational planners have realized that the future of society and educa-
tion cannot be separated and planned for independently of one another,
but that equal consideration must be given to both. Neither can they
ignore the projections made by those in futuristics. Educators con-
cerned with futures planning have recognized that social decisions
made today have educational consequences for tomorrow and that the
impact of the decisions will be felt by the present day students for
several years to come. The following review of the literature will
illustrate concern for social change, its impact upon the schools and
the students, and its significance for educational planning.
Social change has been the process by which the future invaded
people's lives with the passage of time. Toffler in Future Shock (68)
described the extent of social change and the impact upon the individ-
ual noting that the acceleration of this change often produced disas-
trous consequences, particularly for those unprepared to cope with the
shock or impact. Toffler especially warned his readers that too much
change in too short a period of time resulted in a condition he de-
scribed as future shock. What produced the magnitude of the shock
resulted from imbalance between the pace of environmental change and
the limited pace of human response. Consequently, the rate of change
within a time period has more implications for the welfare of society
than the direction of the change (68).
The element of change has permeated society in several respects
and, as a result, has caused society to be in a constant state of flux.
16
Noticeable results from the impact of change can be observed in the
population attributes and peculiarities. Characteristic of the United
States population is the high degree of ethnic and racial heterogeneity
coupled by regional differences. The result is the creation of a
multi-cultural, multi-racial society in which almost every nationality
and race can be found. Another characteristic is that the population
is becoming increasingly urban. From a nation which was predominately
agricultural and rural, the nation has now become one of urban dwellers.
This shift may be attributed to such changes in the economy as well as
increased industrialization, availability of modern technology, and
better work opportunities and advancements. These, in turn, have
created a mobile society (46). Thus, the rapidity of change and the
impact from the change on society has caused much of the so-called
typical American way of life to be interpreted as being atterapts to
adjust and to adapt to the stress caused by the element of change (41).
Pressures from contemporary society have produced changes in the
social institutions, and the pressures from such change, in turn, have
affected contemporary society. Among the social institutions most
directly affected by change have been the schools, the homes, and the
economic organizations and structures. Illustrative of this effect are
many of the recent social movements that occurred in the United States.
These movements, such as the civil rights movement, the women's libera-
tion movement, the affirmative action movement, resulted from pressure
to achieve greater personal security and welfare. From society exert-
ing the pressure for change, legislation was passed and the laws were
modified or changed as a result. Ashby stated that "institutions of
society, like species of animals, adapt themselves not in anticipation
17
of change in the environment but in response to changes that have al-
ready occurred" (7:145-146).
Shane (60) and Rubin (58) essentially agreed to the same in that
education reflected social change and social trends rather than created
them. In essence, they conclude that the schools have served as a
mirror for the changes that occur in society. The impact of this
change on the educational system has been well documented (27, 50).
Throughout two hundred years this country has been served by an edu-
cational system that was flexible enough to receive and respond to
social changes. This system responded by meeting the challenges and
demands of a social order that believed in industrial progress and
that cultivated the elements of change to escape stagnation.
In response, the structure of the educational system submitted
to the demands of the society. Noticeable changes occurred when the
schôols responded to the needs of society during the industrialization
of this country. During this period of time, mass education became
the theme of the educational system in order to provide young people
with an introduction into life in the existing industrial society (68).
The nineteenth century industrialization created a shift in the social
order that directly affected America's expectations of the schools,
and particularly the colleges and universities (27).
The contemporary educational structure and its related problems
also have been affected by change. They have resulted from a period
of history marked by intense economic growth, war, and progress in
science and technology. The pinnacle of these enormous changes was
reached in the period from 1920 to the present (27). The rapidity
with which these forces of change acted upon the schools created many
18
reactions that have in time caused dissatisfaction and unrest in many
of the institutions of higher learning. Wilson described the situation
Virtually all colleges and universities are now caught up in the vital concerns of a rapidly changing society. The former inde-pendence or autonomy is being displaced by interdependence with other institutions and agencies (81:24).
Upon closer examination, much of the social change has caused
discontent and dissatisfaction with the present educational system
(23, 24, 26, 28, 62, 68). Higher education has not escaped the dif-
ficulties in responding to society and the various needs of the people.
As Toynbee noted, "There seems today to be a worldwide consensus that
the traditional system of higher education does not meet, any longer,
the educational needs of a more and more rapidly changing society"
(71:xix). Agreeing, Eurich acknowledged that education must be vastly
improved to meet the challenges of the present and the future and that
"looking to the future of education therefore inevitably means looking
to the future of society" (23:164).
In meeting the challenges of the present and the near future
called for by educators such as Toynbee and Eurich, America would be
entering an age in which education would become a dominant coordinating
force for society (24). For education to attain this new position of
prominence, a perspective must be maintained that requires the use of
educational futures - one that employs futuristic thinking - whereby
educators would probe the future and offer advice on the consequences
of choosing various alternatives (61, 62).
Educational planning requires meeting the demands of a changing
society by considering all possibilities with alternative avenues and
alternative courses of action (61). Eurich charged that too many
19
educators, today, limit future planning by operating on a piece-meal
ad hoc basis, particularly in long-range planning (22). They fail to
see the exact image of the educational future that they seek to create,
Consequently, Eurich warned:
If the educators do not plan for the changes that are inevitable in the near future, the changes will take place at random in response to specific crises and to pressure from special interest groups. Instead of a tapestry we will find ourselves with a badly made patch work quilt (23:173).
To avoid considering a "good" future as merely the present with its
problems solved, educational futurists must restructure the American
Educational enterprise for a constantly changing society (62, 68, 73).
Educational futurism must consider the possible impact of social
trends and consider available options in conjunction with them (60).
Much of the quality of education in the future will depend upon
a series of decisions made today and their ensuing consequences (59,
60). Within the educational realm, Rubin summarized the importance
of futurism when he stated:
...futuristics implies the re-thinking of dominant values and priorities, the determination of desirable and undesirable long-range developments, the plotting of a sensible course of action, and the formulation of strategies and plans through which the desired ends can most effectively be accomplished (57:76).
The future of society and the future of the schools are inseparable.
Contemporary society requires comprehensive educational opportunities
for its emerging generations in order to help them cope more effective-
ly with the rapidity of change. The element of change constantly has
influenced the social order by functioning not only as an accelerator,
but also an instigator within the educational system. Scanlon charged:
We sometimes tend to forget...that educational innovations not only result from social changes - they cause other changes. A
20
kind of domino effect ensues, wherein modifications beget modifi-cations in a seemingly endless continuum (59:87).
Futures educational planning commands the respect of anticipatory
changes as well as current changes arising both within and without the
educational system.
With the formulation of the needed strategies and plans, educa-
tors have looked to the past and observed the present in order to help
guide and shape the future. The history of curriculum change has il-
lustrated that changes in the curriculum more often occurred in re-
sponse to societal fluctuations than from innovative techniques on
the part of theorists. Scanlon has stated, "That it is our image of
the future that largely will determine what kind of curriculum is
planned" (59:87). He also reinforced the thought that schools and
societies do not operate as separate entities and that any contempla-
tive change in an institutional program cannot disregard the status
of the society.
Bell (10) echoed a similar position for the curriculum designer
when he advocated a program of schooling deeply intermeshed with
societal difficulties. He, as well as Lasswell (44), Rubin (58), and
Suppes (67) observed that education today must confront normative
questions. Bell stated:
This does not mean the schools have to become propagandists; in fact, if they become propagandists they become self-defeating. But there are societal questions underlying all problems of social management that have to be explored (10:47).
From the societal projections made by Kahn and Wiener (38), educational
planners must construct a curriculum for the future that will provide
learning experiences which teach students the arts of negotiations,
compromise, tactics for conflict resolutions, and decision-making
21
skills. Bell included the suggestion that education should "provide
learning experiences that foster a kind of national-mindedness in
future generations" (10:51).
All disciplines of higher education will suffer from a future
created by fate if educational forecasting does not occur (58:190).
Projections of likely developments will illustrate the possibilities
of both the desirable and the undesirable future which will enable
educators to plan accordingly. Rubin, in expressing the need, commented;
To discover what will work, it frequently is necessary to elimi-nate, sequentially, what will not work. It follows then that attempts to deal with the future have a pragmatic value if only because such attempts must begin with problems already manifest in the present...The present is prologue and today's problems are inexorably linked with those of tomorrow (58:191).
A growing awareness has resulted that the field of futuristics
has implications for educational use. In the words of Toffler:
The ultimate purpose of futurism in education is not to create elegantly complex, well ordered, accurate images of the future, but to help learners cope with real life crisis, opportunities, and perils. It is to strengthen the individual's practical ability to anticipate and adapt to change, whether through in-vention, informal acquiesance, or through intelligent resistance (70:13).
If education is to meet the demands of a changing society, it
will require the projecting and forecasting of the future, and treat-
ment of the structural and philosophical changes necessary to bring
the emerging culture in line with a desirable future. Such changes
would inevitably require educational innovation in curriculum, metho-
dology, teaching techniques, and perhaps basic organization. Educa-
tional change is most clearly reflected in curriculum design, regard-
less of its source or intent. The futurists who write about the
society which will be and the educational foundation of that society
22
are consistent in stressing the impact of this fundamental interaction.
The curriculum at all levels of education seeks to accomplish this
objective through educational planning, and nowhere is it more in
evidence than in higher education. As has been pointed out, all aca-
demic disciplines in higher education have the tacit charge to look
to the future of their own processes and content. Nowhere in the
structure of higher education is the charge more important than in
the Speech Communication discipline.
The Impact of Change on Speech Communication Curriculum
The academic discipline of Speech secured its place in the system
of education by establishing an area sensitive to the demands of the
society that it served. Throughout its history, this discipline has
shown that it was a field of study capable of transition and modifi-
cation by reflecting changes in keeping with the manifested trends.
Speech courses long have been taught as essential parts of the higher
educational curriculum and have been recognized as being integral in
the education of the whole man (12, 35). From the days of the ancient
Greek rhetoric and poetics through the era of Roman oratory, competent
skills in communication were considered necessary as preparation for
life's activities. During the Middle Ages, rhetoric remained as im-
portant subject matter by being one of the "Seven Liberal Arts" and
has continued as a part of the curriculum ever since (17). The present
day Speech curriculum remains rich from past tradition, but with the
ever changing demands made by modern society, the field of speech must
keep in step with the times. The Speech curriculum holds the promise
of the future in providing the substance and method whereby the com-
plexity of modern life may be understood and passed to each new generation,
23
The importance of competent communication skills has been recog-
nized in the past and is equally recognizable today. In this modern
age of constant change and highly accelerated technological develop-
ment, communication skills so essential to man in contemporary society
have been clearly demonstrated (66). The communication skills shown
to be necessary for survival and required for upward mobility have
been documented by Cartwright (15). He placed the importance of com-
munication abilities within contemporary context by stating, "Communi-
cation is the mechanism by which interpersonal influence is exerted.
Without communication there would be no group norms, group goals, or
organized group action" (15:7-8). Likewise Smith stressed the mastery
of basic speech concepts for the contemporary man when he asserted:
...any person seeking genuine growth of skill in managing himself through a lifetime as speaker and listener must either ground his behavior in an understanding of the basic concepts of speech-communication or else abandon all hopes of rational adaptation to the rapidly changing circumstances which face us all (63:33).
Consequently, the academic field of Speech Communication must not only
allow for the acquisition of competent thought-transference skills,
but also through its educational planning be aware of the future com-
petency required by society (16, 66).
From the constant rate of change experienced in the last several
years, each decade brought to the discipline new and different demands
along with the needs for adaptation. For example, in the decade of
the fifties, the Speech curriculum was composed mainly of the tradi-
tional basic courses, such as persuasion, public speaking, and classi-
cal rhetoric, mainly in preparation for the business world. It
remained much the same until Sputnik shocked society into realizing
the soft complacency that existed in all sectors. The easy cushioning
24
of the fifties no longer remained. Rapid advancement of technology
and the emphasis on the space program brought new demands and adapta-
tion to the curriculum in the sixties. A very technical and scienti-
fic approach to subject content occurred in many academic areas,
Within the discipline of Speech, noticeable emphasis on behavioral
research resulted, and many of the traditional courses began assuming
new perspectives. Investigation into the process of communication
created an empirical approach in courses that provided areas for study
never before offered. Consequently, the Speech curriculum reflected
a response to the demands that the existing technical society placed
upon it. As Braden described the field of endeavor:
It is that the discipline of speech is never static; no one ever completely masters it; each decade brings new demands and neces-sity for adaptation and growth. The field is an ever-growing, dynamic one (12:7).
As discussed earlier, the myriad of perplexing problems now fac-
ing the educational establishment requires major adjustments within
the system of higher education, and in particular within the Speech
Communication discipline. The resulting changes will have profound
effects upon the educational endeavors of the future. Howell observed
the difference as, "We in the education business find ourselves looking
at our curriculum from a changed perspective. A contemporary affairs
orientation appears where it was conspicuously lacking before" (31:5).
The young people presently enrolled in the schools will be entering
the most productive, and publicly, the most influential period of
their lives. These young citizens will take charge of "not today's
society but rather a 'more complex' society that lies only a few years
ahead" (33:25). Accordingly, contemporary educational planning must
25
consider the effects it is likely to have upon society within the
country and inferentially upon the entire world. The process of the
educational system today will have repercussions well into the mid-
twenty-first century which will include the productive period of life
of currently enrolled elementary school children, most of whom will
reach their mid-twenties by the year 2000 (58:207). Futuristic study
in education, and specifically in Speech Communication, of the type
which seeks to define the consequences of present day planning and
decisions provides a glimpse of the future which allows development
of alternative futures when necessary. In support of this planning,
Roever advised:
Now some may view with skepticism what they believe to be the "passing fad" of futurism. Some may view what they believe to be idle speculation without adequate methodology to predict the future (but they should not make that judgment without carefully examining the Delphi technique, computer simulation, technologi-cally based extrapolations, General Systems theory and the like) and some may say that it is nothing new to look at the future. I happen to think it is new to look at the future through the eyes of "futurism" if only in the sense that futurism has provided us with a heuristic metaphor that sets our minds ajar to specu-late, prophesy, prove, coddle, manipulate, and perhaps MOLD some of our future (56:11).
Present day educational planning must, by its very nature, con-
sider the future direction of any field of academic study (55, 66)
and the desired goals of the respective areas (8). Yet some disciplines
within higher education remain in disagreement regarding their proper
goals. The field of Speech Communication as an academic discipline is
faced with recurring controversial situations which have existed with-
in the profession for several decades and which will have an impact on
curriculum goals of the future (5, 79). A growing fragmentation with-
in the discipline has been noticed which results in a "...thin roof
over five or six discrete disciplines..." (63:2). Another issue regards
26
differences in research approaches thereby creating a division in the
discipline which produces the atmosphere that the discipline is striv-
ing to be consensual (80). Wallace described the situation, ",.,as
we look to the future, that we would do well not to dilute our ener-
gies or waste our substance through unnecessary controversy between
'traditionalists' and 'behaviorists'" (76:4), Finally, another
situation is that professionals have not clearly defined the objec-
tives of the discipline in relationship to the total academic arena
nor to the various sub-areas of study that exist within the discipline.
Applbaum noted the situation as, "Unfortunately, our academic disci-
pline seems to exist at times without making an effort to clearly
define its objectives in relationship to the total academic environ-
ment" (4:2). He also noted that a consensus within the discipline
regarding the specific purpose in the future has been lacking, and
Applbaum warned that because of this existing situation:
Speech Communication departments cannot expect to have the con-tinued support of students, institutions, and communities if they cannot explain clearly what their curriculum is supposed to accomplish (4:2).
Historically, the Speech Communication discipline has provided
activities in the arts and humanities, the social sciences, and the
natural sciences. These diverse concerns ranged from scientific
investigation of the etiology of communicative disorders, through the
humanistic studies in rhetoric, public address, oral interpretation
and theater, to the social sciences in the study of communication be-
havior. With this diversification, the very breadth of the speech
communication arts and sciences poses a dilemma (43). Attempts by
authorities in the discipline to alleviate recurring issues resulted
27
in several national conferences where specific conflicts and goals
were emphasized. These meetings originated with the 1963 conference
on graduate education in speech pathology and audiology, and the 1966
conference on theater research, and followed by the 1968 New Orleans
Conference on Research and Instructional Development (43). In 1970
speech scholars attending the National Conference on Rhetoric dealt
with many of these problems (11). The most recent conference was held
in Memphis in 1974 representing an effort by professional educators to
prompt a higher degree of excellence in teaching and research (51).
Although recommendations for specific sub-areas of study resulted
from these conferences, the discipline as a whole continues to reflect
dissension and dissatisfaction (9, 34, 63). Specifically, this dis-
content has been manifested mainly in differences in approaches to
human communication research (scientific vs. humanistic) and in the
justification of the field of study to the total academic arena (5,
80). As a result, the discipline suffers from a "two-world" view
represented by two distinct groups with different names and investiga-
tions:
...those who count a lot, who identify themselves with behavioral investigations using methods of the social sciences, are identi-fied as "communication scientists" who do "communication studies," and people who read a lot of history or speeches and produce speculative observations are "rhetorical scholars" who do "rhe-torical studies" (5:76).
Or as Sloan asked, "What on earth are these houses? 'Humanist' and
'behaviorist?' 'Rhetorician' and 'communicator?' 'Critic-artist' and -
gulp - 'critic-scientist?'" (63:1) According to Arnold, the fault with
a dichotomous view implies that the discipline actually contains two
distinct theories of communication:
28
The separatist view specifieá two populations of hypothesis testers who allegedly make up the world of research. One popula-tion does historical-critical testing, it is implied. The other population does experimental and other quantificational testing (5:77).
With the endorsement of the scientific approach to research re-
sulting from scholars attending the New Orleans Conference on Research
and Instructional Development, the present trend for the discipline
appears toward the social science orientation of study and research
(43, 55). In reality, this approach to the study of speech communica-
tion tended to eliminate much of the traditional curriculum, which
only adds to the dissatisfaction evident throughout the discipline.
Although leaders from Speech Communication at the National Conference
on Rhetoric endorsed broadening the concept of rhetoric and its scope
of inquiry, they mainly reaffirmed and strengthened the rhetorical
approach to research. The choice now facing communication research
appeared clear. While not reflecting diametrically opposing views,
the two dominant stances did emphasize approaches which were drasti-
cally different in orientation. Cries of rapprochement immediately
resulted. Brockriede (13) called for the blending of science and
criticism and appealed for reduction or elimination of polarization
in order that humanists and scientists "can seek knowledge together
to the profit of themselves and their disciplines" (13:138). Even
the professional organization of the discipline, the Speech Communica-
tion Association, recognized the growing division and urged that
measures be taken to strengthen the discipline. Although these dif-
fering views have not fractionalized the discipline to the point of
disintegration, Speech Communication still mirrors unrest which ul-
timately will affect its future direction (5, 9, 56, 76, 79).
29
With these conditions so prevalent, the element of change has
permeated the entire field of study with an impact that has shaken the
very core of the discipline. Many of the colleges and universities
offer courses representative of both theoretical constructs, but do
not appear to have reached agreement upon instructional objectives to
be achieved.
As Applbaum noted:
This is in part a reflection of the present curricular framework. We master selected areas within our field, but rarely attempt to integrate them. Unfortunately, I see little in our actual be-havior that indicates an imminent change. Indeed, the harsh reality of our present dilemma is only blurred by an abundance of hypocrisy. While many scholars continue to pledge allegiance to the traditional concept of a well-rounded program on the under-graduate level, the distribution of requirements and proliferation of highly specialized courses constituting the new curricula make a mockery of the so-called general speech communication degree (4:1).
The discontent resulting from the division between scientific and
humanistic orientations have led members of the discipline to question
the status of the profession and of the curriculum in institutions of
higher learning (31). This division has led to a lack of agreement
in curriculum goals and, particularly, discipline goals. To agree on
future goals is crucial, for the curriculum offered by each school
must not only demonstrate the goals of the discipline, but also must
include curriculum content which will ultimately lead to achieving
these goals. The colleges and universities can only then provide
courses of instruction which show the position taken and which will
provide a curriculum designed to meet the communication complexities
expected of the future.
In order to identify the curriculum goals of the discipline and
the means for achieving them, the methods employed by the futurists
30
lend themselves to such use. Of particular importance is the Delphi
Technique, which is a futuristic method that allows respondents to
state their opinions, probability, and desirability of a given situa-
tion, thereby formulating a forecast of what may occur. A brief re-
sume of the Delphi Technique and its use will serve to illustrate its
usefulness in educational planning.
The Delphi Technique: A Futuristic Method of Inquiry
The decision-making process has always been an important element
in educational planning, yet it presents a number of procedural dif-
ficulties. Whenever agreement or consensus is needed, the usual
method has been to utilize a round-table discussion with influential
individuals pooling their opinions in face-to-face interaction. This
is not the "brain-storming" type as usually understood. Empirical
studies from the past decades illustrate some serious problems en-
countered in this type of face-to-face discussion. Some of the major
difficulties include:
1. Influence of dominant individuals: the opinion of the group
Y^ is usually influenced by the individual talking the most, but the
research shows little correlation between pressure of speech and
knowledge.
2. Noise: much of the discussion is often irrelevant and biased
as a result of semantic difficulties or individual interest rather
than relating to the problem that needs solving.
3. Group pressure for conformity: individual judgment yields
to group pressure. Particularly, the experiments conducted by Asch
(6) illustrates how individual judgraent can be distorted from group
pressures.
- '1
31
With these difficulties so pronounced, the Delphi Technique was
developed as a method to avoid face-to-face confrontation, yet inte-
grate the opinions of experts without sacrificing or compromising in-
dividual suggestions and ideas./ This technique was first publicly » 4
described by Olaf Helmer and Nicholas Rescher (30) in 1959 and has
subsequently undergone much testing. It has been found to be an ef-
fective approach to long-range forecasting in education.
v .. The Delphi process was developed by Norman Dalkey and his asso-
ciates at the Rand Corporation more than twenty years ago. A series
of studies investigated the problem of using group information more
effectively and of improving the statistical treatment of individual
opinions. In 1953, Dalkey and Helmer introduced an additional feature
for investigation, iteration with controlled feedback. The set of
procedures that were developed received the name of "Delphi." The
derivation of the label "Delphi" relates to the Delphic Oracle of
ancient Greece, but Dalkey is of the opinion that the label is mis-
leading, since he maintains that "there is little that is oracular
about the methods" (20:15). The Delphi Technique was originally used
by the Rand Corporation to forecast technological developments per-
taining to urgent defense problems and their consequences; thus like
the ancient Greek oracle, it was used to look into the future (20).
In the 1959 article of Helmer and Rescher, the classic definition
^ o' of the Delphi Technique was given as "a carefully designed program of
sequential individual interrogations (best conducted by questionnaires)
interspersed with information and opinion feedback..." (30:47). This
technique eliminates the necessity of committee activity and the prob-
lems encountered in the face-to-face interaction. According to Dalkey,
32
the procedure has three main features: anonymity, controlled feed-
back, and statistical group response. The three features thus reduce
the major problem areas found in the face-to-face interaction previ-
ously outlined; anon^nmity reduces dominant individuals; controlled
feedback reduces noise; and statistical group response reduces group
pressure for conformity (20).
The Delphi Technique is an important evaluative tool from both
its process and the product which results. It is one of several ex-
ploratory methods which have been described as being more intuitive
than definitive, but it holds promise for investigating some areas
which do not respond readily to other research designs. The basic
operational principle of the technique is that raany individuals judg-
ing an event or probable occurrence will more likely produce a valid
evaluation of what might happen in the future than one individual,
even though he may possess extensive knowledge about a probable event.
It assumes that respondents will use rational judgraent, shared infor-
mation, professional experiences, and other factors which raake them
better informed. Further, it assumes that respondents do not just
"guess" at the probability of future events. The technique, therefore,
is used when an investigator wishes to separate "hope" from "likelihood"
of an event or an occurrence. The Delphi Technique does not raake
projections, but does raove into a future time frame based upon evalua-
tion of individuals who are in the best position to judge what may
happen in the future. Its plausibility, therefore, does not seera to
be arguable to a raatheraatical certainty. With the substantive explan-
atory quality of the technique being questioned, the plausibility of
forecast based upon expert consensus does have extensive logical
validity (77).
33
While the Delphi Technique suffers from the fact that the re- T" i \
sponses are opinion without extensive supportable evidence, the im- »
portance of subjective judgments of knowledgeable individuals is 7\\.í
respected. If, by selection, these individuals are likely to be •
those influential in future events, they bear more credibility than
the typical opinionnaires or checklists used in surveys. The Delphi
Technique recognizes that individuals hold different perceptions about
the present as well as the future, but the process of the technique
accounts to some extent for the consensus of these varying viewpoints
(77).
The Delphi Process
Since the Delphi Technique is a group process with the objective
of obtaining consensus of opinions without bringing the experts to-
r ^ gether in a face-to-face meeting, the procedure is essentially a
series of questionnaires interspersed with controlled opinion feedback.
In its classic use, the first questionnaire asks anonymous individuals
f A to respond to a broad question that should focus on problems, objec-
c i^ ^ A/ tives, solutions, or forecasts and to generate several concise state-
Q
\^ ments concerning the subject area. Each subsequent questionnaire
builds upon responses to the preceding questionnaire. Consequently,
the second questionnaire contains items developed frora the first round
responses with each respondent requested to rate the priority of the
iteras listed. The third questionnaire provides the respondent with an
average, such as the mean, median, or the mode, of the second round
responses for each item so that he may then reconsider his own second
round responses with this information available to him. He responds
34
by moving toward the group judgment or the interquartile range of the
initial group consensus or justifying his response by describing the
information that he has that leads to his minority position. The
final questionnaire provides the respondent with new consensus data
which may include a summary of minority opinions and requests a final
revision of responses ( 5 4 ) / f
In its original use, questionnaire one identifies the issues in
response to the broad problem area; questionnaires two and three give
clarification, supportive statements, criticisras, and a preliminary
indication of priorities of the ranking; and the fourth and final
questionnaire permits the participants to review the prior responses
and state their individual judgraents as to the importance of each
item. The reflected consensus situation deterraines the nuraber of
questionnaires submitted before preparation of a final report (21).
Use of Delphi Technique in Education
The rationale or the justification for the use of the Delphi
method is primarily the historic cliche "that two heads are better
than one" and remains valid for many studies when accurate information
is unavailable or evaluation models require subjective inputs to the
point where they become the dominating parameters (45). Various areas
in education have applied this technique to predict or forecast develop-
ments in such areas as teacher education, educational administration,
federal funding, cost-benefit analysis, cost-effectiveness, and educa-
tional planning. Probably the first application in the context of
higher education was its use at the Institute of Government and Public
Affairs at the University of California (Los Angeles). In this study.
