DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 394 154 CS 509 231

AUTHOR Ciofalo, Andrew, Ed.TITLE Proceedings of the Communications Conference of the

Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities (7th,Chicago, Illinois, July 26-30, 1995).

INSTITUTION Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities.SPONS AGENCY Loyola Coll., Baltimore, Md.PUB DATE Jul 95NOTE 79p.

PUB TYPE Collected Works Conference Proceedings (021)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC04 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS Catholic Educators; Church Related Colleges;

Communication Research; Course Descriptions; *Ethics;Higher Education; *Mass Media; Mission Statements;*Organizational Communication; *ReligiousOrganizations; *Speech Communication

IDENTIFIERS *Jesuits

ABSTRACTThis booklet contains nine papers presented at the

Communications Conference of the Association of Jesuit Colleges andUniversities. The booklet begins with the conference program, a listof attendees, and notes of the business meeting of the Association.Papers in the booklet are "Opening Remarks: A Call to Inaction"(Andrew Ciofalo); "Eloquentia Perfecta in a Multimedia Society" (W.Barnett Pearce); "17 Short Papers about Jesuit Communication"(Richard Blake); "Rome Meeting Articulates New Role for Jesuits inCommunication Culture" (William E. Biernatzki); "The CSCC andCooperative Work in the AJCU-CC" (Paul A. Soukup); "Looking for aJesuit, Catholic Identity in Course Syllabi" (Mary Ann Danielson);"Privacy and Confidentiality as Ethical Issues in CorporateCommunications" (Thomas A. Schick and Ida Critelli Schick);"Fordham's New York City Semester" (Ron Jacobson); and "MissionStatement" (Centre for the Study of Communication and Culture).(RS)

***********************************************************************

* Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made *

* from the original document. *

***********************************************************************

PROCEEDINGS

Ajal-CC

TO THE FDUCATIONAL RE SOURCESINFORM ATIGN CENTE:FA (ERIC)

Associanon op jesurr Collegesan0 Univetzsrnes-

Comunicanons Conmence

PERMIin% T1) R I P ; -)1 f ANDDISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL

HAS BEEN GRANTED BYU S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

cvsc. or Educal,ona, Research and improvement

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER tERIC1

Vr<his document has been reproduced asreceived horn the person or orgarwationoriginating itMinor changes have been made toimprove reproduction qualrly

Sevenrh Annual Meenng

Loyola Univelzsury

Chicago

July 26 -July 30, 1995Pchres nh vo., or npirions sla!nd in thisr 1 u e r,1 dr not nereshaniv nopresantofficial OERI position or poky

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

2

PROCEEDINGS

Seven Tb Annual. Meennq

Associanon op jesurr Colleges

anif) Univegsmes-

ComunicaTwns Conpegence

Eke() by Andizew CiopaloAssocia-re Pizopesson

DepaRTmenT op Wiming and Media

Loyola College

Publisheo in BatTunorze aT Loyola College

wiTh special. Thanks TO The Dean op The College op ARTS

ana Sciences, Davi() Roswell, Fog Financial suppoRT

AJCU COMMUNICATIONSCOM ERENCE

LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGOWed., July 26 -- Sun., July 30

PROGRAM

Wednesday, July 26

Noon on Check-in and registration -- Simpson Livingano. Learning Center

6:00 p.m. Lakefront Picnic -- Piper Hall / Lawn

Thursday, July 27

7:00 a.m. Breakfast

Collaboration9 aan.

A Call to InactionAndrew Ciofalo,

Communication Conference PresidentLoyola College Baltimore

17 Short Papers About Jesuit CommunicationRichard A. Blake, SJ

Le Moyne College

Cooperative Communication VenturesAmong Jesuit Universities

James F. ScottonMarquette University

Eloquentia Perfecto in a Multi-MediaSociety: A Provocation

W. Barnett PearceLoyola University Chicago

Noon: Lunch

14

Jesuit Identity2 p.m.

Shared Vision -- Jesuit Spirit in Education(Video)

Report on Progress of National CommunicationPlan: Update Since Santa Clara

Thomas M. Rochford, SJCommunications Director -- Jesuit Conference

Washington, DC

Communication: A New CultureThe Document on Communication ofthe 34th Jesuit General Congregation

William E. Biernatzki, SJCenter for the Study of Communication and Culture

St. Louis University

CSCC and Cooperative Work in AJCUPaul Soukup, SJ

Santa Clara University

Dinner/Evening On Your Own

Friday, July 28

7:00 a.m. Breakfast

Curriculum9 a.m.

Course Syllabi as Socialization Strategy:Presence or Absence of a Jesuit,

Catholic IdentityMary Ann DanielsonCreighton University

Teaching a Large Lecture Classat a Jesuit University

Don FishmanBoston College

Teaching Gender Roles and Communicationat Boston College

Lisa CuklanzBoston College

Using the Communication Major-as-Citizen Roleto Demonstrate Communication Knowledge and

Proficiency in a Senior Capstone SeminarWilliam Ryan

Rockhurst College

Noon: Lunch

Assessment2 pan.

Process and Outcome of Department MissionStaternent

Mara AdelmanSeattle University

"Outcomes Assessment" for aJesuit Mission Statement

John CaputoGonzaga University

New Methodologies in CommunicationAssessment: Item Response Theory and

Structural Relations AnalysisJohn Hollwitz and Mary Ann Danielson

Creighton University

Dinner/Evening: On Your Own

Saturday, July 29

7 a.m. Breakfast

Communication for Service9 a.m.

Have We Got Media Internships: A Closer Lookat Fordham's New Yark City Semester Program

Ron JacobsonFordharn University

Community Based Radio -- the LakeshoreCommunity Media Project

Jeff HarderLoyola University Chicago

Privacy and Confidentiality as Ethical Issues inCommunicating Organizational Information

Thomas Schick, Ida SchickXavier (Ohio)

Noon: Lunch

Conclusions2 p.m.

Interest Groups around Conference Issues

Business Meeting

Reception/ Buffet Dinner

Sunday, July 30

8 a.m. Breakfast and conversation

Departure

i v

ATTENDEES

Mara AdelmanDepartment of CommunicationSeattle UniversityBroadway and MadisonSeattle, Washington 98122-4460(206) 296-5344 (W)(206) 296-5997 (F)mar@seattleu.edu

Brother William E. Biematzki, S.J.-C,:ntre for the Study of Comm. & Culture

St. Louis University321 North Spring AvenueSt. Louis, Missouri 63156-0907(314) 977-7290 (W)(314) 977-7296 (F)cscc@sluvca.slu.edu

Richard A. Blake, S.J.Le Moyne CollegeSyracuse, New York 13214-1399(315) 445-4621 (W)(315) 445-4722 (F)blakera@maple.lemoyne.edu

John S. CaputoCommunication ArtsGonzaga UniversitySpokane, Washington 99258(509) 328-4220 (W)(509) 484-2818 (F)caputo@gonzaga.edu

Andrew CiofaloWriting/Media DepartmentLoyola College MarylandBaltimore, Maryland 21210(410) 617-2728 (W)(410) 343-0570 (F)ciofalo@loyola.edu

