Virtual Invisibility Race and Communication Education

This article was downloaded by: [50.116.8.
251]
On: 17 December 2014, At: 22:19
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Communication Education
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rced20
Virtual Invisibility: Race and

Katherine Grace Hendrix & Cicely Wilson
Published online: 18 Jul 2014.
Click for updates

To cite this article: Katherine Grace Hendrix & Cicely Wilson (2014) Virtual Invisibility:
Race and Communication Education, Communication Education, 63:4, 405-428, DOI:
10.1080/03634523.2014.934852
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2014.934852
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions
Vol. 63, No. 4, October 2014, pp. 405428
Virtual Invisibility: Race and

Katherine Grace Hendrix & Cicely Wilson
Articles published in Communication Education (CE) from 2000 to 2013 yielded four
major themes: teacher/instructor to student communication, public speaking, technology, and identity. An analysis of the articles within each major theme revealed a
notable absence of research investigating the experiences of students of color and the
pedagogical approaches of professors of color in the classroom. Consequently, utilizing
muted group and standpoint theories, the authors explore who is heard in CE,
from what standpoint, and how the trend of not publishing race-related research is
reproduced.
Keywords: Virtual Invisibility; Race; Communication Education
The 1952 debut issue of The Speech Teacher contained 11 articles and nine book
reviews with the lead article entitled On First Teaching Speech by Loren Reid
(1952). The journal was the third published by the Speech Association of America
(SAA) alongside the Quarterly Journal of Speech and Speech Monographs. After
24 years of publication, in its final issue under the moniker The Speech Teacher,
editor Mary Margaret Roberts (1975) continued the tradition of providing instructional practice lessons to improve teaching on topics including incorporating mock
trials in junior high debate, suggestions for teaching listening, and interview
assignments for the basic course. Effective January 1976, after an earlier vote by the
Speech Communication Association (SCA) Legislative Council, the journal was
renamed Communication Education (CE). Even with the name change, this first issue
provided instructors with information about the use of multiple-choice exams and
the viability of assertive speaking for males and females (Brown, 1976). By 1985,
however, one can see a move toward quantitative research including the third study
Katherine Grace Hendrix (Ph.D., University of Washington, 1994) is a Professor of Communication
at the University of Memphis. Cicely Wilson (Ph.D., University of Memphis, 2013) is an Assistant
Professor of Communication at Chicago State University. Correspondence to: Department of
Communication, University of Memphis, Art & Communication Building, Memphis, TN 38152,
U.S.A. Email: khendrix@memphis.edu
ISSN 0363-4523 (print)/ISSN 1479-5795 (online) 2014 National Communication Association
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2014.934852
406
K. G. Hendrix and C. Wilson
in the Power in the Classroom research program by Kearney, Plax, Richmond, and
McCroskey (1985). This movement parallels research triumphing over teaching in the
academy (Cuban, 1999).
During the initial 51-year history of The Speech Teacher/Communication Education,
over 35 articles [were] published addressing classroom pedagogy and native born
students of color fall[ing] into the following categories: (1) Alaskan native, Native
American, and Puerto Rican students; (2) black studentswith an emphasis on
nonstandard dialects in the classroom; (3) the disadvantaged or at-risk student; and
(4) the diverse and multicultural classroom (Hendrix, Jackson, & Warren, 2003,
p. 177).
Despite finding such articles, Hendrix et al. (2003) expressed a subdued enthusiasm,
in part, because there [was] no clear program of research that consistently acknowledge[d]
the changing demographics within the educational system even as we [prepare to] enter a
new millennium (p. 177). Ten years ago, these scholars stated, The importance of
educational practice coupled with awareness and understanding of human difference
cannot be overstated. It is absolutely nave for us to believe that we, or our students,
enter classrooms across the world tabula rasa (Hendrix et al., 2003, p. 181). They then
acknowledged that scholars concerned with critical pedagogy address curriculum,
agency, and identity negotiation, thereby acknowledging the complexity surrounding
coidentities.
Our review of all articles published in CE from 2000 to 2013 reveals little progress.
The classroom is a reflection of our society, and the compositions of both are
changing every year. According to the U.S. Department of Education (2012), the
percentage of American college students who are Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander,
and black has been increasing. From 1976 to 2010, the percentage of Hispanic
students rose from 3% to 13%. The percentage of Asian/Pacific Islander students rose
from 2% to 6%, while the percentage of black students rose from 9% to 14%. During
the same period, the percentage of white students fell from 83% to 61%.
Exposure to race-related research and a host of diverse standpoints and experiences
may help graduate students, who will become faculty members, develop sensitivity to
the multiple identities that may be present in their classrooms (as well as corporate
settings). Typical publications presume white classrooms and white professors unless
otherwise identified, but research that addresses race and ethnicity specifically will
help teachers remain effective in the face of the complexities of diverse classroom
compositions. Teachers have an obligation to train themselves and their students to
think beyond the white classroom experience (Hendrix, Jackson, & Warren, 2003).
As we reflect on the 100-year anniversary of the National Communication
Association (formerly the Speech Association of America and Speech Communication Association), and in response to the call for philosophical and directional articles
in this particular CE special issue, we critique/analyze the evolution of the journals
content revealing the need for a more all-inclusive path (consistent with the original
mission) with goals producing teaching scholarship (Boyer, 1990; Kreber, 2001;
Weimer, 2006) that enhances the application of such research to a range of shapes,
sizes, and shades in the U.S. classroom and beyond its geographic borders. We focus
Virtual Invisibility: Race and CE
407
on the invisibility of race in recent years despite the obvious demographic changes
in our classrooms from kindergarten through graduate school. We begin with a
thematic analysis of the journals content over the past 14 years, continue with a
discussion of muted group and standpoint theories as a means to explain what the
journal has communicated about race, and conclude by offering reasons for the
absence of research on students of color and that addressing the experiences and
contributions of professors of color in the classroom.1
Thematic Analysis 20002013

The title and abstract from each article were analyzed for keywords and phrases,
which led to the formation of topics. Topics were grouped according to subject
similarities, which were categorized as themes.2 This process was confirmed by two
researchers independently reading and checking the articles content against the
designated themes. Table 1 reflects themes, topics, keywords/phrases, and number of
articles in each theme organized by the thematic analysis.
The major themes are as follows:
.
.
.
.
teacher/instructor-to-student communication;
public speaking;
technology;
identity.
Teacher/Instructor to Student Communication

The first major theme is the broadest containing five subcategories: (a) student
responsiveness and interaction with instructors, (b) immediacy, (c) instructor effectiveness and communication strategies, (d) negative/adverse communication situations,
and (e) interpersonal relationships. Eighty-one articles were located within this theme.
Exemplary research in the student responsiveness subcategory consists of articles
addressing student behaviors (Mottet & Beebe, 2006), student motivations for
communication with teachers (McCroskey, Richmond, & Bennett, 2006), and relational
turning points (Docan-Morgan & Manusov, 2009). Sixteen articles report findings
relative to immediacy with a trend away from studying student behavior (Baringer &
McCroskey, 2000) toward teacher immediacy and learning (Allen, Witt, & Wheeless,
2006; Chesebro & McCroskey, 2001; Titsworth, 2001) along with teacher immediacy
and credibility (Finn & Schrodt, 2012; Pogue & Ahyun, 2006; Witt & Kerssen-Griep,
2011). Among these readings, there was one article specifically acknowledging the race
of its study participants, as Martin and Mottet (2011) studied the affective learning of
Hispanic 9th-grade students.3
The research falling within instructor effectiveness investigated credibility and
student retention (Wheeless, Witt, Maresh, Bryand, & Schrodt, 2011), credibility
and classroom justice (Chory, 2007), and the effect of perceived credibility, relational
distance, and politeness on resistance in the classroom (Zhang & Sapp, 2013). Studies
408
Table 1 Thematic Analysis Results
Theme
Topics
Teacher/
Instructor to
Student
Communication
Student
responsiveness
Immediacy
Instructor
effectiveness and
communication
strategies
Negative/adverse
communication
situations
Interpersonal
Identity
International
instructor and
student issues
Race/ethnicity
Gender
Public Speaking
Anxiety
Pedagogy
Technology
Online/distance
Technology in the
classroom
Keywords/phrases
Responsiveness, instructor
communication, behavior, verbal behavior,
studentfaculty interactions, perception,
teacherstudent relationships, feedback,
engagement, immediacy, perceived
immediacy, verbal and nonverbal
immediacy, instructor immediacy,
instructor effectiveness, learning,
classroom, instructional communication,
classroom participation, classroom
discussion, instructor credibility, teacher
confirmation, engagement, facework,
humor, aggression, resistance, unfairness,
argumentativeness, apprehension, sexual
harassment, violations, misbehaviors, fear,
nagging, dissent, misbehave, interpersonal,
relationship, mentoring, support,
disclosures, respect, connectedness,
teacherstudent relationships, relational
development, prosocial, antisocial,
conversations, relational teaching
Cross-cultural, American, German, United
States, Kenya, international, multicultural,
Ethnic, Chinese, New Zealand, cultural
differences, cultural similarities, China,
Germany, Japan, American classrooms,
Korean, South Korea, non-native Englishspeaking, English, Whiteness, race, antiBlack, racist, black, racialized, interracial,
Australian, White, diversity, racial, Latino/
a, Latino American, Hispanic, feminist,
gender, sexual orientation, gendered
identity, sex
Public speaking, public speaking state
anxiety, speech anxiety, anxious arousal,
pedagogical models, course formats,
traditional, online, instructional methods,
rubric, grade expectations, assignments
Distance learning, web courses, online
academic work, live and distance education
classrooms, online class, asynchronous,
hybrid, online, online degrees, on-line
instruction, web conference, e-mail
communication, online communication,
computer-mediated communication,
software, classroom computer-mediated
communication, technology, computerbased technology, textbook technology,
instructional technology, mobile-phone
usage
Number
of articles
81 (49.7%)
38 (23.3%)
11 (6.8%)
33 (20.2%)
Total 163
409
in this subcategory also addressed teacher facework and communication competence,