35
the participants were well informed leaders in education and were asked
to give perspectives upon changes in American education. The respon-
dents took their tasks seriously, and the results illustrated that the
technique would be very useful in educational planning at all levels
(1).
Another early use of the Delphi method for educational planning
was Helmer's (29) study which was incorporated in the 1965 Kettering
project. A panel of education experts and experts from various fields
related to education elicited a list of preferred goals for possible
federal funding. Other studies, with the purposes of evoking prefer-
ance statements from educators or people directly interested in educa-
tion, have also been conducted. Cyphert and Gant (19) sought opinions
from approximately four hundred respondents from the University of
Virginia and of the state of Virginia to assist in formulating future
goals for the School of Education at the University of Virginia. The
other was the Anderson (3) study conducted in Ohio that produced
general goal preferences relating to an individual school district.
This study, though, restricted its panel of experts to the area of
the local county school district.
A later illustration of the Delphi method being eraployed in a
state-wide effort was the research of Hudspeth (32) where he elicited
plausible occurrences in the future. He divided the responses into
three categories, with only one pertaining to educational institutions.
The results permitted him to acquire insight into future goals and
objectives in higher education.
The Educational Testing Service (ETS) engaged in a series of
Delphi studies on an area-wide basis which included the work of Uhl
36
(74). This survey was unique in that it sought to validate the ETS
published "Institutional Goals Inventory" which could be used for in-
stitutional self-examination purposes. This study differed in its
approach in utilizing the Delphi Technique in that it began its first
round of responses where other Delphi studies would be beginning the
second round. This first round was a response to the "Institutional
Goals Inventory" which had been constructed by ETS. The second ETS
Delphi study was conducted by Norton (52) who used the method in early
planning for establishing needs of a new university, and the third ETS
study was directed by Peterson (53) in 1970. This project further
refined the "Institutional Goals Inventory" developed by the Uhl study.
The research concluded that the identification of goals and priorities
of goals can "be determined when some level of consensus has been
reached through a process that is democratic and participatory"
(53:10).
Other studies have utilized this technique for educational plan-
ning endeavors. For example,\Judd (37)yreported using the method for
curriculum planning. An unidentified chairman of a liberal arts col-
lege's curriculum development committee used the technique to develop
a curriculum for a new branch carapus. With a variety of attitudes
deraonstrated araong the faculty the conclusion was "we carae out ofthis
Delphi experience with a highly innovative experiraentail type of cur-
ricular program that has been adopted by an extremely conservative
faculty" (37:30).
Weaver's (77) article in Phi Delta Kappan reported the uses of
the technique other than as a consensus forecasting tool. Adapting
the method as a teaching tool is largely undeveloped, but the siraulation
37
games are worthy of recognition. At Cornell University, Villegas de-
veloped the "Ghetto 1984 Game" and Osgood of the University of Illinois
developed a computerized gaming device called "Delphi Exploration."
Using this technique as a teaching tool proraises to become more prev-
alent in future years for it is the process through which the players
must go that is viewed as the primary teaching objective by the
developers (77).
The Delphi Technique as a consen.qug fnrprflRf-ing__tool is not limit-
ed to use by academics^ Many other fields have and are utilizing this
technique. The rapid pace of aero-space and electronic technology has
resulted in using the technique as a fundamental tool in technological
forecasting. In the area of classical management science and opera-
tions research, a noticeable need to incorporate subjective informa-
tion is evident, and the Rand Corporation reports the use of the
technique by business corporations, such as McDonnell Douglas and the
Weyerhauser Company, for predicting future possibilities. The use of
the technique is also in evidence internationally. From America, the
Delphi Technique has spread into Europe and the Far East in only nine
years, with the largest study undertaken in Japan (45).
Modern society, with all its complexities, is deraanding improved '
communication among larger numbers and more widely geographically dis- '
persed groups which cannot be satisfied by other forecasting techniques,
The Delphi Technique holds a prominent position in meeting these fore-
casting requirements. By use of a consensus of experts in formulating •
forecasts there is offered a method of blending diverse opinions into •
distinct and clearly stated majority and minority opinions without
the participants ever facing one another. This anonymity forces people
38
to get on with the business at hand. It collects and organizes dis-
sent, and builds consensus. For whatever reasons, competing opinions
apparently converge and synthesize when this technique is used. »
The use of the Delphi Technique has mainly been at the post- ^
secondary level, but offers great possibilities in any educational '
area. Weaver expressed the more promising educational application of
this tool in the following areas:
(a) a method for studying the process of thinking about the future, . (b) a pedagogical tool or teaching tool which forces people to think about the future in a more complex way than they ordinarily would, and (c) a planning tool which may aid in probing priori-ties held by members and constituencies of an organization (77: 271).
With education faced with much uncertainty as to its role in the .
future, it is imperative that educational leadership be provided with '
new and helpful techniques of proven and valid results to assist in •
decision making and planning. To proraote constructive thinking in a -
variety of coraplex situations, the Delphi Technique has played a
prorainent role in educational futures forecasting. '
Suramary
Education is a product of culture, and it reflects many of the
social trends and social changes that occur; it serves to mirror the
existing society. In preparing for the future, educators have realized
the close relationship existing between education and society. They
recognize that the future of society and the future of education are
inseparable and cannot be planned for independently from one another,
but that both demand equal consideration. Consequently, educational
planners are confronted with the responsibility of making decisions
today that will have educational consequences in the next several
decades.
39
Like the changing society in which it thrives, education must '
continually change in response to the educational demands of the
people. As new deraands appear and becorae evident, education, in turn, .
must becorae adaptive and innovative toward these new and different
needs. The resulting needs call for changes in all areas of educa- •
tion including curriculura, methodology, teaching techniques, and even •
organization.
Probably the clearest reflection of educational change is found
in curriculum design, for here all academic areas expose the substance '
of their disciplines, From the constant rate of change, the disci- ,
plines raust respond to the manifested needs by keeping abreast with *
the times. They must consider the future directions they will take in •
their curriculum offerings to insure adequate adaptation to societal
demands. Yet, some disciplines, such as Speech Communication, contain
internal problems which inhibit growth, expansion, and the raeeting of •
stated needs. The present state of the Speech Communication disci-
pline requires educational planning of the nature that will provide a '
blueprint for future development which would describe possible future
courses of action to achieve desired objectives. >
The Delphi Technique, originating in the early fifties, was de- .
\ veloped to provide a specific technique adaptable to obtaining group
consensus. From its traditional four-step process - defining questions,
prioritizing questions, initial group response, and final group re-
sponse - a number of modifications have developed. The first two steps
can be based on authoritative literature or established professional
(^ judgment, but the final steps continue to use controlled feedback and
movement toward consensus. As a tool for projecting goals, agreeing *
40
on priorities, and forécasting change, it is most effective. Its ap-
plication to educational and curricular problems and planning, al-
though still in an experimental stage, is quite promising.
CHAPTER III
DESIGN OF THE STUDY
The primary purpose for conducting this descriptive investigation
was to reach a consensus of attitudes relating to the future goals of
the Speech Communication discipline as reflected in the curriculura.
In addition, the study identified the major research orientation of
the administrative officers within the discipline and explored the re-
lationship between their identified orientation and the focus of the
future Speech Communication curriculura.
Population
The population for this study was defined as the chief administra-
tive officers of the Speech Communication academic area in institutions
identified in the 1975-1976 Speech Communication Directory, a publica-
tion of the Speech Communication Association, as providing course
sequences or degree programs in Speech Communication (65). The Directory
provided a listing of institutions which offer Speech, Speech Communi-
cation, or combined prograras, and the person who has adrainistrative
duties in the Speech area. Of those listed, 996 public and private
four-year institutions were identified and coraprised the population
available for study. No sampling procedure was necessary since the
total population, as defined, made each meraber of the population a
potential respondent.
t
Instrumentation
In social and behavioral sciences the analysis and measureraent of
phenoraena is neither as precise nor as well developed as in the physical 41
42
sciences. In education, however, a researcher may pose questions,
gather data, and describe accurately and precisely the relationship
between variables under examination. It is possible, therefore, to
describe accurately the relationship between eleraents under investiga-
tion. Further, the influence of one variable on another and the
direction of the influence can be deterrained. A researcher, by means
of a data gathering process, may analyze relationships and draw con-
clusions suggested and supported by the data. A cause-and-effect
relationship is raore difficult to determine in the social sciences,
but variables can be isolated, raeasured, and related in a way which
provides meaningful analysis for social and educational problems.
Statistical techniques are available to raeasure such deductions, in-
fluences, and relationships.
As a relatively new research tool, the Delphi Technique is cora-
raonly listed in standard educational research references. The criteria
and strategies outlined by Van Dalen (75) as pertaining to descriptive
research found direct application to the Delphi Technique. In their
broad classifications of research raethods, Festinger and Katz (25)
described criteria that placed the Delphi Technique in the sample sur-
vey research category rather than in laboratory or field setting groups.
The nature of the Delphi Technique requires the use of a series of
questionnaires to generate data necessary to answer the questions which
are a part of the problem under study. This technique, as in many
studies presenting respondents with carefully designed questions, is
the only practical way to obtain the data necessary for research
analysis (75). Kerlinger (42) included the Delphi Technique as a part
of survey research, particularly since part of his definition stressed
43
the importance of this approach as a branch of social scientific in-
vestigation that is designed to serve a practical purpose,
As discussed in the review of the literature on the Delphi Tech-
nique in Chapter II, Delphi questionnaires are each specially designed
for a given investigation. The instruraent used in this study was a
Delphi questionnaire developed to measure consensus and to identify
research orientations of the responding population.
With each Delphi study requiring the development of a specific
instrument or series of instruraents to elicit responses to questions
for which consensus is sought, the instruments designed for this study
underwent a sequence of developmental steps. The first step in a
Delphi process is either to assume or deterraine an array of events,
problems, directions, or occurrences in the selected area which will
provide the initial pool of items. Historically, this procedure has
involved soliciting items from individuals or agencies determined to
be knowledgeable in the field or utilizing pertinent professional
literature. In either case, a select or small group, such as a panel
of judges, is recommended due to the extensive, and at times, unrefined
list of items making up the initial instruraent. The objective at this
point is to reduce and refine the items to a number which represent
raajor and iraportant, as well as unresolved, issues to which a larger
population or sample will be asked to respond. The first step may be
eliminated if the issues are small in number or if the available liter-
ature has specified a list of needs, problems, or issues which are
generally agreed upon as representing the position of a given group.
The modification of Delphi instrument content and the construction of
Delphi instruments for subsequent rounds are thereby reduced by the
available information and identification of problems.
44
Phase I
The initial step in constructing the needed Delphi questionnaire
was to locate potential items for use, Phase I of this study was under-
taken to discover possible problem areas of the Speech Comraunication
discipline as perceived by a select panel of judges. The panel con-
sisted of individuals who held academic rank, possessed an earned
doctoral degree, and had a history of active participation in profes-
sional Speech Communication organizations. An application of Applbaum's
(4) evaluation of the discipline and of opinions from leading educators
within higher education suggested six raajor areas of concern relevant
to the Speech Communication discipline. The areas included projected
trends, problems, and developments in higher education; projected
trends, problems, and developments in Speech Communication; projected
objectives of the Speech Communication discipline; identification of
areas to be eliminated, revised, or added to the curriculum in order
to achieve the desired future goals; curriculura revision to reflect
societal needs; and curriculum changes needed to reflect the Speech
Comraunication discipline of the future. An open-ended questionnaire
that stated the six areas of concern was designed and subraitted to the
panel of judges. A copy of the questionnaire is found as Appendix A.
Seven Speech Communication faculty raerabers were asked to serve as jud-
ges in generating and evaluating iteras in the six areas. Five judges
agreed to serve on the panel, and they provided extensive evaluation
of the iteras frora the literature as well as generated additional iteras,
Frora the initial reaction of the panel of judges, a second ques-
tionnaire was developed which included seventy-six iteras (See Appendix
B), The panel was asked to rank the iteras based on relative iraportance
45
in each of the six areas. The mean score of each itera in the respec-
tive section was used to determine the importance of the item as a
possible problem area. Items were included as high priority problem
areas if their mean ranks fell in the upper half of each scale. Some
additional items were included if a borderline mean rank occurred,
but the item was judged to have high priority if ranked by at least
three judges (criterion: upper quartile rank). As a result of the
judges' ranking, a thirty-four itera instrument was developed including
the high priority problem areas of the Speech Communication discipline
as perceived by the panel of judges (See Appendix C). A third ques-
tionnaire was unnecessary since the panel of experts deraonstrated con-
sensus on the ranking of the iteras within the sections.
Phase II
Within this phase of the study, a close exaraination of the profes-
sional literature disclosedeighty-one possible items of concern for
the Speech Communication discipline. These items were similar to those
perceived by the panel of judges in Phase I and served as an additional
validation of the conclusions reached by them. A coraparison was made
noting sirailarity of iteras frora the two sources, and a synthesizing
process essentially developed. The synthesis was priraarily a process
of selecting and refining the overlapping iteras. From this sequential
development, the result was a twenty-four itera instrument which con-
stituted the statements for Round I in the first mailout to the popula-
tion defined for this study. A copy of the Round I instrument appears
as Appendix D. The twenty-four synthesized items on the instrument
are listed below with their rationale for inclusion and an indication
46
of their major sources, The items appear in the same sequence as on
the Round I Delphi questionnaire used in the study,
Statement 1. The Speech Communication curriculum should be oriented around the skills necessary for decision making and problem solving.
Inclusion of the decision-making and problem-oriented courses
designed to promote these skills in the Speech Communication curricula
was considered essential for individuals to function in a rapidly grow-
ing complex society. Conventional educational practice feasibly can
provide educational experiences which lead to flexible problem-solving
skills in the real world and in environraents which are unfarailiar.
Acquisition of skills in judging the probable consequences of societal
events would guard against any possible disillusionraent and despair
(44, 57, 60, 76).
Stateraent 2. The undergraduate curriculum should provide op-portunities for participation in Speech Communica-tion research.
Capable and interested undergraduates who desire more than the
regular course offerings now suffer from the lack of opportunities to
engage in supervised research and individual study. Opportunities to
meet these needs were recommended for the undergraduate Speech Communi-
cation instructional programs in the published report following the
New Orleans Conference (43). Providing these opportunities would
thereby increase the motivation of students by introducing thera to the
experiraental approach to research and quantitative methods. This would
allow thera to conduct research compatable with their individual learn-
ing styles and competencies. A result from the Phase I section corrob-
orated this inclusion (43).
47
Statement 3. Individualized instruction and self-paced programs should diminish the amount of classroom activity in Speech Communication.
An increase in individualized instruction was identified by the
panel of experts from Phase I of this study. The practice of self-
paced programs may encourage much of the independent study called forth
by many scholars in Speech Coramunication. The opportunity would be
available for the student to pursue an area of interest without the
necessity of day-to-day class raeetings (43).
Statement 4. Instruction in Speech Communication should adopt the use of clearly defined objectives and measurable outcomes.
Statements which specify in behavioral terms the expected student
outcoraes from an instructional prograra were encouraged to be developed
and adopted by academic units in the Speech Communication discipline.
A formal recommendation has been stated to effect development of in-
struments to assess the extent to which students have achieved the
stated objectives (43).
Statement 5. Speech Communication research efforts should be directed primarily to the resolution of current social problems.
The focus of the Speech Communication discipline is related to
socially relevant problems, and the need exists for Speech Communica-
tion scholars to study these contemporary social problems. Examination
of social issues with regard to the Speech Communication dimensions
facilitates solutions to many of the contemporary individual and social
problems. Identifying and establishing priorities for problems which
concern the survival of man, both in the immediate and long-range
futures, remain untouched by many researchers (43, 56).
48
Statement 6, The curriculum in, Speech Communication should be organized around courses which are designed to en-hance job opportunities for Speech Communication graduates.
Much of the quality of education is measured by quantitative
standards, and many of the contemporary students demand "relevant"
courses which are geared to the existing society. With the current
financial crisis experienced in institutions of higher education and
the deraand for accountability outside academia, a shift in the Speech
curriculum has been noticed. The resulting change in some departraents
was from the humanistic concerns to the "vocational" concerns in an
attempt to change the "raarketability" of the Speech Communication major
(35).
Statement 7. Efforts should be devoted to severing organizational ties with Arts and Sciences and Humanities by mov-ing to establish Schools of Communication.
The current organizational pattern of many institutions restricts
rauch of the scope of the Speech Communication discipline. Dissatis-
faction has been expressed by many communication scholars regarding
much of the present organizational academic units. To promote the
broader perspective encompassed by the term "communication," a re-
structuring of traditional academic units appear feasible (43).
Statement 8. Efforts in Speech Communication Curriculum revision should be devoted to making speech courses an es-sential part of all educational prograras rather than proraoting the Speech Coraraunication raajor as a field of study.
All students, regardless of their major area of study need training
in communication skills. With the increase of technology coupled by
the rapid change of society, good communication skills are essential
for mobility and survival, yet these very skills have been found lacking
49
in many educational programs. Provisions for the opportunity to all
students to increase their communication skills does not necessarily
degrade the Speech Communication discipline but enables every student
to have the opportunity to gain needed experience which will be re-
quired of him in the future (43, 35, 64, 66).
Statement 9. The Speech Coramunication curriculum should be re-vised to eraphasize the interdisciplinary nature of the course content.
As a result of raodern technology, new channels and techniques of
communication, accorapanied by probleras confronting contemporary soci-
ety, are so closely related to comraunication that courses erabracing
other fields of study add new perspectives. Examination of communica-
tion normally in such areas of study as psychology, political science,
anthropology, history, English, and education would broaden the scope
and analysis of human communication. Drawing upon experts from other
fields would thereby provide a more complete rendering of communication
transaction (11).
Statement 10. The scientific method of investigating spoken inter-action should be the major theoretical base for the Speech Communication discipline.
To understand the process by which human beings link themselves
with others through the use of symbols, particularly oral symbols,
represents the main area of study for individuals in this discipline.
The scientific approaches of investigating the coramunication act are
quite acceptable and useable in many of the traditional areas of study
such as rhetoric, oral interpretation, and theater. While a variety
of methods for studying interaction exists, the scientific approaches
would best build toward a solid theoretical base for the discipline
(43).
50
Statement 11. Enrollment in Speech Communication courses should be limited to those for whom the content has direct vocational application.
Since many schools now suffer from financial crisis, cutbacks have
occurred in departraents thereby creating curriculum problems. Limit-
ing courses to students who perceive the content as applicable to a
chosen vocation may compensate for the necessity of curriculum cut-
backs and small classes. Experts in Phase I identified an increase
in career education as a trend within higher education and recommended
adding specific context courses to the curriculum which had vocational
overtones. Many of these courses taught in situational contexts (po-
litical, interviewing, and organizational communication) have certain
vocational application.
Stateraent 12. A significant core of the Speech Communication cur-riculum should be based on research conclusions regarding strategies and constraints in message choice, communication environments, and speech functions.
Current research has oversiraplified the multidimensional communi-
cation process by limiting the view of communication behaviors. Al-
though some consideration has been given to the examination of sequen-
tial behavior in interaction, courses based on research conclusions
regarding strategies and constraints in coraraunication behavior are
lacking (4, 43).
Statement 13. Speech Communication should be based on a "source-message" centered curriculum as opposed to a "message-audience" curriculum.
Too many rhetoricians have been concerned with the discourse of
the past and have been satisfied in using only an accurate manuscript
of a speech as the main source of data. They continue to support the
dominant "source-message" approach to the study of rhetoric, and by
51
doing so, they have ignored other accurate data regarding the thetor-
ical situation. By concentrating only on the written manuscript, they
lose other pertinent sources of data through tirae. With the inclusion
of relevant data that surround a rhetorical act, a "raessage-audience"
centered rhetoric curriculum would result and would encourage scholarly
and sophisticated work regarding the conteraporary communication phenom-
enon (9, 11).
Statement 14. Major elements in the course content of Speech Communication should insure that students are pre-pared to adapt to the constant rate of change re-flected in the society.
The accelerating rate of change now experienced by society has
created many difficulties for people unprepared to cope with the change.
Generally, education suffers basically from the gap between its con-
tent and the living experience of students. Little provision exists
for students to link education to life, yet much of the content within
the Speech Communication discipline offers the opportunity to establish
this needed relationship. Equipping students to cope effectively with
the demands of unanticipated events falls within the scope of the dis-
cipline (4, 60, 68).
Statement 15. The Speech Communication curriculum of the future should eliminate those traditional performance areas such as oral interpretation, voice and arti-culation, debate, and parliamentary procedure.
In an attempt to make course offerings more relevant for the
student and his skills raore "marketable," many of the traditional per-
formance courses are now in jeopardy. The cries for job training and
vocationally oriented courses force many of the humanistic courses
from the curriculum. Many departments of Speech Communication, suf-
fering from the "raarketability" syndrome, have abolished courses in
52
rhetorical theory, the history of American public address, the oral
performance of literature, and other non-job related courses (35).
Statement 16. The application of educational technology should replace the classroom teacher as the medium of instruction in Speech Coramunication.
Educators are confronted with how to utilize rauch of the educa-
tional technology now readily available. Easy accessability of the
technical innovations has created a shift in the instructional pro-
cess. The traditional classroom teacher is no longer the focal point
in the learning environment. Some of the individualized instruction
called forth by scholars may be conducted by the use of technical in-
novations in teaching (43, 58).
Stateraent 17. Within the practical framework of institutional scheduling, the Speech Communication curriculum should be structured on a raodular approach.
Much of the Speech Communication curriculum raay be designed on a
modular approach which would allow students the maxiraura learning op-
portunity. Providing a flexible curriculum with many points of entry,
not restricted by prerequisites, will elirainate rauch of the problems
coramonly associated with curriculum scheduling. The raodulâr approach
or "mini-course" allows students to concentrate on specific elements
and to be totally absorbed in the subject. This method of teaching
appears favorable for much of the coursework in Speech Communication
and meets much of the change from traditional teaching approaches now
demanded by society. Experts in Phase I identified the modular in-
struction approach as a desirable curriculum change.
Stateraent 18. Credit hour requireraents in Speech Coramunication should be reduced in order that students have greater opportunities for interdisciplinary study.
53
Encouraging students in interdisciplinary study would provide
them with the opportunity to expand and broaden their perspective of
human communication. To gain pertinent knowledge from outside the
Speech Communication field facilitates awareness of the communication
process from different dimensions, yet the prospects of interdiscipli-
nary study remain low in number. The structure of academic departments
existing in higher education lends to the fractionalizing of knowledge
into distinct, and sometimes artificial, compartments. Reducing the
core requirements would allow options for interdisciplinary study (11,
43).
Statement 19. Speech Communication should be fused with the sub-ject matter content of the social sciences (psy-chology, sociology, political science) rather than continue as a separate discipline.
Since much of the content matter relies heavily on the social
sciences, Speech Communication may be absorbed into any one of the
areas. The question of research methodology, so representative of the
two dominant stances now existing in the Speech Communication disci-
pline, raay be resolved by this absorption (80).
Statement 20. The instructional program in Speech Communication should be revised to reflect more empirical re-search.
The very breadth of the Speech Communication discipline creates a
dilemma in disseminating the vast array of research and, as a result,
fractionalizes the information into specific compartments. A conse-
quence of this condition is the proliferation of professional and
scholarly organizations which are concerned with different areas of
study in human communication. As a result, teaching and research in
human communication lack coordination, cohesion, and unity (43).
54
Stateraent 21. The Speech Communication curriculum should be re-vised to include specific context courses such as political communication, organizational communica-tion, and legal communication.
In light of present and future societal needs, the curriculum
should provide the student with instruction that acquaints him with a
variety of comraunication behaviors. Attention would be directed to
the kinds of behaviors that would facilitate or hinder comraunication
in different contexts. Studying the interaction of variables in
specific contexts would provide the student with a general understand-
ing of how communication functions within the particular environment.
In today's climate of rapid change, the practical study of discourse
may be raore profitable in terras of survival (4, 76).
Stateraent 22. Much of the content of Speech Comraunication grad-uate courses should be incorporated into the under-graduate prograra.
Dissatisfaction with the present curriculum has been noted and
a need exists to enrich the undergraduate program. Inclusion of the
substantive areas of study in the undergraduate level has several ad-
vantages such as improving the quality of the prospective graduate
student, identifying and developing the potential scholar early in the
educational program, and providing opportunities for individual in-
quiry (43).
Statement 23. Speech Comraunication research efforts should be directed toward merging behavioral and rhetorical approaches in a common approach to research design.
The division of the traditionalists and the behavioralists has
caused members of the discipline to choose between two research ap-
proaches. Much of the literature has been in support of both of these
approaches, yet the existing division has been strong enough to warrant
55
cries of rapprochement from scholars representative of both caraps.
The plea for the scientific and humanistic approaches to move toward
a blending of the critical and empirical techniques in order to provide
a common approach to research design is the essence of this itera (5,
11, 13, 43, 76, 79, 80).
Stateraent 24. The Speech Coramunication curriculum should provide a course concerning the relationship of classroom coramunication to learning and instruction for all prospective teachers.
Within the confines of the instructional-learning environment are
the variables of message transmission and raessage reception. The
Speech Communication discipline is well qualified to provide all pro-
spective teachers with insights into the nature of classroom communi-
cation and its relationship to learning and instruction. Knowledge of
the processes involved in the reception and processing of information
while developing good communication skills for the teacher-student
relationship encourages the learning processes (43).
The above iteras which appeared on the questionnaire represented
the synthesized issues found to be most controversial within the
Speech Communication discipline. The procedure to develop the ques-
tionnaires for this study met the requireraents of the Delphi Technique
process. The first questionnaire asked individuals to respond to broad
questions, designed to be open-ended, that focused on identifying
problems and objectives within higher education and particularly in
Speech Communication. The second questionnaire contained items from
the first round responses, and the panel was asked to rate the priority
of the items. The third questionnaire developed for this study in-
cluded synthesized items from the selected judges and from the
56
professional literature. Each subsequent questionnaire was developed
from the responses to the preceding questionnaire, which was a re-
quirement of the Delphi Technique. Consequently, the twenty-four item
questionnaire sent to the population used in this study was an instru-
ment developed from such a procedure.
Procedure
The Speech Curriculum Delphi study was conducted between the
months of Septeraber and January in the 1976-1977 academic years. The
respondents who held the highest administrative positions for the
Speech Communication area in four-year public and private institutions
comprised the population invited to participate in the Delphi study
of Speech Communication. These chairpersons were selected due to their
experience and positions in Speech Comraunication as representing those
best able to avaluate the future of the Speech Comraunication curric-
ulum and the issues largely unresolved throughout the discipline. The
respondents remained anonymous to each other and were not provided a
predetermined basis for making their initial decisions and evaluations
on Round I of the Delphi study.