0V U

Lisa M. CuklanzCommunication & TheaterBoston College215 Lyons HallChestnut Hill, MassachuF nts 02167(617) 552-8894 (W)(617) 552-2286 (F)cuklanz@bcvms.bc.edu

Mary Ann DanielsonDepartment of Comm. StudiesCreighton University2500 California PlazaOmaha, Nebraska 68178(402) 280-2530 (W)(402) 280-2143 (F)maddam@creighton.edu

Donald FishmanDepartment of CommunicationBoston CollegeChestnut Hill, Massachusetts 02167(617) 552-4285 (W)(617) 552-2286 (F)fishmand@bcvms.bc.edu

Mary Pat Haley, B.V.M.Department of CommunicationLoyola University Chicago6525 North Sheridan RoadChicago, Illinois 60626(312) 508-8525 (W)(312) 508-8492 (F)mhaley@luc.edu

John HoUwitzDepartment of Comm. StudiesCreighton UniversityOmaha, Nebraska 68178(402) 280-2532 (W)(402) 280-2143 (F)jcholl@crighton.edu

9v i

Ron JacobsonDepartment of CommunicationFordilam University20 Osee PlaceCos Cob, Connecticut 06807(718) 817-4849 (W)(203) 629-3664 (F.)Gary Kolarcik"Contact"/Sacred Heart Program3900 Westminster PlaceSt. Louis, Missouri 63108(314) 533-0320 (W)(314) 533-0335 (F)

Robert V. Lyons, Si.Communication Arts Depart:I-lentGonzaga University502 East Boone AvenueSpokane, Washington 99258(509) 328-4220 ex 6047 (W)(509) 484-2818 (F)

Bren Ortega MurphyDepartment of CommunicationLoyola Univel sity Chicago6525 North Sheridan RoadChicago, Illinois 60626(312) 508-3732 (W)(312) 508-8492 (F)bmurphy@luc.edu

John PaulySaint Louis UniversityDepartment of Communication3733 West Pine BoulevardSt. Louis, Missouri 63105(314) 977-3192 (W)

W. Barnett PearceDepartment of CommunicationLoyola University Chicago6525 North Sheridan RoadChicago, Illinoi, 50626(312) 508-8824 W)

vii

"Tapirw...w

(312) 508-8492 (F)bpearce@mail.luc.edu

Rev. Thomas M. Rochford, S.J.Jesuit Conference1424 16th Street NW-Suite 300Washington, D.C. 20036(202) 462-0400 (W)(202) 328-9212 (F)tomrochford@aol.com

William RyanDept. of Communication & Fine ArtsRockhurst College1100 Rockhurst RoadKansas City, Missouri 64110(816) 926-4042 (W)(816) 926-4588 (F)wryan@vaxl.rockhurst.edu

Ida SchickGraduate Program in Health Services AdministrationXavier UniversityCincinnati, Ohio 45207-5171(513) 745-3716 (W)(513) 745-3705 (F)

Thomas SchickDapartment of Communicaion ArtsXavier UniversityCincinnati, Ohio 45207-7331(513) 745-2954 (W)(513) 745-4301 (F)schickt@xavier.xu.edu

James F. ScottonDepartment of JournalismMarquette UniversityMilwaukee, Wisconsin 53233(414) 288-5608 (W)scottonj@vms.csd.mu.edu

i 1. viii

Paul A. Soukup, S .J.Communication DepartmentSanta Clara Univer,itySanta Clara, California 95053(408) 554-4022 (W.(408) 554-4913 (F.-psoukup@scuacc.,:u.edu

Rev. Paul S. Tipton, S.J.Association of Jesuit Colleges & UniversitiesOne Dupont Circle. Suite 405Washington D.C. 20036(202) 862-9893 ((202) 862-8523 (Fblkrobe aol.com

Jennifer F. WoodCommunication DepanmentSt. Joseph's Hall 215Santa Clara UniversitySanta Clara, California 95053(408) 554-2158 ON i(408) 554-4913 (Fjwood scuacc.sc:: edu

NOTESAJCU Communication Conference BusinessMeetingLoyola University ChicagoJuly 30, 1995

* Andy Ciofalo commented on the importance of thisconference as a means of establishing connections betweenand among the Jesuit colleges and universities.

* Andy asked that all conference papers/presentations beforwarded to him, preferably on disc, by Sept. 30.

* Regarding the timing of future meetings, the grouprecommended mid to late June as a preferable time afterJune 15 for those schools on quarter calendars.

* The 1996 meeting will be at Gonzaga University inSpokane, Washington.

* Regarding the 1997 meeting, the group discussed thepossibilities of mounting an international conference inRome at the Loyola Rome Center. While there was someentht.siasm for the idea in principle, many participantsraised questions regarding finances. Most schools do notfund foreign travel. Some feared that having theconference abroad would automatically cut the attendancein half. Bill Biernatzki said he would contact the Jesuitcentral offices in Rome to see if there might be ways tofund such a meeting. Ron Jacobson, Bill Biernatzki, AndyCiofalo and Mary Pat Haley will form a sub-committee todo some fact-finding.

* In the meantime, other sites were named for thefollowing years:

-- 1997: Boston College or Fordham-- 1998: Xavier or Creighton--1999: Santa Clara or Loyola Marymount

* The group discussed broadening participation in theconference and networking with Jesuit institutions withdepartments of communication who haven't been active in

13 x

the group. The group recommended opening participationto all communication faculty. Letters would be written tochairs, vice presidents and c'eans, and presidents of theschools advising them of the 'ue of the AJCU-CC. JohnHollwitz (Creighton) talked a )(AA using e-mail to garnerinterest in the AJCU-CC. Johr also announced that he hadalready begun to establish ai, e-mail group of AJCUparticipants.

* Regarding an idea that had surfaced earlier in theconference, a group was formed to investigate with theeditors the possibility of devoting a future issue ofConversations to the subject of communication. PaulSoukup (Santa Clara), Tom Schick (Xavier), John Caputo(Gonzaga) and John Pauly (St. Louis) volunteered to directthis effort.

* Regarding ideas for future discussion/future conferences:-- faculty exchanges among departments/schools of Jesuit

universities-- changing curricula-- faculty development / training--compiling a directory of faculty members in thedepartments of communication which would includeteaching and research interests

-- more on capstone courses-- approaches to assessment-- internship programs in other cities-- more on mission statements-- successful advising programs-- communication as art / creation

#2 and #3 of Jesuit films-- foundation courses-- conflict management within faculties

Mary Pat Haley, BVMConference Program ChairLoyola University (Chicago)

x i

CONTENTS

A Call to Inaction/Andrew ClofalolPage 1

Eloquentia Perfecta/ W.Barnett PearcelPage 5

17 Short Papers/Richard Blake S.J./Page 12

New Role for Jesuits/William Biernatzki S.J.1Page 2.2

Cooperative WorklPaul Soukop S.J./Page 27

Course Syllabi and Jesuit Identity/Mary Ann Danielson/Page 29

Ethical Issues in Corporate Communications/Thomas A. Schick and Ida Critelli Schick!

