Search

The results of this study argue that communication, and specifically oral communication education, is critical to students' future personal and professional success. Similar to three earlier studies, thematic analysis of 2,155 articles, identified in academic and popular press publications extending from 2016 to 2020, provides support for the centrality of the communication discipline's content and pedagogy. These results reinforce the importance of communication to promoting health communication; growing individually and in relation to others; enriching the educational enterprise; enhancing organizational processes; being a responsible community member locally, nationally, internationally, and globally; and addressing crises, safety, risk, security, and science communication. Subthemes are identified in each of these six thematic categories, and the results are compared with those of the three earlier iterations of this study and in light of major shifts in the sociopolitical and cultural environment in the U.S. and the globe since the last iteration.

The creation of innovative and impactful communication theories depends on improving our theorizing practices. A grounded practical theory analysis of communication theory textbooks and exercises explored representations of theorizing and what it means for students to think like theorists. The analysis suggests that communication theory pedagogy embraces a model of theorizing as practical application where existing theories and deductive reasoning are used to understand communication situations and develop communication practices. Theorizing as practical invention is offered as a complementary approach to theorizing as practical application that centers on the creation of theories and explanations using abduction. Implications for communication theory pedagogy grounded in theorizing as practical invention are presented.

In times of uncertainty, the messages we receive can be long-lasting and influential. This study sought to understand what memorable messages students recalled receiving from their instructors at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic and what kind of impact those messages had on them. Based on open-ended responses, students (N = 297) recalled emotional support messages most frequently, followed by motivational, solidarity/unifying, compliment/praise, and tangible/informational support messages. Students described how these messages influenced them in a variety of ways, including impacts on their motivation and performance, the instructor-student relationship, and their level of confidence and morale. The majority of these messages had the most significant associations with perceptions of the instructor-student relationship. Results highlight the influential role of instructor messages and provide important implications for instructors' future communication practices, whether in times of uncertainty or stability.

Author Jennifer Waldeck writes that her earliest research exposed her to the difficulty that students appear to encounter in accessing potential mentors and building productive relationships with them. In fact, the lack of student mentees available to serve as research participants was one of the drivers behind a decision to explore communication strategies for initiating mentoring relationships in a 1997 study (developed with Victoria Orrego, Tim Plax, and Pat Kearney). Over 20 years later, students still report barriers to effective mentoring; thus, a new paradigm for mentoring could in fact be in order. In this essay, Waldeck shares her reactions and reflections to the advocate model and suggests how she believes communication research might help advance it. Then she discusses some institutional approaches that might enhance the experiences of students of color (SOC) create opportunities for them to connect with appropriate mentors, stay in school, and consider graduate school. Institutional attention to SOC that involves strong mentoring at the undergraduate and graduate levels will hopefully build a pipeline of prospective faculty of color (FOC). Waldeck believes more FOC to mentor future generations of scholars can potentially ameliorate many of the stunning difficulties such as perceptions of disenfranchisement and diminished confidence and competence Harris and Lee discuss in their essay.

Instructors use humor in the classroom in numerous ways, including behaving stupidly, offering impersonations, manipulating their nonverbals, telling a story, joke, or pun, and using a costume or prop. How students decode their instructors' use of humor impacts their feelings about the course and their instructors. In this study, we investigated students' (N = 306) perceptions of their humor homophily with their instructors, as well as their overall view of the appropriateness of the instructor's classroom communication. Humor homophily was positively related to instructor humorousness, students' affect for their instructor, and their likelihood of enrolling in another class with their instructor. We also found that the intensity of instructor humorousness' relationship with student affect decreased when students perceived their instructor as appropriate. However, the more students found their instructors to be humorous and reported humor homophily, the more appropriate students rated their instructors' communication.

In a post #SilentSam, #METoo, #BlackGirlOnCampus, #WhatHappenedtoSandraBland world, a world where universities find themselves inundated by a 24-hour social media cycle and the truth of campus life is one viral video away, both communication staff and instructors are often tasked with new social media responsibilities not previously encountered or imagined. Toniesha Taylor begins by examining the ways that institutions of higher education have utilized social media, events at two universities illustrate the complexities involved with its use: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill and A&M University. She goes on to define womanism as a scholarly pursuit based in the lived experiences of Black women. Womanism in this context is focused on the communicative practices of individuals who must survive and thrive in institutions steeped in Eurocentrism, whiteness, and patriarchy. Extending this ethic of social justice further, Beauboeuf-Lafontant (2002) argues for three womanist principles that help people cultivate an inclusive, community-oriented educational culture: an embrace of the maternal, a commitment to political clarity, and an ethic of risk. Taylor applies these principles to create a set of best practices for faculty and staff involved in program, departmental, and university social media relations (even if not as communication directors, as many involved with social media are embedded in local programs and departments). She concludes by suggesting that one way to pursue the goals of communication teachers and scholars while also addressing social media crises when they occur is to teach about the ways university social media accounts function as meaning-making tools.