The initial Delphi instrument, Round I, contained the final twenty-
four statements relating to Speech Communication curricular goals, to
which the respondents indicated their opinions, evaluated desirability,
and expressed probability of occurrence. Space for comment was pro-
vided for each item. Round I instruments were sent to the Speech
Communication administrative officials in the 996 four-year public
and private institutions inviting their participation in the Delphi
study and requesting an early response. In the time allotted for
Round I, 313 responses were returned, 303 of which were usable in the
57
study. This group provided the basis for the study, and their re-
sponses to the Delphi instruments provided the institutional and in-
dividual respondent characteristics describing the participants.
Their opinions and conclusions regarding the Speech Communication
curriculum were used as the feedback data for Round II, as the Delphi
process moved the group toward consensus.
As has been pointed out, the Delphi Technique has an overall ob-
jective of moving independent respondents toward consensus. While
this is a part of each Delphi application, it is obvious that the ul-
timate objective of total group consensus on individual items is rarely
achieved. The Delphi process as a research technique does not specify
either a statistical or logical level for conclusions to be drawn re-
garding such consensus. A Delphi researcher may accept a siraple ma-
jority of respondent agreement or disagreement as such an indication.
While this would be a defensible position, a higher level of consensus
was selected for this study in order that the conclusion raay be more
defensible. If a percentage of agreement matrix is subjected to chi-
square analysis using the hypothesis which compares the distribution
raatrix to chance responseSj_J.t would require an agreeraent level of
2 sixty-five percent to be significant at the .05 level (X = 4.60).
Further, an agreement level of sixty-eight percent would be required
in order for the distribution to be significant at the .01 level
(X^ =6.70). In order that questions which were eliminated from the
Round I Delphi Questionnaire as having reached a level of consensus
which did not require their presentation to the respondents for a
second round evaluation, a consensus level considerably above that
required by chance was selected. If the agreeraent level is placed at
58
eighty percent, the resultant chi-square of 19.79 exceeds the .001
level and provides both a logical and statistically defensible posi-
tion for an assumption for consensus. This would mean that an eighty
percent agreement of the respondents on any Delphi item would occur
less than one time out of one thousand as a result of chance factors.
After the analysis of Round I, the participants were sent Round
II Delphi instruments to indicate again their opinions concerning the
items on which there was no consensus on the Round I instrument, Items
which produced a consensus in Round I were eliminated for this second
sequence, The respondents were provided information concerning the
responses from Round I for the remaining items and were advised to
consider their Round II responses with this information available to
them. Thirteen unresolved statements reraained on the Round II instru-
raent to which they were asked to respond as well as raake a brief cora-
ment on those items for which their responses fell outside the stated
majority. A copy of the Round II instrument appears as Appendix E.
The respondents received an initial letter in Round I stating the
purpose of the study and a brief explanation of the Delphi Technique.
An addressed postage paid return envelope was provided to facilitate
prorapt responses. Inforraation cover letters and addressed postage
paid return envelopes accompanied Round II in order to encourage con-
tinued participation in the study. Responses to Round II included 225
returns, of which 220 were usable in the study. Analysis of the Round
II respondents was carried out in order to evaluate the conclusions
concerning the opinions relating to the Speech Comraunication curricu-
lum, the desirability of Speech Communication curriculum goals, and
the probability of events. The group of final respondents provided
59
the basis for study and analysis relating to institutions and individual
characteristics, and by statistical analysis provided data allowing
conclusions to be reached regarding the hypotheses, as stated. The
results of the study as presented in Chapter IV outlined in detail the
results of the application of the statistical treatments to the data
gathered by the Delphi instrumentation.
Analysis of the Data
The demographic data and responses to the Delphi instruments pro-
vided information which was used in analysis and conclusions related
to the hypotheses of the study and the research questions. Descrip-
tive statistics were employed to present information describing the
individual, institutional, and prograra characteristics of the respon-
dents. Absolute frequencies and relative percentages aided in drawing
conclusions as to the population characteristics. Responses to the
Delphi instrument by individual, institutional, and program subgroups
were similarly treated.
Comparison of responses to the Delphi instruraent by those identi-
fied with either huraanistic or scientific acaderaic orientation was
carried out by analysis of crossbreaks. Significance was tested by
the use of the chi-square statistic with the .05 confidence level.
Comparison of institutional and individual variables was through ap-
plication of one way analysis of variance, with the resultant F test
interpreted using the .05 confidence level. In selected comparison,
the t test for significant differences was utilized at the ,05 level
of confidence, Due to the hypothesized influence of some individual
and institutional variables, multiple analysis of variance was employed
60
to determine raajor influencing variables, with the .05 level of con-
fidence as the determinant of significance.
CHAPTER IV
RESULTS
This study was conducted in order to reach consensus of attitudes
relating to the future goals of the Speech Communication discipline as
reflected in the curriculum. The results from the two rounds of the
Delphi questionnaire are presented and discussed according to indivi-
dual characteristics of respondents, institutional characteristics,
program characteristics, curriculum items, and major research orienta-
tion.
Population
The population for this study was defined as the chief adrainis-
trative officers of the Speech Coramunication acaderaic area in the 996
public and private institutions listed in the 1975-1976 Speech Communi-
cation Directory (65) of the Speech Communication Association (SCA),
which offer acaderaic prograras in Speech or Speech Communication. From
the 996 initial Round I questionnaires sent, 313 were returned which
then comprised the sample used to represent the total population of
Speech Communication administrative officers for Round II. Only 303
returns were actually usable for analysis in Round I. Frora the Round
II questionnaire, 220 returns were received and analyzed.
Individual Variables
A section of the Delphi questionnaire yielded inforraation con-
cerning the individual respondents, the institutions represented by
those respondents, and the type of Speech Communication programs of-
fered by the institutions.
61
62
Of the 303 returns, the Speech Communication administrative of-
ficers included 82.4 percent male respondents and 17.6 percent female
respondents, The responding sample represented 0,7 holding a bachelor's
degree, 23,0 holding the master's degree, and 76,3 holding a doctoral
degree, In response to the questions concerning the number of years
since highest degree, over one-third of the participants indicated
that there had been less than five years, over one-fourth indicated
between 6-10 years, 11-15 years for 15,7 percent, 16-20 years for 8,7
percent, and 20 years or more for 12 percent of the respondents,
Membership in the Speech Comraunication Association (SCA) included
81,9 percent of the sample with 18.1 percent not holding SCA meraber-
ship. An indication of professional organizational involvement was
deterrained by attendance at Speech Communication regional association
raeetings and SCA national conventions. Alraost one-third of the re-
spondents have not attended any regional meetings and slightly over
one-fourth have not attended SCA national conventions in the last five
years. Less than one-half have not attended regional or national meet-
ings or, at the most, have attended only one meeting. Only 17.4 per-
cent have attended two regional raeetings and 21.1 percent have at-
tended two national conventions in the last five years. Those attend-
ing three regional meetings included 12.1 percent while those in
attendance at three national conventions comprised 13.7 percent. At-
tendance at four regional meetings included 9.1 percent and attendance
at four national conventions was 9.0 percent. Members who indicated
attending regional meetings and national conventions every year for
the last five years involved 14.1 percent and 11.7 percent respectively.
Table 1 reports the above individual variables in the six individual
data categories.
63
TABLE 1
DESCRIPTIVE DATA PERCENTAGES OF INDIVIDUAL, INSTITUTIONAL, AND PROGRAM VARIABLES
Individual Variables
Recency of Degree Sex
Male 82. Female 17.
SCA Member
Yes 81.9 No 18,1
.4
.6
Highest Degree
Bachelor Master Doctorate
0.7 23.0 76.3
Regional Participation Meetings %
None 31,5 1 15.8 2 17.4 3 12.1 4 9.1 5 14.1
Cumulative
31. 47. 64. 76. 85, 100.
,5 ,3 ,8 ,8 ,9 ,0
Years
1 6 11 16
- 5 - 10 - 15 - 20
20+
% Cumulative
36.3 27.3 15.7 8.7 12.0
36.3 63.6 79.3 88.0
100.0
National Participation Meetings %
None 1 2 3 4 5
28.4 16.1 21.1 13.7 9.0 11.7
Cumulative
28.4 44.5 65.6 79.3 88.3 100.0
Institutional Variables
Institutional Size
Under 5,000 52.0 5,000 - 10,000 25.2 10,000 - 15,000 8.3 15,000 - 20,000 6.0 20,000+ 8.6
Institutional Support
Public 57.0 Private 43.0
Institutional Type
Four Year 55.8 Graduate 44.2
SCA ECA SSCA CSCA WSCA None
Region 10.6 20.5 21.8 11.1 36.0
Program Variables
Speech Organization
Major Area 31.0 Department 58.2 Division 10.8
Speech Degree
None 20.0 Bachelor 50.5 Master 22.3 Doctorate 6.3
Faculty
1 - 5 6-10 11 - 15 16 - 20 20+
Size
58.0 21.3 12.0 3.0 5.7
64
Institutional Variables
The Delphi questionnaire also yielded information on the institu-
tional variables, The institutional data ranged frora 52,0 percent of
the respondents from schools with less than 5,000 population to 25*2
percent for schools with a population of 5,000-10,000. For institu-
tions of 10,000-15,000 population, 8.3 percent responded while 6.0
and 8.6 percent responded for schools of 15,000-20,000 population and
above 20,000 respectively. Public institutions represented 57.0 per-
cent of the sample while 43.0 percent represented private institutions
of higher learning, with 55.8 percent identified as four-year schools
and 44.2 percent identified as graduate institutions. Responding
institutions were divided by their geographic locations as represented
by the regional association. Eastern Communication Association re-
sponded with 10.6 percent of the returns, Southern Speech Communication
Association responded with 20.5 percent, Central States Speech Associa-
tion returned 21.8 percent, and Western Speech Communication Associa-
tion returned 11.1 percent. Institutions who did not declare regional
membership associations represented 36.0 percent of the returns. In-
stitutional variables are reported in Table 1.
Program Varíables
Speech Communication program variables were included as part of
the informational data supplied by the respondents to the Delphi
questionnaire. Data regarding the academic programs described by the
303 administrative officers disclosed that 20.9 percent of the insti-
tutions did not offer a degree in the field of Speech Communication
while 50.5 percent offered a bachelor's degree. The Master's degree
65
was offered by 22.3 percent of the institutions and the doctoral de-
gree by 6.3 percent of the responding schools. These public and pri-
vate institutions had faculty sizes which included 1-5 members with
58.0 percent of the returns, 6-10 members with 21.3 percent of the
returns, 11-15 with 12.0 percent of the returns. Schools with faculty
sizes from 16-20 members responded with 3.0 percent and schools with
a faculty of 20 and over represented 5.7 percent of the sample in the
study.
The academic organization of Speech Communication in the institu-
tion responding included 31 percent who offered Speech Communication
or included a major area only, 58.2 percent as departraents, and 10.8
percent who used a division organizational pattern. The data concern-
ing Speech Communication variables are presented in Table 1.
Analysis of Data
Responses to the Delphi Questionnaire included 303 usable re-
sponses to Round I and 220 usable responses to Round II. In order to
provide a general overview of the respondents' agreeraent with the
curriculum statement, projection of when the curriculura direction
might become a part of the curriculum, and a reflection of the de-
sirability of the occurrence, Table 1 summarizes the percentage of
responses. Table 2 reports the percentage of agreeraent and disagree-
ment with the Speech Communication Curriculum statement by statement
number for both Rounds I and II. The oraission of a stateraent from
Round II follows the criteria established as reported in Chapter III.
Consensus for such agreement could be in either direction of agree-
ment or disagreement with the statement. Table 2 reports the mean
66
TABLE 2
DELPHI QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS IN PERCENTAGES OF RESPONSES
Agreement/Disagreement
Statement Number
Stateraent
Stateraent
Stateraent
Stateraent
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Stateraent
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Round I
67.4
75.3
22.8
74.5
17.7
58.0
30.0
51.4
80.3
25.4
1.7
73.9
13.3
89.5
11.4
2.4
42.7
19.7
12.1
53.7
82.8
35.7
73.4
94.9
Agree
Round II
78.6
87.3
12.3
87.1
(None)
54.1
17.4
36.0
(None)
10.0
(None)
89.4
(None)
(None)
(None)
(None)
11.1
(None)
(None)
68.1
(None)
20.2
92.1
(None)
Disagree
Round I
32.6
24.7
77.2
25.5
82.3
42.0
70.0
48.6
19.7
74.6
98.3
26.1
86.7
10.5
88.6
97.6
57.3
80.3
87.9
46.3
17.2
64.3
26.6
5.1
Round II
21.4
12.7
87.7
12.9
(None)
45.9
82.6
64.0
(None)
90.0
(None)
10.6
(None)
(None)
(None)
(None)
88.9
(None)
(None)
31.9
(None)
79.8
7.9
(None)
Round I - N = 303
Round II - N = 220
67
TABLE 2 - Continued
Projected Date
Stateraent Number
Statement
Stateraent
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Stateraent
Statement
Statement
Stateraent
Stateraent
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Mean Date Round I
1985
1985
1989
1985
1990
1984
1992
1990
1986
1989
1999
1986
1993
1986
1995
2001
1991
1992
1996
1988
1986
1988
1990
1986
Round II
1984
1984
1993
1986
(None)
1985
1993
1991
(None)
1993
(None)
1985
(None)
(None)
(None)
(None)
1994
(None)
(None)
1987
(None)
1992
1987
(None)
Median Round I
1982
1982
1986
1984
1986
1992
1990
1987
1985
1987
2002
1984
1990
1994
1992
2005
1989
1989
1996
1986
1984
1986
1988
1984
Date Round II
1984
1984
1990
1984
(None)
1984
1991
1990
(None)
1990
(None)
1985
(None)
(None)
(None)
(None)
1992
(None)
(None)
1986
(None)
1990
1987
(None)
Round I - N = 303
Round II - N = 220
68
TABLE 2 - Continued
Desirable/Undesirable
Statement Number
Statement
Statement
Stateraent
Statement
Statement
Statement
Stateraent
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
Statement
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
De£
Round I
70.8
79.3
26.6
74.6
26.2
62.8
30.5
55.1
83.6
28.6
2.7
74.5
15.0
90.4
12.0
1.9
47.7
23.9
14.2
60.6
83.0
39.1
75.9
95.6
jirable
Round II ]
81.3
86.8
12.9
86.2
(None)
55.9
21.5
39.6
(None)
12.1
(None)
91.1
(None)
(None)
(None)
(None)
12.8
(None)
(None)
71.3
(None)
22.7
92.7
(None)
Undesirable
R.ound I
29.2
20.7
73.4
25.4
73.8
37.2
69.5
44.9
16.4
71.4
97.3
25.5
85.0
9.6
88.0
98.1
52.3
76,1
85.8
39.4
17.0
60.9
24.1
4.4
Round II
18.8
13.2
87.1
13.8
(None)
44.1
78.5
60.4
(None)
87.9
(None)
8.9
(None)
(None)
(None)
(None)
87.2
(None)
(None)
28.7
(None)
77.3
7.3
(None)
Round I - N = 303
Round II - N = 220
69
and median dates resulting from the respondents projection of the in-
corporation of the curriculum direction for each curriculum stâtement.
Table 2 records the evaluation of the desirability or undesirability
of the curriculum oocurrence for each statement in the same manner as
agreement and disagreement as reported in Table 2.
Consensus for elimination of a curriculum statement after Round I
was defined as agreement by at least eighty percent of the respondents,
since this level exceeded the .001 level of significance when compared
2 to chanpe (X = 19.79). This level was achieved for eleven stateraents
(statements 5, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, and 24) for Round I.
Round II questions which reached this level included an additional
seven statements (statements 2, 3, 4, 7, 10, 12, and 17). Statement 1
agreement level was just below the consensus level at 78.6 percent
with a desirability level of 81.3 percent. Statement 22 also was
only slightly below the consensus level at 79.8 percent with a de-
sirability level of 77.3 percent. Statement 20, with an agreeraent of
68.1 percent and a desirability of 71.3 percent, is also below the
.001 consensus level. These statements exceed the .01 level of con-
fidence which requires a consensus level of sixty-eight percent
(X = 6.70). The remaining two statements, statement 6 and stateraent
8, continued below the .01 confidence level necessary for consensus.
These two stateraents reraained sufficiently unresolved by the respon-
dents to result in polarized positions. Due to the lack of clear
movement toward consensus and the fact that only these two of the
original twenty-four statements remained in this configuration, a
third round was judged not likely to be productive, with data analysis
and conclusions based on the two completed rounds.
70
The data in this study were analyzed by individual, institutional,
and academic program variables as responses to the two rounds of the
Delphi instrument. The data concerning responses to the Speech Com-
munication curriculum statements included in the Delphi instrument
are best received by reporting the responses to the individual state-
ments, noting differences between the sub-groups of respondents, This
procedure permits observations and conclusions which relate to in-
dividual speech curriculum projections by sub-group variables, Gen-
eral conclusions regarding Speech Communication curriculum changes as
reflected by the total sample are thereby made more meaningful as a
part of the final conclusions, In addition, the sub-group responses
contribute, both logically and statistically, to the ensuing recom-
raendations, Placed in proper perspective, they are directly related
to Speech Communication curriculum projections included in each state-
ment as a part of the Delphi Technique. The sequence of the data
presented in this section, therefore, will follow the numerical se-
quence of the Delphi questionnaire items.
Statement 1. The Speech Communication curriculum should be oriented around the skills necessary for decision making and problem solving.
Respondents in Round I indicated a general agreement with the
inclusion of decision-making and problem-solving skills as a major
orientation for the curriculum and that efforts in this direction
would be desirable (67.4 percent and 70.8 percent, respectively).
While there was some variation between the percentage distributions
among the individual, institutional, and prograra sub-groups, there
wereno significant differences with the exception of the distribution
by institutional size. The sraall and very large institutions indicated
71
a higher level of agreement with this curriculum direction than did
the medium-size institutions.
Round II increased the percentage of agreements by respondents
and the level of desirability by over ten percent in each case (78.6
percent and 81,3 percent, respectively), A significant difference in
the percentage of agreement with this curriculum direction is noted
wheri respondents are grouped as to the recency of their highest de-
gree. The pattern in this regard, while not conclusive, indicated
those with the most recent degrees were less likely to favor this
curriculum direction. Support for including these skills in the cur-
riculum was more likely to be found in respondents frora southern and
central SCA regions. Finally, there was also sorae indication that
sraaller institutions would judge this curriculura direction to be
achieved at an earlier date than individuals representing larger in-
stitutions. Table 3 reports the individual, institutional, and pro-
gram sub-groups.
Statement 2. The undergraduate curriculum should provide oppor-
tunities for participation in Speech Communication research.
The responses to Round I for Statement 2 indicated a general
agreement with providing opportunities for research activities in the
undergraduate Speech curriculum and that this is a highly desirable
curriculum direction. There are, however, wide ranges within the sub-
groups which differ from the overall agreement level of 75.3 percent
and a desirability level of 79.3 percent. SCA merabers found this em-
phasis in the curriculum raore desirable than did non-SCA members, and
it appeared that the more active the respondents were in SCA activi-
ties, the more likely they were to agree with the statement, and the
72
W
pq < H
o M H pq M píS H
o M H H
W O < H
M W H U CAl eeí
S w M pL,
P C/D O W M U > S M W
W
H H pq
C/3
W u !z; w píí w w w
o M W M
M CO
w w w
CS| X
w
pq
CAl w Q
w
pq
M CO W o
CN X!
Pá
W
CM X
w w
CJ) <
M
Q
W
S o <í
cn W pq <í M Pí < >
CA) W •-1 pq
â píá <í >
0) H
M >
o
d) N
•H co
ctJ C o
• H +J
+ j • H 4-J Cfl C
O S S O
H cn
•
0 0
ro
<U N
• H CO
M
fi O
• H •P :3
æ M
M
I
0 0
o •H 00 d)
Pí
<3 u co
• ro
• m
•X * m cr» vO
u OJ
r û
e 0)
s <í u CAl
• CN vO
CTt
(U 0) ^^ bO OJ o <H o >^ o tí (U a 0)
Pá
• • CM vO
O CM
•M ^ o a a 3
co M CtJ C o
•H • U ;3 4-1 •H •M CO C
M
•K * <r 00
M M
OJ a >^
H
M cd c: o
•H •P 3 4J •H 4-1 Ul tí
M
•ÎC •K i n m { ^ M
0) N
•H CAl
M cd C o
•H 4J 3 +J •H 4-) CO C
M
•K • vO CM
M M
C o
•H 4J cfl N
•H C (fl W) ^
O
Æ o (U Q) P.
CO
•ic •K r v M
00 M
(U (U M 60 (U O Æ o (1) (U o.
CAl
• • o <J-
o CM
(U N
•H CO
>> 4J M 3 O cd w
• < ! •
CvJ
<r
M (U
, û
a s s < u C/3
• CTi O
ro M
o •H +J cd P<
•H o
•H 4J M cd
f ^
M CtJ c o
•H 4J ctí :z:
r^ CNl
o M
O Q) U bû (U P 4-1 O
> o tí (U o <u
M M
w
pq
Pá <3 >
O M H
H M H CO
iz; M
HC -{C M M vO M
•K -K -ÎC • - -00 M <r in <í r^
• * •« •K -ÎC • « vO <í- ro CTi C3^ 0 0
r^ <J-M
O •H 4J CCJ
• H o
• H 4J >-l cd
U P4 (U
, û M e cfl (U tí
^5 < bO CJ CU c/3 pá
cM 00 in ( N M
+J u o O, 0) <u Pí CX N 3 ^ . • H
CA) H C/2
cd cd (d C C! C o o H • H
o o r^ M CM M
P!
o •H 4J cd N
• H C cd
:3 4J • H 4J
O •H +J
4-1 •H 4J
<U OJ (U H N
bO 00 •H !-i (U C/D
O Q
H 4-1
æ cn cn C C C
M M M
o (U (U
o (U (U
cx cu cd Cn CT) w
^3 O
I CM
I CM
CO W
pq
^ í !z: o M H ! 3 H M H co
(U
o !z:
• o
4 J >-l o
Cu
cn
cd C o
• H 4J :3 4J • H 4J cn c!
73
(U :3 tí
•H +J tí O o
ro W
pq < H
CM X!
CM X!
W ^ pq
ã M cn w o 53 5 ~»^ w HJ pq
S M C/D
w Q
• -m ro CO CM
• • 0 0 Cvj M M
C Ci 0 0
•H •H 4J 4J cd cd CX Pu
•H •H 0 0
•H •H 4J 4J U U cd cd
P^ PM
M M cd cd tí tí 0 0
•H -H 00 -M <u cd pí5 z:
• • vO 0
• 0 M
<U P. > . H
M cd tí 0
•H 4-1 tí 4-1 •H 4J CO tí
M
•K 0 0
• m M
<U <U 5-1 bO <U «
^ 0 <U <U P4
C/3
CM X
cn
C/2
w pq
C/D
w pq
<í >
îz: o M H Í 3 H M H cn ÎS M
•K * •K cn r>. r^ m
• • vO -^l-
• • • csi <y\ m 00
00
• • • CTi CTi 00 <r
* -00 o 00 <y\
• • <T> O
(U <U U bO <U O
4J cn <u
CÆ ><! •H <U ffi CO
<u <u <u VJ N bO •H <U æ
Q >^
rtí +J O M (U 3 (U O o. cd
C/3 W
• 00
•<r CM
W
pq
Q M > M
Q
M
•K • • <y\ <t
t ^ M
í-l CU
Xi S (U
<u <u u bO <U 0 U-l 0
> . 0
<u <! o CJ (U cn pá
^
<u p . >^
H
cd
o •H 4-1 :3 + j •H +J cn
<í- o vo <r
• •<r 00
• 00
<u <u <u U N 00 •H <U cn
Q
o <u
p . cd co w
>. 4J M
o
<u cu 5-1 t) <U
Q
4J CO <u
rtí 00 î^
•H (U
M
I CO
M
I co
<u CU u 00 (U Q
o CU (U p .
CA)
o
• C M m
(U (U
00 (U
Q
co (U
00 •H Ptí
M O P. P. :i n
cd tí o
•H
cn
a
w pq
Í 3 Q M > M Q
M
CO
w
M
< ! >
O M H t 3 H M H CO
!z; M
•K r^ < t
• vO
(U (U
00 <u
Q
4J cn (U 00
•H P3
I
<r
o CM
vO
tí O
•H +J cd N
•H tí <d 00 í-i o ,tí o (U (U o. co
• CM vO
u o p .
C/3
cd tí o
•H +J :3 + j •H +J CO
• 00 co
vO
tí o
• H +J cd N
• H c <d 00 u o ,r: o <u (U p . co
I
<r
74
'TS
<u
tí • H +J tí O
CJ
co w pq < ! H
CSJ X
W
pq
M C O
w Q
CM X!
W >^
CvJ í^
W w Pí o < : co
w W Píí o <î
<r CT\
(U C/2
• -co vd-<r m
• vO 00
<U co
1
m
M
tí
o Pí o :z:
I
m
• -CO M o <r
• • vO 00
tí o
•H +J cd N
•H tí cd 00 u o ^ o cu <u p. co
<u <u >-l ûO <u
Q
Xí o (U (U a
CO
C/2 W
pq < ! M
! 3 Q M > M Q
M
co W hJ pq <J M
!z; o M H P H M H co M
• CM CTv
. < t
• t ^ M
• CO M
C o
•H +J cd a
•H o
•H +J M cd U
* • cr> vO
• vO
+J U O (X, CU 3
co M cd tí o
•H
• • <!• r
• co M
<U N
•H CO
M cd tí o
•H
• • M 00
• co M
<U N
•H co
* - -<r o <3 CO O CM
• • csi m
• m C7N
• cr> m
vO 0 0 CM
tí o
• H +J cd N
• H tí cd
<u <u u
<u N
00 00 •H Vi <U C/2 D Q
O <U (U
o (U <u
P H P . cd co co w
:3 o
M O M M tí O
• H +J cd P- CU
• H (U O U
• H 00 4-1 <U U Q cd
P-l U-H o
M cd > ^ C O O C
• H <U 4-1 O cd <u ^ Pá
<u N
• H co M cd c o
• H +J tí 4J • H 4J CO tí
<U (U >-i 00 <u
Q
rtí o <u (U p .
co
M
I
vO
M M
I
vO
M cd tí o
• H >< 0 0 <U CU
C/3 p á
3 3 +J 4-1 • H • H +J 4-1 co <0 tí tí M M
• •K vo cr. M O
• • M CM M CO
>% +J M
o <d
W
co w pq
Pí < >
Q M > M Q !2:
• -CO VO <T\ r^
• •K M r>. M r
* •K <r cM m CT\
<r cM M tí o
• H +J cd o.
• H o
• H
X <u co
v cd
PH
M cd C o
•H 00 (U
Pí
v O CM
>-l O a, <u P, N tí •H
co co
cd cd tí tí o o
• H • H +J +J :3 3 +J +J • H • H +J 4J CO CO tí tí
cr> m M
<U <u <U }-l N 00 •H (U co
o <u (U o P H cd
co w
I
75
<u d tí
•H 4J tí o
CJ
CO
w hJ
CM !x!