Page 47

New York City Semester/Ron JacobsonIPage 59

Mission Statement/Centre for the Study of Communication and

CulturelPage 61

1 5

Operunq RewaRks:

A Call TO Inacnon

Andrew CiofaloLoyola College in Maryland

AJCU-CC Pre.sident, 1995-96

Welcome to the Seventh Annual Meeting of Associationof Jesuit Colleges and Universities-CommunicationsConference (AJCI_J-CC). Since the organization resurrecteditself at St. Louis in 1989, by next year. we will have had 4meetings in the Midwest. 3 in the West and 1 in the East.Now that we have a system of rotatinL, meetings, the futurepromises a more balanced distribution coast to coast.

This has been our most solid achievement in seven years.I believe that not so long ago we voted, under the inspireduroino of Santa Clara's Tom Shanks, to establish a dues todevelop a fund to defray promotional expenses. No onehas complained about our failure to follow through on this.And thanks to Bert Akers. we developed two years ago aconstitution, which we promptly put away and neverconsulted.

Is this a crisis in the making? When we pay no heed toour basic operating principles and when we fail to organizeourselves to accomplish specific goals, can this beconsidered critical? Our group constantly articulates broadgoals of inter-institutional cooperation --in technology, inresearch, in service and in pedagogy. Yet we rarely committo these initiatives with broad endorsements or anyaccountable follow through. We certainly are not aproactive group, and I am concerned that given theparameters of success within our culture, we will see ourlack of action as "failure.-

As a relatively young organization, the problem is notthat we expect too much of ourselves: rather it is that weare unsure of our expectations. Add to this a tinge of guiltover spending hard-to-come-by travel monies simply tokeep in touch and share ideas, then thc vague need to haveconcrete accomplishments suddenly becomes animperative. And Dick Blake's (Le Moyne) observationsthat our definition of Jesuit-based education often

1

encompasses trite platitudes that are equally applicable tosecular education is a direct challenge to our sense of beingdifferent (i.e., value-based). Maybe we need to look atourselves and our institutions in a totally different way,perhaps reinvent ourselves.

In this annual "state of the organization" assessment. Iwould suggest that what looks like ennui is merely areflection of the dissonance in Jesuit ranks over the missionand goals of Jesuit education. I consider it a sign ofintellectual acuity and mental health that our instincts forinaction are so finely honed.

While we profess to share a common set of values, weare subject to the same theoretical divisions that havedivided our communication disciplines. Now can we counton a shared set of Jesuitical values to keep us centered oncommon goals that ary significantly from the goals of theCatholic institutions and secular institutions.

Yet, I think that each of us ttending these meetings feelsthat there is somethin "special" about our Jesuitidentification, something that sets us apart from otherinstitutions, perhaps even above them. This soundsdangerously like an elitist attitude, and if that is the case,then we are depending on image and reputation to carry us.And nothing will stifle initiative more quickly than an elitistmind set that enables us to rest on our laurels, even if wemerited those lauded at a different time, in a different place,under different conditions. Is it possible that our impulse totalk and stand pat are a form of nostalgia?

Our association and our annual meetings are really about"connectedness." We live in a rapidly changingenvironment, both for the academy and our disciplines. Forthose of our departments enjoying the trappings oftechnological and enrollment success, we feel demeaned bybring valued at our institutions primarily for bringing homea reliable pay check - the cash cow for less productiveprograms. Yet those departments whose development havebeen thwarted by administrations that see our disciplinebringing up the rear of academic priorities, yearn at leastfor the practical recognition that an investment incommunication programs will yield a tenfold return on thebottom line.

I am going to suggest that being technologically advancedon our campuses is not the only way to serve the interestsof our students. There are some colleges represented here

17 2

that have "zero" technology and while this may have manyliabilities e., attracting and keeping young faculty), Ihave not heard a lament that the graduates of theseprograms are not finding niches in their chosen careers atany less rate than our students from our more advancedprograms.

In fact, the technologically poor schools may have adistindt advantage. They stay focussed on the cognitivedevelopment that is necessary to understand and function inthe new communications environment. The emergence ofanthropology and its sidebars in popular culture and inter-cultural communication gives these institutions theopportunity to hire faculty from a broad spectrum ofdisciplines - a situation that can enrich a department'sdialogue with other departments in an institution. Those ofus that are too deeply invested in technology have thelimiting burden of hiring technologically oriented faculty,of creating a technological gap between older and youngerfaculty, and turning out students who are more adept atgadgetry than content. I don't think the idea of the"philosophical plumber" works here.

This has been a long route to share with you what I thinkAJCU-CC is all about. It is not about leaders andfollowers. It is about sharing responsibilities. It is notabout getting us ail up to the same speed. It is aboutappreciating our intellectual diversity, respecting ourvarious orientations, and learning from each other.Sometimes we'll dwell too much on political strategies thatin the end will homogenize us into indistinguishableinstitutions. I like to hear John Pauly (St. Louis) talk abouthis strategies for educating communications majors andreshaping the mission of his department to serve studentsdespite the continued lack of technology for the foreseeablefuture. Departments such as his are best positioned toarticulate the place of our discipline within the corecurriculum and perhaps ride point for all of us inestablishing the centrality of the communications disciplineto the development of an intellectually astute citizen.

This organization is valuable in that it is a sounding boardfor ideas and a way of connecting individuals andinstitutions with similar or common interests andphilosophies. There are spectacular ideas that emanate fromour conversation pit after the stimulus of a thoughtfulpresentation. Creating opportunities for like-minded people

is3

and institutions to join forces, not under the AJCU-CCbanner, to follok through on programs, projects andstudies.

I think one of the highlights of our annual meeting shouldbe a session on how connections made at AJCU-CCresulted in a cooperative venture or simple innovation. Wecan talk about a web page, or a guide book or a publisheddirectory or an electronic journal, but it takes only one ofus to start it and open it up to all of us. AJCU-CC is nothere to give an imprimatur to your efforts, but rather toenhance and encourage your ideas through general reactionand the voluntary association of those members interestedin working together.

I admit that I find it hard not to be grandiose in mythinking coneerniniy, the role of AJCU-CC. My proposalthat we meet in Rome and with representatives fromEuropean and other nearby Jesuit institutions is simply adevice to get us focussed on issues of globalization in ourcurricula and programs. Maybe some of us will combine towork on a joint international program - and I'll admit Fmprimed to jump into such a venture. Maybe others will findthe resolve and vision to chart a separate course.

I think the greatest gift we can give ourselves iscontinued fellowship in a non-judgmental atmosphere.Continued respect for our diverse approaches willencourage the openness, honesty, caring and sharing thatwill make it worth while for us to continue returningannually and perhaps invite others of our colleagues toshare in this wonderful experience. This is the only placewhere I can come to engage in a Jesuit dialogue without theusual catch words of Jesuit-lay collaboration. What wehave here is a true adhocracy.

Therefore, this year I am not asking for the broadendorsement of the AJCU-CC for a mission, philosophy orconcrete objectives. Rather I am inviting any of you with aspecial interest to voluntarily step forward and indicatewhat you intend to do, based on what you will have heardat the meeting, to contribute to the development of thisorganization as a catalyst for faculty, student, departmentaland institutional development.