Drawing on scholarship focused on the concept of emotional labor, this study investigates the communicative role of college instructors in managing their students' mental health. Interviews with instructors (N = 17) focused on their perceived communicative roles in their students' mental health management, the communicative techniques they use to address students' mental health in and outside of the classroom, and the concerns they have in addressing the mental health of their students. Notably, instructors identified four communicative roles they feel comfortable assuming, three overarching communicative techniques utilized in their day-to-day interactions with students, and two primary concerns in addressing students' mental health. These communicative roles and techniques suggest a continuum of interpersonal engagement and comfort (or lack thereof) in discussing mental health topics with students. Findings are discussed in terms of their contribution to communication and instruction research, their connections to the emotional labor provided by college instructors for their students, and practical implications for university administration.

Students' concealed carry of guns is now legally allowed at many instructors' places of employment, representing an influential and understudied message. Therefore, using Emotional Response Theory and the chilling effect, the purpose of this study was to examine how college instructors perceived the legal presence of guns on campus influenced their instructional communication. Utilizing qualitative methods, interviews highlighted how instructors viewed the interaction of power, their role as an instructor, communication with students, and the dynamic created by campus carry. For participants, campus carry impacted their communication in one of three ways: by causing them to reframe, refocus, or resign in their communication with students. Implications, limitations, and directions for future research are discussed.

The six essays published in this issue all seek to extend principles of communication and instruction. They share an instrumental view of communication as a way to address problems and deficiencies and simultaneously position instructional communication research squarely within larger organizational and professional communication contexts. In addition, they demonstrate the ubiquity and relevance of not only teaching communication principles and skills across contexts beyond traditional classrooms, but also conducting instructional communication research dedicated to informing and improving upon such practices. With these strengths in mind, however, the author asserts that these essays also speak to some of the limitations to be overcome when applying current concepts of instructional communication in nontraditional contexts. Moreover, he also argues that some scholars are beginning to address them in their instructional work beyond the classroom.

This study investigated how managers, entry-level employees, and hiring professionals in the optics and photonics industry socialize each other to enact the communication norms and expectations in their workplaces. A qualitative analysis of transcripts from interviews conducted with 33 employees at 15 companies produced five prevalent themes related to what optics and photonics employees consider competent communication (proactive questioning, efficient decision-making, familial-like humor, tactful translation, and fluent modality switching) and three socialization processes (presumed competence, informal mentoring, and structured training). These competencies and processes necessitate what we term "cross-occupational communication": an interactive, iterative process involving communicative needs assessment, information exchange, and rhetorical/situational flexibility with groups distinct in background, training, and occupational role. It is difficult to create workplace-like experiences that truly capture the field-specific communication practices involved in organizational socialization within traditional classrooms; therefore, we argue for systematic and intentional communication in the disciplines instruction that considers cross-occupational communication needs in the workforce.

Recently, many scientists and science advocates have taken the responsibility to mobilize for the sake of science. With fake news or "alternative facts" on the rise, many scientists and science supporters are determined to protect the credibility of science and promote evidence-based policy-making. At the core of these mobilization efforts is teaching: making science accessible to the public and policy makers in ways that mitigate false information. This paper argues that communication scholars can contribute to this important conversation through exploring instructional aspects of science activism. The paper proposes potential areas of investigation focused on intersections among science, mobilization, teaching, and learning. To do so, such research will involve scientists and nonscientists, as well as lifelong and first-time activists, in negotiating instructional practices to mobilize for science.

Whereas hate is defined as extreme negative feelings for others because of some aspect of their identity (Perry, 2001; Waltman & Haas, 2011), hate speech is discourse devoted to the vilification of the other's identity (Waltman, 2015; Waltman & Mattheis, 2017). It is an attempt to vandalize the other's identity to such an extent that the very legitimacy and humanity of the other is called into question. The combination of "alternative facts," the rejection of fact-based truth claims, and the political campaigns that intentionally divided Americans into tribes have all contributed to making U.S. political discourse increasingly susceptible to mainstreaming hate. Hate speech that was once relegated to dark corners of the Internet and viewed as the discourse of hate groups is now appearing in the everyday discourse of our politicians. In this essay, Michael Waltman outlines several things that could be contributing to this normalizing of hate and hate speech. And although hate has certainly always characterized U.S. history. He argues that the normalcy of hate discourse represents a new era that poses unique challenges to scholars and educators who wish to talk with their students about hatred in American life. Ultimately, he suggests that teachers and scholars of communication studies have a responsibility and opportunity to respond to this increasingly normal, virulent trend that infects our universities and society.