W hJ pq
ã
CM !xi
CM X!
• • VO m
tí o
•H +J cd P .
•H o
•H +J >-i cd
p^
cd tí o
•H +J <d
C/D w hJ pq < M Pí < : >
Q M > M Q
•K 00
<y>
cr. M C! o
• H +J cd P .
• H o
• H 4J 1-1 cd
P^ M cd tí o
•H 4J cd
I
r^
•K • -CM CO Csl CM
• . <y\ o
0) <u p^ N >% •H H cn
cd cd C C
• • • • r>. r^ < r ro
• • CM * ^
CO w l-J pq
Pá
0
o M H
H M H co
CM CTN
m
<u p -> ^
H
cd tí o
•H +J
+J •H +J CO tí
M
O •H +J tí
O •H 4J
+J •H •H 4J +J <n co
<u <U (U >-i N 00 •H (U C/3
Q !:-.
,tí +J O M (U 3 (U O P, cd
co w
co w hJ pq < : M
m
CM
00
(U <u
00 <u
Q
rtí O <u (U p -
C/D
•K •K CXv CM cM m
. a
M m
<u <u u oo <U >-i
Q <U 'B +j B
cn <u
_gg 00 <
•H CJ ÎU CO
co
w pq
< >
hJ < :
Q M > M
CO
w pq
Pí < í >
O M H tD H M H CO !3
• •« • - • • <r cM m o co cr. M o
• • CO 0 0
• • <r 0 0
•
• <y\
o
• • <r o
•
• r Cvl
• • CO
<r
• 0 0
o cTi vo m cM r>. r^
* • -- - • M M cn <T> M m
• - • -:Í •K 4Í CO CO M 00 m cTv
vO
o a a tí co M cd tí o
•H +J 3 +J •H +J co tí
M
<U P-> H M cd C o
•H 4J d 4J •H 4J co tí
M
<U N
•H cn M cd tí o
•H +J 0 +J •H +J CO C
M
tí O
•H 4J cd N
•H
c cd 00 U o Æ o <u <u CL co
(U (U u 00 (U
Q
rd o <u <u CL co
(U N
•H cn >. +J M d o cd w
>-4 (U
rP 6 (U
s < CJ co
co w t-I pq
<3
Q
Q
co w hJ pq < : M
S O
o a M H H M H C/D !2:
<u < tí >
• * • - -Csl <t- o 00 r - o
M <r co m
tí tí o o
•H •H 4J +J cd cd p . p -
• H • H o o
• H • H +J +J >-i >-i cd cd
CM PLI
<u <u >-i 00 (U >-i
Q (U
«-i co <u <u S
4 : : ^ 00 < í
•H O !x! co
M cj^ r^ M M
4J >-i O o , <u <u P. P. N tí >^'r\
CO H CO
M M M <d cd cd C! tí C3
O O • H • H
cd cd C! tí o o
•H •H 00 +J (U cd
Pí ^
o •H 4J
CO CM CO M CM CM
C! O
•H +J cd N
• H C cd
<r vo r-. M M tí c! o o
•H •H +J +J cd cd p . p -
• H - H
• • m m cr. m
• • t ^ 00
<u (U >-l
o • H
0 +J • H
CU N
00 00 -H V4 (U CA> O Q
•H +J +J 4J cn co co tí tí C
M M M
rtí O <U <U
O (U (U
0 o
p. p . cd C/2 co w
o •H
4J +J U U cd cd
^ Pu CL, (U
X I M M 6 cd cd <U C C!
2 0 0 •H •H
<î 00 +J c j (U cd cn pd z:
tí 0
•H +J cd N
•H C! cd 00 u 0 Æ 0 <u <u CU co
(U (U >-l 00 (U Q
x: 0 <u (U p . co
I
00
M
I
00
76
'O <u tí tí
•H 4J C! O
CJ
CO
w
pq < H
CM X
CM Xi
CM
X
co w pq
C/3 w hJ pq
â §
Q M > M Q 13
co w l-I pq <í
<u ^ <u ^ tí ^ tí > o O o
!2: M iz; s H <
H O M o H Pí CO PM
M
•K <r <r
• 00
<U M (U M >-i 00 T3 (U d
Q d O
rtí Pí o <U O <u s p . ^ co
M
I
cr>
* m CO
• C3>
<U <U U 00 <u
Q
rtí O cu (U p . co
• M CT\
• M M
C! O
•H 4J cd a
•H o
•H +J >-i cd (^ M cd tí o
•H 00 <u Pá
• M m
• M M
C! O
•H +J cd p .
•H O
•H 4J M cd
PH
M cd C! O
•H +J cd
!2:
• • MD -<r
• m M
<u N
•H CO
M <d tí o
•H +J tí +J •H +J cn tí
M
• CO M
• 00
<u <u ^ 00 cu Q rtí o <u <u P4 co
• • <ys cM m 00
• • 00 o
M
<U N
•H C/D
M cd tí
tí o O •H
•H +J 00 CJ <U +J
PH " H +J
< cn ( j a CO M
C/D W H 4 pq < :
M
>
! 3 Q M > M
Q
M
•K • M CO
• co CM
tí o
•H +J cd P.
•H O
•H +J U cd
cd c o
•H 00 <u
píî
I
o
co w
pq < M
O M H
H M H C/2
M
<U N
•H CO
cd tí o
•H 4J tí 4J •H +J cn c:
co w hJ pq < M
Q M > M Q
M
CO W
pq
â
o M H PD H M H C/2
•K o o
• r <r
• as
• •<r co
• m
• m co
• 00
cu <u u oo (U
Q
rtí o <u <u CU
C/2
cu <u
00 <u
Q
cn <u
rc: 00
•H
æ
C3
o •H 00 (U
Pí
< :
o C/3 M
I
o
• • <r <r
• r- CM
o m
<u <u >-i 00 <u Q
rtí o <u cu a
co
n w 1-^ pq < M
C/D w l-J P3
a pá
0 cu ! ^ (U
<; o o o ! 3 SS M S Q H
> H M M
g H co
M S M
^
I
M
^3
§ O
Pá
o
M M
I
77
CM X!
' d (U d c:
• H +j C! o
I
CO
w pq < H
CM !><
CM XI
• m <r
• co
• o
CO
CM co
co w t-J cu pq <u < u M 00 Pí (U < Q > ^ O
co
w pq
OJ
I
CM
I
co
§ O
Pá
o
I
CO
I
<r
P Q M >
> O C! <U O
Q <U !z: pá
co w l-J p:5
!^ <u -^ <u ;z; c > c! o o o H !z; 2 S H <3 tD (^ H O H O H Pí CO PM :z; M
M
X) C tí O Pí
O
M
I
<r
C/ w hJ pq
á > <u
C!
co
w pq
Pá
h^ o î ^ O
< s ;z: :s t3 Q M > M Q
I
m
<u <J <u tí > C
o
H
H M H co !z: M
M
T3 C
O Pá
O !2;
M M
I
m
78
<u tí tí
•H +J tí O
CJ
I
CO
w hJ pq < : H
CM X!
W i-J pq
CM X
w >H
CM X!
W w Pí
<3 co
W w Pá
M O Ctí Píî PL hJ w Q
Q
•K m co
tí o
•H 00 <u
Pí
< o co
• o CM
co
• • vO 00
•
m
CM
<r
tí o
•H oo (U
Pá
<í CJ co
sO
13 tí
O P^
o :2:
I
vO
• • CM <r CO
(U co
C o
•H 00 <U
Pí
<î o C/3
co w pq
Pá
>
Q
Q
cn w
pq
Pí
o M H :i3 H M H C/3 M
•K CO
r ^
m
!^ <u
co
I
• •
o •
Csl
• CM 00
c O
•H 4J <d
•H o
•H 4J >-l cd
P-i
cd tí o
•H 00 (U Pí
• CM 00
• Csl fO
tí o
•H 00 cu
Pá
<L> co
• • 00 vO co r-.
• • < r cM M M tí tí O O
•H •H +J +J cd cd p. P.
•H 'H o o
•H •H +J 4J U U cd cd
PM PH
<d cd tí tí o o
•H •H 00 +J <u <d
M
I
r^
• r^
00
tí o
•H 00 (U
Pí
< : o co
CA)
w 1-4 pq
Pí
z : o M H t3 H M H co ^ ;
• CO m
• CM CM
<U N
•H CO
>. +J M tí O cd w
• • • >;r >Xi vO O
• • •<r 00
u <u
•i <u
!^ < <U CJ
co co
• CM CM
• 00 CO
co w <u <u pq U
á oo <u
(^ Q
> M-t O
Q
>^ O tí <u o
M <U Q P^ M P^
• • cy\ m
• 00
u Q)
•i cu
<5 CJ cn
M
I
00
O M H
H M H co !3
• • m co
• CM
tí O
•H 00 (U
Pí
<3 o co
co w 1-4 pq
<U C o !z:
M M
nd tí
o Pi
o
I
00
79
<u tí tí
•H +J tí O
O
CO
w
pq < : H
CM !><
W 1-4 pq
CM X!
CM ! ^
W W Pá o < co M Q
• •K CJN VO
m r^ • •
•<r >d-
U <u
•i <u
><í < : <u u
co co
• CM
cr. •
CT\ CO
• C3 O
• C3
tí O
•H +J cd N
•H tí <d oo >-i
O
rtí o (U <u p .
CAi
co w H 4 <U pq <U < u
00 <u
Q %
O
13 Q
>. O c
> <U M O Q <U ^ Pi
•K 00 co
w w Pí C5
. ^ H
g Q C/3 B
O M P í !33 CM Q
w ^ 1 Q
M
1
(J^ M
<U co
• • M CM
•K
o M
vO
CO
w 1-4 pq â ^
o s s o
p Q M > M Q
H ! 3 H M H co
c O •H +J cd N / - s
•H M C M cd 00 Td
^ c O 0 O
Æ Pá O <U O (U ;z; p . ^ co
M M
1 1
M
M 1 1
o CM
• 00 CM
<u N
• H CO
M
o cd w
cn w h4 pq
M
• • CM vO
• 00
>J cu 'B S <u S <í u co
• • «^ C3
• • CO o
• 00
!^ (U co
• • • • O co CM vO
• • m r M M
C C O O
•H •H +J +J cd cd P. P.
•H •H O O
•H •H +J +J >-í >-i cd cd
PH P-I
M M cd cd
c c O O •H •H 00 +J (U cd
pcí 2 ;
• - -• • * 00 vO o m vo co
• • • cr> o m
M M
+J > o P . <u <u P^ PL, N 0 >>^H
CO H C/)
T-\ r-{ r-{ cd <d cd C C C o o o
•H •H •H 4J +J 4J c 0 d +J +J +J •H •H •H 4J +J +J cn co co
tí tí tí M M M
CM
M
O CM
^ l cu
rO S <u
< : o co
* * CM co
• 00
4 cu
rP
B <u S < : o C/3
• • o vO
•
tion 21
cd P.
•H o
•H +J >-i <d
P^
M cd
c o •H 00 (U
Pí
J.<
• o CM
•
tion 20
cd P.
•H o
•H +J >-i cd
p->
M cd
c a •H + j cd
12;
co w 1-4 pq <: M Pí <: >
NAL
o M
INSTITUT
• • o m
•
ort
7
p . p . tí co M cd C o
•H +J 0 4J •H +J CO C
M
•K r co
• vO
<u p->. H M cd C O
•H 4J 0 +J •H +J (0 C
M
•K • m M
• vO M
CU N
•H CO
M cd C O
•H +J tí +J •H 4J CO
c M
M
M CM
80
X) <u p c
•H 4J
c O
CJ
co
W 1-4 pq < : H
CM X!
CM X
CM X!
co
• • - • M CO CM M O O^
• . . r^ m o
C o
•H +J cti N
•H C cd
(U <U u
<u N
00 00 •H •j <u c/:)
Q
o <u <u
> . 4J rtí
O M <u d <u o
Pí Pí cd CO C/3 W
• * -v O v O v O o^ M <r
• • • vO vO O
c o
• H +J cd N
• H c cd
• vO <3^
C/D
w h4 p:5 < :
Pá <: > <U h4
c <: o 12; . :s o
P M Q M > M Q
M
H ! 3 H M H CO
M
<U (U >-4
<u N
00 00 •H H <U C/3
O Q
rtí O <u <u
o <u <u
>> +J
tí o
cu p. cd co co w
M
x)
§ o
Pí o
Csl
M M
CM CM CM
<U P . >>
H
cd C o
•H +J O 4J •H +J cn C
M
co w 1-4 pq < : M Pí
•a r-s <r
• 00 CO
co w h4 pq
^
CM CM
Q
M
(U c O
C/3 W 1-4 pq
O M H
r=) H M H CO
co w 1-4 pq < : M
<u c O
<U C O I
Q
tn w 1-4 pq <:
C/D
w 1-4 pq
Pí
1-4 <U > (U § C _ C !z: o s o O !z; <tí îs M Pí H O
^ q H Pá M CL, H C/3 ;z: M •K
•
r^ M
c O
•H +J cd P.
•H o
•H +J >-i cd
CM
<d C o
•H +J cd
!2;
co CM
CO CM
81
CM X
o CT\
00
w h4 pq
C/
w
'X3 (U tí tí
•H +J C O
U
CO
w h4 pq < : H
w h4 pq
M <n w Q
CM !x!
CM X!
W W Pí O < : co M Q
W W Pí O < :
c o
• H OO <U
Pí
u CAl
co
M rtí p 1-4
w Q
! 3
o Pí
Q
§
M
1
<r CM
co CO W W h4 h4 pq pq < :
Pí < : >
h4 <U î ^ < tí :^ !I3 O O Q !2: M M H > ^ M H Q M S H M CO
!2:
<u c o
12:
^ M M
T3 C d o Pí
o !2; v-^
i _ j 1 1
M
m o
• <u
rtí +J
X)
c o >^ <u
rO
00 •H CO
•
M O
• (U
rC +J
T3 C o !>. (U
r P
00 •H C/2
• •
CM
82
higher evaluation of desirability. Further, individuals in public
institutions and those who were associated with larger Speech Communi-
cation academic organizations, particularly the larger institutions
with graduate programs, were likely to find the inclusion of research
activities an important and desirable direction.
Round II responses increased the general level of agreement with
Statement 2 and the desirability of the curriculum direction. There
were two significant differences in the sub-group responses in Round
II as contrasted with Round I, although the direction of the responses
as reported above remain constant. Significant differences were found
in the greater desirability of this curriculum direction for SCA raera-
bers and for those employed in public institutions. The Round II re-
sponse increased the level of agreeraent frora 12 percent to 87.3 per-
cent and the desirability level to 86.8 percent, both clearly exceed-
ing the consensus criterion. The expectation of realization of this
curriculum component was expected to occur by the mid-1980s, Table 3
reports the percentage distribution of the individuals, institutional,
and program sub-groups for Statement 2.
Statement 3. Individualized instruction and self-paced programs
should diminish the amount of classroom activity in Speech Communication.
The responses to Stateraent 3 in Round I indicated disagreement
and undesirability to individualized instruction and self-paced pro-
grams in order to diminish the amount of classroom activity in Speech
Communication. The variation from the 77.2 percent disagreement and
73.4 percent undesirability influence of this direction of the cur-
riculum was found in SCA members and the raore experienced faculty
raembers. They did not evaluate this direction as negatively as
83
non-SCA members or faculty members with less experience. Respondents
representing larger Speech Communication faculties held more favorable
views toward this curriculum direction.
The responses which were a part of Round II indicated a higher
level of consensus by over ten percent for both agreement and desira-
bility factors. A total of 87.7 percent disagreed with the reduction
of typical classroom activities while 87.1 percent felt that this
curriculum direction would be undesirable. While this clearly reached
consensus, significant differences araong sub-groups were noted. This
curriculum direction was judged more negatively and undesirable by
those faculty raembers who did not hold the doctorate and who taught
in programs not offering graduate degrees than for those with the
doctorate and those in programs with graduate offerings. Further,
female, more often than male, respondents viewed this direction as
negative and undesirable. Table 3 reports percentage distributions
for both Round I and Round II responses by individual, institutional,
and program sub-groups.
Statement 4. Instruction in Speech Communication should adopt
the use of clearly defined objectives and measur-able outcoraes.
Although responses to Round I indicated a general agreement with
employing specific objectives with measurable outcoraes and that this
would be a desirable direction for the Speech Communication curricu-
lum, the level of consensus was not reached (74.5 percent and 74.6
percent, respectively). Respondents to Round I who held higher
degrees, who are employed in public institutions, and who were not a
part of larger Speech Communication divisions do not agree with the
curriculum direction or see it as desirable as those who held lower
84
degrees, those who were employed in private institutions, and those
who were a part of smaller Speech Communication programs.
Round II responses moved the agreement and desirability levels
beyond that needed for consensus (87.1 percent and 86.2 percent,
respectively). The only significant differences between sub-group
responses was found in the larger Speech Communication programs view-
ing stated objectives and measurable outcoraes in a raore positive way
than did smaller Speech Communication programs. Table 3 contains the
response percentages of the individual, institution, and program sub-
groups for Rounds I and II.
Statement 5. Speech Communication research efforts should be directed primarily to the resolution of current social problems.
Individuals participating in this study clearly did not view
the resolution of social probleras as the major direction for Speech
Coramunication research. The general disagreeraent with this curricu-
lura direction and concern that the direction would be undesirable
was found in a consensus of 82.3 percent and 73.8 percent, respective-
ly. Male respondents did not view the curriculura direction, as im-
plied by this statement, as negatively as did female respondents.
Those who were not SCA members and who were employed in private in-
stitutions believed that such research efforts were likely to occur
at an earlier date than did SCA raembers and those connected with
public institutions. Table 3 reports the percentage distributions by
individual, institutional, and program sub-groups for Round I.
Statement 6. The curriculum in Speech Communication should be organized around courses which are designed to en-hance job opportunities for Speech Communication graduates.
85
Although placement of graduates from Speech Communication pro-
grams receives considerable attention and may be a source of concern
in some areas, respondents were almost equally divided as to the need
for curriculum revision which centered on job placement. A larger
percent viewed this change as desirable than agreed to its importance
(52.8 percent and 58.0 percent, respectively). Variations among
population sub-groups indicated wide ranges of concern for this cur-
riculum direction. Individuals representing sraaller speech programs,
and those offering less than the doctorate agreed with an increased
emphasis on career concerns as a part of the curriculum while those
who represented larger programs and who offered the doctorate in
Speech Communication were raore likely to disagree with an increased
emphasis on job related content.
Round II found respondents still evenly divided as to the ira-
portance of relating the Speech curriculura to job opportunities and
the desirability of the resultant emphasis (54.1 percent and 55.9
percent, respectively). Respondents who were more active in profes-
sional activities, who held more recent degrees as well as those who
represented smaller institutions and programs offering less than the
doctorate felt a stronger concern for career factors in the curriculum
than did those who were less active professionally, held older de-
grees, offered the doctorate in Speech Communication, and represented
larger institutions. Percentages of responses by individual, insti-
tutional, and program sub-groups for both Round I and Round II appear
in Table 3.
Statement 7. Efforts should be devoted to severing organizational
ties with Arts and Sciences and Humanities by mov-ing to establish Schools of Communication.
86
Individuals responding to Round I tended to disagree with moving
Speech Communication from Arts and Sciences to a more independent or-
ganizational identity and felt that a movement in that direction would
not be desirable (70.0 percent and 69.5 percent, respectively). Those
more likely to agree with the curriculum organization direction were
male, more involved in professional activities, represented public
institutions, offered the Master's degree, and represented mediura-
size Speech Communication faculties and institutions. Respondents
who represented public institutions and who were a part of the south-
ern and eastern SCA regions felt that this organizational change was
likely to occur at an earlier date.
Round II responses resulted in a higher level of opposition to
separation of Speech Communication from Arts and Sciences and the un-
desirability of its occurrence (82.6 percent and 78.5 percent, re-
spectively). A stronger agreement with this organizational change
was found in those who were more active professionally, who represent-
ed graduate level institutions, speech programs offering the doctorate,
and larger speech faculties and institutions. Table 3 summarizes the
individual, institutional, and program sub-groups for Round I and II.
Statement 8. Efforts in Speech Communication curriculura revision should be devoted to raaking speech courses an es-sential part of all educational programs rather than promoting the Speech Communication major as a field of study.
Respondents in Round I were almost equally divided as to the pro-
motion of Speech courses as service eleraents of higher education rather
than as a distinct major, with 51.4 percent agreeing with such curric-
ulum modification and 55.1 percent feeling such direction desirable.
Those who would be more in agreement with this organizational
87
orientation include those who held less than the doctorate, non-SCA
members, and those who participated less in professional activities.
Additional support was found for those representing private institu-
tions, undergraduate institutions, smaller speech programs, baccalau-
reate level speech offerings, and small institutions.
Round II resulted in a higher level of consensus by the respon-
dents in questioning an increased emphasis on the service component
of the speech curriculum with approximately two-thirds responding
negatively. Round II respondents who were more likely to favor the
service emphasis included non-SCA members, those less professionally
involved, larger speech programs and those offering less than the
doctorate in speech. Results from Round I and Round II for the individ-
ual, institutional, and program sub-groups are in Table 3.
Stateraent 9. The Speech Communication curriculum should be re-vised to emphasize the interdisciplinary nature of the course content.
Respondents in this study strongly agreed with the interdisci-
plinary nature of Speech Communication and see it as a desirable cur-
riculum direction (80.3 percent and 83.6 percent, respectively). Sub-
group responses show some variation, but with significant differences
found only in terms of the Speech Communication degree offered by the
respondent's institution. Generally, the higher the degree offered,
the less likely were individuals to agree with an interdisciplinary
emphasis on course content. Table 3 reports the percentage distri-
butions by individual, institutional, and program sub-groups for
Round I.
Statement 10. The scientific method of investigating spoken sym-bolic interaction should be the major theoretical base for the Speech Communication discipline.
88
The movement toward more scientific approaches as a major premise
for Speech Communication was a direction with which most of the re-
spondents would not agree and, in fact, found undesirable (74.6 per-
cent and 71.4 percent, respectively). Those who were raost likely to
agree with an increased scientific orientation included those more
involved in professional activities, offered graduate degrees, and
were from larger institutions.
Round II responses increased both the consensus and desirability
by over 15 percent (90.0 percent and 87.9 percent, respectively).
Those tending to find the scientific emphasis more appropriate for
the curriculum were individuals holding doctorates, those involved in
programs offering advanced degrees, and individuals from larger in-
stitutions. The scientific approach was viewed as desirable more
frequently by individuals who were associated with the central and
western regions. Table 3 summarizes the individual, institutional,
and program sub-groups for this time.
Stateraent 11. Enrollraent in Speech Communication courses should be limited to those for whom the content has di-rect vocational application.
An overwhelming consensus on Round I was found concerning the re-
striction of speech courses to a career preparation enrollment. Over
98 percent disagreed with this restriction and over 97 percent felt
that it was undesirable. No significant differences between individ-
ual, institutional, and program sub-groups were found with the excep-
tion the indication that individuals in the larger speech program areas
judged an occurrence of this direction more unlikely. Table 3 re-
ports the individual, institutional, and program sub-groups for this
stateraent.
89
Statement 12. A significant core of the Speech Communication cur-riculum should be based on research conclusions regarding strategies and constraints in message choice, communication environments, and speech functions.
Round I revealed a general agreement with the concern for more
effective strategies based on research conclusions in the curriculum
and the fact that this was a desirable direction (73.9 percent and
74.5 percent, respectively). There were no significant differences
in the individual, institutional, and program sub-group responses to
this statement for Round I.
Round II moved the consensus of agreement and desirability to a
much higher level (89.4 percent and 91.1 percent, respectively). The
only significant difference found between the sub-groups was the ten-
dency for SCA members to believe that this curriculum innovation would
occur at an earlier date. In Table 3 are the individual, institu-
tional, and program sub-group responses for item 12.
Statement 13. Speech Communication should be based on a "source-raessage" centered curriculum as opposed to a "message-audience" curriculura.
Participants in the study felt strongly that the "source-raessage"
curriculura should not be the dominant approach for the future and that
its continuation would be undesirable (86.7 percent and 85.0 percent,
respectively). The general agreement with this position was seen also «
in the fact that there were no significant differences between individ-
ual, institutional, and program sub-groups in response to this state-
raent. Table 3 reports the results.
Stateraent 14. Major elements in the course content of Speech Communication should insure that students are prepared to adapt to the constant rate of change reflected in the society.
90
There was a high level of agreement with the need to prepare
students to cope with change and that this was a most desirable cur-
riculum direction (89.5 percent and 90.4 percent, respectively).
General agreement among sub-groups was found in the absence of any
significant differences for individual, institutional, and program
variables. There was indication, however, that raore recent graduates
believed that this objective will be realized at an earlier date.
Table 3 states the results for the stateraent.
Stateraent 15. The Speech Communication curriculum of the future should elirainate those traditional perforraance areas such as oral interpretation, voice and ar-ticulation, debate, and parliamentary procedure.
Respondents in this study resisted the elimination of the more
traditional Speech curriculum areas and felt that any raove in that
direction was most undesirable (88.6 percent and 88.0, respectively).
The overall consensus in this area was further supported by the fact
that there were no significant differences between any individual,
institutional, and program categories. The results for these vari-
ables are in Table 3.
Statement 16. The application of educational technology should replace the classroora teacher as the medium of instruction in Speech Communication.
Respondents did not feel that a decreased emphasis on classroom
teaching was appropriate or desirable (97.6 percent and 98.1 percent,
respectively). The only significant difference between sub-groups
was found in SCA regional membership. The eastern and southern re-
gions were somewhat more likely to view an increased use of technology
in a favorable manner, and expectation that some changes in this di-
rection may be noted at an earlier date. Table 3 summarizes the in-
dividual, institutional, and program variables.
91
Statement 17. Within the practical fraraework of institutional scheduling, the Speech Communication curriculum should be structured on a modular approach.
Participants in Round I were equally divided as to the importance
of a modular curriculum and if this curriculum direction would be
desirable (42.7 percent and 47.7 percent, respectively). Female re-
spondents and those representing smaller speech faculties were raore
likely to see such scheduling as a positive curriculum direction.
Respondents in the central SCA region were least likely to view a
modular approach as desirable.
Round II respondents increased their consensus concerning this
statement in excess of 30 percent. Modular scheduling was not viewed
as an iraportant direction for the curriculura and was evaluated as
undesirable if it should occur (88.9 percent and 87.2 percent, re-
spectively). Those who felt raore comfortable with curriculura changes
in this direction were those who were more involved in professional
activities and who represented the larger speech faculties. Individ-
uals in the southern and central regions viewed modular approaches as
less desirable than those in the eastern and western regions. Table 3
states the results of the individual, institutional, and program
variables.