19

4

ELoQuenTia Pozpecra in aMulTune3la Socicry

W. Barnett PearceLoyola University Chicago

In 1993 the Task Force on the Core Curriculumpresented a "Report" to the Dean of the College of Arts andSciences at Loyola University Chicago. The "Preamble" tothe report contained three paragraphs. The secondparagraph described "eloquentia perfecta" as one of themajor elements in the Jesuit tradition for higher education.(The first paragraph simply cited the Jesuit tradition as thecontext for Loyola University; the third claimed that actionas well as intellect was the involved in the educationalmission of a Jesuit university.)

After giving such a place of pride to "eloquentiaperfecta," the "Report" of the Task Force nowhere referredto the department, discipline, or field of communication. Ifound this surprising since I believe that we have, orshould have, or at least should want to be perceived ashaving, some connection with whatever is meant by"eloquentia perfecta." To repeat, while I brandish theReport as Exhibit A, nowhere is "communication"-whether as department, discipline, field or, horror ofhorrors, courses -- mentioned in the entire report.

To the Administration and colleagues on the Task Forceat Loyola, I addressed many messages, noting theiroversight and seeking to inform them of our vital role inpreparing students for "eloquentia perfecta." AsDepartment Chair, my role was appropriately a forensicone. But to this intramural group of colleagues fromdepartments of communication, I want to be moredeliberative and pose the following question: Why, in theminds of administrators, students, Boards of Trustees,etc., is the department, discipline, or field ofcommunication so often seen as disconnected fromwhatever might be meant by "eloquentia perfecta"?

As a provocation, I suggest that we have not practiced"eloquence" very well. The etymology of communication is

"to make common." Well, we haven't made much in

5 20

common.During the past three years, our department has revised

its entire cumculum. In tile processes, we have been bothaided and hampered by the fact that there is no standardcurriculum, or een an array of standard curricula, in ourfield. Perhaps there should not be, but in terms of ourability to explain who we, are to administrators andcolleagues not in our discipline or field, the absence ofsuch standards is a problem.

Last year (1994). two major histories of the field werepublished by distinzuished scholars: Everett M. Rogers, AHistory of Communication Study: &Biographical Study.New York: The Free Press: 1994, and Hermann Cohen,The History of Speech Communication: The Emergence ofa Discipline: 1914-1945, Annandale, VA: SpeechCommunication Association, 1994. In his review of thesebooks (Communication Theory,, 5, 1995, pp. 181, 183-4),Bob Craig said, ".Astonishingly, these two books do notoverlap at all; not a single person or topic is more thanmentioned in both... Neither quite explains how we gotwhere we are, but each illuminates places where some ofus, or anyway parts of us, have come from. In their mutualobliviousness, no less than in the wealth of data theypresent for contemplation and the many historical questionsthey leave unans%ered, these books may finally tell usmore about the future agenda of communication studiesthan about the past of our field."

Craig's astonishment, feigned as it might be, would onlybe increased were he to include in his review a third historyof our discipline or field published the year before: Billy I.Ross, ed., Seventy-Five Y ears of Journalism and MassCommunication Leadership: The History of the Associationof Schools of Journalism and Mass Communication.Columbia, South Carolina: ASJMC, 1993. These threebooks, which I here brandish as Exhibit B, have no morein common than if they were describing three unrelateddisciplines or fields. Whatever else this does, it hampersour ability to explain ourselves as central to "eloquentiaperfecta" to Task Forces, Deans, and Trustees.

About five years ago, a group of scholars under theleadership of Brenda Dervin undertook the task ofre-thinking communication. They published two volumesof essays: Dervin, Brenda, ed. RethinkingCommunication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1989. Their

21

conclusion: there is no way to subsume under any singlestory the various schools of thought, paradigms, traditionsof communication theory. While I brandish these books asExhibit C, nose in your mind again the question, why, inthe minds of Trustees, Task Forces and the occasionalmarauding Dean, is the discipline, field, and department ofcommunication disassociated from "eloquentia perfecta"?

It is not my purpose to bewail the current condition, I ammuch more interested in focusing on how we might goforward.

One way not to zo forward is by the more forcefulassertion of any one of our multiple traditions orparadigms. That is, we do not do well to assert thatRogers' or Cohen's or Ross, et al.'s version of our historyand current status is correct, no matter how eloquent theargument. I say this because this strategy is forked on adilemma. If the advocates for these and other versions ofthe discipline engage in forceful advocacy and nonesucceeds in carrying the da. ), then we have simplyreproduced the same pattern that we now find ourself in,but at a higher level of intensity. On the other hand, ifsomeone succeeds in claiming _the disciplinelfield for aparticular story, then we have imposed one story on othersin an act of historical/intellectual fascism against which allright-thinking men and women of good will will becompelled to revolt, and we have lost the richness of thesuppressed traditions and paradigms.

One way in which we might go forward is to giveattention to the skills that our students need for eloquentiaperfecta in the world in which they live. The effect of thisis to reverse figure and ground. Often we foreground ourintellectual tradition, identifying ourselves with the mediawe study (speech: mass) or profession we shadow(management; journalism) and use this as the "frame" inwhich we develop courses, advise students, and representour departments/discipline/field to our colleagues. I amsuggesting that we instead foreground the experience ofour students and bring to that experience whatever we finduseful from our intellectual tradition. I believe that thisshift, subtle as it seems, will, to borrow a phrase, "frommany a frightful blunder free us."

Let me start with the hackneyed observation thatFreshmen matriculating in Fall, 1995, who complete theirschooling in the "standard" four years, will be looking for

22

-77W-144"?.' ACFmaq9,- _

jobs or taraduate schools in the year 2000. What kind ofworld will they li e in?

Some fairly ob ious and noncontroversial characteristicsof the contemporary and near-future social world are these.

1. It is a multi-media world, in whicn media are not justalternative ways of transmitting messages but, as WalterOng, S.J., has taught us, are powerful forces shapingforms of consciousness and patterns of social institutions.Our students w ill live in a world unlike most of ourdepartments, in w hich orality, literacy, what my colleagueslike to call videocy, and what we might yet learn to callcybercy are simultaneously present. We do our students adisservice if we teach them that these media are separate,and our teaching is counterproductive if it does not teachthem to identif and move eloquently among the variousmedia (and the forms of consciousness and socialstructures which attend them) that are in contemporarysociety.

2. It is a world in which the relative density of variousmedia vary tremendously from place to place. It is not thecase that all of the current elementary school generation arecomputer literate: it is the case that elementary schoolchildren differ as much or more in their computer literacythan do adults. And to whatever extent that computerliteracy gives a person an advantage, we will be dealingwith a society whose diversity is increased by just thatincrement between the "haves" and the "have nots." One ofthe skills required of our students is that of discerningrelative density of various media (and the forms ofconsciousness and social structures which attend them) andlearning how to move eloquently among them.

3. It is a world in which the pace of change is rapid. ofcourse, the speed of chane is a relative matter, and I meanthat it is rapid both using the metric of precedent (that is,change occurs more rapidly than it used to) and using themetric of a human life (that is, a person with a normallife-span will hae to confront change many times). Theimplication of this for eloquentia perfecta is that forms ofcommunication have a short life cycle and that they do notnecessarily transfer well from one place to another (becausethat other place is changing as well, according to the logicof its own evolution), and that patterns of communicationare often layered. in which several patterns, some obsolete,some current, and some avant garde are juxtaposed in the

23 8

same time period. Whatever else eloquence means in sucha world, adaptability, creativity, and responsiveness arecrucial elements.

