Ann L. Darling’s research while affiliated with University of Utah and other places

Dannels (20019. Dannels , DP . 2001. Time to speak up: A theoretical framework of situated pedagogy and practice for communication across the curriculum. Communication Education, 50: 144–158. [Taylor & Francis Online]View all references) has advocated Communication in the Disciplines (CID) as a model for Communication Across the Curriculum (CXC) teaching and scholarship. Turning attention toward CID work requires an alternative way of thinking and planning, and invites an expanded, discipline-specific agenda for CXC scholarship. The purpose of this study was to engage in that discipline-specific agenda—using Carolyn Miller's discourse of technology framework to interpret and explore the communication practices of one disciplinary community (mechanical engineering) with attention to the public presentation genre. Using an ethnographic orientation, data were extracted from a variety of documents (the Department of Mechanical Engineering website, course syllabi, assignment descriptions, and guidelines for evaluating oral performances) as well as field notes from meetings and classroom observations. Results illustrate this community was indeed driven by the discourse of technology—that speaking well in this community meant focusing attention on the “object” (and/or visual representations of that object) and away from the self or personal identity of the speaker. This study concludes by discussing implications of these results in terms of CID practice—specifically asking whether we should become agents of those disciplinary discourses with whom we work or whether we should retain some responsibility to the broader mission of a college education.

In the last decade engineering education and industry have requested assistance from communication educators. Responding to increased attention on the changing expectations for practicing engineers and an attendant need for better communication skills, these teams of engineering and communication educators have been working to incorporate speaking and writing in engineering education. Despite a great deal of anecdotal evidence that communication is important to working engineers, relatively little data based information is available to help us understand better the specifics of how and why communication is important for these particular professionals. This paper reports the results of practicing engineers' descriptions of the importance of oral communication. These data suggest that engineering practice takes place in an intensely oral culture and while formal presentations are important to practicing engineers, daily work is characterized more by interpersonal and small group experiences. Communication skills such as translation, clarity, negotiation, and listening are vital.