Statement 18. Credit hour requirements in Speech Communication should be reduced in order that students have greater opportunities for interdisciplinary study.
Participants generally disagreed with a reduction of core require-
ments and would find a move in that direction as undesirable (80.3
percent and 76.1 percent, respectively). Feraale respondents and non-
SCA merabers tended to support fewer hours in required Speech Communi-
cation courses. Individuals in the eastern and central SCA regions
92
voice stronger support for raaintaining larger numbers of core require-
ments than do those in the southern or western region. The results
pertaining to the individuals, institutional, and program categories
are in Table 3.
Statement 19. Speech Communication should be fused with the sub-ject matter content of the social sciences (psy-chology, sociology, political science) rather than continue as a separate discipline.
Individuals responding to this study strongly disagreed with the
elimination of Speech Communication as a separate discipline and
judged the result as most undesirable should it occur (87.9 percent
and 85.8 percent, respectively). Female respondents, non-SCA members,
and institutions without departmental status were likely to view this
organizational change in a somewhat more desirable manner. Individ-
uals representing undergraduate institutions and those with more
recent degrees concluded that this change raight occur at an earlier
date. In Table 3 are the individual, institutional, and program sub-
groups.
Statement 20. The instructional prograra in Speech Communication should be revised to reflect more erapirical re-search.
Respondents in Round I were in favor of a raore erapirical basis
for Speech programs and believed the direction to be desirable al-
though the support was far from consensus (53.7 percent and 60.6 per-
cent, respectively). There were no significant differences between
sub-groups with the exception that the very large speech faculties
tended to support this position while medium size faculties were
strongest in objecting to the empirical emphasis,
Round II increased the percentage of agreeraent and evidenced a
stronger position for the desirability (68.1 percent and 71.3 percent.
93
respectively). There were no significant differences between individ-
ual, institutional, and program sub-groups although individuals af-
filiated with private institutions believed that such changes will be
longer in occurring. The results for the individuals, institutional,
and program variables are in Table 3.
Statement 21. The Speech Communication curriculum should be re-vised to include specific context courses such as political communication, organizational communica-tion, and legal communication.
Participants indicated strong agreement with the concept of
specific context courses and that a greater emphasis in this area
would be a desirable Speech Coramunication direction (82.8 percent and
83.0 percent, respectively). Stronger support for this direction was
found among male respondents, SCA merabers, and those who participated
more widely in professional activities. A higher level of agreement
with this curriculum direction was also found on the part of individ-
uals in public institutions, graduate institutions, and larger insti-
tutions of over 10,000 enrollment. Finally, stronger support for con-
text courses was found in speech prograras representing a department
structure, which offer higher speech degrees, and have a larger speech
faculty. Table 3 reports the individual, institutional, and program
sub-groups for this item.
Statement 22. Much of the content of Speech Coraraunication grad-uate courses should be incorporated into the undergraduate program.
Respondents in Round I disagreed with the curriculum change which
would move existing courses to the undergraduate level and indicated
that it would be undesirable if such changes were effected (64.3 per-
cent and 60.9 percent, respectively). There were no significant
94
differences between the individual, institutional, and program sub-
groups with the exception that individuals representing graduate in-
stitutions were somewhat more likely to approve of such curriculum
changes.
Round II increased the concensus almost 15 percent both for
those who would resist the course level change and the evaluation of
its undesirable consequence (79.8 percent and 77.3 percent, respec-
tively). The strength of this consensus is further indicated by the
absence of any significant differences between any of the sub-group
categories. Table 3 reports the individual, institutional, and pro-
gram variable results.
Statement 23. Speech Communication research efforts should be directed toward raerging behavioral and rhetorical approaches in a common approach to research design.
The respondents in Round I indicated agreement with a more com-
mon research design and the fact that this would be a desirable cur-
riculum outcome (73.4 percent and 75.9 percent, respectively). While
there were sorae differences between percentages of responses, there
were no significant differences between any of the sub-group variables.
Round II responses increased the agreeraent and desirability con-
sensus by almost 20 percent (92.1 percent and 92.7 percent, respec-
tively). There were no significant differences on individual, insti-
tutional, or program variables with the exception of a significant
difference in the percentage of responses based on professional acti-
vity. While no clear pattern emerged, those with limited participa-
tion and a high level of participation tended to be more in agreement
with this curriculum direction than those with a moderate level of
activity. The results for the individual, institutional, and program
categories are in Table 3.
95
Statement 24. The Speech Communication curriculum should provide a course concerning the relationship of classroom communication to learning and instruction for all prospective teachers.
Participants in this study were in strong agreement that special
courses should be provided as a special service to teacher education
programs and that this is a most desirable curriculum component (94.9
percent and 95.6 percent, respectively). The strength of this agree-
ment will be found in a high level of consensus between the sub-group
variables, There is indication that respondents who were a part of
the western SCA region would be less likely to proraote such service
courses than would individuals in other SCA regions. Table 3 indi-
cates the results of the individual, institutional, and program vari-
ables for this item.
Scientific-Huraanistic Orientation Scale
The nature of the Delphi Technique, which requires the use of
specific statements to which respondents are asked both to agree and
to indicate an evaluation of desirability, lends itself to further
use. In addition to drawing conclusions based upon the consensus of
agreement and indication of desirability of the total group, each
participant is identified as agreeing with each statement and as re-
cording alignment with desirability for the content of that statement.
If stateraents clearly reflect a position, such as philosophical, eco-
nomical, political, social, or other opinion which can be categorized,
additional scales or ratings based on individual responses can result,
The twenty-four curriculum statements used in this study included a
number of statements clearly defining a respondent's position concern-
ing an agreeraent with a scientific orientation or a huraanistic orien-
tation to the Speech Comraunication curriculum.
96
Nine statements in the Speech Curriculum Delphi instrument (state-
ments 2, 4, 5, 10, 12, 13, 16, 20, and 23) reflected either a scien-
tific or humanistic orientation depending upon the choice of the
respondent in agreement or disagreement with the position as well as
the judgment regarding the desirability or undesirability of the con-
sequence. This selection perraits each participant the assignraent of
a score value for each of the nine stateraents based on the two re-
sponses. These stateraents were designed so that agreeraent with the
stateraent and indication of desirability reflected a scientific orien-
tation while disagreeraent with the stateraent and undesirability re-
flected a huraanistic orientation. The scientific-huraanistic scale
which results from this scoring procedure is, in fact, a continuum
in keeping with the realistic placeraent of individuals in agreeraent
with these orientations. That is to say, individuals are unlikely to
be totally scientific or huraanistic in their views but will be placed
along a continuum between these scale extremes. The scoring, there-
fore, of the scientific-humanistic scale included a scientific score
ranging from 0 to a raaximum of +18 score points, a humanistic score
ranging from 0 to -18 score points, and a total scientific-humanistic
scale score ranging frora -18 to +18. A percent scientific score,
therefore, includes scientific position on both parts of each of the
nine questions for a total of +18 score points. Conversely, a per-
fect huraanistic position on both parts of each of the nine questions
for a total of -18 score points. The distribution of the 303 parti-
cipants in this study for each of the three scale scores appears in
Table 4.
97
TABLE 4
SCIENTIFIC - HUMANISTIC SCALE SCORE DISTRIBUTION
SCORE SCIENTIFIC SCORE HUMANISTIC SCORE SCI-HUM SCORE
No. Percent No. Percent No. Percent
18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 -7 -8 -9 -10 -11 -12 -13 -14 -15 -16 -17 -18
.3
1.0
.3
8 5 21 12 44 13 48 19 52 19 30 11 13 3 1
2.6 1.7 6.9 4.0 14.5 4.3 15.8 6.3 17.2 6.3 9.9 3.6 4.3 1.0 .3 2
1 4 5 17 16 42 20 56 21 35 9 41 3 21 2 7
.7
.3 1.3 1.7 5.6 5.3 13.9 6.6 18.5 6.9 11.6 3.0 13.5 1.0 6.9 .7
2.3
1.0
1 8 1 5 1 23 6 15 6 42 7 23 15 30 12 21 4 36 3 6 2 19 1 3 1 6 1
.3 2.6 .3
1.7 .3
7.6 2.0 5.0 2.0 13.9 2.3 7.6 5.0 9.9 4,0 6.9 1.3 11.9 1.0 2.0 .7 6.3 .3
1.0 .3 2.0 .3
.3 .3
Totals 303 100.0 303 100.0 303 100.0
98
Scientific-Huraanistic Orientation Coraparison
While Table 4 presents the array of scores on the scientific-
humanistic scale for all respondents, a raore meaningful presentation
of scores would follow the sub-group categories. Table 5 reports the
mean scores and standard deviations for each of the scientific-
humanistic scores by individual, institutional, and program sub-groups.
For sub-groups involving dichotomous data, comparisons were made by
use of the t tests, with one-way and multiple analysis of variance
techniques applied to the other sub-groups.
In order to determine if significant differences existed between
the scientific-humanistic orientation of major individual and insti-
tutional sub-groups, the t test was used at the .05 significance
level. Table 6 reports the comparison of the mean scientific scores,
the mean humanistic scores, and the raean scientific-humanistic total
scores by sex, SCA membership, degree level of respondent, institu-
tional support and institutional type, There were no significant dif-
ferences between the three raean scores of raale and feraale respondents.
No significant differences were found between the three raean scores
of SCA and non-SCA members. There were no significant differences
between the three mean scores of respondents who held the doctorate
and who were below the doctorate. There were no significant dif-
ferences between the three mean scores of individuals who represented
public or private institutions. There was a significant difference
between the scientific score of individuals employed by graduate in-
stitutions and those employed by undergraduate institutions. A higher
mean score for respondents from graduate institutions was significant
at the ,05 level. There were no significant differences on the
99
m
w h4 pq < : H
H O H
O M H C/3
• > <u Q
• co
o M H !2; w M u CO
w Pí o u co
o M
w M H w M U CAJ
c cd <u
S
w Pí o u co
• > <u Q
• co
C cd <u
> (U
Q co
C <d <U
+j tí <u
n3 tí O P-co <U
Pí
<4-l O
cu <u >-l 00 <u
Q
o •H Ê cu cd o
< :
> . pq
cM m O 00
• • vo m
<r m o M
• • M M I t
i ^ m <r cM
• • CO CO
<r r.« m r^
• • OO 00 I I
M 00 CO M
• • CO CO
•<r cvj <r vo
• • r^ r^
co
u <u +J co cd S cn
• B
>-i o M <U
rtí O cd
<u +j cd >-i o 4J o o
pq Q
+J C <u C O P. co (U Pí M-l o
<U co
> . pq
cM m 00 M
• • m vo
o vo M CM
I I
00 vO CM CO
• • CO c o
o <r 00 co
• • 00 00 I I
M vO • •
CO CO
(y\ 00 vO O
• • r>. r^
(U M
<u cd rH B cd <u
S w
p. •H rtí cn u <u
•i <u
< : o co
> . pq
CM vO CTi r>.
, . m m
<r C3> <T. o
• • O CM I I
00 r^ CM CO
• • CO CO
O vO r^ CT\
• • 00 00 I I
o co CM CM
• • co co
<r r-. r>> 00
• • r^ vo
>-l <u
r P
u <u
X I B <u s
B <: <u S <: u C/3
o cn c o !z:
cn >-i cd <U
> ^
m
4J co cd
C •H
(U o C cd
13 C <U 4J +J < : 00
c •H +J <U <U
< : o co
cd C o
•H 00 <U
Pá
> . P5
00 o vO <y>
• • m m
<Ti CM r^* vo
• • M O I I
m <j-CM CM
• • CO CO
O CT\ o <r
• • CJ^ 00 I I
CO 00 M CM
• • co co
M C^ cM r^
• • r«. r^
<U C <U O C
S O
100
T3 cu 0 c
•H +J tí o u
I
m
w h4 pq <: H
H 4 <^ H O H
O M H co
• > <U
Q •
w pd o o C/D
u
w Pí o u CA)
u M
w M H !z: w M u co
co
c cd (U
• > <u Q C/2
C cd <u S
• > <u
Q •
cn
C cd <u X
co ^ cd <u >*
m 4J co cd
fu
tí •H
(U o c cd
'O
c cu 4J 4J <:
00
c •H +J <u <u s <: u co M cd c o •H 00 <u
PÍ
>. pq
r^ r^ co vo r^ M o co
. . . . m vo i ^ m
o^ M co co r^ vo cr> »d-
. . . . M O M O I I I
o r ^ co o m cM cr. cTi
. . . . co r o co CM
CT. ^ r^ r~ vO 00 O M
• • • • 00 00 CJ 00
I I I I
O M vO cr. cvj M m cT>
. . . . CO CO CO CM
o m m o Cr. CM M M3
. . . . vo 00 r^ 00
(U <U >-i <u
O ^-1 P > > rC O •H fi íri fi^ fjL,
cn >-i <d <u
m
co cd
PM
C • H
<U O C <d
'tí tí <u +J
00
c •H +J <u <u
< : u co
cd c o
•H +J cd
> . pq
M Cr. vO vO vO CO CM vO r-» CM M o
vo m m vo m vo
vo o co o vo <r o m M cM cr. o^
I I I M O O
I I I
CO CM <3N r^ CT> vO m cM cM cM r^ <r
CO CO CO CO CM c o
r-« m vo M r~ vo m 00 r^ 00 vo 00
00 00 00 00 00 00 I i I I I I
M r>* vo co cr> <r <r o M <r r^ cM
CO CO CO CO CM c o
M m r^ M o M m co m vo r^ cT.
r^ r^ r.- r^ r^ r^
<U <U (U >-i (U C <u o >-i :3 > o tí ^ rtí o -H îz: O H H w w
+ J >-l o p . p-0
co
cd c o
•H 4J o +J •H 4J co
c M >. pq
<í-r^ co vO M
• • m vo
vo ^ O CM
M I
cM <y\ CM CO
• • co co
< í r-*
• 00 1
00 \0
• 00 1
O vO M CO
• • CO CO
vo <r vo <r
• • r - r^
<U o +J
• H cd - H > XI -H d n
P^ PM
101
T3 <U tí tí
•H +J C O
U
m w h4
< H
W Pá o u co
u
o u co
u M w M H
W M U CO
> <U
Q
co
C cd <u
> <u
Q •
co
C cd <u
S
> (U
Q •
co
C cd <u
<u p . >>
H
cd C
o •H +J d +j •H 4J CO C
M
>> m
m co 00 00
• • m m
r^ cM vo m
• • M O
I I
m M CO CM
• • co co
cM r -cj <r
• • 00 00
I I
CTi O M CM
• • CO CO
CO v O csi <y\
• • r^ r^
<u +J cd c
^ 3 cd (U >-i +J 00 cd >-i 0 (U x )
T3 cd C >-i
C o
•H +J cd N
•H C cd 00 >-l o §
M 0 O
•H H >-i P
U
rtí O <u <u p .
co
> . pq
CM 00 vO Cs» 00 M
• • . vo m m
m M o^ CM M vO
. . . M M O
I I I
cT. < r co •vT CO 00
• • • CO CO CM
O VO o^ r^ r^ m
• • • 00 00 00
I I I
<r vo co < r M 00
. . . CO CO CM
r - co M < r vD CTN
• • • r^ r^ r^
cd <u u <
u o •r-) cd S
+j
c <U s +J >-l cd P. <u Q
C o
•H co •H > •H Q
CT\ r>. cM o m cT 00 < r
. . . . m m m
m cr. r^ cr< O vo CM M
. . . . M M O M
1 1 1 +
cr. 00 r~ cN O CO CM co
. . . . CO CO CO CO
CO M vO CM
<r o <r co • • • •
00 Cr. 00 00 I i I I
m r^ r^ m co M O cg
• • • • CO CO CO CO
00 cr. cr> cM CO CM M <r
• • • • r-- r^ 00 00
m <u -<U >J >-i o O O M <u <u Q rtí
O O cd Z pq
co m-
U <u +J co J3 S
(U +j <d >-i o 4J
o o Q
102
<U P c
•H +J C o u
m
w h4 pq < : H
w Pá O u cn
u M w M H
W M U co
> <u
Q •
co
C cd <u
> (U
Q
cn
C cd <u
> <u Q
C/D
c <d (U
p -• H rtí cn >-i <u
•i <u
C o
•H 4J cd
• H O O co co
< : cd c o
•H 00 <u
Pí <: u C/2
> . pq
r cM co 00 M 00 vO CM
• • • • vo m m vo
vO vO CM m yo c^ ir>, r-i
. . . . M M O M I I i i
O M < r CM CO CO M vO
• • • • CO CO CO CO
<r <r o 00 cr. 00 vo 00
• • • • 00 00 00 00 I I I I
CM O CO O m CM O M
. . . . co co co co
00 00 CO CO cM m o r-v
• • • • r^ r-« 00 r--
"<:<:-<: <: u co u U CO C/3 C/D W C/D u : 2
00 <r m vo cM o r^ co co M
vo m m <r vo
m vo cTi ^ co o M <r o r-{ r-\ r-\ T-{ <D 1 1 1 +
CT. -^ r vo m co M cr. cT m
CO CO CM CM co
<r co r co M r 00 M co <r 00 00 cr vo 00 I i I I i
co M m vo vo co M vo m o
CO CO CM co co
r r r 00 M co r v cr. r <r r r r^ r 00
m o o O M CM CM
m M i i u
\ I (U M vO >
r-\ \0 r-\ r-\ (D
cr» co M o^ vo vO CO CO vO M
m vo m m vo
VO O CO CM CO r-- cM .^r <r m
O M CM O M I i i I i
CM 00 r^ M CM
Degree
Highest
Since
Years
Number of
>^ pq
cM <r
CO CO
<r 00 m vo
00 00 i i
M O M m
ro co
>d- CT. r^ <r
o m cM
co co co
O CM vO <r ON o
<y\ r^ cr. 1 1 1
cr. r^ vo <T. O^ CM
CM CM CO
00 m co c r . c o m
r^ r^ v o 0 0 r^
o m M
i 1
M vO
m o M CM
i i
M ^ M M
O CM
>-i <U > o
103
'O <u c c
•H +J c o u
m w h4 pq < : H
í H o H
U M H C/2
• > cu Q •
co
u M W M H W M U co
W Pá o u C/3
u M
w M H
w M U co
O O CM CM v -
O r.» o cM r
vo m vo m m
CM cr. vo r ^ vo m r^ M M < r
• . . . . M O CM O O
i I I I
> <U
Q •
c/2
C <d (U
> cu
Q •
co
c cd <U
(U N
• H CO
cd C o
•H 4J tí 4J •H 4J CO C
> . pq
^ <r M cM 00
CO M vO CM O
CO CO CO CO CO
cr. o vo M m r-- vo m M M 00 00 cr. 00 00
i i i i i
o co M m vo co cM o r o CO CO CO CM c o
m cM o <r cM cN 00 <r cr. vo
r r-- r r^ 00
o o o
A
m >-t
<u T3 C P
O O O
#\ o M
i O o o
•N
m
o o o
ø\
m M
i
o o o
9S
o M
O O O
w
o CM
1
o o o
«\ m M
O o o
A
o CM
>- (U > o
104
p.
o pá o
>^ pq
îs: o co M
vO
w h4 pq < : H
O U
W Pí O u co u M H co
co w
w u
u M
w M :z: u M co
S O Q
W W Pí U w w Q
W O
s <! Q
<: H co
o M H
> w Q
W
w h4 pq
Pí
co co cn
cr. cr. CM
<r. cr cr. CM
r CM
co cr. cr.
M M M vO
• • co co
00 VO CM CO
• • CO CO
cM m 00 M
• • m vo
cr. 00 vO O
• • r-. r
o <r 00 co
• • 00 00
i i
O VO M CM
i i
00 CO <t m CM
00 co -íT m CM
00 co -cr m CM
<u u o o
C/3
o • H »4-1 M • H (U cd 4J M S C <d <u <u S w
•H o
co
<u
(U >-4 o o
co
o •H +J co <u cd
•d '-' 6 C cd <U cd S W
<u <u
<u u o O M
co <U cd -H 6
M cd cu cd :E; w +J o
H
co !z:
M 00
O co Csl CNI
• • CO co
<r r- r^ 00
• • r- vo
-<r <r -cr m CM
<r m
00 < r CM co
• • CO CO
o vO
cr. 00 00
i i
<r m CM
co !z:
VO <r. CM
vo CT CM
VO cr. CM
o CO
CM vO
cr. r-. . .
m m
-sr cr. cr. o o
i CM
i
<r <r <r m CM
(U u o o
C/3
O •H 1+-I •H +J C <U
•H O
CO
>-i 0)
X 0 <u s <: u co
-1
<u X
e <u s <: u cn 1 c o Z
<u > o o cn o
•H +j cn
•H C cd s p X
u <u
X B <u
^
< u C/3
u <u
X
e <u s <: u CA) 1 c o !z:
<u V4 o o co M cd +J o
H
Ct, •H X co M (U
X
e <u s <: u cn
a •H X co >-l <u
X B (U S <: u C/3 i c o !z:
105
(U tí c
•H +J C O
U
vO
w h4 pq < : H
W U
U M W M
o M CO
C/3 O W Q W W pá w O Pi w Q
O
<: Q
<: H C/3
o M H â > w Q
W h4
C/3 co C/2
!z: co C/3
!z: co :z:
00 cr. CM
00 cr. CM
00 cr. CM
co <r
o o CO
o o CO
o o co
co m co
M 00 co M
• • CO CO
r- m -vr cM
• • CO CO
cM m o 00
• • vo m
00 m
vO M
vO CM
O vO M CO
• • CO CO
cM cr. CM CO
• . co co
r^ co VO M
• • m vo
<r <N <r vo
• • r-v r^
<r r m r-~
• • 00 00
1 i
<r m O M M M i 1
vo <r vo <r
r^ r^
- r 00 r^ vo
• • 00 00 i 1
vO - . í O CM
• • M M i i
M cr. r >. CM
CM
<3^ CM CM
M <ri r .. CM
CM
CM O r co
CM O r^ co
CM O r^ co
<u >-l o • o <: co •
;s o •H ca IW •H • ti < tí • <U PO
•H O cn
(U +j cd u o 4J
o o Q
<u u o o
co
o •H +J co
•H
c cd
e tí
• <:
• s <^
• <:
• pq
<u 4J cd >-l
o 4J
o o Q
<u u o o
co
M cd +J o
H
• <:
• s <4}
• <:
• m
<u 4J cd u o 4J
o o Q
cu !-4
o o co
o •H O U-i •H •H M •P X C 0 <U P H
•H o co
<u +J cd >
•H >-(
CM
<u n o o co
o •H +J co
•H
c cd e rí æ
o •H M X 0
p-(
<u 4J cd >
•H >-4
Pn
<U >-i
o o co
M cd 4J
o H
O •H M X P
PH
<U +J <d >
•H >-i
cu
106
13 <U d c •H +J C O U
vO
w h4 pq <: H
W U
U M W M 52: O M CO
co o W Q W W Pá W o pá w w Q w o
<: Q
H co
o M H <: M > W Q
W h4 pq
m o
r^ cr.
cr. o M CM • •
CO CO
00 CO vO CO M M
C/
vO
m M CO CM • •
CO CO
00 CO VO CO M M
co z:
cr. cr. CM
cr. cr. CM
cr. cr. CM
cr. vo
m co 00 00 • •
m m
co m cM <r>
• • r^ r>~
CM r^ cr. v í
• • 00 00 i 1
r^ CM vo m
• • M 0 i i
00 co vO CO M M
<u u 0 0
CO
0 •H I H •H +J C <U
•H 0
cn
<u +j cd c T3 cd >-i 00 u <u
TJ C
Í3
cu 4J cd tí
x) cd >-i
0
0) V4 0 0
co
0 •H +J co
•H C <d 6 3 ffi
<u +j cd 3
^3 cd >-i 00 >-l <u
TJ C 13
<u +J cd 0
TJ cd >-i
0
<u >-l 0 0
C/3
M cd +J 0 H
<u +J cd 0
T3 cd >-l 00 >J <u
T3 C
{3
<U +J cd c T3 cd u
0
107
humanistic score or total score between undergraduate and graduate
institution respondents.
Three individual variables and two program variables include more
than two respondent sub-groups. Scientific-humanistic score means for
these variables, therefore, were subjected to one-way analysis of
variance (ANOVA) procedures in order to determine if there were sig-
nificant differences among the sub-groups. Intra-group and range
differences were subjected to specific tests of significance.
Table 7 reports the three scientific-humanistic scale scores
based on the degree of respondents and the resultant one-way ANOVA
including the F for each score comparison, There are no significant
differences between the mean scores on any of the three scales as a
function of the degree of the respondent, in that no F value reached
the ,05 level of confidence, Intra-group and range differences were
tested by the use of the Duncan, Tukey B, Tukey HSD, and Scheffe
tests; none of which reached the .05 level of confidence.
Using the criterion variable of the number of years since the
highest degree of the respondent, a one-way ANOVA of the three scien-
tific-humanistic scale scores is reported in Table 8. There are no
significant differences for the three scores as a function of the
recency of the highest degree of respondents in that no F value
reached .05 level of confidence. Intra-group and range differences
were tested by the use of the Duncan, Tukey B, Tukey HSD, and Scheffe
tests; none were significant at the .05 level.
Table 9 presents a one-way ANOVA for each of the three scientific-
humanistic scores based on the four SCA regional identifications of
the respondents. Analysis reveals no significant F values at the .05
108
TABLE 7
ONE-WAY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE - SCIENTIFIC-HUMANISTIC SCALE BY DEGREE OF RESPONDENT
Scientific Score Criterion Variable: Degree of Respondent
Baccalaureate Masters Doctorate
Total
Source of Variation
Between groups Within groups
Total
N
2 69 229 300
ss.
14.125 3062.957 3077.082
Mean
5.000 7.5072 7.624 7.580
MS
7.062 10.313
df
2 297 299
Stan.Dev.
1.414 3,328 3.181 3.208
Z
0,685
Not Signif,
Humanistic Score Criterion Variable: Degree of Respondent
Baccalaureate Masters Doctorate
Total
Source of Variation
Between Groups Within groups
Total
N
2 69 229 300
ss.
44.082 3202.836 3246.918
Mean
-13.000 - 8.406 - 8.773 - 8.716
MS
22.041 10.784
df
2 297 299
Stan.Dev.
1,414 3,427 3.245 3.295
F
2.044
Not Signif,
TABLE 7 - Continued
109
Total Score Criterion VariabXe: Degree of Respondent
Baccalaureate Masters Doctorate
Total
Source of Variation
Between groups Within groups
Total
N
2 69
229 300
ss.
100. 10242, 10342.
,238 ,195 ,433
Mean
-8,000 -0.840 -1.148 -1.123
MS^
50.119 34.485
df_
2 297 299
Stan.Dev.
Not
2,828 5,979 5.850 5.881
£
1.453
Signif.