instructor humor, and self-reports of student learning.
The remaining two subcategories nestled under Teacher/Instructor to Student
Communication are negative/adverse communication situations and interpersonal
relationships. The latter, interpersonal relations, neatly divided into three areas: (a)
perceived teacher caring (Teven, 2001), (b) mentoring models (Buell, 2004), and (c)
instructor self-disclosure (Hosek & Thompson, 2009; Schrodt, 2013). In the case of
adverse communication situations, scholars researched teacher and/or student
aggression (Goodboy & Myers, 2012; Myers, Edwards, Wahl, & Martin, 2007; Rocca,
2004), teacher misbehavior (Sidelinger, Bolen, Frisby, & McMullen, 2011), violations
of appropriate social-sexual communication (Lannutti, Laliker, & Hale, 2001), and
sexual harassment in forensics extracurricular activities (Stepp, 2001). Articles on
student dissent, student nagging, and instructor fear appeals also were also labeled
as negative communication and included within this subcategory. Presenting an
alternative view, Bolkan and Goodboy (2013) examined reasons students choose not
to express their dissatisfaction.
Public Speaking
Although the fewest in number, we found the 11 articles in this major theme
consistent with the earliest mission of The Speech Teacher. CE continues to publish
articles examining the traditional public speaking course. Articles published over the
past 14 years can be divided into two simple subclassifications: pedagogy and anxiety.
In the pedagogical theme, Frobish (2000) analyzed Stephen Lucass The Art of
Speaking text exploring how classical traditions of the field remain pertinent in
modern settings. Schreiber, Paul, and Shibley (2012) tested the validity of the Public
Speaking Competence Rubric (PSCR) instrument in predicting student grades and
noted the need for a new generation of scoring tools to assist in assessing public
speaking competence. They suggested five benefits associated with a return to rubrics,
including providing students with clearly specified assignment expectations. Instead
of incorporating an instrument, Larseingue, Sawyer, and Finn (2012) studied
students grade expectations by providing them with a series of grading scenarios
ultimately leading them to recommend that faculty carefully consider the influence of
course rigor, immediacy, and student self-perceived effectiveness when formulating
course grade policies. Finally, this group also includes Levasseur, Dean, and Pfaffs
(2004) discovery of two pedagogical tensions faced by teachers of the advance public
speaking class: (a) teaching theory versus facilitating practice and (b) teaching forms
of speaking versus rhetorical processes.
The seven articles nestled under anxiety range from Behnke and Sawyer (2000,
2004) studying gender-based anxiety patterns or predicting overall speech anxiety
based on sensitization (rest to speech beginning) and habituation (first minute of
speaking), to reviewing public-speaking anxiety (PSA) literature as a foundation for
future theory building and practice (Bodie, 2010), to assessing negative emotional
reactions precipitated by pessimistic explanations of ones stress level as a speaker
410
(Kopecky, Sawyer, & Behnke, 2004). Behnke and/or Sawyer coauthored six of the
seven articles published on anxiety including three investigating differences in anxiety
based on speech type (Witt & Behnke, 2006), examining ways to reduce prespeech
fears (Finn, Sawyer, & Behnke, 2009), and increasing confidence during and between
speech assignments (Finn et al., 2009).
Hence, an analysis of the Public Speaking theme reveals a few studies aimed at
exploring the decision-making processes of professors or providing them with tools
for updating their approach to the basic course, but, for the most part over the past
14 years, CE contained articles centered around the research program of several
scholars interested in better understanding student anxiety and how instructors may
assist in its reduction.
Technology
As with Public Speaking, at first glance two subcategories appear to make up the
33 articles in the major theme of Technology: pedagogy and online/distance learning.
Further analysis of the research in these categories, however, revealed considerable
overlap, thereby making the initial categorizations unproductive. Articles within this
major theme addressed pedagogical issues in the context of the online or hybrid
classroom, while others explored the use of technology in the classroom or when
interacting with students outside of traditional on-site settings. At a macrolevel, in a
2001 Tech Advances special issue of CE, Lane and Shelton (2001) posited what the
role of the Communication discipline should be in the midst of the advancing
technology in our classrooms, and Shedletsky and Aitken (2001) explored four
paradoxes associated with classroom technology (e.g., more accessibility yet less
human touch). Several years later, Allen (2006) queried whether our students are
being set up to fail in the online classroom.
Investigating the practicality of technology, Easton (2003) researched faculty
learning to teach online; Aitken and Shedletsky (2002) experimented with incorporating online discussion groups in their classes; Clark and Jones (2001) sought out the
reasons students chose online as opposed to traditional on-site courses; Stephens and
Mottet (2008) analyzed teaching and learning preferences associated with web training;
and Adams researched the acceptability of online degrees in the job market (Adams &
Defleur, 2006; Adams, Defleur, & Heald, 2007). More recently, Gattoni and Tenzek
(2010) examined the process of medical practitioners adopting technology as part of
their practice, whereas Finn and Ledbetter considered the effectiveness of clear policies
regarding student usage of wireless technology during class time and incorporating
access to technology relevant to course subject matter (Finn & Ledbetter 2013;
Ledbetter & Finn, 2013). In addition, Natalle and Crowe (2013) tested their methods
of information literacy instruction (p. 100) designed to improve students online
catalog/database search skills in conjunction with producing stronger communication
research papers. They believe that they have the foundation for a model for interdisciplinary assessment wherein information literacy and discipline content can be joined to
evaluate specific student learning outcomes (Natalle & Crowe, 2013, p. 102).
411
Researchers viewing the use of technology as a pedagogical tool studied the use
of computer-mediated-communication (CMC) on negotiating power and identity
formation (Wood & Fassett, 2003), quizzing students via mobile phones (Lin &
Rivera-Sanchez, 2012), the utility of online textbook supplements (Sellnow, Child, &
Ahlfeldt, 2005), and the use of PowerPoint (PPT). In the latter case, Downing and
Garmon (2001) found no significant difference between teaching students PPT usage
in a hands-on session versus those assigned to read their printed users guide. Liu
(2010) discovered the utility of technology wikis (software allowing the creation and
modification of Web page content) among undergraduate Communication and
Information Systems students.
The relational aspect of combining technology and teaching can be seen in research
studying professors impressions of their students based on two-way audio/visual
access to their nonverbal behavior compared with two-way audio/one-way video
(Mottet, 2000); the impact of professor use of technology on perceived immediacy
and credibility (Schrodt & Witt, 2006); computer immediacy studied as agency across
three Web courses (LaRose & Whitten, 2000); perceived instructor immediacy in the
live classroom versus video-cast or audio accompanied by PPT slides (Carrell &
Menzel, 2001); social identification with online colearners, educational affect, and
perceived instructor credibility (Carr, Zube, Dickens, Hayter, & Barterian, 2013); the
impact of emails (Stephens, Houser, & Cowan, 2009; Young, Kelsey, & Lancaster,
2011); and student perceptions of their instructors mitigated by the politeness of their
teachers emails (Bolkan & Holmgren, 2012). Other studies addressed affective
and cognitive learning at the graduate level (Russo & Koesten, 2005), classroom
participation (i.e., discussion) across three types of classes (Vess, 2005), and attention
and learning in the midst of texting or surfing the web during class time (Kuznekoff &
Titsworth, 2013; Wei, Wang, & Klausner, 2012).
The most recent piece within our designated timeframe was a brief report on the
effect of student-to-student computer-mediated Word-of-Mouth (WOM) communication on perceptions of instructors and attitudes towards learning (Edwards &
Edwards, 2013). Of special note is the participant age span of such research as
witnessed by Hyun and Davis (2005) studying kindergarten students in a technology
rich classroom (p. 121). On the other hand, Darling (2005) investigated the
communication practices of university mechanical engineering students who,
consistent with Millers (1998) discourse of technology, were driven by the discourse
of technology (Miller, 2005, p. 28). With these two pieces, readers can see the
presence of technology shaping perceptionsin young mindsregarding its normalcy and utility, while Darlings research reveals faculty in a discipline shaping
college students attitudes towards appropriate discourse and delivery when discussing technology.
A review of the research within the Technology theme proved quite informative. The
use of technology is a pedagogical decision (sometimes accepted voluntarily, sometimes
mandated) with repercussions on student/teacher relationships and learning. Furthermore, the presence of technology (e.g., smart phones and tablets) injected into the
412
on-site classroom by students (regardless of the instructors desire) is yet another