4. It is a global world. Gadamer makes good use of themetaphor of horizons. In the contemporary world, it isimpossible to rest comfortably within narrow horizons.Even the assertion of ethnic or intellectual uniqueness mustbe done within a complex set of global relationships inwhich the horizons have moved so far back that we meetourselves on the far side. Whatever else eloquence is in thecontemporary world, it cannot be provincial.

5. It is a world in which communication is not just apersonal act nor a political force but a big business. One ofthe crazymaking aspects of the contemporary period in theUnited States is that we try to make communication policyusing the discourse of the 18th century; we talk of"freedom of speech" and "freedom of the press" in terms ofCongress passing no law that would abridge it. Actually,we have done pretty well in freeing communication fromthe long hand of King George III and of the U.S.government ... and in so doing, we have delivered it intothe hands of business. Communication is not free; it is theslave of the forces of the marketplace.

Are we teaching students what they need to know andneed to know how to do in this kind of world?

Another way in which we might go forward is to giveattention to differential forms of communication. All talk isnot alike, just as all written material is not alike nor alltelevision programming. I believe that we live in a socialworld in which very different forms of communicationcohabit but that we have a relatively underdevelopedprofessional ability for discerning the differences amongthem.

Let me contrast just three of these forms, with no sensethat this is a comprehensive list. There is "strategiccommunication" in which we have a specific agenda andwe communicate in ways designed to entice, trick, or forceothers to support that agenda. This is very different from"deliberative communication" in which we engage withothers in a process of what David Mathews calls"choice-work." Here we argue, listen, and otherwisereason together to evaluate options and choose amongalternatives. It is hard work, and it is often painful, and itrequires collaboration with others. Deliberation is different

9 24

from dialogue, in which we open ourself to another andseek to understand and be understood. One of the bestdescriptions of dialogue was given by Abraham Kaplan(quoted by Rob Anderson, Kenneth N. Cissna, andRonald C. Arnett. eds. The Reach of Dia logae:Coitfirmation, k.oice. and Community, Cresskill, N.J.:Hampton Press. 1994, p. 9).

"When people are in communion, when they are in thisnarrow sense really communicating with one another, thecontent of what is being communicated does not exist priorto and independently of that particular context. There is nomessage, except in a post-hoc reconstruction, which isfixed and complete beforehand. If I am really talking withyou, I have nothing to say; what I say arises as you and Igenuinely relate to one another. I do not know beforehandwho I will be, because I am open to you just as you areopen to me. This. I think, is what makes growth possibleamong human beings, and why it seems to me impossiblereally to teach unless you are learning; why you cannotreally talk unless you are listening. You are listening notonly to the other. you are listening to yourself. Indeed, ina fundamental sense -- I would say in a quite literal scilse --self and other are now so intertwined that we need newconceptual framev.orks, new categories to describe what ishappening."

Note that I am not making the ontological argument thatthese three categories exist. Rather, I am using them tomake the argument that it is important to differentiateamong forms of communication.

Recently the Regents of the University of Californiavoted to end "affirmative action." Ward Conner ly, anAfrican-American businessman who was the Regent whoproposed the decision, has been claiming ever since that heis misunderstood by those who favor affirmative action.That is, he would like to be enmeshed in something likedialogue. Certain cynics saw the hand of Californiagovernor Pete Wilson behind the move and wondered whatconversations occurred between Wilson and Conner ly.Wilson was positioning himself for a run for thePresidency and repealing affirmative action is one of thetopics he had hoped to ride into the White House. Thesesame cynics think that Wilson for sure and maybeConner ly are talking about affirmative action in the contextof strategic comnninication.

25 10

The form of communication makes a difference. and ourresearch as well as our teachmil, might w ell be focused or:helping our students discern amonz dissimilar forMs ofcommunication

Eloquence in a multimedia social world in whichdissimilar forms of communication cohabit, and colonizeeach other, and engage in complicated patterns ofdomination is not easy. Rather than looking backward toour separate histories as the basis for explaining ourselvesto our students, Deans, and various Task Forces, whatwould happen if we were to focus on that which is neededto help our students -- and, Lord help us all -- ourselves tobe eloquent in such a workl?

261 1

17 Shwa PapusAlma jesuiT CommunicaTion

Richard Blake, S.J.Le Moyne College

Late last May, when the rivers opened and canoes fromthe outside, world could reach Syracuse. an enterprisingmerchant named Jacques Blockbuster brought a carton ofvideotapes to our trading post. For three beaver pelts and amoose steak I obtained a splendid video entitled "32 ShortFilms About Glenn Gould," by the Canadian directorFrancois Girard. The film inspired me to entitle thispresentation "17 Short Papers About JesuitCommunication.- The advantage of this format is that bythe time you have decided that you are furious withsomething I have said, I will be saying something else.

Paper#1We .re all talking about "Jesuit tradition." "Jesuit

identity." "Jesuit character" or "Jesuit education."Old timers tell me this is a new phenomenon. When the

Society of Jesus owned and operated the American 28,their "Jesuitness" was taken for granted. The provincialappointed the president, who was often rector as well. Hein turn appointed his Jesuit cronies to the board of trustees.Deans and other petty individuals normall, were thebrethren. Jesuit teachers were represented in virtuallyevery department, and occasionally were taken seriously.Philosophy and theology were mandatory and the rules ofdorm life bore the scent of the seminary. How Jesuit canyou be? What's to talk about? Well, the schools havegone through cataclysmic change in the last 35 years andnow there's quite a bit to talk about. As we prepare toenter a post-Jesuit phase of Jesuit education, we'd best tryto discover what we are talking about.

Paper #2The conversation seems to be getting nowhere.True enough. There is no one magic formula that will fit

a major research center like Loyola Chicago and a

27 12

community based enterprise like St. Peter's in Jersey City.Just when we have a mission statement we can agree on orhave published a slick brochure like the one put out lastyear at Boston College, the school sets off in a newdirection or some new wind blows through academe andone faction or another is outraged that this phrase wasincluded and that dropped. Back to the drawing board foranother round of consensus building.

Paper #3We're sick of the whole thing.That's true, as well. We all want to get back to the

business of teaching. It's extremely frustrating to realizethat the task may never be finished and the perfect formulamay never be crafted. Most of us like closure to ourefforts, and this topic will not close.

Paper #4A great deal of the frustration comes from our attempting

to invest too much in the term "Jesuit." We lose focus.All too often the term Jesuit is hijacked to support

differing political agenda, and we are back to riding ourpredictable hobby horses. This is particularly infuriating.It muddies the waters, to coin a cliche, and makeseverybody as mad as hell, to coin another, on issues thathave little to do with Jesuitry.

One group will use "Jesuit tradition" to argue for a returnto. the 1950s: This is a Roman Catholic instittdion and ifyou don't like it, get out. Teach only the official statementsof the Holy See. Take attendance at Sunday Mass. Givethe dorm prefects flashlights.

