Copyright by PHOEBE INZER PROCTOR HOLLIS 1977

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.