element in the communication process demanding our attention.
Identity
The theme of Identity yielded 38 articles in three subcategories consisting of: (a)
international instructor and student issues, (b) race/ethnicity, and (c) gender. Fifteen
articles were placed within the first subcategory where we found a comparison
between German and U.S. American faculty (Roach & Byrne, 2001); multination
investigation of teacher misbehaviors (Zhang, 2007); teacher emotion and burnout in
Chinese higher education (Zhang & Zhu, 2008); U.S. American students compared/
contrasted with Chinese students (Zhang & Zhang, 2013); teacher immediacy in
Korean, Chinese, and Kenyan classrooms (Johnson & Miller, 2002; Park, Lee, Yun, &
Kim, 2009; Zhang & Oetzel, 2006a, 2006b); and testing nonverbal and teacher
immediacy scales in the U.S., China, Germany, and Japan (Zhang, Oetzel, Gao,
Wilcox, & Takai, 2007). Regulating coidentities and recognizing multiple cultural
perspectives in the classroom are explored in six of the 15 pieces. These six articles
depart from the norm in that they explore deeper, less-discussed pedagogical
and methodological issuesi.e., the needs of students who fail coursework, who
are adjusting to the cultural norms of a classroom foreign to them, and/or who
are adjusting to international teachers with an unfamiliar accent in an American
classroom.
Bardhan (2003) discovered a desire among her undergraduates to update the public
relations curriculum with a more global, less ethnocentric outlook, ultimately making
multiculturalism and the idea that the world is an interconnected entity natural
(p. 171). She then connected this discovery to a transformative multicultural approach
advocated by Banks (1996). Using a qualitative approach, Holmes (2005) examined
how international ethnic Chinese students adapted to Westernized forms of teaching in
New Zealande.g., large lectures with smaller breakout tutorial sessions, whereas
Mortenson (2006), Hsu (2012), and Wadsworth, Hecht, and Jung (2008) used statistical
data. Mortenson was interested in what kind of social support a Mainland Chinese
student might need in contrast to a U.S. American (each studying in his/her own
country) when assigned to read a vignette describing an academic failure and
complete a nine-point Likert scale measuring emotional distress the corresponding
emotion (Mortenson, 2006, p. 134). Hsu measured how the vocal quality of non-native
English speaking professors influenced the apprehension level and learning of their U.S.
undergraduates, while Fitch and Morgan (2003) analyzed undergraduate narratives of
their experiences with international teaching assistants (ITAs) in order to offer
suggestions for improved ITA training. Wadsworth et al. were curious about the effect
of discrepancies between how international students perceived themselves versus how
they were perceived by others. More specifically, those researchers were interested in
how such perceptual gaps affected their subjects identity, acculturation, and beliefs
regarding discrimination. The focus in these studies was on learning how to assist the
international student, including how teachers might adapt their behavior to make
413
acculturation easierwhether in the U.S. or New Zealandor to make exposure to

non-native English speaking teachers easier for students in U.S. American college
classrooms.
Race/ethnicity contained 17 articles of which 10 were accounted for by two special
issues: Critical Communication Pedagogy and Communication Education and Health.2
Four articles explored developing white racial identity and performing whiteness in the
classroom (Martin & Davis, 2001; Miller & Harris, 2005; Warren, 2001; Warren &
Hytten, 2004). One examined diversity initiatives (Muthuswamy, Levine, & Gazel,
2006), and another investigated the affective learning of 9th-grade Hispanic students
(Martin & Mottet, 2011). Three health-related studies were published in 2010, and the
critical progressive pedagogy issue (Jackson & Hendrix, 2003) featured scholarship
about managing coidentities in the classroom (Hendrix et al., 2003); anti-black racist
pedagogy (Giroux, 2003); callresponse in an HBCU (Historically Black Colleges and
Universities) college classroom (Boone, 2003); gendered and racialized identities
(Johnson & Bhatt, 2003); teaching whiteness (Cooks, 2003); and attitudes toward race
in the interracial communication course (Harris, 2003). An example of the critical
pedagogical approach is illustrated in the work of Mackinlay.4
Mackinlay (2003) chose a critical auto-ethnographic method to explore issues
associated with representing another when one is not a member of the group under
study or being taughtin this case, a white woman teaching to/about and researching
indigenous Australian Aboriginal people. Reflexivity and (unexamined) power are
central to her discussion of the complexities of being married to a black aborigine
male, having a mixed-raced child, and yet being able to step away from that identity
(unlike her husband or child). A rare article investigating the African American
students postsecondary experience appeared in the last issue of 2013 (Simmons,
Lowery-Hart, Wahl, & McBride, 2013).
Six articles5 were categorized under gender ranging from publication in
20012006. As part of the Critical Pedagogy special issue, Godley (2003) explored
the gendered identity of high school students and drew upon the notion that identity is
multifaceted, shaped through language, and deeply context-dependent to show how
students were able to hold multiple, gendered subject positions like debater, athlete, and
smart (p. 273). Shue and Beck (2001) conducted an ethnographic study observing the
behavior of dance instructors and whether they communicated a feminist pedagogy,
while Cooks and Sun (2002) investigated power and resistance among college students
enrolled in a gender, culture, and communication course. In that same issue of CE,
Russ, Simonds, and Hunt (2002) manipulated the sexual orientation of a confederate
and measured student perceptions of his credibility. Sellnow and Treinen (2004) were
interested in potential gender bias in student peer speech assessments, and Glascock
and Ruggiero (2006) surveyed whether student and instructor sex and ethnicity
interacted to influence perceptions of teacher credibility and homophily.
Synthesis of identity
Upon closer inspection, over a 14 year period the articles falling within the second
major themeIdentitymake up 23.3% of the total CE publications. At first glance,
414
this may seem an admirable percentage; however, closer inspection reveals some
serious issues. Seven of the 38 articles were published during 2001 and 2002, followed
by Bardhan (2003). One of the six studies classified under gender, a second under
international instructor and student issues, and seven labeled as race/ethnicity
were published in the Jackson and Hendrix (2003) special issue. Hence, 17 of 38
articles (44.7%)approaching halfaddressing identity in some form are accounted
for a decade or more ago. Only two articles appear after the Jackson and Hendrix
special issue that address gender (Sellnow & Treinen, 2004; Glascock & Ruggiero,
2006), and eight articles acknowledge race/ethnicity, of which three are part of a
special issue on Communication Education and Health Promotion (Kreps, Sparks, &
Villegran, 2010). Consequently, approximately half (11) of the Identity research shared
post-20036 focuses on international classrooms and/or comparison/contrasts of such
global learning environmentsin particular Chinawith U.S. American teachers,
students, or Wadsworth et al.s (2008) query regarding ITAs in U.S. classrooms.
Examining cross-cultural classroom dynamics is of critical importance, yet the recent
focus remains on the international classroom (conceptualized with the U.S. being the
domestic site) and experiences of the foreign student in the U.S. for postsecondary
studies, while neglecting those of their American undergraduate and graduate
counterparts of color. At the same time, the challenges and contributions of
international faculty members in the U.S. (Hendrix & Hebbani, in press), female
professors of color (Hendrix, 2007), and U.S. American professors of color (male and
female) are rarely topics of inquiry. Thus, CE continues to perpetuate an image of the
American professor as either genderless or white male,7 unconsciously sending
messages to readers and potential contributors regarding subject matter and methodologies deemed legitimate for publication.8
Maladjusted Metamessages
Based on the analysis, it appears CE has existed for 62 years publishing research that
sidesteps the unique perspectives of students and faculty of color. In the last 14 years,
81 of the articles published focused on teacher/instructor to student communication,
while only 17 articles addressed race/ethnicity, creating a noticeable gap in research.
This major section brings three issues to the forefront and, ideally, will prompt
deliberate thought regarding what is and is not being published in CE. Here we will
address (a) who is to be heard, (b) from what standpoint, and (c) reproducing the
problem.
Who Is to Be Heard?
In the 1970s, anthropologists Shirley and Edwin Ardener observed that many
ethnographers were only talking to the leaders of cultures who were adult males. The
researchers would then use the data taken from males to represent the culture as a
whole, leaving out the perspectives of women, children, and other groups made
voiceless by the cultural hierarchy (Ardener, 1975; Ardener, 1978, 2005). In her work
415
Women and Men Speaking: Frameworks for Analysis, Kramarae (1981) laid out three
central assumptions to the feminist muted group theory:
. Women perceive the world differently from men because of womens and
mens different experience and activities rooted in the division of labor (p. 3).
. Because men are the dominant group in society, the male perception is also
dominant. Womens perceptions and systems of perceiving are seen as less
competent.
. In order to become participating members in society, women must transform
their perceptions and models of perceiving into terms of the dominant group.
Although the theory focuses on women as a muted group, it can be applied to
other nondominant groups. Miller (2005) explained that muted group theory also
posits that the dominant group in a culture controls the various avenues of
expression, and because the dominant group controls these avenues, their style of
expression will be favored. These assumptions are applicable to scholars conducting
race-related research.
The issue of race-related research, when viewed through the lens of the muted
group theory, can be understood as this:
. White scholars and scholars of color may perceive the world differently
because of their unique perception-shaping experiences. One source of
potential diverse experiences could be the result of white scholars and scholars
of color not being held in the same regard by fellow colleagues or students.
. White scholars enact their power politically, perpetuating their power and
suppressing scholars of color ideas and meanings from gaining public
acceptance. The dominant group is the one that holds the power in a given
culture (West & Turner, 2010), and in academia the dominant group would be
those scholars who have a voice in what is published. Though African
American women, for instance, are thought to have made great strides in the
academic profession, they have remained ignored or muted having a place
but not an importance in academe (Davis, 1999, p. 371).
. Scholars of all races interested in studying the impact of race must convert
their research, unique ideas, experiences, and meanings, into mainstream
research agendas in order to be heard. A white male professor once told Patton
(2004), an African American female professor who conducted race-related
research, no one cared about race or racism, none of it mattered, and her
research contributed nothing. He went on to suggest that she lay low and be
silent.
Members of subordinate groups are not as free or as able as members of the
dominant group are to say what they wish, when, and where they wish (Kramarae,
1981). West and Turner (2010) also note that muting may take place as a result of
the unpopularity of the views that a person is trying to express (p. 484). Because this
appears to be the case with race-related research, guidelines about what research is
416
permissible is also a form of muting or silencing the nondominant group by a social