Heated battles over free speech have erupted on college campuses across the United States in recent months. Some of the most prominent incidents involve efforts by students to prevent public appearances by speakers espousing controversial viewpoints. Efforts to silence offensive speakers on college campuses are not new; in these endeavors, one can hear echoes from the late 1980s and early 1990s. There is, of course, a meaningful distinction between organized efforts by students to silence speakers and policies adopted by colleges and universities to protect students from objectionable speech. It is, however, important to note that these efforts share a common motivation: They involve questions about the reach of the First Amendment in situations that involve structured or unstructured efforts to silence speakers or suppress ideas that some members of the community deem offensive. To assess the desirability of these efforts, it is necessary to consider the value of the speech being suppressed. Unlike political speech, which is always assumed to have value, courts and commentators have suggested that speech such as racial epithets, defamatory statements, and obscene utterances (referred to by academics and jurists as "low-value speech") should receive less First Amendment protection. This essay challenges this typology, offering a communication-focused (and legally grounded) defense of low-value speech within institutions of higher education committed to debate, dialogue, and the free exchange of ideas. To accomplish their mission, college and universities need to be a place where students and scholars are free to consider a broad range of ideas, most especially those that test conventional wisdom or the prevailing viewpoint.

Research has established that students often consider the delivery of instructor feedback to be a face-threatening event. To minimize the potential negative effects of feedback, verbal and nonverbal face-threat mitigation (FTM) strategies are utilized by instructors. Advances in digital feedback systems, like online documents and learning management platforms, allow instructors to add nonverbal elements, such as profile pictures or emojis, to this feedback. Two mixed-method studies were employed to investigate the role of these nonverbal cues in digital feedback. Study 1 (N = 236) employed a 2 by 2 experiment (presence or absence of FTM tactics by presence or absence of instructor picture), showing that FTM strategies have substantial positive impact on feedback and instructor perceptions, and that the inclusion of instructor pictures with this feedback has no effect. Study 2 (N = 218) utilized a 2 by 2 experimental design (presence or absence of FTM tactics by presence or absence of matched-valence emojis). Results confirm main effects of FTM techniques (mitigation strategies lead to positive effects), but the addition of emojis had no perceptible influence. Implications for technology-driven instructional feedback are discussed.

College instructors use lecture and its current counterpoint--active learning--widely and often rely on both strategies, but the question of which best promotes student learning has become a debate that ignores the fact that learning can result from both. Students still listen to and learn from lectures. They pass exams, obtain degrees, and function successfully as professionals. Additionally, people learn by doing: research on active learning supports its merits for enhancing affective and cognitive learning--even in those classes that students find difficult or uninteresting. However, contention focuses on how well each accomplishes learning. The authors' premise of this brief forum article is that lecture is neither dead nor necessarily "bad," and active learning is not a panacea. Instructors should build on the interplay between the two when deciding how best to promote learning. The authors argue that there are several ways in which instructors typically make decisions about their in-class pedagogy, and that each potentially limits instructional effectiveness. Teachers should make sound decisions based on the assumption that the deepest learning occurs when lecture and active learning are used strategically and in relationship with one another. [Other articles in this forum include: The Lecture's Absent Audience (EJ1132073); The Lost Art of Lecturing: Cultivating Student Listening and Notetaking (EJ1132054); Lecture and Active Learning as a Dialectical Tension (EJ1132004); What Is the Place of Lecture in Student Learning Today? (EJ1132078); Sage on the Stage or Bore at the Board? (EJ1132063); Rethinking Lecture-Learning from Communicative Lenses: A Response to Forum Essays (EJ1132088); and The Lecture and the Learning Paradigm (EJ1132080).]

In this response, Scott Titsworth analyzes similarities among the forum essays and then offers ideas for how instructional communication scholars might adopt greater situational awareness in research, theory, and application of their work. [Other essays in this forum include: (1) FORUM: Interpersonal Communication in Instructional Settings: The Instructor-Student Relationship as an Alternative Form of Superior-Subordinate Relationship (Scott A. Myers), see EJ1121090; (2) FORUM: Interpersonal Communication in Instructional Settings: Interpersonal Communication Research in Instructional Contexts: A Dyadic Approach (Alan K. Goodboy, Deborah A. Kashy), see EJ1121093; (3) FORUM: Interpersonal Communication in Instructional Settings: A Cautious Approach to Reliance on Interpersonal Communication Frameworks: The Importance of Context in Instructional Communication Research (Zac D. Johnson, Sara LaBelle, Jennifer H. Waldeck), see EJ1121095; (4) FORUM: Interpersonal Communication in Instructional Settings: The Interplay between Interpersonal Communication and Instructional Communication (Narissra Maria Punyanunt-Carter and V. Santiago Arias), see EJ1121087; (5) FORUM: Interpersonal Communication in Instructional Settings: Raising New Questions and Restoring our Focus on Authentic Student Learning (Derek R. Lane), see EJ1121117; and (6) FORUM: Interpersonal Communication in Instructional Settings: What Role Should Interpersonal Communication Play (or not) in Instructional Communication Research: A Response to the FORUM Essays (Deanna D. Sellnow), see EJ1121147.]