More frequently, others use it to consecrate the agenda ofthe 1960s and 1970s, or 1990s. We need a massive doseof honesty and humility on these points. Jesuit collegeshave struggled with social-justice issues just like any otherinstitutions. Being Jesuit gives them no inside track. Let'slook at a few examples.

Georgetown and the Jesuit seminary at WoodstockMaryland were built with the earnings of plantations. Inthe 1930s an eminent American Jesuit prepared a statementfor the Vatican, maintaining that Christians should notpersecute Jews, since it only nit. de them "morestiff-necked." Fortunately, the document was neverpublished. At St Louis, in t'ae 1940s, Jesuits were

expelled not only from the University but from theMissouri Province for insisting that social events should beopen to all students, regardless of color.

The tradition is not helpful in dealing with the women'sissues either. St. Ignatius carried the baggage of hisBasque heritage and his military background. His originalprejudices were reinforced when one of the three womenhe was forced to accept into the Society of Jesus was adescendent of the Spanish Queen, Juanna la Loca (Johannathe Mad). Sister Johanna apparently lived up to her familytradition. As a result, Dominicans, Benedictines andFranciscans have women's orders, and Jesuits don't.Some of his comments about women in the SpiritualExercises would have Ignatius up on charges in anAmerican university today. In America, the Catholic boysgenerally went to the priests and brothers and Catholic girlsto the sisters. It's probably fair to say that Jesuitinstitutions were not hostile to women; they were just notinvolved, and the sisters, with their own schools tosupport, were happy to keep it that way.

From the founding of the first Jesuit school in Sicily in1548, Jesuits have always argued about whether theyshould educate the disadvantaged so that they can helpthemselves, or should concentrate on elites, who could beexpected to create a just society as they moved intoleadership roles. The unanswerable question is not "Whyis there no Jesuit Harvard?", but "Should there be a JesuitHarvard?" I suspect the faculties at Georgetown andDetroit-Mercy would come up with different answers. Cananyone argue that our present policies on these mattersevolved and continue to evolve without confusion andconflict?

Paper #5At its worst, the discussion of Jesuit heritage leads to

same generalities that any educational institution wouldembrace.

Once we cut through the distractions of our favoritepolitical agenda, we come up with descriptive statementsequally suitable for any kindergarten or barber college.Could you imagine any school advertising that it educatesthe partial person? Or offers large classes? Or deals withstudents on an impersonal basis with absolutely no

29 1 4

attention to their individual needs? Or refuses to prepareanyo- for rewarding_ careers and public service. In otherwords, the characteristics of Jesuit education that we putinto our promotional literature are often an embarrassment.They mean nothing.

Paper #6It's important to keep at it.If a school is to maintain any distinctive character, and if

its faculty is to be part of an educational tradition with anyclaim to special value, we have to keep asking ourselveswhat our schools are trying to do and how do we asindividuals fit in? The conversation is important not onlyfor the university in its marketing efforts but for ourselvesas professional educators.

Paper #7Jesuits have no principles.This is key. The Society of Jesus was not founded as a

teaching order. No one formulated a philosophy ofeducation and then started a pious organization to put it intopractice. In fact, the early Jesuits didn't know what theywanted to do. They turned this indecision into a virtue,maintaining that they wanted to remain free to do anythingthat the church needed, anywhere and at any time, "for thegood of souls." They seemed eager to travel to remoteplaces, a tradition that remains very much alive todayalthough currently Paris, Hilton Head and Disneyland seemmore desirable destinations than the Paraguayan rainforests or the tundra of northern New York State.

In a very short time, however, while Ignatius was stillalive, the Jesuits found themselves in the school business.In their travels, these early Jesuits started to read the signsof their times. Here's what they saw: exploration andcolonization, technology and revolution, the Protestantreformation and Italian renaissance, and a Church thatseemed singularly unprepared for any of it. The need foreducation seemed paramount. The week long visit to avillage with a few catechism lessons, a musical pageant anda barn burner of a sermon to get the burgers into aconfessional didn't have the lasting impact that theywanted. Goodbye to the open road and light horse cavalryconcept of ministr Hello to the schools, and fundraising, building maintenance, years of secular studies,

1 5 3 0

3.1

-4

fights with local politicians and ecclesiastics andcollaboration vith laymen and laywomen. They didn'tplan it; they didn't intend to be school teachers; it justhappened. Or perhaps more accurately, God wanted it tohappen.

Paper #8Jesuit education, then, is a specifically spiritual and

Catholic ministry, one of many forms of ministry thatJesuits could have undertaken "for the good of souls."

As a monk in good standing, I regret that many of us areafraid to say this. The overarching goal of Jesuit activity inthe early days was (and I hope remains today) "the good ofsouls." In an age when good Catholics believed that therewas no salvation outside the church, the early Jesuitsbelieved that travelling around the world to make converts,keeping Catholics from slipping away and makingpracticing Catholics more fervent were goals to be pursuedby any means necessary. For some strange reason, in avery short period of time, they concluded that teachingmathematics and rhetoric, grammar and physics, theaterand dance w ere the best means available to accomplishthese g.oals.

Paper #9The Jesuit tradition is opportunistic.The early Jesuits were ingenious in exploiting their

opportunities for ministry. At first, rather than involvingthemselves in running schools, they simply openedresidences in university towns and got the best availableeducation for their own scholastics on the cheap. Later,when they needed money to feed these young men, thepriests taught a few courses themselves, accepting no feefor their services, but with the understanding that theywould receive a healthy subsidy from the municipality orgenerous townspeople. Eventually, they saw the folly oftheir ways and took off in hot pursuit of tuition-payingbodies. To make these colleges attractive to lay studentsand their checkbooks, they had to offer secular subjectsalongside the seminary curriculum. When they discoveredthat these "open- colleges were actually a splendid way tofurther "the good of souls," they reached out aggressivelyto expand their network of schools around the world.Somehow the original idea of using lay students merely to

31

support the education of future priests dropped away.They wanted to exploit their markets to keep the schoolsfinancially sound and thus provide an apostolic launch padfor their work of "saving souls."

How many of our universities today are going throughendless market analyses of opportunities for newprograms, evening divisions and the like? Are thehumanities faculties upset? Do they claim theadministration is trying to destroy the character of theinstitution for financial gain? I could imagine the sameallegations being hurled back and forth in Jesuit recreationrooms in the 16th century. The Jesuit tradition lives!

Paper #10The Jesuit tradition is adaptable.As we discover in our present day discussion, there is no

one model of Jesuit education that fits every circumstance.It changes from one culture to another. The early Jesuitshad to analyze the needs of the native peoples of Paraguay,of sophisticated Roman nobility or Indians in Goa andadapt their form of education to the personal and culturalneeds of the people. As the situation changed, so did theschools. Imperial power switched from one country toanother and finally collapsed as independence movementssucceeded. The schools had to adapt in order to survive.In China, India and to some extent in the Americas, theearly Jesuits showed a remarkable ability to learnlanguages, cultures and religious traditions. As men oftheir time, their ultimate goal, of course, was to lead allpeoples to Christ, but their ability to see God's activity invaried ways led them to respect the beliefs of others and getinto hot holy water with the Vatican, where Christianityand Western European culture were not only inseparable,but synonymous.