understanding of who holds the power and who does not (Gendrin, 2000).
An anonymous black scholar weighed in on her observations of bias against
race-related research. Research that questions or critiques white behavior is not
permissible, while research on deceased (or iconic) black people and studies that
criticize black peoples behavior are permissible (Hendrix, 2005). Houston (2002)
reported 34 articles on the interpersonal communication of African Americans were
published in communication journals from 1975 to 2000. This research, comparing
black and white communicative perceptions and practices, is an example of the type
of race-related research that may be deemed permissible, as the studies focused
primarily on African American relational practices.
The dominant group prefers race-neutral research that addresses topics such as
classroom interaction, student engagement, and pedagogical methods. While these
topics are important, in order to represent the communication academic community
with accuracy and improve the quality of knowledge available, more perspectives
should be included. Orbe and Allen (2008) discern that white scholarship tends to
ignore race because white Americans are often seen as having no race and often [do]
not mention race in contexts where racial dynamics are commonly known to matter
(p. 206).
Scholars of color are muted by the employment of a double standard, which is
enacted by questioning methodology and researcher bias. Hendrix (2005) addressed
this double standard, as it was assumed that black researchers would be unable to
maintain objectivity when conducting race-related research while white researchers
would be naturally objective regarding all research. The double standard of researcher
objectivity appears to mute scholars of color by discouraging them from studying
how race impacts their experiences in academia. White scholars who are interested in
race-related research seem to also be muted, as race-related research appears to be
omitted by mainstream journals. It seems that mainstream scholarship tends to treat
race as an ahistorical, essential, and depoliticized aspect of identity (Allen, 2007,
p. 260).
From What Standpoint?
In cultures with hierarchical societies, the daily activities and experiences of
oppressed groups provide insights about the society that the dominant group will
not understand or appreciate (Harding, 2009). Standpoint theory explains that the
circumstances of a social group shape the outlook of its members. This theory
provides a framework for understanding systems of power, as various groups within a
culture or society are involved in unequal power relationships.
Harding (2009) stressed that one has to either live as a member of the oppressed
group or do the necessary work to gain a rich and nuanced understanding of what life
is like from the standpoint of the oppressed group (p. 194). Because the social,
material, and symbolic circumstances are different for each group, discriminatory
behaviors create different lived experiences for the oppressed and the oppressors.
417
Perspectives on social life will vary but no perspective should be deemed right or
wrong (Harris, 2012; Wood, 2005).
The struggle for scholars of color to publish race-related, qualitative research in
mainstream communication journals is an example of a group within a society or
culture that possesses a different perspective because of its hierarchical position.
There seems to be a sign that reads No Race-Related Research, Please that flashes
on for scholars who conduct (in particular, qualitative) race-related research.8
The experiences of many scholars of color in academia are distinctly different from
the experiences of their white counterparts. Harding and Wood claimed that the
social groups within which we are located powerfully shape what we experience and
know as well as how we understand and communicate with ourselves, others, and the
world (Griffin, 2009, p. 441). More specifically, the standpoint theories of Harding
(2009) and Wood (2005) suggested the inequalities of gender, race, class, and sexual
orientation can be used to observe how different locations within the social hierarchy
generate distinctive accounts of nature and social relationships.
There is a connection between standpoint theory and the acquisition of knowledge
that must be considered. In societies with hierarchies of race, ethnicity, class, gender,
sexuality, and other social factors, those at the top of the hierarchy learn about
themselves and the world around them from their own stratumthis is the source of
their knowledge (Harding, 1993). Knowledge can also be gained from observing the
activities and lives of those at the bottom of the hierarchythe marginalized or
oppressed groups. Omitting the experiences and lives of those at the bottom stratum
is to devalue and disregard the knowledge that can come from that social position
that standpoint. Standpoint theory asserts all knowledge attempts are socially
situated but, as scholars, we must consider that the experiences of those at the
bottom of the hierarchy can be the start of everyones research (Harding, 1993).
Communication Education publishes a great deal of articles about classroom
experience, but very few discuss experiences of teachers/professor/students of color.
Scholars of color and their experiences seem to be invisible in higher education
(Davis, 1999; Harris, 2012). Individuals who attempt to see no color generally mean
well, as not conceptualizing scholars and students in terms of color is an honorable
sentiment. However, to not see color is to disregard those individuals whose teaching
and research are impacted by color. This could be a result of Eurocentrism.9
According to Titus Pop (2011), a professor in the department of English Language
and Literature at Partium Christian University in Ordea, Romania:
Eurocentrism is the practice, conscious or otherwise, of placing emphasis on European
(and, generally, Western) concerns, culture, and values at the expense of those of other
cultures. Eurocentrism often involved claiming cultures that were not white or
European as being such or denying their existence at all. (p. 1)10
The term Eurocentrism is used in this discussion to refer to the omission of