110
TABLE 8
ONE-WAY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE - SCIENTIFIC-HUMANISTIC SCALE BY YEARS SINCE HIGHEST DEGREE
Scientific Score Criterion Variable: Years Since Highest Degree
1 - 5 6-10 11 - 15 16 - 20 Over 20
Total
Source of Variation
Between groups Within groups
Total
N
109 82 47 26 36 300
ss.
35.945 3041.137 3077.082
Mean
7.743 7.488 6.979 8.346 7.527 7.580
MS
8.986 10.309
ái 4
295 299
Stan.Dev,
3,110 3.504 2.989 2.965 3.256 3.208
F_
0.872
Not Signif.
Humanistic Score Criterion Variable: Years Since Highest Degree
1 - 5 6-10 11 - 15 16 - 20 Over 20
Total
Source of Variation
Between groups Within groups
Total
N
109 82 47 26 36 300
ss.
46.160 3201.883 3248.043
Mean
-8,541 -8.683 -9.404 -7.923 -9.055 -8.723
MS
11.540 10.854
df
4 295 299
Stan.Dev.
3,219 3,478 3,069 3.509 3,215 3.295
F
1.063
Not Signif,
111
TABLE 8 - Continued
Total Score Criterion Variable: Years Since Highest Degree
1 - 5 6-10 11 - 15 16 - 20 Over 20
Total
Source of Variation
Between groups Within groups
Total
N
109 82 47 26 36 300
ss.
162. 10179. 10341.
,446 ,484 ,930
Mean
-0.761 -1,195 -2.425 0.423 -1.528 -1.1300
M^
40,611 34,506
d^
4 295 299
Stan,Dev.
5.691 6.331 5.311 5.693 6.157 5.881
F_
1.177
Not Signif.
112
TABLE 9
ONE-WAY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE - SCIENTIFIC-HUMANISTIC SCALE BY SCA REGIONAL MEMBERSHIP
Scientific Score Criterion Variable: SCA Regional Membership
ECS SSCA CSSA WSCA
Total
Source of Variation
Between groups Within groups
Total
N
32 62 66 33
193
ss.
13.699 1910.055 1923.754
Mean
7.281 7.581 8.030 7.727 7.710
MS
4.566 10.106
d£
3 189 192
Stan.Dev,
Not
3.522 3.196 3.028 3.095 3.165
F_
0.452
Signif,
Humanistic Score Criterion Variable: SCA Regional Membership
ECA SSCA CSSA WSCA
Total
Source of Variation
Between groups Within groups
Total
N
32 62 66 33
193
ss.
3.320 2065.543 2068.863
Mean
-8.938 -8.839 -8.606 -8.879 -8.782
MS^
1.107 10.929
ái
3 189 192
Stan.Dev.
Not
3.301 3,305 3,142 3.621 3.283
F
0.101
Signif,
113
TABLE 9 - Continued
Total Score Criterion Variable: SCA Regional Membership
ECA SSCA CSSA WSCA
Total
Source of Variation
Between groups Within groups
Total
N
32 62 66 33
193
ss.
33,665 6569.816 6603.481
Mean
-1.656 -1.258 -0.515 -1.151
MS
11.222 34.761
df.
3 189 192
Stan.Dev.
Not
6.173 5.817 5.633 6,280
F
0.323
Signif,
level for the scientific-humanistic scores as a function of regional
merabership, Intra-group and range differences were tested by the use
of the Duncan, Tukey B, Tukey HSD, and Scheffe tests; none were sig-
nificant at the ,05 level.
Participants in this study represented four levels of Speech
degree offerings in their respective institutions. Table 10 subjects
the three mean scientific-humanistic scores of the sub-groups to one-
way ANOVA analysis. There were no F values which reached the .05
level of confidence as a function of the speech degree level, and the
intra-group and range differences were tested by the use of the Dun-
can, Tukey B, Tukey HSD, and Scheffe tests. None of the results were
significant at the .05 level.
Respondents were grouped by the Speech Communication faculty
size, with the five sub-group scientific-humanistic score means
114
TABLE 10
ONE-WAY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE - SCIENTIFIC-HUMANISTIC SCALE BY SPEECH DEGREE OFFERED
Scientific Score Criterion Variable: Speech Degree Offered
None Bachelor's Master's Doctorate
Total
Source of Variation
Between groups Within groups
Total
N
63 152 67 19 301
^
54.019 3023.238 3077.257
Mean
7.381 7.289 8.194 8.421 7.558
MS^
18.006 10.179
df_
3 297 300
Stan.Dev.
Not
3.353 3.168 3.066 3.254 3.209
F_
1.769
Signif.
"Humanistic Score Criterion Variable: Speech Degree Offered
None Bachelor's Master's Doctorate
Total
Source of Variation
Between groups Within groups
Total
N
63 152 67 19 301
ss.
25.367 3223.191 3248.558
Mean
-8.429 -9.007 -8.463 -8.316 -8.696
MS^
8.456 10.852
df_
3 297 300
Stan.Dev,
Not
3.094 3.382 3.268 3.318 3.295
F
.779
Signif.
115
TABLE 10 - Continued
Total Score Criterion Variable: Speech Degree Offered
None Bachelor's Master's Doctorate
Total
Source of Variation
Between groups Within groups
Total
N
63 152 67 19 301
ss.
126.922 10216.277 10343.199
42 34
Mean
-1.048 -1.691 -0.269
.105 -1.125
MS
.308
.398
df
3 297 300
Stan.Dev,
Not
5,592 5.965 5.822 6.091 5.857
F_
1.230
Signif.
reported in Table 11. One-way ANOVA computation reveals no significant
differences between the scientific score means and the total score
raeans as a function of faculty size. Intra-group and range differences
were tested by the use of the Duncan, Tukey B, Tukey HSD, and Scheffe
tests; neither of which was significant. The humanistic score one-
way ANOVA did not result in an F value significant at the .05 level;
however, the Duncan multiple range test did indicate a significant
difference between the humanistic score mean achieved by the 16-20
faculty size group and the means of the other four groups at the .05
confidence level.
In order to determine the interaction of institutional support
and institutional type on the scientific-humanistic scale scores,
multiple classification analysis of variance techniques were applied
to the three scores. Table 12 reports the multiple ANOVA for each of
116
TABLE 11
ONE-WAY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE - SCIENTIFIC-HUMANISTIC SCALE BY SPEECH COMMUNICATION FACULTY SIZE
Scientific Score Criterion Variable: Faculty Size (FTE)
1 - 5 6-10 11 - 15 16 - 20 Over 20
Total
Source of Variation
Between groups Within groups
Total
N
174 64 36 9 17 300
^
27.602 3028.597 3056.199
Mean
7.368 7.766 7.972 7.778 8.412 7.558
MS_
6.902 10.266
df
4 295 299
Stan.Dev,
Not
3,334 3,110 2.646 3.563 3.063 3.209
F
0.672
Signif.
Humanistic Score Criterion Variable: Faculty Size (FTE)
1 - 5 6-10 11 - 15 16 - 20 Over 20
Total
Source of Variation
Between groups Within groups
Total
N
174 64 36 9 17 300
s^
60.840 3186.078 3246.918
Mean
-8.736 -8.828 -9.167 -6.333 -8.412 -8.696
MS
15.210 10.800
df_
4 295 299
Stan.Dev.
Not
3.388 3.135 2.971 2.958 3.554 3.295
I 1.408
Signif.
TABLE 11 - Continued
117
Total Score Criterion Variable: Faculty Size (FTE)
1 - 5 6-10 11 - 15 16 - 20 Over 20
Total
Source of Variation
Between groups Within groups
Total
N
174 64 36 9 17 303
S^
89. 10218. 10308.
,664 ,922 .586
Mean
-1.345 -1.063 -1.194 1.444 0.000 -1.125
MS_
22.416 34.640
df.
4 295 299
Stan.Dev.
Not
6.077 5.740 5.350 4.362 6.124 5.857
F
0.647
Signif.
TABLE 12
MULTIPLE CLASSIFICATION ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SCIENTIFIC-HUMANISTIC SCALE
118
SOURCE OF VARIATION SUM OF MEAN DEG, OF SQUARES SQUARES FREEDOM SIGNIF,
Scientific Score by Institutional Support and Institutional Type
Institutional Support Institutional Type Two Way Interaction
Institutional Support/ Institutional Type
Within Total
0,389 37,052
12.055 3036.656 3088.519
0.389 37.052
12.05? 10.224
1 1
1 297 300
0.038 3.624
1.179
.999
.055
.278
Humanistic Score by Institutional Support and Institutional Type
Institutional Support Institutional Type Two Way Interaction
Institutional Support/ Institutional Type
Within Total
4.717 18.841
28.695 3200.544 3248.523
4.717 18.841
28.695 10.776
1 1
1 297 300
Total Scientific-Humanistic Score by Institutional Support and Institutional Type
0.438 1.748
.999
.184
2.663 .100
Institutional Support Institutional Type Two Way Interaction
Institutional Support/ Institutional Type
Within Total
6. 102.
74. 10121, 10299,
,259 ,640
.034
.879
.984
6. 102.
74. 34, 34,
,259 ,640
.034
.080
.333
1 1
1 297 300
0. 3.
2
,184 .012
.172
,999 .080
.138
119
the three scientific-humanistic scores with indication of support and
type variation and two-way interaction analysis. The resultant F
values as reported did not reach the ,05 significance level on any
interactions for the three scale scores, The scientific score ap-
proached significance as a result of the variance contributed by the
type of institution of the respondent with an F value of 3.624 and a
.055 significance level,
The comparison of humanistic and scientific orientations of the
respondents by the use of the t test, one-way analysis of variance,
and multiple analysis of variance using the raean scientific-huraanistic
scores, indicated that there were no significant differences between
these mean scores when analyzed by sex of respondent, SCA membership,
degree of respondent, institutional type, and institutional support.
Further, no significant interactions were found when these scores were
analyzed by degree of respondent, recency of degree, SCA region,
speech degree offered, or faculty size. Finally, no significant main
effects were found in the interaction of institutional support and
type with the scientific-humanistic scores of respondents. The lack
of significant differences and interactions between the criterion
variables with the scientific-huraanistic orientation of respondents
is verified by use of the chi-square statistic to analyze the per-
centage distributions of huraanistic and scientific orientations with
reference to these variables. Table 13 reports these percentage dis-
tributions by individual, institutional, and program variables with
the resultant chi-square and significance level. No significant dif-
ferences on any of the criterion variables were found when comparing
the scientific-humanistic orientation of the respondents.
120
TABLE 13
SCIENTIFIC-HUMANISTIC ORIENTATION OF RESPONDENTS BY CRITERION VARIABLES IN PERCENTAGES
INDIVIDUAL VARIABLES
Humanistic Scientific
Humanistic Scientific
1-5 Yrs.
Humanistic 33.8 Scientific 39.8
Male
82.5 83.9
Baccalaureate
1.3 0.0 ^
X
SEX Female
17.5 16.1
X^ = .02 (NS)
DEGREE Master's
22.0 22.9
= 1.51 (NS)
Doctorate
76.7 77.1
RECENCY OF DEGREE 6-10 Yrs. 11-15 Yrs. 16-20 Yrs.
28.8 24,6
18.1 11.9
6.9 11.0
Over 20
12.5 12.7
X^ = 4.20 (NS)
SCA MEMBERSHIP
Humanistic Scientific
Humanistic Scientific
Humanistic Scientific
None
31.9 28.4
None
27.5 28.2
SCA 1
16.3 15.5
SCA ] 1.
16.3 15.4
Yes
78.8 87.1
X
REGIONAL 2
20.6 13.8 X^ =
ÎÎATIONAL 2_
21.9 22.2
No
21. 12.
= 2.64 (NS)
PARTICIPATIOîs 3_
10.0 15.5
4.79 (NS)
PARTICIPATION 2
14.4 13.7
3 9
[
4_
8.8 9.5
4.
8.1 7.7
5.
12.5 17.2
5.
11.9 12.8
121
TABLE 13 - Continued
INSTITUTIONAL VARIABLES
INSTITUTIONAL SIZE Under 5,000 5-10,000 10-15,000 15-20,000 Over 20,000
Humanistic Scientific
54.7 46.4
Humanistic Scientific
Humanistic Scientific
24. 28.
.2
.8 8.1
2 ^-^ yr = 2.34
(NS)
5.0 8.1 7.6 9.3
INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT Public Private
57.1 58.5
X = = .01
42.9 41,5
(NS)
INSTITUTIONAL TYPE Four Year Graduate
58.4 50.4
41.6 49.6
X^ = 1.43 (NS)
Humanistic Scientific
20.4 14.5
SCA REGION Eastern Southern Central
31.1 31.1 34.2 35.5 x2 = 2.20 (NS)
Western
17.5 15.8
PROGRAM VARIABLES
SPEECH ORGANIZATION Major Department Division
Humanistic Scientific
31.8 32.5
X
57.3 10.8 58.1 9.4
2 = .15 (NS)
Humanistic Scientific
None
19.4 22.0
SPEECH DEGREE OFFERED Baccalaureate Master's Doctorate
55.6 44.9 X2
18.8 26.3
3.54 (NS)
6.3 6.8
122
TABLE 13 - Continued
PROGRAM VARIABLES
Humanistic Scientific
1-5
57.9 56.8
FACULTY SIZE 6-10 11-15 16-20
21.4 13.2 1.9 21.2 11,9 4,2
X^ = 1.42 (NS)
Over 20
5.7 5.9
A similar analysis of percentage distributions for each of the
Delphi statements based on the scientific-humanistic orientation of
the respondents is found in Table 14. A comparison of the responses
for those with a humanistic orientation based on the scientific-
humanisnic total score and those with scientific orientations based
on scientific-humanistic total scores are indicated, with the resul-
tant chi-square and significance level for each. Comparisons appear
for the three parts of each Delphi statement and round.
Humanistic and scientific orientations of respondents were de-
termined by their responses to selected Delphi statements on Round I
of the application of the instrument to the 303 respondents. Using
the total score of the Scientific-Humanistic Scale, respondents were
identified as to their orientation based on the direction of their
responses to the nine statements which were designated as scientific-
humanistic scale items. Significant differences between the two
groups of respondents on the Round I statements of the Scientific-
Humanistic Scale would be expected. Table 14 indicates that with one
exception such did occur (statements 2, 4, 5, 10, 12, 15, 20, and 23)
at a highly significant level. Statement 16 shows no significant
123
TABLE 14
RESPONSES TO DELPHI STATEMENTS BASED ON HUMANISTIC OR SCIENTIFIC ORIENTATION
DELPHI STMNT. & ROUND
HUMANISTIC SCIENTIFIC HUM. SCI,
Ag ^ e Disag. Agree Disag. JL. Sig MeanYr. MeanYr,
1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4
17 17
20 20
22 22 23 23
I II I II I II I II
5 - 1
I II
1 8 - 1 1 9 - 1
I II
2 1 - 1 I II I II
2 4 - 1
65.5 78.6
34.4 21.4
69.4 79.1
30.6 20.9
.26
.01 NS NS
63.7 79.5
36.3 20.5
91.4 95.4
8.6 4.6
26.14 9.37
.01
.01 15.9 9.4
84.1 90.6
33.0 15.1
67.0 84.9
9.99 1.05
.01 NS
60.8 81.7
39.2 18.3
93.2 95.3
6.8 4.7
35.51 7.02
.01
.01 8.3 91.7 32.5 67.5 24.07 .01
35.9 10.4
64.1 89.6
52.5 10.5
47.5 89.5
5.60 .05
.05 NS
11.6 88.4 25.7 74.3 7.64 .01 4.6 95.4 19.5 80.5 13.35 .01 29.1 57.0
70.9 43.0
85.0 84.7
15.0 15.3
78.21 16.14
.01
.01 82.0 18.0 84.1 15.9 .08 NS 32.9 16.5
67.1 83.5
40.0 25.3
60.0 74.7
1.08 1.84
NS NS
58.7 89,3 95.5
41.3 10.7 4.5
90.8 94.1
8.2 5.9
32.95 .88
.01 NS
93.9 6.1 .10 NS
1986 1984
1985 1985
1985 1985
1984 1984
1991 1993
1987 1992
1987 1986
1985 1985
1992 1988 6 -6 -7 -7 -8 -8 -9 -10 -10 -11 -12 -12 -13 -14 -15 -16 -
I II I II I II I I II I I II I I I I
49.4 47.0 27.2 15.4 51.7 29.5 78.4 8.0 5.2 1.3 60.4 86.8 7.6 88.1 4.4 1.9
50.6 53.0 72.8 84.6 48.3 70.5 21.6 92.0 94.8 98.7 39.6 13.2 92.4 11.9 95.6 98.1
69.4 64.0 33.1 21.2 53.2 41.2 84.3 45.9 15.1 2.6 91.4 91.9 18.6 91.0 21.7 3.4
30.6 36.0 66.9 78.8 46.8 58.8 15.7 54.1 84.9 97.4 8.6 8.1 81.4 9.0 78.3 96.6
9.79 5.07 .84 .77 .01
2.44 1.13 48.11 4.62 .12
30.91 .80
6.09 .30
17.97 .17
.01
.05 NS NS NS NS NS .01 .05 NS .01 NS .05 NS .01 NS
1984 1984 1994 1993 1990 1993 1987 1993 1994 1999 1988 1986 1995 1986 1996 2000
1984 1986 1990 1993 1990 1990 1986 1987 1992 1997 1985 1984 1993 1986 1994 2002
1992 1994
1990 1994
1993 1990 1997 1995 1990 1988
1986 1986
1986 1985 1988 1993
1988 1991
1991 1988
1989 1987
1986 1986
TABLE 14 - Continued
HUMANISTIC SCIENTIFIC 2
X Sig D e s i r . U n d e s i r . D e s i r . Undes i r . X^
124
Sig
3.60 NS 67.6 32 .4 74 .8 25.2 1.13 NS 8.06 NS 81 .5 18 .5 81 .9 1 8 . 1 .01 NS 4 .32 NS 68 .3 31.7 93.5 6.5 22.16 .01 2 .48 NS 78.7 21 .3 9 5 . 1 4 .9 8.82 .01
10 .48 NS 17 .4 82 .6 40.6 59.4 16 .35 . 01 3.77 NS 1 2 . 3 87.7 1 1 . 1 88 .9 .00 NS 6.13 NS 60 .4 39 .6 93 .3 6.7 32 .75 .01 4^28 NS 8 1 . 1 18 .9 95 .3 4 .7 7 .51 .01
14.39 .05 14 .4 85 .6 42 .7 57 .3 22.97 .01 5.32 NS 53 .9 4 6 . 1 74.5 25.5 10 .15 .01 5.60 NS 4 8 . 1 51.9 65.9 3 4 . 1 5.20 .05 11.87 8.81 3.89 4.58 2.49 13.31 7.44 1.47 9.19 3.97 3.75 5.67 2.88
NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
25.4 14.7 54.2 33.0 80.9 8.7 6,8 2.1 59.0 89.5 9.2 89.7 5.0
74.6 85.3 45.8 67.0 19.1 91.3 93.2 97.9 41.0 10.5 90.8 10.3 95.0
36.6 30.0 56.6 44.6 88.0 52.6 17.3 3.0 92.4 92.8 20.0 91.3 22.0
63.4 70.0 43.4 55.4 12.0 47.4 82.7 97.0 7.6 7.2 80.0 8.7 78.0
3.00 5.35 .05
2.11 1.80 50.54 3.95 .00
32.18 .26
4.32 .04
14.47
NS .05 NS NS NS .01 .05 NS .01 NS .05 NS .01
7.76 NS 1.4 98.6 2 .0 98 .0 .04 NS 2.78 NS 41 .9 58 .1 58.0 42 .0 4 .57 .05 3.44 NS 11 .8 88 .2 12 .5 87 .5 .01 NS 5.70 NS 15 .4 84 .6 29 .3 70.7 5.66 .05 7.08 NS 8 .1 91.9 19.4 80.6 5.53 .05 9.20 NS 38 .2 61 .8 86.7 13 .3 55.00 .01 6.64 NS 60 .0 40 .0 85 .5 14 .5 13 .55 .01 4 .39 NS 82 .4 17 .6 8 4 . 1 15 .9 .04 NS 9.59 NS 32 .8 67.2 46 .8 53.2 3.86 .05 1.93 NS 17 .6 82 .4 28 .0 72 .0 2.27 NS
"6716 NS ÔÎTT 3873 9379 6 j [ 29.84 7Ô 7.16 NS 90 .5 9 .5 94 .0 6.0 .40 NS
T r 3 5 NS 9578 4 .2 95 .2 4 .7 .01 NS
125
difference between the groups. The differences between those with
humanistic and scientific orientations on Round II responses to these
questions revealed that significant differences occurred for four
statements (statements 2, 4, 5, and 20) at the .01 level, two state-
ments (statements 10 and 23) were significant at the lower .05 level,
while one statement (statement 12) shows no statistical significance
between the groups. Statements 15 and 16 did not require a Round II.
For those statements which required a Round II, five statements (state-
ments 2, 4, 12, 20 and 23) found the change in percentage distribu-
tions of responses moving from the humanistic orientation position of
Round I toward the scientific orientation position, with little change
noted in the position of those with a scientific orientation on Round
11. One statement (statement 10) found the reverse for Round II, with
the scientific orientation position in Round I moving toward the
humanistic orientation position in Round II.
A comparison of the position of those with humanistic and scien-
tific orientations for all Delphi stateraents found eight stateraents
significantly different at the .01 level (statements 2, 3, 4, 6, 10,
12, 20, and 23), one statement at the .05 level (statement 17), and
four requiring a Round II. For the eleven statements for which only
a single round was necessary, four statements (stateraents 5, 15, 18,
and 19) were significantly different at the .01 level, one stateraent
(stateraent 13) was different at the .05 level, and six stateraents
(statements 9, 11, 14, 16, 21, and 24) were not significantly different
for the two groups. Round II responses show significant differences
between those with humanistic and scientific orientations at the .01
level for three statements (stateraents 2, 4, and 20), two statements
126
(statements 6 and 10) at the .05 level, and nine statements (statements
1, 3, 7, 8, 12, 15, 17, 22 and 23) reveal no significant differences.
Summary
Data from the responses to the Delphi instrument were presented
by individual, institutional, and prograra subgroups and on the
scientific-humanistic orientation by the individual, institutional, and
prograra sub-groups. Discussion of the data and conclusions which re-
sult from the responses of the participants in the Speech Communication
Curriculum Delphi study are reported in Chapter V.
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The purpose of this investigation was to establish consensus from
Speech Communication administrative officers concerning the future di-
rection of Speech Communication instructional objectives. This study
also identified the major research orientation of the administrative
officers representing the Speech Communication discipline and investi-
gated the relationship between their research orientation and the fore-
casted curriculum objectives. The population consisted of administra-
tive representatives from the Speech Coramunication acaderaic area in
996 public and private four-year institutions. These institutions
were listed in the official directory of the Speech Communication
Association, the 1975-76 Speech Coraraunication Directory (65), and were
identified as offering course sequences or degree prograras in Speech
Communication. The total population, as defined, made each member of
the population a potential respondent; consequently, no sampling pro-
cedure was necessary.
To reach the consensus on items pertaining to Speech Communication
curriculum, the Delphi Technique was utilized to gather the data. This
particular technique is defined as a futuristic method of reaching
consensus of agreement, probability, and desirability of issues or
problems in a given area, The Delphi Technique instrument consisted
of a twenty-four item questionnaire, that stated areas of curriculum
concern within the Speech Coramunication discipline, Two rounds were
conducted for this study with 303 usable responses for Round I and 220
127
128
usable responses for Round II. The study covered a period from Sep-
tember, 1976 through February, 1977.
Data resulting from the Delphi instrument and information provided
by the respondents were reported in detail in Chapter IV and serve as
a basis to test the hypotheses posed for the study. The stated hypoth-
eses were tested by the use of appropriate statistical analysis lead-
ing to statements of statistical significance. The .05 level of sig-
nificance was selected as the basis for conclusions regarding signif-
icant differences and interactions. Five null hypotheses were tested
and the results are summarized below.
Null Hypothesis I: There will be no significant difference be-
tween desirable Speech Communication curric-ulum objectives as forecasted by Speech Com-munication administrators on the basis of the individual variables of sex, highest degree attained, recency of degree, Speech Communication Association membership, and participation in professional organizations.
Sex. Female respondents disagree with the use of individualized
instruction and self-paced programs, are less inclined to eraphasize
research for the resolution of social probleras, and do not support
the reorganization of Speech Coramunication into Schools of Comraunica-
tion. They do, however, see the modular approach as a desirable cur-
riculum innovation and are more likely to proraote the joining of
speech with other social sciences.
Highest Degree Attained. Respondents holding less than the doc-
toral degree would not utilize self-paced and individualized instruc-
tion and are less likely to view the scientific method of investigating
spoken symbolic interaction as the major theoretical base in Speech
Communication. Further, these individuals are more likely to agree
129
with the establishment of defined objectives and measurable outcomes
as well as the inclusion of speech courses in all educational programs.
Recency of Degree. Speech Coramunication administrators with the
raost recent degrees would not favor the curriculura to be oriented
around decision-raaking and problem-solving courses and would not choose
to utilize individual instruction and self-paced programs. Those with
extensive experience since receiving their highest degree (over twenty
years) tend to disagree with vocationally oriented eraphases in the
curriculum.
Speech Communication Association Merabership. SCA raembers agree
that the undergraduate curriculum should provide more research oppor-
tunities, inclusion of individualized instruction and self-paced pro-
grams, and contain more specific context courses. Non-SCA raerabers
would make speech courses a requireraent for all educational prograras
and provide a greater emphasis on interdisciplinary study.
Participation in Professional Organizations. Respondents who
have the highest level of professional involvement would support a
greater emphasis on research in the undergraduate curriculum, the
establishment of Schools of Communication, and the use of the scien-
tific method as the major research thrust. They would not, however,
eraphasizemore vocationally oriented courses. Individuals who are
less involved in professional activities would not use a raodular ap-
proach or implement specific context courses. Individuals who have
extensive involvement and those who have the most limited involvement
lend stronger support to the blending of the behavioral and rhetorical
approaches for a common research design.
130
The null hypothesis stating no significant differences between
individual variables must be, at least, partially rejected since one-
fifth of the possible differences were significant at the .05 level
or above. Some significant differences were found on all individual
variables in terms of the responses to the Delphi stateraent, with
thirty-seven (21 percent) of the possible 185 differences falling into
this category on the two rounds.
Null Hypothesis I; There will be no significant difference be-tween desirable Speech Coramunication curric-ulum objectives as forecasted by Speech Communication administrators on the basis of the institutional variables of institu-tional size, institutional support, insti-tutional type, and Speech Communication Association geographic region.