This study utilized the longitudinal survey research design using students' motives to communicate with their instructors as a test case. Participants were 282 undergraduate students enrolled in introductory communication courses at a large Mid-Atlantic university who completed the Student Communication Motives scale at three points (Time 1: second week, Time 2: eighth week, Time 3: 14th week) during the Spring semester. The use of the longitudinal survey research design revealed three motives fluctuated in use: (a) the "relational" motive was used more at Time 3 than at Time 2, (b) the "functional motive" was used less between both Time 1 and Time 3 and Time 2 and Time 3, and (c) the sycophancy motive was used less between Time 1 and Time 2, but more between Time 2 and Time 3. The advantages of using a longitudinal survey research design in instructional communication studies are reviewed.

Anita Vangelisti writes in this response that although the recommendations set forward in this "Forum" are well thought out and important additions to the discussion, teacher-scholars in the field of communication can, and should, do more. She agrees that there is a need to identify and describe learning outcomes in communication, and says that the work done by the faculty who participated in the LOC Project is overdue. Vangelisti also advocates for the need to empirically interrogate the leaning outcomes put forth to ascertain how they are best taught and, as noted by Mello and his colleagues, how they should be evaluated. With this said, the learning outcomes generated by the LOC Project and the ideas offered in the current forum represent "a starting point for conversations" as opposed to an endpoint (see NCA's LOC Project). Vangelisti observes that in addition to investigating learning outcomes, how they are used, and how they might be refined, there is a need to continue the conversation by conducting research that demonstrates why the communication outcomes being taught are so important. She believes various stakeholders and researchers should also be more than responsive or reactive. They should be proactive. What Communication educators and researchers bring to the conversations about teaching and learning is a deep understanding of and an ability to embrace the complexity of communication, and the LOCs and the present "Forum" essays offer an exciting starting point for further discussion.

Could teacher communication behaviors generally assumed to be positive ever be detrimental to student realization of particular outcomes? This essay argues for increased scholarly attention to this question. The authors advocate a research agenda that explores the potential "downside" of teacher communication behaviors (TCBs); problematizing established TCBs in light of the National Communication Association's Learning Outcomes in Communication (LOC).

This study examined how mentoring initiation and maintenance strategies mediate the relationship between acculturative stress and intercultural communication competence on Chinese graduate students' program satisfaction. Results supported a partial mediation effect for mentoring maintenance strategies. By specifying the mediating effect, the model explained significantly more variance in program satisfaction beyond the direct effects of the intercultural variables. We extended one premise of mentor enactment theory to a cross-cultural context by investigating the unique roles of expressing appreciation and communicating personal goals as effective maintenance strategies in predicting Chinese international graduate students' satisfaction. Practical implications are also discussed.

This study gathered longitudinal and descriptive data on the nature of the basic communication course, continuing a tradition dating back to 1968. Now in its ninth iteration, convenience sampling and hard copy distribution of the survey instrument resulted in a total of 188 respondents (21 from two-year schools, 167 from four-year schools). This study reports and discusses data in the following categories: (a) general description of the course; (b) course administration; (c) assessment, standardization, and assignments and grading; (d) course content and pedagogy; and (e) media, technology, and online teaching. General reflections are provided about the results in light of changing landscapes in the U.S. educational system and recent research and other activities of communication scholars related to the basic communication course. Recommendations are offered for future scholarship about the communication discipline's "front porch."

Parent-teacher communication continues to evolve due to smartphones and other new communication technologies. In all, 1,349 parents completed the Parental Academic Support Scale to assess the frequency and importance of communication across modes. Confirmatory analysis revealed a good model fit. Media richness theory was applied to parents' qualitative and quantitative responses to understand the communication modes parents now select to communicate with teachers at the P-12 level. The data revealed an increase in parents' preference for frequent e-mail communication as well as for emerging modes of parent--teacher communication such as text messaging and social media. Implications for media richness theory and changes to parent--teacher communication are discussed.