research that focuses on students and professors of color.11 As observed by Allen
(2007), because race is an enduring phenomenon with important implications for
418
society as well as the classroom, it merits theoretical and practical attention; but the
necessary attention has not been given.
Hendrix (1998) identified a gap in the educational and instructional communication literature regarding the history and classroom experiences of black professors
and teachers. The gap has not been closed. Since 1998, the need for research that
represents teachers and students of color equally has increased. Research on
situations and experiences in higher education should reflect the increasing diversity
that is rapidly occurring. It is worthwhile publishing research on the distinctive
experiences of scholars of color, as race-related research adds to the academic
communitys quality of knowledge. Such research can be obtained by recognizing
scholars race-related experiences, but limiting research based on the authors
unconventional or alternative standpoint creates a cycle of imbalanced gatekeeping
that may continue with future scholars.
Reproducing the Problem
This section focuses primarily on current and future graduate students who may one
day contribute to the discipline as scholars. Writer, professor, and management
consultant Peter Drucker said, The most important thing in communication is hearing
what isnt said (as cited in Fleck, 2013, p. 50).
Graduate students rely heavily on research journals and look to them for
epistemological guidance. What is published influences how graduate students
establish themselves in the classroom, develop their research agendas, and understand
the inner workings of the academic community. What is not published may also
influence graduate students to continue the status quo. The problem this analysis
brings to the forefront is a gap in research brought on by three oversights: (1) a lack
of diverse experiences represented in research, (2) the suppression of unpopular ideas
and meanings, and (3) the repetition of mainstream research.
As mentioned earlier, exposure to race-related research and diverse standpoints
and experiences could help graduate students who will become faculty members
develop sensitivity to the multiple identities that may be present in their classrooms.
Because standpoints vary according to cultures and social groups, intercultural
understanding could lead students to develop more flexible world views and
increased tolerance for differences (DeTurk, 2001). This is especially important, as
much can be learned from the points of convergence and divergence among students
and professors of color in the U.S. and other countries.
In the introduction of her book on crossing cultures, Patty Lane (2002) explained
culture as
a system of meanings and values that shape ones behavior Our culture shapes who
we are, what we believe, and how we behave. At no point in our human interactions do
we take off our culture and set it aside. It is always with us in all of our relationships, in
all of our thinking and our processing of the world around us (introduction).
419
Dimensions of culture, race, and ethnicity carry the same significance. Though racerelated research may represent unpopular and/or uncomfortable views, knowing how
these aspects of oneself can influence everyday academic experiences would yield
invaluable epistemological contributions to the discipline.
Creating a research agenda is considered to be a major goal of most graduate
students. It helps them develop short- and long-term goals (Reedy & Murty, 2011). It
is natural for research agendas to change. Some change as a result of unreceptive
responses to research from unconventional standpoints. In these cases, agendas
change because of their focus on race and ethnicity or the double standards of
researcher bias for white and nonwhite scholars. When faced with these circumstances, graduate students and new tenure-track professors may feel pressured to
convert their research interests into more mainstream areas.
A lack of diversity implies uniformity and ensures more of the samesame topics,
same standpoints, and the same methodologies. If students follow the well-traveled
paths of research created by scholars before them, there will never be diversity of
voice, standpoint, or experience. It is important for future scholars who are interested
in learning and sharing how race and ethnicity can impact classroom teaching and
student interaction to know their research is needed and welcomed.
Discussion
For the junior white or faculty member of color who finds him/herself under pressure
to publish, the publication record of Communication Education does not invite
research that identifies race as a key variable. It does not flash a sign welcoming his/
her experiences of establishing credibility in a classroom of diverse students. Nor does
it encourage the junior (or senior) scholar to submit qualitative research that might
help teachers become sensitive to nuances in the classroom such as the impact of
socioeconomic levels on their students classroom performance. It does, however,
clearly indicate a patha circular path (well traveled by the dominant group) that
can be taken if one wishes to be regarded and accepted. Sprague (2002) described the
progress of CE as a spirala cyclical model of change. She said, We have revisited
topics again and again but we never really go back to the same topics in quite the
same way (Sprague, 2002, p. 339). Although [scholars] return to familiar places and
see them with new eyes, she stressed the importance of seeking new and productive
ways to address significant topics like diversity (Sprague, 2002, p. 340).
It is only natural for all scholars to want to feel accepted in their academic
community, but scholars interested in race tend to face a decision that influences
their careerseither they can conduct their race-related research that may make their
white counterparts uncomfortable and find themselves on the outside looking in, or
they can revise their research agendas to include more mainstream topicsdenying
their voices and experiencesin order to be accepted and succeed in a community
that would prefer not to see color.
Failure to convert could lead to fewer publications in well-regarded journals, which
would eventually have a negative impact on career and tenure goals. When scholars
420
alter their research interests in order to adapt to the academic communitys

