2.2 What Does the Academic Study of Communication Look Like?

Here’s the short version of how Communication Studies became a discipline. Scholars in a wide variety of fields noticed that their interests overlapped with those of scholars in other fields. English departments were teaching how to communicate clearly through writing, but some instructors included spoken communication as well, and taught classes in “eloquence” (which referred not just to how to enunciate words clearly, but how to compose a good speech). As journalism expanded from newspapers to include new media like radio and television, professors realized that they were looking at some of the same topics as theater departments and film schools. Philosophy departments taught courses in how to make logical arguments, while social psychology and political science departments examined persuasion techniques that were not purely logical. Sociology departments became interested in group dynamics and decision-making, and family therapists realized that they were studying much of the same things. As noted in the previous chapter, people interested in electronics were the first to develop models of the communication process. Slowly, scholars from all of these fields realized that it was time to form a distinct new academic discipline.

It should be no surprise that the first question— “What should we call this new discipline?” — would take some time to answer. Those who started off by focusing on public speaking and rhetoric naturally thought that the word “speech” covered the field well. A national organization, founded in 1914, was at first called the National Association of Academic Teachers of Public Speaking. It then went through a series of name changes, becoming the Speech Communication Association in 1970, and finally, in 1997, the National Communication Association. The names shift happened in part because the field grew to incorporate nearly 50 subdisciplines, and many scholars didn’t feel that their discipline was represented by the narrow word “speech.”

Naturally, the scholars who came into this new academic field from disparate areas brought their own academic traditions with them. Some fit under the general umbrella of “humanities” (such as philosophy), some under the umbrella of “social sciences” (such as psychology and sociology). This explains why Communication Studies students sometimes get frustrated writing papers, because half of their teachers ask them to use the MLA citation style (used in the humanities) and the other half insist on APA style (used in social sciences).

To add to the confusion, the discipline also has a long history of merging with and splitting off from many other fields. Long before I got there, my department at the University of Minnesota was called the Department of Speech and Theatre. It split into two departments in the 1950s, and it’s now the Communication Studies department, and is adjacent to the School of Journalism and Mass Communication. Many professors have moved from one department to another, and other department mergers have been proposed but not adopted. Meanwhile, other colleges and universities have formed different alliances:

• The University of New Mexico has a Department of Communication and Journalism
• Depauw University has a Department of Communication and Theater
• Carroll University has a Department of Communication and Sociology
• The University of Idaho has a Department of Psychology and Communication Studies
• Boston University has a Department of Mass Communication, Advertising and Public Relations
• The University of Mary Washington has an English, Linguistics and Communication department.

If any of these combinations have changed by the time you read this, it only proves the point that “what discipline goes with what” is a question that’s continually being revisited.

This is all a way of showing that Communication Studies is an inherently cross-disciplinary field, which is not a bad thing. The academic world recognizes the value of “cross-pollination” between disciplines, and Communication Studies may be better positioned than any other to make those connections. If the cost is a little confusion about what things are called or where to take particular courses, that is a small price to pay. It may mean that in a job interview, a student with a communication degree will need to take a little longer than, say, a chemistry major to explain what they studied in school, but it also makes communication majors adaptable to a wider variety of jobs than a student with a narrower focus. The previous chapter tackled the issue that communication degrees don’t always get the respect they deserve, but that appears to be changing: the Princeton Review listed “Communications” as the second most valuable degree, saying “It will prepare you for a wealth of career options in business, advertising, human resources, public relations, government, education, media and social services.”