Mentoring is a trusting, developmental supervisory relationship whose success largely depends on participants' interpersonal abilities. Feedback interventions with mentees commonly present interactional challenges to maintaining that relationship, yet are integral to any teaching-learning context. In this study we examined whether and how two key, trainable teacher communication abilities--face-threat mitigation (FTM) and nonverbal immediacy--predicted students' perceptions of being mentored by a teacher. Levels of actual FTM tactics and teacher nonverbal immediacy (TNI) cues were manipulated in a feedback intervention situation on video and analyzed across a 2 × 2 design. Factorial MANCOVA analysis of perceived mentoring detected significant multivariate main effects for FTM tactics and for TNI cues, no significant two-way interaction effect between those two interpersonal variables, and differences in how TNI and FTM each contributed to predicting mentoring's four measured dimensions. Theoretical and pedagogical implications are discussed in light of facework, approach-avoidance, feedback intervention, and leader-member exchange theories.

The purpose of this study is to better understand new college students' attitudes toward and perceptions of communication media and technology and themselves as communicators in the context of communication competence. Building on the results of a previous qualitative study, the researchers developed a survey focused on communication competence in the technologically rich 21st century and collected responses from 223 entering college freshmen. Among other findings, results of this investigation provide a picture of Generation C students' (born after 1990) descriptions of how they actually and prefer to communicate, in formal and more personal situations and relationships. The students indicated a preference for face-to-face communication in all of 10 communication situations, with some differences observed based on sex of students.

As ways that communication scholars can prepare students to meet challenges and transform society are considered, for the greater good, the authors argue that it is essential to consider the realm of health communication (Morreale, Valenzano, & Bauer, 2016). The authors focus on a growing need for rigorous research as a cornerstone of communication skills training for health professionals. Although education has reached a point where it is clear that communication skills training can reduce some of the human costs and financial burdens of healthcare, the authors maintain the gold standard for delivering this type of instruction is understudied. This article suggests that what remains to be understood are (a) precisely how communication affects health outcomes and (b) how communication skills training is best delivered. The authors believe both would benefit from theoretically driven, methodologically sophisticated programs of research with the promise of evidence-based recommendations. They support the need to study what happens when learning communication becomes part of the culture of care rather than a one-off event so that the health care professions can accumulate evidence demonstrating how communication instruction can cure much of what ails the healthcare system.

Throughout its history, instructional communication research has played an important role in the discipline of Communication. In tracing its lineage, Myers (2010) explains that instructional communication research has focused on communicative behaviors that instructors use with their students to better understand and facilitate affective and cognitive learning. Thus, it has been instrumental in elucidating the ways in which communication influences the messages instructors and students send in the classroom. David Kahl, Jr. suggests that instructional communication research suffers from a somewhat myopic view of instruction. He sees a need to expand the scope of instructional communication research in order to better understand and resist increasing neoliberal pressure on education. Kahl argues that instructional communication research is well suited to address this problem, as it directly investigates communication at the site of the problem--the classroom. Therefore, he contends that instructional communication research can respond to this problem by coupling itself with the critical paradigm. Coupling the paradigms will provide a more comprehensive understanding of neoliberalism than either paradigm would alone. Doing so will allow for the production of scholarship that examines communication pedagogy through empirical and critical lenses to understand the effect that neoliberalism has on communication, teaching, and learning.

For decades, instructional communication scholars have relied predominantly on cross-sectional survey methods to generate empirical associations between effective teaching and student learning. These studies typically correlate students' perceptions of their instructor's teaching behaviors with subjective self-report assessments of their own cognitive learning. The author feels that these self-report perceptual studies are limited by design, providing little insight into how various teaching behaviors foster authentic student learning (Lane,2017). The author maintains that learning is always the result of some process at work in the mind of the student learner; there is no direct absorption or transfer of knowledge taught by a teacher. Instead, there are mechanisms through which effective teaching helps students learn, and these indirect mechanisms are mediators between teaching and learning. Since learning is a process, the author feels it should be researched as such and argues that one of the greatest reforms for instructional communication research over the next five years would be to encourage researchers to design teaching-learning experiments and adopt recent advances in linear modeling (see Darlington & Hayes, 2017; Hayes, 2013) to test hypotheses featuring mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis to better understand the mechanisms through which learning occurs and the boundary conditions under which learning opportunities are optimized. By doing so, scholars will study authentic learning as the causal process that it is and identify with greater precision how and when teaching does (or does not) foster authentic student learning.