expectations, their students may also be affected. When students are denied the benefit
of diversity (i.e., learning from various standpoints) and exposure to critical pedagogy,
it could become easy for them to employ double standards of their ownholding
faculty of color to one standard, while holding white faculty to another. This pattern
could continue when they become bona fide members of the academic community with
voices regarding what should and should not be published.
The third option is to convert ones research agenda to one more mainstream in
nature after tenure has been obtained, credibility as a scholar and objective researcher
established, and then shift ones research focus to race-related issues. Employing this
strategy delays the scholars research program a minimum of five years and may take
him/her in a direction completely away from their original interests.
Conclusion
A thorough analysis of the literature in CE reveals thatat bestwe view students
being taught by a gender/raceless professor but more than likely, a white male.
A review of the past decade reveals we have failed to progress in this area; instead, we
continue to fold back on ourselves, yielding maladjusted research that does not reflect
the nuances of a changing society or classroom demographic.
In the last 14 years, more than half of the articles published focused on teacher/
instructor to student communication, while only 17 articles addressed race/ethnicity.
When reflecting on the history of The Speech Teacher/Communication Education, the
author of the first article published in the journal anticipated it would continue to
exist another millennium (Reid, 2002). If this is the case, we must do better. In the
2003 special issue of CE exploring coidentities in the classroom, Jackson, Hendrix,
and Warren expressed hope that the issues raised would motivate educators to
systematically and programmatically investigate the changing-student and teacherfaces and life experiences that now gather together in the same classroom setting (p.
188). Jackson et al. implored us not to let another decade go by without a concerted
effort moving us toward a more thorough explication of the complexities of the
classroom stemming from the negotiation of multiple identities. Yet, we instructional
scholars ignored their warnings and have let another entire decade go by.
Acknowledgments
Literature review database search conducted by Shelia S. Massey and graduate research assistant,
Marcus Hassell.
Notes
[1] Students and professors of color refer[s] to people who have been racially marked or
identified as different than the norm of American white by physical or cultural characteristics,
the term used is people of color (Heider, 2000, p. 7).
[2] All 163 articles cannot be cited given the page limitation associated with this manuscript.
Consequently, a representative group of articles are cited within each theme.
421
[3] This same article on 9th-grade Hispanic students is duplicated in the subcategory race/
ethnicity under the identity major theme and immediacy under TeacherStudent Communication major theme.
[4] Mackinley (2003) can be placed in any of the three subcategories under the identity theme
international, race/ethnicity, or gender. We have placed it under race/ethnicity.
[5] Eight articles were originally placed in the identity subcategory gender; however, two were
removed as they were duplicated elsewherethe 2003 articles by Johnson and Bhatt and
MacKinlay were analyzed under race/ethnicity.
[6] Qin Zhang is sole author or coauthor on six of these articles.
[7] Consistent with the published aim and scope of CE, the National Communication Publications
Board can improve on encouraging submissions presenting the postsecondary experiences
occurring in other countries.
[8] The bias against qualitative, interpretive methods of conducting research will not be addressed
in this manuscript.
[9] Eurocentrism is a form of ethnocentrism, as there is a focus on ones own ethnic group and
its social standards as the basis for evaluative judgments concerning the practices of others
with the implication that one views ones own standards as superior (Joseph, Reddy, & SearleChatterjee, 1990, p. 1).
[10] In other words, Eurocentrism either identifies cultures as the subordinate other or ignores
them altogether.
[11] While our focus is on the U.S., the same concerns may be relevant to students and professors
of color in other nations.
References
Adams, J., & Defleur, M. H. (2006). The acceptability of online degrees earned as a credential for
obtaining employment. Communication Education, 55, 3245. doi:10.1080/03634520500
343376
Adams, J., Defleur, M. H., & Heald, G. R. (2007). The acceptability of credentials earned online for
obtaining employment in the health care professions. Communication Education, 56, 292307.
doi:10.1080/03634520701344959
Aitken, J. E., & Shedletsky, L. J. (2002). Using electronic discussions to teach communication
courses. Communication Education, 51, 325331. doi:10.1080/03634520216512
Allen, B. J. (2007). Theorizing communication and race. Communication Monographs, 74, 259264.
doi:10.1080/03637750701393055
Allen, M., Witt, P. L., & Wheeless, L. R. (2006). The role of teacher immediacy as a motivational
factor in student learning: Using meta-analysis to test a causal model. Communication
Education, 55, 2131. doi:10.1080/03634520500343368
Allen, T. H. (2006). Is the rush to provide on-line instruction setting our students up for failure?
Communication Education, 55, 122126. doi:10.1080/03634520500343418
Ardener, E. (1975). Belief and the problem of women: The problem revisited. In S. Ardener (Ed.),
Perceiving women (pp. 127). London: Mabley Press.
Ardener, S. (1978). Defining females: The nature of women in society. New York, NY: Wiley.
Ardener, S. (2005). Ardeners muted groups: The genesis of an idea and its praxis. Women and
Language, 28, 5054.
Banks, J. A. (1996). The canon debate, knowledge construction and multicultural education. In J. A.
Banks (Ed.), Multicultural education, transformative knowledge, and action: Historical and
contemporary perspectives (pp. 329). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Bardhan, N. (2003). Creating spaces for international and multi(inter)cultural perspectives
in undergraduate public relations education. Communication Education, 52, 164172.
doi:10.1080/03634520302473
Baringer, D. K., & McCroskey, J. C. (2000). Immediacy in the classroom: Student immediacy.
422
Behnke, R. R., & Sawyer, C. R. (2000). Anticipatory anxiety patterns for male and female public
speakers. Communication Education, 49, 187195. doi:10.1080/03634520009379205
Behnke, R. R., & Sawyer, C. R. (2004). Public speaking anxiety as a function of sensitization and
habituation processes. Communication Education, 53, 164173. doi:10.1080/0363452041000
1682429
Bodie, G. D. (2010). A racing heart, rattling knees, and ruminative thoughts: Defining, explaining,
and treating public speaking anxiety. Communication Education, 59, 70105. doi:10.1080/
03634520903443849
Bolkan, S., & Goodboy, A. K. (2013). No complain, no gain: Students organizational, relational, and
personal reasons for withholding rhetoric dissent from their college instructors. Communication Education, 62, 278300. doi:10.1080/03634523.2013.788198
Bolkan, S., & Holmgren, J. L. (2012). You are such a great teacher and I hate to bother you but:
Instructors perceptions of students and their use of email messages with varying politeness
strategies. Communication Education, 61, 253270. doi:10.1080/03634523.2012.667135
Boone, P. R. (2003). When the Amen Corner comes to class: An examination of the pedagogical
and cultural impact of callresponse communication in the Black college classroom.
Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Washington, DC:
Carnegie Foundation.
Brown, K. L. (Ed.). (1976). Communication Education, 25, 190.
Buell, C. (2004). Models of mentoring in communication. Communication Education, 53, 771783.
doi:10.1080/0363452032000135779
Carr, C. T., Zube, P., Dickens, E., Hayter, C. A., & Barterian, J. A. (2013). Toward a model of
sources of influence in online education: Cognitive learning and the effect of Web 2.0.
Communication Education, 62, 6185. doi:10.1080/03634523.2012.724535
Carrell, L. J., & Menzel, K. E. (2001). Variations in learning, motivation, and perceived immediacy
between live and distance education classrooms. Communication Education, 50, 230240.
doi:10.1080/03634520109379250
Chesebro, J. L., & McCroskey, J. C. (2001). The relationship of teacher clarity and immediacy with
student state receiver apprehension, affect, and cognitive learning. Communication Education, 50, 446456. doi:10.1080/03634520109379232
Chory, R. M. (2007). Enhancing student perceptions of fairness: The relationship between instructor
credibility and classroom justice. Communication Education, 56, 89105. doi;10.1080/
03634520600994300
Clark, R. A., & Jones, D. (2001). A comparison of traditional and online formats in a public
speaking course. Communication Education, 50, 109124. doi:10.1080/03634520109379238
Cooks, L. (2003). Pedagogy, performance, and positionality: Teaching about Whiteness in
interracial communication. Communication Education, 52, 245257. doi:10.1080/03634520
32000156226
Cooks, L., & Sun, C. (2002). Constructing gender pedagogies: Desire and resistance in the
alternative classroom. Communication Education, 51, 293310. doi:10.1080/03634520
216517
Cuban, L. (1999). How scholars trumped teachers: Change without reform in the university
curriculum, teaching, and research 18901990. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Darling, A. L. (2005). Public presentations in mechanical engineering and the discourse of
technology. Communication Education, 54, 2033. doi:10.1080/03634520500076711
Davis, O. I. (1999). In the kitchen: Transforming the academy through safe spaces of resistance.
Western Journal of Communication, 63, 364381. doi:10.1080/10570319909374647
DeTurk, S. (2001). Intercultural empathy: Myth, competence, or possibility for alliance building.
423
Docan-Morgan, T., & Manusov, V. (2009). Relational turning point events and their outcomes in
college teacherstudent relationships from students perspectives. Communication Education,
58, 155188. doi:10.1080/03634520802515713
Downing, J., & Garmon, C. (2001). Teaching students in the basic course how to use presentation
software. Communication Education, 50, 218229. doi:10.1080/03634520109379249
Easton, S. S. (2003). Clarifying the instructors role in online distance learning. Communication
Education, 52, 87105. doi:10.1080/03634520302470
Edwards, A., & Edwards, C. (2013). Computer-mediated word-of-mouth communication: The
influence of mixed reviews on student perceptions of instructors and courses. Communication Education, 62, 412424. doi:10.1080/03634523.2013.800217
Finn, A. N., & Ledbetter, A. M. (2013). Teacher power mediating the effects of technology policies
on teacher credibility. Communication Education, 62, 2647. doi:10.1080/03634523.2012.
725132
Finn, A. N., Sawyer, C. R., & Behnke, R. R. (2009). A model of anxious arousal for public speaking.
Finn, A. N., Sawyer, C. R., & Schrodt, P. (2009). Examining the effect of exposure therapy on public
speaking state anxiety. Communication Education, 58, 92109. doi:10.1080/0363452080
2450549
Finn, A. N., & Schrodt, P. (2012). Students perceived understanding mediates the effects of teacher
clarity and nonverbal immediacy on learner empowerment. Communication Education,
61, 111130. doi:10.1080/03634523.2012.656669
Fitch, F., & Morgan, S. E. (2003). Not a lick of English: ITA identity through student narratives.
Fleck, F. (2013). What successful principals do: 169 tips for principals. New York, NY: Routledge.
Frobish, T. S. (2000). Jamieson meets Lucas: Eloquence and pedagogical model(s) in the art of
public speaking. Communication Education, 49, 239252. doi:10.1080/03634520009379213
Gattoni, A., & Tenzek, K. E. (2010). The practice: An analysis of the factors influencing the training
of health care participants through innovative technology. Communication Education, 59,
263273. doi:10.1080/03634521003605808
Gendrin, D. M. (2000). Homeless womens inner voices: Friends or foes? In M. J. Hardman &
A. Taylor (Eds.), Hearing many voices (pp. 203219). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Giroux, H. A. (2003). Spectacles of race and pedagogies of denial: Anti-Black racist pedagogy under
the reign of neoliberalism. Communication Education, 52, 191211. doi:10.1080/03634520
32000156190
Glascock, J., & Ruggiero, T. E. (2006). The relationship of ethnicity and sex to professor credibility
at a culturally diverse university. Communication Education, 55, 197207. doi:10.1080/
03634520600566165
Godley, A. J. (2003). Literacy learning as gendered identity work. Communication Education, 52,
273285. doi:10.1080/0363452032000156244
Goodboy, A. K., & Myers, S. A. (2012). Instructional dissent as an expression of students verbal
aggressiveness and argumentativeness traits. Communication Education, 61, 448458.
doi:10.1080/03634523.2012.699635
Griffin, E. (2009). A first look at communication theory (7th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Harding, S. (1993). Rethinking standpoint epistemology: What is strong objectivity? In L. Alcoff &
E. Potter (Eds.), Feminist epistemologies (pp. 4982). New York, NY: Routlege.
Harding, S. (2009). Standpoint theories: Productively controversial. Hypatia, 24, 192200. doi:10.1111/
j.1527-2001.2009.01067
Harris, T. M. (2003). Impacting student perceptions of and attitudes toward race in the interracial
communication course. Communication Education, 52, 311317. doi:10.1080/0363452032000
156271
Harris, T. M. (2012). Flying solo: Negotiating the matrix of racism and sexism in higher education.
Women in Language, 35, 103107.
424
Heider, D. (2000). White news: Why local news programs dont cover people of color. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Hendrix, K. G. (1998). Black and White male professor perceptions of the influence of race on
classroom dynamics and credibility. The Negro Educational Review, 49, 3752.
Hendrix, K. G. (2005). An invitation to dialogue: Do communication journal reviewers mute the
race-related research of scholars of color? Southern Communication Journal, 70, 329345.
doi:10.1080/10417940509373338
Hendrix, K. G. (Ed.). (2007). Neither White nor male: Female faculty of color [Special issue]. New
Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2007, 197.
Hendrix, K. G., & Hebbani, A. (Eds.). (in press). The hidden road: The journey of the non-native
English speaking international communication professor from teaching assistant to tenured
professor. New Directions for Teaching and Learning.
Hendrix, K. G., Jackson, R. L., II, & Warren, J. R. (2003). Shifting academic landscapes: Exploring
co-identities and critical progressive pedagogy. Communication Education, 52, 177190.
doi:10.1080/0363452032000156181
Holmes, P. (2005). Ethnic Chinese students communication with cultural others in a New Zealand
university. Communication Education, 54, 116. doi:10.1080/03634520500442160
Hosek, A. M., & Thompson, J. (2009). Communication privacy management and college
instruction: Exploring the rules and boundaries that frame instructor private disclosures.
Houston, M. (2002). Seeking difference: African Americans in interpersonal communication