Institutional Size. Respondents representing large institutions
(15,000-20,000) are less likely to view decision-making and problem-
solving skills as a desirable curriculum direction. The larger the
institution, the more agreeraent is evidenced in support of the scien-
tific approach as the raajor theoretical base for the discipline, with
the largest institutions (over 20,000) encouraging additional oppor-
tunities for research on the undergraduate level. The smaller insti-
tutions are more in agreeraent with requiring speech courses in all
educational programs but strongly oppose the establishment of Schools
of Communication.
Institutional Support. Responses from those representing public
institutions would support a research emphasis on the undergraduate
level, support promotion of Speech as a separate discipline, and en-
courage the addition of specific context courses in the curriculum.
Representatives of private institutions would utilize raore defined
131
objectives and measurable outcomes in Speech Communication but would
not seek to establish Schools of Communication.
Institutional Type. Undergraduate institution representatives
would not expand the use of individualized instruction and self-paced
programs or move to establish Schools of Communication; they would,
however, encourage speech courses as requirements in all educational
prograras. Representatives of graduate institutions would encourage
more research activities on the undergraduate level and would expand
the use of specific context courses.
SCA Region. Respondents who represent institutions located in
the central and western regions strongly support the scientific method
as the raajor theoretical base for the discipline, but they would not
expand the use of educational technology in the classroora. Those rep-
resenting the central region are less likely to encourage raodular ap-
proaches in the curriculum.
The null hypothesis stating that there would be no significant
differences between institutional variables is partially rejected.
Significant differences at the .05 level or above were found among all
institutional variables which were a part of the Delphi instrument with
28 (18 percent) of the possible 148 differences reaching the selected
level.
Null Hypothesis III: There will be no significant difference be-tween desirable Speech Communication curric-ulum objectives as forecasted by Speech Coraraunication administrators on the basis of the program variables of organizational pattern, Speech Communication degrees of-
^ fered, and Speech Communication Full-Time Equivalent faculty size.
Organizational Pattern. Respondents from institutions without
highly organized speech areas are more likely to move toward making
132
speech a requirement in all educational programs. Representatives
from departmental support increased research activities at the under-
graduate level, favor specific context courses, but would not encourage
merging speech content with the social sciences. The more highly or-
ganized speech areas, such as divisional arrangeraents, see less need
in defining curriculura objectives and outcomes and would resist a move
to eraphasize vocational courses.
Speech Comraunication Degrees Offered. Representatives of insti-
tutions not offering a degree in speech would not encourage the estab-
lishraent of specific context courses. Those representing institutions
without degrees in speech or offering only the baccalaureate degree
highly favor interdiscipllnary eraphases, would discourage the scien-
tific approach as the major base of the discipline, and would dis-
courage the establishment of Schools of Communication. Institutions
offering graduate programs in speech are more likely to develop re-
search opportunities at the undergraduate level. Doctoral degree
granting institutions would proraote individualized and self-paced
programs, but would resist an increased emphasis on the vocationally
oriented courses.
Speech Communication Full-Time Equivalent Faculty Size. Respon-
dents from sraall Speech Communication faculties would not expand re-
search opportunities at the undergraduate level and would not support
expansion of individualized, self-paced, or specific context courses.
Those from the larger speech faculties would not emphasize requiring
speech in all educational programs or expand vocationally oriented
courses. Faculties described as either small or large tend to view
the modular approach as a less desirable direction of the curriculum.
133
The null hypothesis stating no significant differences between
program variables is partially rejected. Significant differences at
the .05 level of significance- or above occurred in over one-fourth of
the responses concerning these variables. Significant differences were
found for 31 (27 percent) of the possible 111 differences reflected in
the Delphi statements.
Null Hypothesis IV: There will be no significant difference be-tween desirable Speech Communication curric-ulura objectives as forecasted by Speech Coramunication administrators identified with the scientific and humanistic orientations.
A comparison of the mean scores on the scientific scale, humanis-
tic scale, and the scientific-humanistic total score by sex, SCA mem-
bership, degree of respondent, institutional support, and institutional
type reveal no significant differences between any of the scores and
variables with the exception of the scientific scale for undergraduate
and graduate institutional types. The higher mean score for the grad-
uate institutions was significant at the .05 level. The responses of
individuals identified with a humanistic or a scientific orientation
resulted in selection of curriculura directions incorporated in the
Delphi stateraents which were significantly different on fourteen state-
ments in the first round. This difference was maintained for six
Delphi statements on the second round.
Respondents who are identified with the scientific orientation
more strongly support curriculum objectives dealing with undergrad-
uate research opportunities, use of individualized and self-paced
programs, specifying measurable outcomes, inclusion of vocational
elements, emphasis upon erapirical research conclusions, and a raove to
blend behavioral and rhetorical eleraents in research design. Those
134
identified with the humanistic orientation would judge as undesirable
directions of the curriculum those which would establish the scientific
method, use research efforts in the solution of social problems, em-
phasize a "source-message" curriculum, eliminate traditional performance
areas, expand interdisciplinary studies, and raove to fuse Speech Com-
raunication with the social sciences.
With over one-half of the Delphi stateraents resulting in signif-
icant differences between the Speech curriculum elements viewed in a
positive direction by respondents with scientific or humanistic orien-
tations, the null hypothesis that there would be no significant dif-
ferences between curriculum objectives identified with these two groups-
is rejected.
Null Hypothesis V: There will be no significant interaction be-tween the scientific and huraanistic orienta-tions to the Speech Communication discipline as a function of the individual, institutional, and program variables.
There were no significant differences between respondents identi-
fied with a huraanistic or a scientific orientation as a function of
individual, institutional, and prograra variables. In addition, no
significant interactions were found based on degree of respondent,
recency of degree, SCA region, Speech degree offered, or faculty size.
No significant raain effects were found in the interaction of institu-
tional support and type with the scientific-humanistic scores of re-
spondents. The absence of significant differences and interactions be-
tween the criterion variables and the scientific-humanistic orientation
of the respondents results in the inability to reject the null hypoth-
esis which specified that no significant interactions would occur.
135
Consensus on Speech Communication Direction
Respondents to the Delphi statements indicated consensus on
twenty-two of the twenty-four statements, with two statements remain-
ing unresolved in a polarized raanner. Of those on which consensus
was reached, agreement with ten statements and disagreeraent with
twelve stateraents gives clear indications regarding what direction
they feel the Speech Coramunication of the future should take. The
Delphi statements were independently evaluated by those participating
in the study and, in fact, represent separate facets of the curriculum.
In drawing conclusions from the responses, however, they may be viewed
as relating to five general curriculura directions: specific skill
developraent, research eraphasis, raethodology, theoretical base, and
organizational pattern.
Specific Skill Development
During a time of decreased enrollraent in higher education and
expressed concern for the vocational application of university courses,
the Speech Communication curriculum should move, at least in some
selected direction, to make courses more vocationally relevant. The
Speech Communication curriculum of the future should emphasize ele-
ments which proraote decision-raaking and problem-solving skills, ad-
justing to societal changes, and communication skills for prospective
teachers. There would be no raove to lirait Speech Communication
courses to those who planned careers in Speech Communication or re-
lated fields, The revision of course content to make more specific
reference to vocational preparations is not an agreed upon objective,
with this direction of the curriculura remaining unresolved (Stateraents
1, 6, 11, 14, and 24).
136
Research Emphasis
Major directions of the Speech Communication curriculum should
include expanded opportunities for undergraduates to participate in
research, a greater emphasis on empirical research conclusions, and
a blending of behavioral or rhetorical techniques. On the other hand,
research efforts should not be directed toward the resolutions of
current social problems (Stateraents 2, 5, 12, 20, and 23).
Methodology
The instructional raethodology which is judged to be iraportant to
the Speech Communication of the future would not include raany of the
innovations which appear in the current professional literature. Re-
spondents do not feel that the Speech Communication curriculum would
be enhanced by the extended use of individualized instruction, self-
paced prograras, modular scheduling, or educational technology (State-
ments 3, 16, and 17).
Theoretical Base
There is a consensus that the Speech Communication curriculum
should not choose the scientific method as its major theoretical
base, but would raove in a direction of a "raessage-audience" curriculum.
Neither would a raove to elirainate the traditional perforraance areas be
supported. There is a need to develop measurable outcomes and inter-
disciplinary programs while including specific context courses (State-
ments 7, 9, 10, 13, 15, and 21).
Organizational Pattern
When the respondents expressed their views toward the organiza-
tional patterns and administrative eleraents of the Speech Communication
137
curriculum, it was clear that the possible directions expressed in
the literature are not those felt to be helpful and desirable. Speech
Communication should reraain independent but a part of the departmental
organization typically found in Arts and Sciences areas. There is no
indication that course requirements should be reduced, fused with
social sciences, or be subjected to readjustment of graduate or under-
graduate content, An unresolved issue concerns the move to seek
greater use of Speech Communication by all majors (Statements 7, 8,
18, 19, and 22).
Conclusions
The 303 respondents representing the Speech Communication academic
programs throughout the nation have, with few exceptions, rather firm
beliefs regarding the important directions for the Speech Communication
curriculum. They support a curriculum designed for students to adapt
to change by providing specific courses oriented toward decision-
making and problem-solving skills rather than toward a vocational
emphasis. There is need for expanded and a somewhat redirected re-
search eraphasis in Speech Communication programs. This would involve
a major effort to include undergraduates in research activities and
reflect empirical research in the curriculum, There is little indi-
cation that the respondents would support a move to effect changes in
the methodology which is currently a part of the Speech Communication
classroora, A continued reliance on the presence and direction of the
classroora instructor is judged to be more important than the student
directed approaches or developing educational technology,
On the whole, participants in this study rejected the selection
of the scientific raethod as the single theoretical base, preferring
138
to incorporate in it elements of critical analysis in order to provide
a common approach to research, There are strong feelings on the part
of the respondents that if Speech Communication is to reraain a sig-
nificant acaderaic entity in higher education, it raust maintain its
departmental status, preferably as a part of the Arts and Sciences or
Humanities area. They feel little pressure to expand course require-
ments or to urge a greater interdisciplinary perspective. The inde-
pendence of Speech Communication is further supported by reluctance
to raove toward curriculura revisions which might diminish the estab-
lished distinctions between Speech Communication and other aeademic
disciplines within the social sciences. There is no indication, how-
ever, that this independence and autonoray would manifest itself in
a move to establish speech courses as essential requirements for all
undergraduates.
There were no significant differences on any of the criterion
variables which distinguish between the scientific or huraanistic
orientations of the respondents or any significant interactions which
could be attributed to these variables in the selection of a respec-
tive orientation. In addition, there resulted a relatively norraal
distribution of scores on the scientific scale, huraanistic scale, and
the scientific-huraanistic total scale. The lack of an identifiable
orientation for the discipline was further deraonstrated by the fact
that almost eighty percent of the scientific-humanistic total scores
fell within one standard deviation of the mean, which in the construc-
tion of the scale is at the mid-point of the scientific-humanistic
continuum. There were, however, significant differences between the
evaluation of Speech Communication curriculum directions on the part
139
of those with either a scientific or humanistic orientation. As would
be expected, those with a scientific orientation would promote cur-
riculum directions which emphasize research activities, measurable
curriculum criteria, and student oriented methods. In keeping with
the huraanistic orientation, those so identified would resist curric-
ulura directions which would further emphasize scientific methods, in-
crease research activities, move further from the traditional per-
formance areas, or raove Speech Communication toward a more inter-
disciplinary context.
Speech Coramunication Curriculum of the Future
The data obtained in this research provides a basis for fore-
casting the future for the Speech Communication discipline as reflected
in the curriculum. Responses to the Delphi instrument serve to pro-
ject the type of curriculum which might be expected, and the results
indicate the possible directions of the discipline. Certainly the
responses of the administrative officers to the questionnaire give
some indication of what is likely to occur. Since the future Speech
Communication curriculum is influenced by their decisions, a curric-
ulum projection can be formulated.
The Speech Communication discipline of the future will be iden-
tified as a strong, independent field of study which will include a
vast array of interests, However, these specific areas will probably
contribute to increased specialization, which may only serve to drama-
tize the differences that will exist among speech scholars within the
next ten years, The division of the scholars will be in the different
approaches to research resulting in two distinct camps: those loyal
140
to the scientific approach and those loyal to the humanistic approach,
The orientation division, accompanied by the increased specialization,
may be a harbinger for the separation of pure speech subjects and the
social science oriented subjects by 1990. Certainly there is nothing
that foreshadows a major reconciliation of the two orientations be-
fore 1990 to the extent that the Speech Coramunication discipline of
the future is likely to be identified significantly with one of the
two approaches.
Another expectation of this condition will be the different focus
of curricula offered depending upon institutional characteristics. A
difference will be expected in the larger institutions, particularly
those with graduate programs. These schools will have a very sound
scientific orientation and will offer more courses in quantitative
methods designed to enhance their research prograras. The sraaller
institutions, however, will be traditionally oriented, hut will be
sensitive to the demands of society by revising many of their tradi-
tional courses. They will offer a curriculum reflecting vocational
concerns. There will be no major differenee in the Speech Communica-
tion curriculum of the future between public and private institutions
given comparable size and prograra level. By 1990 the Speech Coramuni-
cation curriculum within individual institutions will definitely re-
flect a dominant philosophical position of either the scientific or
the humanistic orientation to the study of human communication. This
position will very likely coincide with the orientation of the adminis-
trative officer.
This Speech Communication curriculum of the future, derived from
the Delphi Technique, indicates that by 1988 the curriculum will
141
respond to changes in society by increasing situation-oriented courses.
As the society changes and the deraands change, the Speech Communica-
tion curriculum will be made adaptable to societal needs. Basically,
the classroom procedure will insure that students will receive in-
struction that will enable them to cope with the rapid rate of change.
The resulting curriculum will be student-oriented which will facilitate
these needed skills.
Generally, this Delphi study foretells little change in the future
for the Speech Communication discipline as reflected in its curriculura.
It portends that the two dominant orientations within the discipline
hamper agreement to future curriculum goals. Probably the raost per-
plexing problems faced by the Speech Communication discipline is recog-
nition of the demand for change. How the discipline will actually
respond to the demands of society remains to be seen, but if its sup-
porters align with past occurrences, then the discipline will respond
and will change where the need is evident. Change must occur in order
to avoid stagnation, and the refusal to recognize the needed change by
clinging to tradition often results in a future created by fate. The
constituents of Speech Comraunication must face the areas of concern,
must recognize the need for change, and raust be willing to change
where necessary for the survival of the discipline. They raust adapt
and grow in fruitful directions. The decisions made today produce
the consequences of tomorrow - undoubtedly the wisdom of the profes-
sion is at stake and the future depends upon the wisdom in the choices.
Recommendations for Future Study
Further investigation is needed before conclusions may be drawn
142
concerning the direction of change in the Speech Communication curric-
ulum. The following questions need to be addressed:
1. What is the major research orientation of individual faculty
members?
2. What is the coincidence of agreement between the research
orientation of faculty raembers in Speech Comraunication with those found
for administrators in this study?
3. How are Speech Communication research orientations reflected
in the course content of Speech Communication courses?
4. What are the characteristics of individual faculty members
which relate to the selection of a humanistic or scientific orientation
in the Speech Coraraunication discipline?
5. Are there corabinations of individual, institutional, and pro-
grara variables which have predictive value in determining the orienta-
tion of the Speech curriculura and its content on an institutional basis?
APPENDIX A: QUESTIONNAIRE NO. 1
The eleraent of change permeates our society in various ways with
one of the most observable being in our educational institutions.
The educational environraent within our institutions of higher learn-
ing receives the full irapact of social change thereby producing raany
hardships and obstacles for educational planning. The decisions made
now will long have repercussions well into the next two decades. It
may be concluded that in raaking decisions, we must consider that:
(1) educational thinking and planning take into account more of the
future probabilities than is typically demonstrated now, and (2) that
factors now viewed as decisive in the current state of affairs raay
well not be the most iraportant and significant factors to be con-
sidered in shaping long-terra educational plans and policies. Within
the Speech Communication discipline we observe the impact of change
in raany respects that command recognition and attention for it is by
communication that we are able to establish and transfer new thoughts.
Within the above general framework, please respond to the follow-
ing inquiries with a brief justification given for the position taken:
1. What do you consider to be the raost iraportant trends, prob-
lems, and developraents that will be experienced in higher education
during the next fifteen years?
Trends:*
Problems:
Developments:
*NOTE: The original instrument provided approximately one-third page for each response listed.
143
144
2. What do you believe to be the most important trends, prob-
lems, and developments to be experienced within the discipline of
Speech Communication within the next fifteen years?
Trends:
Problems:
Developraents:
The element of change also appears to be the most influential
accelerator in society for a change is the process by which the future
invades our lives with the passage of time. Society and its educa-
tional institutions are constantly changing at an enorraous rapid rate
of speed and the curriculum of any field of study should adapt, change,
and provide assistance for the student to exist and have some eleraent
of enjoyment in a world dominated by modern technocracy. Within our
acaderaic discipline there exists a lack of agreeraent respecting our
specific purpose in the future as a field or area of study for we have
not clearly defined our objectives or goals in relationship to the
total acaderaic environraent so appropriately reflected by the curriculum
framework of the present day institution.
With the above preliminary reraark in raind, please respond to the
following with a brief justification for the position taken:
3. What should be the objectives of the Speech Communication
discipline by 1990?
4. Identify the areas of the Speech Communication discipline
that should be eliminated, revised, or added to so as to better
achieve the desired future goals or objectives of the discipline.
5. Should the Speech Communication curriculum be designed to
145
reflect communication patterns, communication dysfunctions prevalent
within the society, as the methodology of study and presentation?
6. What curriculum changes should be effected so as to properly
reflect the Speech Communication discipline of the future within our
institutions of higher learning?
APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE NO. 2
The second questionnaire is a summary of the responses from the
first questionnaire previously submitted under date of April 28, 1976
The responses received are now to be ranked by you according to im-
portance. The rank of 1 will represent the raost important rank.
Since the sections vary in the number of responses received, please
rank them in sequences from one (1) the most iraportant to whatever
the rank number may be as the least iraportant.
1. What do you consider to be the most important trends, prob-
lems, and developments that will be experienced in higher education
during the next fifteen years?
Trends: (Rank from 1 through 14) Faculty accountability (as demanded by public, coordinating
boards, and students) Job security (tenure and/or unionization) Declining enrollment of students Departraentalization (dirainishing) Class size enrollraent increased Teaching effectiveness as basis of reward Individualized instruction (increase in) Decline in student educational quality at all levels Stronger degree requirements More cross disciplinary study options Politicalization of the academy (promotors and advocates of
political system of the present society) Increase of career education Greater student seriousness respecting education Monetary (financing - budget) accountability
Problems; (Rank from 1 through 8) General Education vs. Career education in curriculum designing Increased eraphasis on technical training Rising cost of education Formula for funding of programs Changing image of the student Instructor preparation to cope with the changes University role in the changes occurring in society
146
147
Developments: (Rank from 1 through 7) Cutback in state appropriations Selective recruiting of students Modular curriculum (aids) Changing traditional degree requirements Faculty unionization Tenure abolishment or tightening Meeting needs of technocracy by new training in skills
2. What do you believe to be the most iraportant trends, prob-
lems, and developments to be experienced within the discipline of
Speech Communication within the next fifteen years?
Trends (in Speech Comraunication): (Rank frora 1 through 6) Increase in career orientation programs Decline of the traditional pure speech subjects More communications instruction in eleraentary and secondary
level This discipline moving toward a social science discipline Curriculum changes to meet new and different demands Increase recognition of morality in speech
Problems (in Speech Communication); (Rank from 1 through 7) Justification as an academic discipline Decline in "Major" enrollment Inability to restrict nuraerical size of class Inadequate budget or program budgeting Performance vs. cognitive basis of instructions Ability to translate research into instructions (lacking) Increase in specialization
Developments (in Speech Comraunication); (Rank frora 1 through 4)
Increased use of technology to amplify and magnify communica-tion
Community forensics replacing interscholastic forensics Individualized instructions increasing Innovative programs to meet special interest being demanded
3. What should be the objectives of the Speech Coramunication
discipline by 1990? Rank from 1 through 6.
Develop new methodologies and means of disseminating the
discipline knowledge Increase contribution to citizen education for oral com-
petency (systemized instruction throughout the educa-tional period)
Achieve status as a fully developed rational science Discipline iraproveraent reflecting higher scholarship
148
Creation of new curriculum to meet vocational needs or de-
mands
Functional and effectiveness research of various communica-tions systems relating to human behavior
4. Identify the areas of the Speech Communication discipline
that should be eliminated, revised, or added to as to better achieve
the desired future goals or objectives of the discipline.
Elirainated; (Rank from 1 through 5) Debate Oral interpretation Parliamentary procedure Voice and articulation Forensics
Revised; (Rank from 1 through 7) Public communication Aesthetic programs Non-verbal communication Responsibility in communication Communication theory Classical rhetoric Synthesize all areas
Added to: (Rank from 1 through 4) ICA communication eraphasis Non-verbal communication Specific situational courses (political communication, or-
ganizational communication, inter-culture, etc.) Departmental division establishing (1) the pure speech sub-
jects and (2) the social science oriented subjects
5. Should the curriculum provide studies in coramunications
systems and functions applicable to varied specific vocational needs?
Yes No
6. What curriculum changes should be effected so as to properly
reflect the Speech Communication discipline of the future? Rank 1
through 8.
Add specific context courses (Non-verbal or interviewing, political)
Elirainate traditional pure speech subjects Provide modular instructions
149
Add quantitative raethods courses on undergraduate level Add courses reflecting social science emphasis Insufficient knowledge of pattern or systera needs for course
change Application of knowledge to realistic contexts Modify rhetoric and public address
APPENDIX C; THE HIGH PRIORITY PROBLEM AREAS AS PERCEIVED BY THE PANEL OF JUDGES
1. Trends in Higher Education: a. Faculty accountability (as demanded by public, coordinating
boards and students) b. Increase of career education c. Monetary (financing-budget) accountability d. Declining enrollment of students e. More cross disciplinary student options f. Class size enrollment increase g. Job security (tenure and/or unionization)
Probleras in Higher Education; a. Rising cost of tuition b. General education versus career education in curriculum design-
ing c. University role in the changes occurring in society
Developments in Higher Education; a. Changing traditional degree requirements b. Meeting needs of technocracy by new training in skills c. Modular curriculum d. Cut-back in state appropriations
2. Trends in Speech Communication: a. Decline of the traditional pure speech subjects b. This discipline moving toward a social science discipline
Problems in Speech Comraunication: a. Justification as an academic discipline b. Ability to translate research into instructions (lacking) c. Performance versus cognitive basis of instructions
Development in Speech Communication; a. Individualized instructions increasing
3. Objectives of the Speech Communication Discipline by 1990: a. Develop new methodologies and raeans of disseminating the dis-
cipline knowledge b. Functional and effectiveness research of various communication
systems relating to human behavior
4. Eliminate: a. Voice and articulation b. Parliamentary procedure c. Oral interpretation
Revised: a. Aesthetic programs b. Public communication c. Synthesize all areas d. Classical rhetoric
150
151
Add-to: a. Specific situational courses (political communication, organi-
zational communication, inter-cultural)
5. Should the curriculura provide studies in communications systems and functions applicable to varied specific vocational needs? Answered; Yes
6. Curriculum changes: a. Add specific context courses (Non-verbal or interviewing,
political) b. Add courses reflecting social science emphasis c. Provide modular instruction
APPENDIX D: ROUND I INSTRUMENT
Texas Tech University P.O. BOX 4209
Lubbock, Texas 79409
Division of Speech Comnríunication Plione (806) 742-215:
Dear Colleague:
We are engaged in a research project concerning the future status and structure of the Speech Communication discipline in higher education. The specific focus is on goals of the discipline as reflected through curricula, Our purpose is to utilize the Delphi Technique to seek consensus among department chairmen regarding curriculum revision, research orientation, course content, and instructional objectives,
The Delphi Technique is a synthesizing process which attains consen-sus from isolated anonymous respondents. A brief questionnaire (24 items) will be submitted to department chairmen whose answers supply feedback for a subsequent questionnaire to the same group. The feed-back from the questionnaires is used to narrow the range of opinion so that a usable consensus emerges after two or three rounds of the questionnaires.
In this particular study, consensus is sought from a broad constit-uency of the Speech Communication discipline who will assess the academic future of the profession. The feedback of information will be analyzed and used in the following rounds with all individual re-sponses remaining confidential. The responses, therefore, produce a consensus from the participants charting the future direction of the discipline and its purpose as a field of study. The results of the study will be provided to all participants.
Your cooperation and opinions are vital for the three rounds of ques-tionnaires in order to attain the necessary consensus. Please com-plete the questionnaire and return it in the enclosed self-addressed, stamped envelope within two weeks to insure that the second round may be proraptly returned to you.
Sincerely,
William J, Jordan Associate Professor of Speech Communication
Enclosures
Phoebe P, Hollis Instructor of Speech Communication
152
153
SPEECH COMMUNICATION CURRICULUM DELPHI QUESTIONNAIRE ROUND I
Many trends are eraerging which will have a significant irapact on the future of the Speech Communication discipline as a profession and on curriculum revision. The following are stateraents concerning the possible direction of these trends reflected by curriculura revision. While some of these changes have occurred in some departraents, please indicate by checking:
1. Whether you AGREE or DISAGREE that the itera should become a reality,
2. The year that you feel this reality will occur, and 3. Whether it is a DESIRABLE or UNDESIRABLE occurrence, assuraing
that it occurs.
1. The Speech Communication curriculum should be oriented around the skills necessary for decision making and problem solving. A. AGREE DISAGREE B.
C. D.
Will occur by: 2005 2010 DESIRABLE Comments:
1980 1985
UNDESIRABLE
1990 1995 2000
The undergraduate curriculura should provide opportunities for par-ticipation in Speech Coraraunication research.. A. AGREE DISAGREE B.
C. D.
Will occur by: 2005 2010 DESIRABLE Comments:
1980 1985
UNDESIRABLE
1990 1995 2000
3. Individualized instruction and self-paced programs should dirainish the amount of classroom activity in Speech Communication. A. AGREE DISAGREE B.
C. D.
Will occur by: 2005 2010 DESIRABLE Comments;
1980 1985
UNDESIRABLE
1990 1995 2000
4. Instruction in Speech Comraunication should adopt the use of clear-ly defined objectives and measurable outcoraes. A. AGREE DISAGREE B.
C, D.
Will occur by; 2005 2010 DESIRABLE Comments:
1980 1985
UNDESIRABLE
1990 1995 2000
154
5. Speech Communication research efforts should be directed primarily to the resolution of current social problems, A, AGREE DISAGREE B,
C. D.
Will occur by: 2005 2010 DESIRABLE Comments;
1980 1985
UNDESIRABLE
1990 1995 2000
6, The curriculum in Speech Communication should be organized around courses which are designed to enhance job opportunities for Speech Communication graduates. A. AGREE DISAGREE B.