In 1938, Dewey wrote "Mankind likes to think in terms of extreme opposites." In this response to the FORUM essays, Deanna Sellnow writes that she heard Dewey's words as she read the authors' struggle with the either-or question regarding the role of interpersonal communication in instructional research. She argues that this is not an either-or question at all, and the problem that need to be rectified rests with the outcome measures of much of the research focused on interpersonal constructs in instructional settings. She advances her argument by focusing on what instructional communication is, an assessment of the essays included in this forum, how interpersonal communication-based instructional research foci ought to be adjusted to truly advance instructional communication research, and a call for future research in instructional communication that will place it where it belongs not only in classroom settings, but also in the world beyond the academy. [Other essays in this Forum include the following: (1) FORUM: Interpersonal Communication in Instructional Settings: The Instructor-Student Relationship as an Alternative Form of Superior-Subordinate Relationship (Scott A. Myers), see EJ1121090; (2) FORUM: Interpersonal Communication in Instructional Settings: Interpersonal Communication Research in Instructional Contexts: A Dyadic Approach (Alan K. Goodboy, Deborah A. Kashy), see EJ1121093; (3) FORUM: Interpersonal Communication in Instructional Settings: A Cautious Approach to Reliance on Interpersonal Communication Frameworks: The Importance of Context in Instructional Communication Research (Zac D. Johnson, Sara LaBelle, Jennifer H. Waldeck), see EJ1121095; (4) FORUM: Interpersonal Communication in Instructional Settings: The Interplay between Interpersonal Communication and Instructional Communication (Narissra Maria Punyanunt-Carter, and V. Santiago Arias), see EJ1121087; (5) FORUM: Interpersonal Communication in Instructional Settings: Raising New Questions and Restoring our Focus on Authentic Student Learning (Derek R. Lane), see EJ1121117; and (6) FORUM: Interpersonal Communication in Instructional Settings: Improving Situational Awareness for Instructional Communication Research: A Forum Response (Scott Titsworth), see EJ1121131.]

In this article the author addresses whether educators have accumulated sufficient knowledge about interpersonal communication in the instructional context--at least as it pertains to the relational perspective--"and" whether other meaningful topics in the instructional communication literature have been ignored. The author's purpose here is to address both of these issues by considering the value of raising new questions and envisioning possibilities for restoring the focus on improving authentic student learning outcomes. He advances the argument that there is still much to learn about instructional communication from the relational perspective and that that those in the field can advance the discipline by restoring focus on authentic student learning. [Other articles in this FORUM include: (1) FORUM: Interpersonal Communication in Instructional Settings: The Instructor-Student Relationship as an Alternative Form of Superior-Subordinate Relationship (Scott A. Myers), see EJ1121090; (2) FORUM: Interpersonal Communication in Instructional Settings: Interpersonal Communication Research in Instructional Contexts: A Dyadic Approach (Alan K. Goodboy, Deborah A. Kashy), see EJ1121093; (3) FORUM: Interpersonal Communication in Instructional Settings: A Cautious Approach to Reliance on Interpersonal Communication Frameworks: The Importance of Context in Instructional Communication Research (Zac D. Johnson, Sara LaBelle, Jennifer H. Waldeck), see EJ1121095; (4) FORUM: Interpersonal Communication in Instructional Settings: The Interplay between Interpersonal Communication and Instructional Communication (Narissra Maria Punyanunt-Carter, V. Santiago Arias), see EJ1121087; (5) FORUM: Interpersonal Communication in Instructional Settings: Improving Situational Awareness for Instructional Communication Research. A Forum Response (Scott Titsworth), see EJ1121131; and (6) FORUM: Interpersonal Communication in Instructional Settings: What Role Should Interpersonal Communication Play (or not) in Instructional Communication Research: A Response to the FORUM essays (Deanna D. Sellnow), see EJ1121147.]

The basic communication course, with its roots in classical Greece and Rome, is frequently a required course in general education. The course often serves as our "front porch," welcoming new students to the Communication discipline. This essay first outlines early traditions in oral communication instruction and their influence on future iterations of the course. In addition, because fundamental changes in higher education in more modern times affected emphases and delivery of the course, we focus on the relationship between general education and the basic course and the significant curricular changes to the course during the latter part of the 20th century. Finally, we discuss ramifications of the evolution of the basic course, as the discipline moves forward into the 21st century.

Elwood Murray (1897-1988) was a pioneer in communication education. Beginning in the 1930s, he applied nontraditional methods in the speech classroom to encourage students to internalize and apply what they learned, and to view knowledge holistically. Drawing on the work of Kunkel, Moreno, Lewin, and Korzybski, Murray focused on developing skills in interpersonal and group communication. He facilitated classroom activities that he believed would bring about positive change in students' personalities as well as enhance their relationships and leadership ability. Communication methodologies, he argued, could facilitate learning in all fields and foster interdisciplinary understanding. In spite of much skepticism by his colleagues, Murray introduced innovative classroom practices that advanced our thinking about instructional communication.