research, 19752000. The Howard Journal of Communications, 13, 2541. doi:10.1080/
106461702753555021
Hsu, C. (2012). The influence of vocal qualities and confirmation of nonnative English-speaking
teachers on student receiver apprehension, affective learning, and cognitive learning.
Hyun, E., & Davis, G. (2005). Kindergartners conversations in a computer-based technology
classroom. Communication Education, 54, 118135. doi:10.1080/03634520500213397
Jackson, R., II & Hendrix, K. G. (Eds.). (2003). Racial, cultural, and gendered identities in
educational contexts: Communication perspectives on identity negotiation [Double special
issue]. Communication Education, 52, 177317.
Johnson, J. R., & Bhatt, A. J. (2003). Gendered and racialized identities and alliances in the
classroom: Formations in/of resistive space. Communication Education, 52, 230244.
doi:10.1080/0363452032000156217
Johnson, S., & Miller, A. (2002). A cross-cultural study of immediacy, credibility, and learning in
the U.S. and Kenya. Communication Education, 51, 280292. doi:10.1080/03634520216514
Joseph, G. G., Reddy, V., & Searle-Chatterjee, M. (1990). Eurocentrism in the social sciences. Race
Class, 31, 126. doi:10.1177/030639689003100401
Kearney, P., Plax, T. G., Richmond, V. P., & McCroskey, J. C. (1985). Power in the classroom III:
Teacher communication techniques and messages. Communication Education, 34, 1928.
doi:10.1080/03634528509378579
Kopecky, C. C., Sawyer, C. R., & Behnke, R. R. (2004). Sensitivity to punishment and explanatory
style as predictors of public speaking state anxiety. Communication Education, 53, 281285.
doi:10.1080/0363452042000265206
Kramarae, C. (1981). Women and men speaking: Frameworks for analysis. Rowley, MA: Newbury
House.
Kreber, C. (Ed.). (2001). Scholarship revisited: Perspectives on the scholarship of teaching [Special
issue]. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2001, 1104.
Kreps, G. L., Sparks, L., & Villegran, M. M. (Eds.). (2010). Communication education and health
promotion [Special issue]. Communication Education, 59, 215219. doi:10.1080/0363452100
3657734
425
Kuznekoff, J. H., & Titsworth, S. (2013). The impact of mobile phone usage on student learning.
Lane, D. R., & Shelton, M. W. (2001). The centrality of communication education in classroom
computer-mediated-communication. Communication Education, 50, 241255. doi:10.1080/
03634520109379251
Lane, P. (2002). A beginners guide to crossing cultures: Making friends in a multi-cultural world.
Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
Lannutti, P. J., Laliker, M., & Hale, J. L. (2001). Violations of expectations and social-sexual
communication in student/professor interactions. Communication Education, 50, 6982.
doi:10.1080/03634520109379233
Larseingue, M., Sawyer, C. R., & Finn, A. N. (2012). Components of students grade expectations for
public speaking assignments. Communication Education, 61, 428447. doi:10.1080/03634523.
2012.708765
LaRose, R., & Whitten, P. (2000). Re-thinking instructional immediacy for web courses: A social
cognitive exploration. Communication Education, 49, 320337. doi:10.1080/03634520009379221
Ledbetter, A. M., & Finn, A. N. (2013). Teacher technology policies and online communication
apprehension as predictors of learner empowerment. Communication Education, 62, 301317.
doi:10.1080/03634523.2013.794386
Levasseur, D. G., Dean, K. W., & Pfaff, J. (2004). Speech pedagogy beyond the basics: A study of
instructional methods in the advanced public speaking course. Communication Education,
53, 234252. doi:10.1080/0363452042000265170
Lin, J., & Rivera-Sanchez, M. (2012). Testing the information technology continuance model on a
mandatory SMS-based student response system. Communication Education, 61, 89110.
doi:10.1080/03634523.2011.654231
Liu, X. (2010). Empirical testing of a theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: An
exploratory study of educational wikis. Communication Education, 59, 5269. doi:10.1080/
03634520903431745
Mackinlay, E. (2003). Performing race, culture, and gender in an indigenous Australian womens
music and dance classroom. Communication Education, 52, 258272. doi:10.1080/
0363452032000156235
Martin, J. N., & Davis, O. I. (2001). Conceptual foundations for teaching about whiteness in
intercultural communication courses. Communication Education, 50, 298313. doi:10.1080/
03634520109379257
Martin, L., & Mottet, T. P. (2011). The effect of instructor nonverbal immediacy behaviors and
feedback sensitivity on Hispanic students effective learning outcomes in ninth-grade writing
conferences. Communication Education, 60, 119. doi:10.1080/03634523.2010.496868
McCroskey, J. C., Richmond, V. P., & Bennett, V. E. (2006). The relationships of student end-ofclass motivation with teacher communication behaviors and instructional outcomes.
Miller, C. R. (1998). Learning from history: World War II and the culture of high technology. Journal
of Business and Technical Communication, 12, 288316. doi:10.1177/1050651998012003002
Miller, K. (2005). Communication theories: Perspectives, processes, and contexts. New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill.
Miller, N. A., & Harris, T. M. (2005). Communicating to develop White racial identity in an interracial
communication class. Communication Education, 54, 223242. doi:10.1080/03634520500
356196
Mortenson, S. T. (2006). Cultural differences and similarities in seeking social support as a response
to academic failure: A comparison of American and Chinese college students. Communication Education, 55, 127146. doi:10.1080/03634520600565811
Mottet, T. P. (2000). Interactive television instructors perceptions of students nonverbal
responsiveness and their influence on distance teaching. Communication Education, 49,
146164. doi:10.1080/03634520009379202
426
Mottet, T. P., & Beebe, S. A. (2006). The relationship between student responsive behaviors, student
socio-communicative style, and instructors subjective and objective assessments of student
work. Communication Education, 55, 146164. doi:10.1080/03634520600748581
Muthuswamy, N., Levine, T. R., & Gazel, J. (2006). Interaction-based diversity initiative outcomes:
An evaluation of an initiative aimed at bridging the racial divide on a college campus.
Myers, S. A., Edwards, C., Wahl, S. T., & Martin, M. M. (2007). The relationship between perceived
instructor aggressive communication and college student involvement. Communication
Education, 56, 495508. doi:10.1080/03634520701466398
Natalle, E. J., & Crowe, K. M. (2013). Information literacy and communication research: A case
study on interdisciplinary assessment. Communication Education, 62, 97104. doi:10.1080/
03634523.2012.720690
Orbe, M. P., & Allen, B. J. (2008). Race matters in the Journal of Applied Communication
Research. The Howard Journal of Communication, 19, 201220. doi:10.1080/1064617080
2218115
Park, H. S., Lee, S. A., Yun, D., & Kim, W. (2009). The impact of instructor decision authority and
verbal and nonverbal immediacy on Korean student satisfaction in the U.S. and South Korea.
Patton, T. O. (2004). Reflections of a Black woman professor: Racism and sexism in academia. The
Howard Journal of Communications, 15, 185200. doi:10.1080/10646170490483629
Pogue, L. L., & Ahyun, K. (2006). The effect of teacher nonverbal immediacy and credibility on
student motivation and affective learning. Communication Education, 55, 331344.
doi:10.1080/03634520600748623
Pop, T. (2011). From Eurocentrism to hybridity or from singularity to plurality. Retrieved from
http://www.theroundtable.ro/Archive/literary_studies/titus_pop_from_eurocentrism_to_hibr
idity_or_from_singularity_to_plurality.doc
Reedy, J., & Murty, M. (2011). Creating a research agenda. Retrieved from http://www.grad.
washington.edu/mentoring/memos/research-agenda.shtml
Reid, L. (1952). On first teaching speech. Communication Education, 1, 18. doi:10.1080/
03634525209376521
Reid, L. (2002). The Speech Teacher: Early years. Communication Education, 51, 333336.
doi:10.1080/03634520216529
Roach, K. D., & Byrne, P. R. (2001). A cross-cultural comparison of instructor communication in
American and German classrooms. Communication Education, 50, 114. doi:10.1080/
03634520109379228
Roberts, M. M. (Ed.). (1975). The Speech Teacher, 24, 1392.
Rocca, K. A. (2004). College student attendance: Impact of instructor immediacy and verbal
aggression. Communication Education, 53, 185195. doi:10.1080/03634520410001682447
Russ, T., Simonds, C., & Hunt, S. (2002). Coming out in the classroom An occupational hazard?:
The influence of sexual orientation on teacher credibility and perceived student learning.
Russo, T. C., & Koesten, J. (2005). Prestige, centrality, and learning: A social network analysis of an
online class. Communication Education, 54, 254261. doi:10.1080/03634520500356394
Schreiber, L. M., Paul, G. D., & Shibley, L. R. (2012). The development and test of the public speaking
competence rubric. Communication Education, 61, 205233. doi:10.1080/03634523.2012.670709
Schrodt, P. (2013). Content relevance and students comfort with disclosure as moderators of
instructor disclosures and credibility in the college classroom. Communication Education,
62, 352375. doi:10.1080/03634523.2013.807348
Schrodt, P., & Witt, P. L. (2006). Students attributions of instructor credibility as a function of
students expectations of instructional technology use and nonverbal immediacy. Communication Education, 55, 120. doi:10.1080/03634520500343335
427
Sellnow, D. D., Child, J. T., & Ahlfeldt, S. L. (2005). Textbook technology supplements: What are
they good for? Communication Education, 54, 243253. doi:10.1080/03634520500356360
Sellnow, D. D., & Treinen, K. P. (2004). The role of gender in perceived speaker competence: An
analysis of student peer critiques. Communication Education, 53, 286296. doi:10.1080/
0363452042000265215
Shedletsky, L. J., & Aitken, J. E. (2001). The paradoxes of online academic work. Communication
Education, 50, 206217. doi:10.1080/03634520109379248
Shue, L. L., & Beck, C. S. (2001). Stepping out of bounds: Performing feminist pedagogy within a dance
education community. Communication Education, 50, 125143. doi:10.1080/03634520109379239
Sidelinger, R. J., Bolen, D. M., Frisby, B. N., & McMullen, A. L. (2011). When instructors
misbehave: An examination of student-to-student connectedness as a mediator in the college
classroom. Communication Education, 60, 340360. doi:10.1080/03634523.2011.554991
Simmons, J., Lowery-Hart, R. Wahl, S. T., & McBride, M. C. (2013). Understanding the AfricanAmerican student experience in higher education through a relational dialectics perspective.
Sprague, J. (2002). Communication Education: The spiral continues. Communication Education, 51,
337354. doi:10.1080/03634520216532
Stephens, K. K., Houser, M. L., & Cowan, R. L. (2009). R u able to meat me: The impact of students
overly casual email messages to instructors. Communication Education, 58, 303326.
doi:10.1080/03634520802582598
Stephens, K. K., & Mottet, T. P. (2008). Interactivity in a web conference training context: Effects on
trainers and trainees. Communication Education, 57, 88104. doi:10.1080/03634520701573284
Stepp, P. L. (2001). Sexual harassment in communication extra-curricular activities: Intercollegiate debate
and individual events. Communication Education, 50, 3450. doi:10.1080/03634520109379230
Teven, J. J. (2001). The relationships among teacher characteristics and perceived caring.
Titsworth, S. (2001). The effects of teacher immediacy, use of organizational lecture cues, and
students note taking on cognitive learning. Communication Education, 50, 283297.
doi:10.1080/03634520109379256
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). Digest of Education
Statistics, 2011 (NCES 2012-001). Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/2012001.pdf
Vess, D. L. (2005). Asynchronous discussion and communication patterns in online and hybrid
history courses. Communication Education, 54, 355364. doi:10.1080/03634520500442210
Wadsworth, B. C., Hecht, M. L., & Jung, E. (2008). The role of identity gaps, discrimination, and
acculturation in international students educational satisfaction in American classrooms.
Warren, J. T. (2001). Doing Whiteness: On the performative dimensions of race in the classroom.
Warren, J. T., & Hytten, K. (2004). The faces of Whiteness: Pitfalls and the critical democrat.
Wei, F. F., Wang, Y. K., & Klausner, M. (2012). Rethinking college students self-regulation and
sustained attention: Does text messaging during class influence cognitive learning?
Weimer, M. (2006). Enhancing scholarly work on teaching and learning: Professional literature that
makes a difference. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
West, R., & Turner, L. H. (2010). Introducing communication theory: Analysis and application. New
York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Wheeless, V. E., Witt, P. L., Maresh, M., Bryand, M. C., & Schrodt, P. (2011). Instructor credibility
as a mediator of instructor communication and students intent to persist in college.
Witt, P. L., & Behnke, R. R. (2006). Anticipatory speech anxiety as a function of public speaking
assignment type. Communication Education, 55, 165172. doi:10.1080/03634520600566074
428
Witt, P. L., & Kerssen-Griep, J. (2011). Instructional feedback I: The interaction of facework and
immediacy on students perceptions of instructor credibility. Communication Education, 60,
7594. doi:10.1080/03634523.2010.507820
Wood, J. T. (2005). Feminist standpoint theory and muted group theory: Commonalities and
divergences. Women & Language, 28, 6164.
Wood, A. F., & Fassett, D. L. (2003). Remote control: Identity, power, and technology in the
communication classroom. Communication Education, 52, 286296. doi:10.1080/03634520
32000156253
Young, S., Kelsey, D., & Lancaster, A. (2011). Predicted outcome value of email communication:
Factors that foster professional relational development between students and teachers.
Zhang, Q. (2007). Teacher misbehaviors as learning demotivators in college classrooms: A crosscultural investigation in China, Germany, Japan, and the United States. Communication
Education, 56, 209227. doi:10.1080/03634520601110104
Zhang, Q., & Oetzel, J. G. (2006a). A cross-cultural test of immediacylearning models in Chinese
classrooms. Communication Education, 55, 113. doi:10.1080/03634520600748599
Zhang, Q., & Oetzel, J. G. (2006b). Constructing and validating a teacher immediacy scale: A
Chinese perspective. Communication Education, 55, 218241. doi:10.1080/03634520600
566231
Zhang, Q., Oetzel, J. G., Gao, X., Wilcox, R. G., & Takai, J. (2007). Teacher immediacy scales:
Testing for validity across cultures. Communication Education, 56, 228248. doi:10.1080/
03634520601089092
Zhang, Q., & Sapp, D. A. (2013). Psychological reactance and resistance intention in the classroom:
Effects of perceived request politeness and legitimacy, relationship distance, and teacher
credibility. Communication Education, 62, 125. doi:10.1080/03634523.2012.727008
Zhang, Q., & Zhang, J. (2013). Instructors positive emotions on student engagement and critical
thinking in U.S. and Chinese classrooms. Communication Education, 62, 395411. doi:10.1080/
03634523.2013.828842
Zhang, Q., & Zhu, W. (2008). Exploring emotion in teaching: Emotional labor, burnout, and
satisfaction in Chinese higher education. Communication Education, 57, 105122. doi:10.1080/
03634520701586310