Today in our country, the colleges that once served theneeds of immigrant German and Irish Catholics now try tocarry out their mission amid a bewildering mixture ofcultures, just at the early Jesuits did. The relativehomogeneity of American Catholic culture has evaporated.How do we adapt to the new realities of our society? Howon earth can we serve the needs of various peoples, whilekeeping some kind of Catholic identity for "the good ofsouls." How do we even say this without being accused ofproselytism or cultural imperialism? In some ways, the

1 7 32

early Jesuits seem more successful at this than we are, butmaybe that is because the less successful were boiled in oilor trampled by elephants.

A footnote to this notion of adaptability may hit close tohome for some of us. The early Jesuits did not seem toregret turning their schools over to native peoples when thetime came to move on. It's sad when today so manyJesuits and our most enthusiastic lay supporters complainthat the Catholic character that I loved at Holy Cross in the1950s has been destroyed. The Jesuits are selling out andletting lay people take over "our schools. Serving souls,reading the signs of the times and moving on is the Jesuittradition of adaptability. The challenge for the nextgeneration of Jesuit educators --and in the United Statesthese will include very few Jesuits-- will be to discover itsown appropriate strategies for "the good of souls.

Paper #1 1The Jesuit tradition is incarnational and humanistic.Jesuits are worldly, and not only in the sense that they

know the best restaurants in town, or in any other town forthat matter. In the spiritual sense, are not comfortable inthe sacristy. They try to find God in all sorts of people andthings and ideas. For the good of their souls, students atJesuit institutions should learn not to flee from the secularworld but to embrace it. This is not, however, the samething as being held hostage by it, as though there were nouniverse worth investigating outside the material order.Questions of spiritual value and personal commitmentought to be very much at the heart of the educationexperience at a Jesuit colleee.

Paper #12This search for values and personal commitment involves

dialogue between varied cultures and social classes.Not everybody poses the questions in the same way.

The early Jesuits followed the paths of exploration andconquest around the world and were enriched by contactwith other cultures. Even in Europe they insisted in mixingstudents from different social classes and in Prague eventaught Protestants alongside Catholics. Sure of their ownidentity, these pioneers welcomed exchange between thoseof differing traditions.

Surely in this group it is not necessary to point out how

33 1 8

the modern means of communication have speeded up andintensified the exchange of ideas, not only on campuses butthroughout the world. Paradoxically, at this stage, the easeof communication today makes the dialogue more difficult.It frightens people. As long as I do not know what blacks,Hispanics, AIDS victims, women, the elderly, aliens andthe Michigan Militia feel and think, they don't bother me.Each newscast and talk show makes these competingdemands more public and thus more threatening. Theresult, at its gentlest, is the backlash vote of 1994; at itsworst it creates other Bosnias, other Ruandas.

The Jesuit university can be a civilized forum forcontinuing the dialogue between differing social classesand value systems. Frequently, as we all know, it fails,but often too it is a stunning success, a fact that we may betoo slow to appreciate.

Paper #13Current usage translates "the good of souls" as "the

service of faith and the promotion of justice."Here the secular and spiritual goals converge. From a

standpoint of our faith and respect for the faith of others,we confront the injustices in society and gather theresources to combat them. This is a spiriwal, godlyactivity, whether or not a person is a believer. Atheists andagnostics can collaborate in this work, aided andencouraged, it is hoped, by the atmosphere of a Jesuittradition that asks embarrassing questions and seeksrealistic solutions, wherever they may be found.

Paper #14Outside the campus, in the American scene at large, this

project especially involves dialogue with dogmaticsecularists.

Is there any doubt that one of the most spectacularfailures of the academic community has been its blindnessto faith'? What a surprise when we discovered enormouspower of "Muslim fundamentalism," or "the religiousright" or even the Catholic Church during the collapse ofCommunism in Eastern Europe. Religious people, quaintrelics that they are thought to be, inhabit a world that hasbecome meaningless for the vast majority of Westernintellectuals and opinion leaders. How do we learn tolisten respectfully but critically to this dominant culture and

1 9

get it to listen to us.That's where we communications scholars come in.

Paper #115The study of media reveals the values of the dominant

culture.Research can help us understand what the dominant

culture rea:ly believes. It helps us get below the surfacesand find out whether any common ground exists that willmake this dialogue more fruitful. A simple example: myown work on the films of Woody Allen has revealed to mysatisfaction an enormous core of religious sensibility.Allen would deny this, of course, but it's there. I'm sureresearch on the other media is equally rewardin. Throughour writing and teaching, we can help our society discoverits real values and the values being relentlessly marketed tothem. On a good day, our research may even providefeedback to the media industries. On a very good day, theymay act on it.

Paper #16Its national and international character makes the Jesuit

network a particularly suitable environment for suchreflection.

Meetings like this are merely a slight indication of theenormous resources we have at our disposal. We are partof a network of 28 institutions of higher education in thiscountry and over 200 throughout the world. We claimsome kind of common Jesuit heritage, even though weknow how difficult it is to say exactly what that heritage is.We are have the capability to engage in dialogue on a vastscale.

In its recent General Congregation, 300 Jesuits fromaround the world, with their many different cultures andpolitical and social histories, hammered out statements notonly on in-house topics but on issues iike culture, theintellectual life, universities, the ecology and even women.They were trying to set directions for engaging the iK:uesthat today's world is struggling with. That's the kind ofwork we ought to be doing in our universities. I hope tosuggest, however, that our primary partner in dialogue inthis time and place is dogmatic secularism of the media inour own country. We can't begin to have justice inAmerica, if our only faith rests on an unspoken but real

35 2 0

=

belief in personal economic gain, to be achieved throughthe use of the right toothpaste and the right underarmdeodorant.

Paper #17The enterprise is so vast that no one person or onefaculty

can embrace its entirety. The work requires thecontributions of all different kinds of people from manydifferent backgrounds.

That's why we need all sorts of people to join in theeffort: Jesuits and non-Jesuits; Catholics andnon-Catholics; believers and non-believers. The richer andmore diverse the conversation we have among ourselvesand our colleagues, the more we will have to offer in thewider dialogue we join for "the good of souls."

2 1 36

Rowe Meenng Aitrwu lams NewRoLe Fug jesurrs in

Comomnicanon Canine

Brother William E. Biernatzki, S.J.Centre for the Study of Communication and Culture

Saint Louis University

The 34th Jesuit General Congregation met in Romeduring the first three months of 1995. One of its majorefforts was to write documents which would formulatepolicies regarding various aspects of the Society's life andactivities for the next few decades.

Communication has been mentioned in documents issuedby previous General Congregations. For example, Decree4 of the 32nd General Congregation (1975), "Our MissionToday," listed communication as one of the four prioritydimensions of the work of the Society, along withtheological reflection, social ministry, and t.-lucation. Asthat document put it. all four dimensions were to bebrought together in all the activities of the Society, with thegoal of "the service of faith and the promotion of justice,"which was to be the aim of all Jesuit work.