In the late 1980s, noted communication scholar Cassandra Book laid out a comprehensive rationale and agenda for communication education research specifically focusing on pedagogical content knowledge for Communication courses in K-12 education. It has been 25 years since Book published her call for those in our discipline to pursue research interests in communication pedagogy. The purpose of this essay is to evaluate the progress, or lack thereof, that scholars in our discipline have made in this area and to provide suggestions for advancing a communication pedagogy advocacy and research agenda for the 21st century.

Academic entitlement (AE) refers to the expectation of educational success despite the input of personal effort needed to earn it (Boswell, 2012). Entitled students feel that learning should require minimal work and that difficulties encountered during the learning process should be attributed to instructors, rather than themselves. AE has become increasingly associated with academic consumerism, or the view that "students are paying customers for their education and deserve the same customer satisfaction and service as any other type of consumer" (Sohr-Preston & Boswell, 2015, p. 183). AE has also been linked to many negative attitudes and behaviors including low self-efficacy and poor study habits (Greenberger, Lessard, Chen, & Farruggia, 2008). Entitled students are more likely to provide excuses for their work and express negative complaints when they dislike a course (Goldman & Martin, 2014; Goodboy & Frisby, 2014). Due to the negativity that surrounds AE, most instructors seek to combat entitlement in their classrooms. Not all students feel/act entitled, but for those that do, directly confronting their beliefs would likely be perceived as a personal attack and may alienate students from their instructor while creating unnecessary tension in the classroom. Instead, instructors must adapt their teaching practices around entitlement, not so that they implicitly acknowledge or reward AE, but so that they maintain an optimal learning environment for as many of the students as possible. Instructional communication research can help instructors adapt their practices around entitled students. Yet, just as student expectations continue to change, research must also evolve. It is possible that behaviors that were once promoted in the literature as effective are now considered by students to be a given, coinciding with their consumeristic expectations. As such, the authors offer and detail three directions to help future research address entitlement in today's classrooms: (1) Researchers should continue examining the strategies that instructors use to make course content relevant to students; (2) Scholars need to diversify their investigations of technology and the way in which it is used and discussed in the classroom; and (3) Researchers should reexamine millennial students' communication concerns. [For the other essays in this forum: (1) FORUM: Instructional Communication and Millennial Students: Scripting Knowledge and Experiences for Millennial Students (Angela M. Hosek, Scott Titsworth, EJ1102964); (2) FORUM: Instructional Communication and Millennial Students: Hoverboards and "Hovermoms": Helicopter Parents and Their Influence on Millennial Students' Rapport with Instructors (T. Kody Frey and Nicholas T. Tatum, EJ1102970); (3) FORUM: Instructional Communication and Millennial Students: "Me"llennials and the Paralysis of Choice: Reigniting the Purpose of Higher Education (Marjorie M. Buckner and Michael G. Strawser, EJ1102967 ); (4) FORUM: Instructional Communication and Millennial Students: Managing Imposter Syndrome among the "Trophy Kids": Creating Teaching Practices that Develop Independence in Millennial Students (Kirstie McAllum, EJ1102980); and (5) FORUM: Instructional Communication and Millennial Students: Teaching Communication to Emerging Adults (Paula S. Tompkins, EJ1102974). Responses include: (1) FORUM: Instructional Communication and Millennial Students: Millennials, Teaching and Learning, and the Elephant in the College Classroom (Sherwyn P. Morreale and Constance M. Staley, EJ1102955); and (2) FORUM: Instructional Communication and Millennial Students: The Power of Language: A Constitutive Response to Millennial Student Research (Kyle C. Rudick and Scott Ellison, EJ1102961).]

This eighth in a series of surveys of the basic communication course, begun in 1968, has as its purpose to gather longitudinal and descriptive data on the nature of the course. The latest study differs from past studies in that some of the results are presented comparatively for two-year and four-year colleges and universities. Samples for both populations were randomly selected from the NCA list of 1,295 communication programs resulting in a total of 208 respondents, 165 from four-year schools and 43 from two-year schools. The survey instrument from 2006 was revised and expanded and the study now reports, discusses, and interprets data based on (a) course orientation, interpersonal or hybrid, and demographics; (b) course enrollment and delivery methods; (c) method of course direction; (d) course administration, instruction, and training; (e) assessment and standardization across sections; (f) grading; (g) instructional content and enhancement; and (h) media, technology, and distance education. In addition to discussing results of the present study, observations about the longitudinal results since 1968, and reflections about the basic course in light of broader socioeducational trends and instructional communication research and theory, are provided. (Contains 11 tables.)