Virtual Invisibility Race and Communication Education

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Virtual Invisibility Race and Communication Education

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article was downloaded by: [50.116.8.

Virtual Invisibility: Race and

Click for updates

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions

Virtual Invisibility: Race and

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

Katherine Grace Hendrix & Cicely Wilson

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

K. G. Hendrix and C. Wilson

Virtual Invisibility: Race and CE

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

Thematic Analysis 20002013

Teacher/Instructor to Student Communication

K. G. Hendrix and C. Wilson

Table 1 Thematic Analysis Results

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

Virtual Invisibility: Race and CE

in this subcategory also addressed teacher facework and communication competence,

K. G. Hendrix and C. Wilson

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

Virtual Invisibility: Race and CE

K. G. Hendrix and C. Wilson

on-site classroom by students (regardless of the instructors desire) is yet another

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

Virtual Invisibility: Race and CE

acculturation easierwhether in the U.S. or New Zealandor to make exposure to

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

K. G. Hendrix and C. Wilson

Virtual Invisibility: Race and CE

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

K. G. Hendrix and C. Wilson

permissible is also a form of muting or silencing the nondominant group by a social

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

Virtual Invisibility: Race and CE

The term Eurocentrism is used in this discussion to refer to the omission of

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

K. G. Hendrix and C. Wilson

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

Virtual Invisibility: Race and CE

K. G. Hendrix and C. Wilson

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

alter their research interests in order to adapt to the academic communitys

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

Virtual Invisibility: Race and CE

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

K. G. Hendrix and C. Wilson

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

Virtual Invisibility: Race and CE

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

K. G. Hendrix and C. Wilson

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

Virtual Invisibility: Race and CE

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

K. G. Hendrix and C. Wilson

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

Virtual Invisibility: Race and CE

Downloaded by [50.116.8.251] at 22:19 17 December 2014

K. G. Hendrix and C. Wilson