C. D.
Will occur by: 2005 2010 DESIRABLE Comments:
1980 1985
UNDESIRABLE
1990 1995 2000
7. Efforts should be devoted to severing organizational ties with Arts and Sciences and Humanities by moving to establish Schools of Communicat ion. A. AGREE DISAGREE B.
C. D.
Will occur by: 2005 2010 DESIRABLE Comments;
1980 1985
UNDESIRABLE
1990 1995 2000
8. Efforts in Speech Communication curriculum revision should be de-voted to making speech courses an essential part of all educational programs rather than promoting the Speech Communication major as a field of study. A. AGREE DISAGREE B.
C. D.
Will occur by: 2005 2010 DESIRABLE Comments;
1980 1985
UNDESIRABLE
1990 1995 2000
9. The Speech Communication curriculum should be revised to eraphasize the interdisciplinary nature of the course content. A. AGREE DISAGREE B. Will occur by; 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
2005 2010 C. DESIRABLE UNDESIRABLE D. Comments:
10, The scientific method of investigating spoken syrabolic interaction should be the major theoretical base for the Speech Communication discipline. A. AGREE DISAGREE B. Will occur by; 1980 1985, 1990 1995 2000
2005 2010 C. DESIRABLE UNDESIRABLE D. Comments:
155
11. Enrollment in Speech Coramunication courses should be liraited to those for whom the content has direct vocational application. A. AGREE DISAGREE_ B. Will occur by: 1980 1985 1990_ 1995 2000
2005 2010 C. DESIRABLE UNDES RABLE D. Comments:
12. A significant core of the Speech Communication curriculum should be based on research conclusions regarding strategies and con-straints in message choice, communication environments, and speech functions. A. AGREE DISAGREE B.
C. D.
Will occur by: 2005 2010 DESIRABLE Comments:
1980 1985
UNDESIRABLE
1990 1995 2000
13. Speech Communication should be based on a "source-message" cen-tered curriculum as opposed to a "message-audience" curriculum. A. AGREE DISAGREE B. Will occur by; 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
2005 2010 C. DESIRABLE UNDESIRABLE D. Comments:
14. Major elements in the course content of Speech Communication should insure that students are prepared to adapt to the constant rate of change reflected in the society. A. AGREE DISAGREE B.
C. D.
Will occur by: 2005 2010 DESIRABLE Comments:
1980 1985
UNDESIRABLE
1990 1995 2000
15. The Speech Communication curriculum of the future should eliminate those traditional performance areas such as oral interpretation, voice and articulation, debate, and parliamentary procedure. A. AGREE DISAGREE B.
C. D.
Will occur by: 2005 2010 DESIRABLE Comments:
1980 1985
UNDESIRABLE
1990 1995 2000
16. The application of educational technology should replace the class-room teacher as the raedium of instruction in Speech Coramunication. A. AGREE DISAGREE B.
C. D.
Will occur by: 2005 2010 DESIRABLE Comments:
1980 1985
UNDESIRABLE
1990 1995 2000
156
17. Within the practical framework of institutional scheduling, the Speech Communication curriculum should be structured on a modular approach. A. AGREE DISAGREE
21.
B.
C. D.
Will occur by: 2005 2010 DESIRABLE Comments:
1980 1985
UNDESIRABLE
1990 1995 2000
18. Credit hour requirements in Speech Communication should be reduced in order that students have greater opportunities for interdis-ciplinary study. A. AGREE DISAGREE B.
C. D.
Will occur by: 2005 2010 DESIRABLE Comments:
1980 1985
UNDESIRABLE
1990 1995 2000
19. Speech Communication should be fused with the subject matter con-tent of the social sciences (psychology, sociology, political science) rather than continue as a separate discipline. A. AGREE DISAGREE B.
C. D.
Will occur by; 2005 2010 DESIRABLE Comments;
1980 1985
UNDESIRABLE
1990 1995 2000
20. The instructional program in Speech Communication should be re-vised to reflect more empirical research. A. AGREE DISAGREE B. Will occur by: 1980 1985 1990 1995_ 2000_
2005 2010 C. DESIRABLE UNDESIRABLE D. Comments:
The Speech Communication curriculum should be revised to include specific context courses such as political communication, organiza-tional communication, and legal communication. A. AGREE DISAGREE B. Will ^ r by: 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
2005 2010 C. DESIRABLE UNDESIRABLE D. Comments:
22. Much of the content of Speech Communication graduate courses should be incorporated into the undergraduate program. A. AGREE DISAGREE
1990 1995 2000 B.
C. D.
Will occur by: 2005 2010 DESIRABLE Coraments:
1980 1985
UNDESIRABLE
157
23. Speech Communication research efforts should be directed toward merging behavioral and rhetorical approaches in a common approach to research design. A. AGREE DISAGREE B.
C. D.
Will occur by; 2005 2010 DESIRABLE Comraents:
1980 1985
UNDESIRABLE
1990 1995 2000
24. The Speech Communication curriculum should provide a course con-cerning the relationship of classroora communication to learning and instruction for all prospective teachers. A. AGREE DISAGREE B.
C. D.
Will occur by: 2005 2010 DESIRABLE Comments;
1980 1985
UNDESIRABLE
1990 1995 2000
In order to report the results of the study to participants and provide the feedback which is a necessary part of the Delphi Technique, please complete the following information. Individual and institutional information will, of course, remain confidential.
SEX: Male Feraale HIGHEST DEGREE; Bachelor's Master's Doctorate YEARS SINCE HIGHEST DEGREE; 1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20_
Over 20 SCA INDIVIDUAL MEMBER: Yes No SCA REGIONAL MEMBER: ECA SSCA CSSA WSCA SCA REGIONAL ASSOCIATION MEETINGS ATTENDED IN LAST 5 YEARS: 0
1 2 3 4 5 SCA NATIONAL CONVENTIONS ATTENDED IN LAST 5 YEARS: 0 1 2
3 4 5 INSTITUTIONAL SIZE: Under 5,000 5,000-10,000 10,000-15,000_
15,000-20,000 Over 20,000 INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT: Public Private INSTITUTIONAL TYPE; Four Year Graduate SPEECH COMMUNICATION ORGANIZATION: Major Area Only Departraent_
Division SPEECH COMMUNICATION DEGREES OFFERED; None Bachelor's
Master's Doctorate SPEECH COMMUNICATION FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT FACULTY MEMBERS; 1-5
6-10 11-15 16-20 Over 20
NAME;___ ^INSTITUTI0N:__ (Please Print)
If address used is incorrect, please provide correction__
APPENDIX E: ROUND II INSTRUMENT
Texas Tech University P.O. BOX 4209
Lubbocl<, T e x a s 79409
Division of S p e e c h Communica t ion Plione (806) 742-215;
Dear Colleague:
Thank you for participating in the initial round of the Delphi anal-ysis of the potential future direction of the Speech Coraraunication discipline. Your prompt response was most appreciated and indicates your interest in this study. Our purpose remains to seek consensus from department chairmen concerning curriculum revision, course con-tent, and instructional objectives.
Enclosed you will find the second questionnaire regarding Speech Communication curricula revision. Round II of the Delphi Technique provides you with the Round I responses from the Speech Communication departraental chairmen. You may like to consider your response to this second questionnaire with this information available to you.
Again we would like to assure you that confidentiality will be main-tained for all participants. Please return the Round II questionnaire within two weeks in order to allow tirae for the necessary analysis and summary of the responses before sending you the final round of the study. A self-addressed, stamped envelope is provided for your convenience.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely yours.
William J, Jordan Associate Professor of Speech Communication
Phoebe P. Hollis Instructor of Speech Communication
Enclosure
158
159
SPEECH COMMUNICATION CURRICULUM DELPHI QUESTIONNAIRE ROUND II
From the initial round of the Delphi analysis, responses were re-ceived and tabulated from almost three hundred colleges and universi-ties. Eleven questions have been eliminated from this second round, since consensus was reached with over 80% agreement of the respondents The results of Round I responses for the remaining questions are pro-vided for your consideration. Although the Delphi Technique is a method of reaching consensus, it also elicits and refines the opinions of individuals to arrive at "convergent" or "polarized" views on pos-sible future events. Therefore, please consider the results of Round I in making your responses. If your current response falls outside the stated majority, please raake a brief comment on your position. Please indicate by checking:
A. Whether you AGREE or DISAGREE that the item should becorae a reality within the Speech Communication discipline, If you AGREE, indicate the year that this reality will occur, and
Assuming that it occurs, whether it is a DESIRABLE or UN-DESIRABLE occurrence.
B.
C.
1. The Speech Coiranunication curriculum should be oriented around the skills necessary for decision raaking and problem solving.
Results of Round I Round II
A.
B,
C,
D,
Agree Disagree Mean Year Median Year Desirable Undesirable Comments:
67,8% 32.2% 1986 1982 69.8% 30.2%
A. AGREE DISAGREE
B. Will occur by: Present to 1980 1985 1990 1995 2005 2010
C. DESIRABLE UNDESIRABLE
2. The undergraduate curriculum should provide opportunities for participation in Speech Coramunication research.
A,
B,
C,
D.
Results of ]
Agree Disagree Mean Year Median Year Desirable Undesirable Comments:
Round I
76.1% 23.9% 1985 1982 79.6% 20.4%
Round II
A.
B.
C.
AGREE DISAGREE
Will occur by: 1980 1985 1995 2000
DESIRABLE
Present to 1990 2010
UNDESIRABLE
160
Individualized instruction and self-paced prograras should diminish the amount of classroom activity in Speech Communication.
Results of Round I Round II
A.
B.
C.
D.
Agree Disagree Mean Year Median Year Desirable Undesirable Comments:
21.3% 78.7% 1989 1986 26.5% 73.5%
A.
B.
AGREE DISAGREE
Will occur by: 1980 1985__ 2000 2005
Present to _ 1990
2010
C. DESIRABLE UNDESIRABLE
Instruction in Speech Communication should adopt the use of clearly defined objectives and measurable outcomes.
Results of Round I
A.
B.
C.
D.
Agree Disagree Mean Year Median Year Desirable Undesirable Comments;
73.6% 26.4% 1986 1984 72.9% 27.1%
Round II
A. AGREE DISAGREE
B. Will occur by: 1980 1985 2000 2005
C. DESIRABLE
Present to 1990 2010
UNDESIRABLE
The curriculura in Speech Communication should be organized around courses which are designed to meet the vocational concerns of Speech Communication graduates.
A.
B.
C,
D,
Results of Round I
Agree Disagree Mean Year Median Year Desirable Undesirable Comments;
55.9% 44.1% 1984 1982 60.5% 39.5%
Round II
A.
B.
C,
AGREE DISAGREE
Will occur by: 1980 1985 2000 2005
DESIRABLE
Present to 1990 2010
UNDESIRABLE
Efforts should be devoted to severing organizational ties with Arts and Sciences and Humanities by raoving to establish Schools of Communication.
Results of Round I Round II
A.
B.
Agree Disagree Mean Year Median Year
31.5% 68.5% 1992 1990
A. AGREE DISAGREE
B. Will occur by: 1980 1985__ 2000 2005
Present to 1990 2010
161
c.
D.
Desirable Undesirable Coraments:
32.9% 67.1%
C. DESIRABLE UNDESIRABLE
Efforts in Speech Communication curriculum revision should be devoted to making speech courses an essential part of all educa-tional programs rather than promoting the Speech Communication major as a field of study.
Results of Round I
A.
B.
C.
D.
Agree Disagree Mean Year Median Year Desirable Undesirable Comments;
48.0% 52.0% 1991 1988 51.7% 48.3%
Round II
A. AGREE DISAGREE
B. Will occur by; 1980 1985 2000 2005
C. DESIRABLE
Present to 1990 2010
UNDESIRABLE
8. The scientific method of investigating spoken symbolic interaction should be the major theoretical base for the Speech Communication discipline.
A.
B.
C.
D.
Results of Round I
Agree Disagree Mean Year Median Year Desirable Undesirable Comments:
25.7% 74.3% 1990 1988 28.5% 71.5%
Round II
A.
B.
C.
AGREE DISAGREE
Will occur by: 1980 1985 2000 2005
DESIRABLE
Present to 1990 2010
UNDESIRABLE
A significant core of the Speech Communication curriculura should be based on research conclusions regarding strategies and con-straints in message choice, communication environments, and speech functions.
Results of Round I Round II
A.
B.
C.
D.
Agree Disagree Mean Year Median Year Desirable Undesirable Comments;
72.7% 27.3% 1986 1984 74.4% 25.6%
A. AGREE
B.
DISAGREE
Will occur by: Present to 1980 1985 1990 2000 2005 2010
C. DESIRABLE UNDESIRABLE
162
10, Within the practical framework of institutional scheduling, the Speech Communication curriculum should be structured on a modular approach (e.g., mini-courses).
A.
B.
C.
D.
Results of Rc
Agree Disagree Mean Year Median Year Desirable Undesirable Comments:
)und I
39.7% 60.3% 1991 1990 44.8% 55.2%
Round II
A.
B,
C,
AGREE DISAGREE
Will occur by: 1980 1985 2000 2005
DESIRABLE
Present to 1990 2010
UNDESIRABLE
11. The instructional program in Speech Communication should be re-vised to reflect more erapirical research.
Results of Round I Round II
A.
B.
C.
D.
Agree Disagree Mean Year Median Year Desirable Undesirable Comments:
52.1% 47.9% 1988 1987 59.5% 40.5%
A.
B.
AGREE DISAGREE
Will occur by: Present to 1980 1985 1990 2000 2005
C. DESIR^BLE
2010
UNDESIRABLE
12. Much of the present content of Speech Communication graduate courses should be incorporated into the undergraduate program.
13
A,
B.
C.
D.
Results of Round I
Agree Disagree Mean Year Median Year Desirable Undesirable Comments:
36.9% 63.1% 1989 1987 40.4% 59.6%
Round II
A.
B.
C.
AGREE DISAGREE
Will occur by: Present to 1980 1985 1990 2000 2005 2010
DESIRABLE UNDESIRABLE
Speech Communication research efforts should encompass behavioral and rhetorical techniques in a common approach to research design,
Results of Round I
A, Agree 74.1% Disagree 23,3%
B, l ean Year 1990 Median Year 1988
Round II
A,
B,
AGREE
Will < 1980 2000
DISAGREE
3ccur by: 1985 2005
Present 1990 2010
to
163
c.
D.
Desirable Undesirable Comments;
76.7% 23.3%
C. DESIRABLE UNDESIRABLE
Please provide the following information in order that we may return the final round for consensus, if necessary. If no final round is required, a summary of the results will be sent to you at the follow-ing address. Thank you again for your participation in the Speech Communication Curriculum Delphi study.
NAME
INSTITUTI0N_
ADDRESS
LIST OF REFERENCES
1. Adelson, Marvin. "Planning Education for the Future; Comments on a Pilot Study." American Behavioral Scientist 10 (March 1967); 1-31. ~ ~
2. Amara, Roy. "Misconceptions About Futures Research and Planning." World Future Society Bulletin 10 (March-April 1976); 3-4.
3. Anderson, D. P. "Clarifying and Setting Objectives on an Inter-mediate School District's Objectives Utilizing the Delphi Technique." Paper presented at the AERA Syraposiura on Explor-ing the Potential of the Delphi Technique by Analyzing its Application, Minneapolis, Minnesota, March 4, 1970.
4. Applbaura, Ronald L. "Will Speech Coramunication Survive as a Discipline?" Paper presented to the Speech Communication Association meeting in Houston, Texas, December 1975.
5. Arnold, Carroll C. "Rhetorical and Communication Studies: Two Worlds or One?" Western Speech 35 (Spring 1972); 75-81.
6. Asch, Solomon E. "Opinions and Social Pressure." In Small Groups: Studies in Social nteration, pp. 318-324. Edited by A. Paul Hare, Edgar F. Borgatta, and Robert F. Bales. New York: Alfred A. Knope, 1975.
7. Ashby, Eric. Adapting Universities to a Technological Society. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1974.
y
8. Banghart, Frank W. and Trull, Albert. Educational Planning. New York: The MacMillan Company, 1973.
9. Becker, Samuel L. "Presidential Message." Spectra 10 (February 1974); 1-2.
10. Bell, Daniel. "Schools in a Communal Society." In The Future of Education; Perspectives on Tomorrow's Schooling, pp. 31-48. Edited by Louis Rubin. Boston; Allyn and Bacon, 1975.
11. Bitzer, Lloyd F. and Black, Edwin, eds. The Prospect of Rhetoric. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc, 1971.
12. Braden, Waldo W. "An Uncommon Profession." The Southern Speech Journal 36 (Fall 1970); 1-10.
13. Brockriede, Wayne. "Trends in the Study of Rhetoric: Toward a Blending of Criticism and Science." In The Prospect of Rhetoric, pp. 123-139. Edited by Lloyd F. Bitzer and Edwin Black. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc, 1971.
164
165
14. Bruner, Jerome. "The Role of the Researcher as an Adviser to the Educational Policy Maker." Oxford Review of Education 1 (1975): 183-202.
15. Cartwright, Dorwin, ed. Studies in Social Power. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press, 1959.
16. Castaldi, Basil. Educational Facilities; Planning, Remodeling, and Manageraent. Boston: Allyn and Bason, Inc, 1977.
17. Cordasco, Francesco. A Brief History of Education. Totowa, New Jersey: Littlefield, Adams & Co., 1970.
18. Cornish, Edward. "What Shall We Call the Study of the Future?" The Futurists 11 (February 1977); 44-50.
19. Cyphert, Frederick R. and Gant, Walter L. "The Delphi Technique: A Tool for Collecting Opinions in Teacher Education." The Journal of Teacher Education 21 (Fall 1970); 417-425.
20. Dalkey, N. C. The Delphi Method. An Experimental Study of Group Opinion. The Rand Corporation, RM - 5888 - PR. June 1969.
21. Debecq, Andre et al. Group Techniques for Program Planning, Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Forseman and Company, 1975.
22. Eurich, Alvin C. "Managing the Future; Some Practical Suggestions." In The Future Acaderaic Community, pp. 223-234. Edited by John Caffrey. Washington, D.C.; American Council on Educa-tion, 1969.
23. Eurich, Alvin C. Reforraing Araerican Education. New York; Harper and Row, Publishers, 1969.
24. Fantini, Mario D. "Frora School System to Educational System" Phi Delta Kappan 57 (September 1975): 10-11.
25. Festinger, Leon and Katz, Daniel. Research Methods in the Be-
havioral Sciences. New York; Holt, Rinehard and Winston,
Inc, 1966.
26. Furst, Lyndon G. "The Educational Fifth Column: An Expanded Role for Teachers." Phi Delta Kappan 57 (September 1975): 8-10.
27. Handlin, Oscar and Handlin, Mary F. The Araerican College and American Culture. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Corapany, 1970.
28. Hechinger, Fred. "Education's 'New Majority'." Saturday Review, September 1975, pp. 14-18.
29. Helraer, Olaf. The Use of the Delphi Technigue in Probleras of
Educational Innovations. The Rand Corporation, P - 3499, December 1966.
166
30. Helmer, Olaf and Rescher, Nicholas. "On the Epistemology of the Inexact Sciences." Manageraent Science 6 (October 1959); 25-52,
31. Howell, William S. "Presidential Address - 1971." Spectra 7 (February 1972); 4-7.
32. Hudspeth, D. R. "A Long Range Planning Tool for Education: The Focus Delphi." Syracuse: Syracuse University Research In-stitute, 1970.
33. Husen, Torsten. "The Purposes of Futurologic Studies in Education," Alternative Educational Futures in the United States and in Europe. Center for Educational Research and Innovation. Paris; Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Develop-ment, 1972, 25-26.
34. Jeffrey, Robert C, "Presidential Message." Spectra 9 (February 1973): 1-2.
35. __. "Speech and the Huraanities; Departraental Philosophy." The Southern Speech Coramunication Journal 41 (Winter 1976); 158-164.
36. Joseph, Earl C. "An Introduction to Studying the Future." In Futurism in Education, pp. 1-26. Edited by Stephen P. Hencley and James R. Yates. Berkeley; McCuthan Publishing Corporation, 1974.
37. Judd, Robert C. "Delphi Method: Computerized 'Oracle' Accelerates Consensus Formation." College and University Business 49 (September 1970); 30-34.
38. Kahn, Herman and Weiner, Anthony. The Year 2000; A Framework for Speculation. New York: MacMillan, 1966.
39. Kauffman, Draper L., Jr. Futurisra and Future Studies. Washington,
D.C.: National Educational Association of the United States, 1976.
40. Kelly, Harold H. and Thibaut, John W. "Experimental Studies of Group Problem Solving and Process." In Handbook of Social Psychology, Vol. 2, pp. 735-785. Edited by Gardner Lindzey. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1954.
41. Keniston, Kenneth. "Social Changes and Youth in America." In The College Student and His Culture: An Analysis, pp. 40-60. Edited by Kaorv Yamamoto. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1968.
42. Kerlinger, Fred N, Foundations of Behavioral Research, New York; Holt, Rinehard and Winston, Inc, 1964.
.167
43. Kibler, Robert J. and Barker, Larry L., eds. Conceptual Frontiers in Speech-Communication. New York: Speech Association of America, 1969.
44. Lasswell, Harold D. "The Future of Government and Politics in the United States." In The Future of Education: Perspectives on Tomorrow's Schooling. pp. 1-21. Edited by Louis Rubin. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1975.
45. Linstone, Harold A. and Turoff, Murray. The Delphi Method: Tech-niques and Application. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1975.
46. London, Jack. "The Social Setting for Adult Education." In Handbook of Adult Education, pp. 3-23. Edited by Robert M. Smith et al. New York: The MacMillan Company, 1970.
47. Lonsdale, Richard C. "Futurism; Its Development, Content, and Methodology." In Educational Futurism 1985, pp. 7-29. Edited by Walter G. Hack. Berkley, California; McCutchan Publishing Corporation, 1971.
48. McHale, John. World Facts and Trends, New York: Collier Books, 1972.
49. Michael, Donald. The Unprepared Society: Planning for a Pre-carious Future. New York; Basic Books, 1968.
50. Miller, J. and Brooks, D. V. N. The Role of Higher Education in War and After. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1944.
51. Newcorabe, P. Judson and Allen, R. R., eds. New Horizons for Teacher Education in Speech Communication; Report of the Memphis Conference of Teacher Education. Skokie; National Textbook ComBany, 1974.
52. Norton, D. P. The Governors State University Needs Survey. Evanston, Illinois; Educational Testing Services (Midwestern office), 1970.
53. Peterson, Richard E. The Crisis of Purpose; Definition and Use of Institutional Goals. ERIC Clearing House on Higher Educa-tion, Washington, D.C., Report No. R5, October 1970. Ed. -049 - 713.
54. Rasp, A. F. "Delphi: A Decision Maker's Dream." Nation's Schools (July 1973); 29-32.
55. Roever, James E. "New Orleans, Wingspread, and Pheasant Run Briefly Revisited." Western Speech 37 (Winter 1974); 7-12,
168
56. Roever, James E. "Speech-Communication Research: Relevance-, and Relevance^." Central States Speech Journal 23 (Summer 1972): 109-117.
57. Rubin, Louis. "Editorial Commentary." In The Future of Education; Perspectives on Tomorrow's Schooling, pp. 75-82. Edited by Louis Rubin. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1975.
58. . "Observations on Future Schooling." In The Future of Education; Perspectives on Tomorrow's Schooling, pp. 189-207. Edited by Louis Rubin. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1975.
59. Scanton, Robert G. "Policy and Planning for the Future." In The Future of Education: Perspectives for Tomorrow's Schooling, pp. 83-95. Edited by Louis Rubin. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1975.
60. Shane, Harold G. "Social Decisions and Educational Policy." In The Future of Education: Perspectives on Tomorrow's School-ing, pp. 103-114. Edited by Louis Rubin. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1975.
61. . The Educational Significance of the Future. Blooming-ton, Indiana; Phi Delta Kappa, Inc, 1973.
62. . "The Future as a Force in Educational Change." Phi Delta Kappan 57 (September 1975); 13-15.
63. Sloan, Thomas. "A Plague on Both Our Houses?" Spectra 11 (June 1975); 1-2.
64. Smith, Donald K. "Speech for Tomorrow; Concepts and Context." The Speech Teacher 15 (January 1966); 30-33.
65. Speech Communication Association. 1975-1976 Speech Coramunication Directory. Falls Church, Virginia: Speech Communication Association, 1975.
66. Spekke, Andrew. "Is Going to College Worth the Investment?" The Futurist 10 (December 1976); 297-303.
67. Suppes, Patrick, "The School of the Future: Technological Pos-sibilities," In The Future of Education: Perspectives on Toraorrow's Schooling, pp. 145-157. Edited by Louis Rubin. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1975.
68. Toffler, Alvin. Future Shock. New York; Randora House, Inc, 1970.
69. . "The American Future is Being Bumbled Away." The Futurist 10 (April 1976); 97-105.
169
70. . "The Psychology of the Future." In Learning for Tomorrow: The Role of the Future in Education, pp. 3-18. Edited by Alvin Toffler. New York: Vintage Books, 1974.
71. Toynbee, Arnold. "Higher Education in a Tirae of Change." In Campus, 1980: The Shape of the Future in Higher Education, pp. xix-xxiv. Edited by Alvin C. Eurich. New York: Delacorte Press, 1968.
72. Tugwell, Franklin. Search for Alternatives. Cambridge, Massa-chusetts: Winthrop Publishers, Inc, 1973.
73. Tyler, Ralph W. "The School of the Future; Needed Research and Development." In The Future of Education: Perspectives on Tomorrow's Schooling, pp. 165-180. Edited by Louis Rubin. Boston; Allyn and Bacon, 1975.
74. Uhl, Norman P. Encouraging Convergences of Opinion through the Use of the Delphi Technique in the Process of Identifying an Instituion's Goals. Princeton, New Jersey: Educational Testing Services. Report No. PR 71-2, February 1971. Ed -049 - 713.
75. Van Dalen, Deobold B. Understanding Educational Research: An Introduction. New York; McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1973.
76. Wallace, Karl R. "For the Well-Being of the Profession." Spectra 8 (June 1972): 3-6.
77. Weaver, W. Timothy. "The Delphi Forecasting Method." Phi Delta
Kappan 52 (January 1971); 267-271.
78. Welty, Gordon. "Plato and Delphi." Futures, June 1973.
79. White, Eugene E. "Prospects for the Future: Changing Continuity." The Speech Teacher 23 (March 1974); 139-143.
80. Williams, Kenneth R, "Speech Communication Research: One World
or Two?" Central States Speech Journal 21 (Fall 1970); 175-180.
81. Wilson, Logan. "Higher Education and the National Interest." In Campus, 1980; The Shape of the Future in Higher Education, pp. 23-42. Edited by Alvin C. Eurich. New York: Delacorte Press, 1968.
82. Ziegler, Warren L, and Marion, Michael M. An Approach to the Futures - Perspective in American Education. New York: Syracuse University Research Corporation, 1970.
top related