LET'S TALK ABOUT IT (LTAI) (Lederman, Stewart, Bates, Greenberg, LeGreco, & Schuwerk, 2007), a scenario-based alcohol prevention simulation, has been used in a curriculum infusion design to promote healthy alcohol-related decision making among college students. Its use offers a unique research opportunity to explore students' beliefs and talk about sex and friendships in the culture of college drinking. This study examines students' alcohol-related decisions and discussion of those decisions. In the simulated drinking context LTAI, participants have to decide what to do about an intoxicated female friend in a scenario in which a new male acquaintance invites her to go to his place. A qualitative observation and analysis of 141 undergraduate students' discussions about the situation and their decisions in it about how to treat their friend revealed two major themes: the importance of relational factors in students' decision making, and the variety of communicative strategies employed to protect their friends. In addition, the use of curriculum infusion and simulations regarding college drinking provided students with complex yet salient communication problems to investigate while also addressing a major health concern.

Using prospect theory and the extended parallel process model, this study examined the effect of gain/loss message framing on perceptions of severity, susceptibility, response efficacy, and self efficacy (derived from the extended parallel process model), as well as perception of message effectiveness and behavioral intention in a community based Latino American sample. Results indicated no significant differences between a gain- and loss-frame for any of the outcome variables. In addition, message effectiveness, susceptibility, and response efficacy were the best predictors of intention to engage in early testing behavior. (Contains 5 notes and 2 tables.)

Patients with diabetes who experience low-health literacy often struggle in their roles as health consumers. A multi-disciplinary group of educators and researchers collaborated to develop a video intervention to help these patients better understand their disease and communicate more effectively with their physician. We describe the assessment study and report preliminary patient perception outcome data regarding the utility of the videos as a communication and health education intervention. Generally, the participants found the intervention to be helpful and informative. For many, the intervention led them to consider behavior changes. For others, the intervention was a prompt for diabetes-related conversations with their physicians. Participant responses also provided empirical support that the intervention was consistent with key principles of message design for patients with low-health literacy. (Contains 5 notes.)

Successfully evaluating students' work challenges teachers to achieve both corrective task and identity-protection goals in interaction. This study investigated how face-threat mitigation that students received from their teachers during feedback influenced students' judgments about the quality and usefulness of the feedback their instructors provided and their perceptions of those instructors' credibility. Public-speaking students (N=356) at three universities were surveyed about their instructors' feedback regarding their first graded speech that term. Multiple regression analyses showed that receiving attentive facework during instructional feedback predicted students' perceptions that feedback was fair and useful. Skilled instructional facework also predicted students' less defensive responses to criticism and their higher credibility ratings of their instructors. Findings support attentive instructional facework as a communication mechanism whose skillful use aids feedback's reception and integration and enhances instructors' credibility as worthy feedback providers. (Contains 2 tables and 2 notes.)

Communication-across-the-curriculum (CXC) programs provide assistance to other disciplines on the teaching and learning of communication--meeting an increasingly important need for students not only to be content specialists, but also coherent communicators. Research emerging from this initiative details programmatic challenges and emphases, but also provides insight into the unique interdisciplinary issues involved with teaching communication in other disciplinary cultures. Through a systematic thematic analysis, this review provides a synopsis of CXC scholarship over the past 25 years--highlighting three distinct eras of CXC scholarship that illustrate differing approaches to negotiating the mission of interdisciplinary change: cross-curricular proactiveness, cross-curricular skepticism, and cross-curricular curiosity. Over this time period researchers in this scholarly discussion have engaged in work that has produced detailed program descriptions and assessment, transferable instructional resources, and increasingly more discipline-specific empirical results and theoretical contributions. To increase CXC's impact, though, future scholarship could respond to pressing challenges by adopting a stance of cross-curricular advocacy that is proactive in ways characteristic of early research but with a more focused commitment to empirical rigor, theoretical sophistication, and reflective scholarly partnerships. (Contains 5 tables and 7 notes.)

This interpretive study explored the communicative strategies teachers employ when constructing and presenting course syllabi to overcome challenges teachers face surrounding the syllabus. Data included 13 classroom observations, 19 teacher interviews, and document analysis of the instructors' syllabi. Communication strategies teachers used to welcome students, balance tensions when presenting the syllabus, and focus students' attention during the presentation emerged. The findings offer teachers suggestions on how to present and construct the syllabus more effectively. (Contains 2 tables.)

The study examines the dilemmas communicated by White students as they addressed issues of whiteness raised in an undergraduate interracial communication course. Data included semester-long in-class observation, three focus groups of White students from the class, and student documents. Communication patterns associated with dealing with White privilege, defining an antiracist lifestyle, and becoming comfortable with communicating about race were identified. Reasons for and response to white student silence in diversity-related courses are discussed.