Nevertheless, this document of the 34th GeneralCongregation is the first document that any Jesuit generalcongregation has ever devoted entirely to communication.It is one of 23 documents issued by GC34, and is groupedwith five others. under the heading, "Dimensions andParticular Sectors of Our Ministry."

Each of the tw entythree texts was drafted by acommittee. The committee on communication, like theothers, included a broad spread of geographicalrepresentation. but it was heavily influenced by two NorthAmerican members. Fathers Pierre Belanger, of the FrenchCanadian Province. and John Privette, Provincial of theCalifornia Province. Both hold advanced degrees incommumcation studies.

Father Belanger is the codirector of JESCOMCanada,the Jesuit secretariat for communication work in that

37 2 2

country, and he also works in audiovisual production atthe Centre SaintPierre in Montreal.

Before becoming provincial, Father Privette taught in thecommunication department at Santa Clara University.Consequently, while the document is for the guidance ofJesuits throughout the world, it has a North Americanflavor and accurately reflects the mass media situation inNorth America.

So far, the documents of GC34 are only available in"interim" form. Their "definitive" texts, in threelanguages, are being worked over and translated by Jesuiteditors in Rome. Nevertheless, there is no reason tobelieve the official texts will differ significantly from theinterim texts.

As the title "Communication: A New Culture"suggests, the document stresses the changes whichelectronic communication is making in contemporaryculture. It says that Saint Ignatius recognized andresponded to a comparable change which was occurring inhis own time, the 16th Century. Then, it was printing withmoveable type which was revolutionizing Europeanculture. That change brought with it massive chP.nges insocial and intellectual life which required a whole newapproach to growth in the spiritual life, as well. Historianshave noted that one reason for the rapid spread ofProtestantism in early 16th century Europe was theReformers' eagerness to use the latest printing technologiesand the tardiness and even reluctance of Catholics to usethem. That Catholic attitude gradually changed, and theearly Jesuits were some of the leaders in promoting thechange.

In the present day, the growth of the electronic massmedia, together with the dataprocessing and informationrevolution, confront us with a challenge comparable to thatwhich printing posed for Ignatius and the early Jesuits. Itis not only the technologies which are changing, but ourways of learning, knowing, and even thinking andreasoning. As the text of the Communication Documentsays: "This world of communication develops what iswidely identified as a new culture, one that is non-linear,image-oriented, intuitive and affective in its understandingof the world."

The flow of electronic images not only comes at us morerapidly than was possible in the print media, but it also

2 338

often is disjointed and ambiguous. Frequently, it ismanipulative, ur.c.,ing us to buy things or do things wewould not otherwise want to buy or do. The values themedia represent often challenge Gospel values and they cansubtly undermine the spiritual and moral character of theiraudiences. But. if used correctly, the new media also offertremendous opportunities for learning and both personaland social development. The electronic media create a newkind of cultural environment, and we need new skills tosuccessfully engage it, survive it, and use it forconstructive purposes.

The new document reiterates and emphasizes even morestrongly what the 32nd General Congregation had saidabout communication being not so much a sector ofJesuiapostolic activity, of interest only to those Jesuits whospecialize in it. but a "major apostolic dimension" of thework of all Jesuits. It says, "Clearly, not all Jesuits shouldengage in media. Nevertheless, every Jesuit, in order to beeffective, must be aware of and well versed in thelanguage, symbols. and strengths and weaknesses of themodern communication culture. This is a way to make theshaft, to realize that this new communication environment isa milieu in which large numbers of people can be reachedand enriched, where literacy, knowledge and solidarity canbe fostered.-

The Society of Jesus always has been committed to theproclamation of the Good News of the Ciristian message,but effectiveness in that proclamation requires the use of alanguage understood by the audience. The cultural changesbrought about by the electronic media have brought withthem chaniles in laniluag.,e, which must be accommodatedto if communication is to be effective.

All Jesuits and all Jesuit apostolates, including theuniversity apostolate, are committed to the "service of faithand promotion of justice." But to serve faith and promotejustice in the modern world requires use of the modernlanguageas it has been shaped by the electronic media.Jesus used parables drawn from the life of his time andplace to communicate his message. Contemporary Jesuitsare called upon to learn how to phrase the same message interms which their own contemporaries can relate to andunderstand.

The methods and means used to adapt to and use themodern media can be very diverse, according to the

3 9 2 4

document. The means to be used depend on the situation,and can range all the way from television production andthe Vatican Radio for W. hich the Society has long beenresponsible all the way dow n to folk media, street plays,and bulletin boards.

The document explicitly mentions the need to coordinatethe action of "Christians and other people of good will" topromote the freedom of the press wherever it is threatenedor suppressed. Collaboration w ith others also is needed tobring about another requirement of justice in worldwidecommunications, that is "an equitable flow ofcommunication between industrialized and developingcountries." All peoples not only should have an equalchance to express their own cultures and their own needsthrough the mass media, but they also should have the rightnot to always have their own media dominated by theborrowed cultures and values of the richer countries.

Media education also is emphasized by the document assomething in which Jesuits should be involved to helpgive people a critical understanding of the mcdia andthereby a means both to protect themselves from its abusesand to use it most effectively for their own humandevelopment. It encourages Jesuits to "be among the bestmedia educated people in order to participate In this broadeducational task." Jesuits, themselves, have to be trainedin how to use the media constructively, for their ownwellbeing as %melt as in their apostolic work. So, thedoca.ment recommends a stronger emphasis oncommunication training in the formation of all Jesuits.What is needed is an understanding of the potential of themedia which can be integrated into the other apostolates ofthe Society in the most constructive and useful way. Someshould specialize in communication work, but the wholeSociety has to be aware of it and its potential application tooffier dimensions of the Society's work.

The text of the communication document met with agenerally favorable reaction from the delegates to theGeneral Congregation. One of its weaknesses, as onedelegate commented to me, is that, while the "informationrevolution" is mentioned, it is nc. adequately treated. Theimplications of the revolution in data transmission,information retrieval, and other "nonmass" uses oftelecommuniciffions technology may ultimately prove to beof greater importance than the mass communications

2 5 4 0

revolution which preoccupies the writers of the document.Where do we go from here? "We," in our immediate

context, means not only Jesuits but all who arecollaborating in the communications teaching and researchof the American Jesuit Colleges and Universities. Toanswer that question, we have to ask where we have comefrom and where we are now.

I think we have come a long way. Most American Jesuitcolleges and universities appear to have some kind ofcomrnunication program. Some have been outstanding.The Society, itself, has not hesitated to assign youngJesuits to studies in this area. The Society has establisheda secretariat (JESCOM) in its Roman Curia to coordinate itscommunications activities throthzhout the world, and eachregional area of the Society has both a secretariat and anorganization for coordination of the work in its own area.Jesuits have been prominent in the work of Unda (theCatholic broadcasters' orizanization),UCIP (the Catholicjournalists' organization) and OCIC (the Catholicfilmmakers' organization). This gathering ofrepresentatives from the communication departments ofJesuit colleges and universities testifies to an ongoingeagerness to strengthen that work throughinterinstitutional cooperation.That kind of cooperation is needed if we are to know howto proceed most effectively in the future. The field ofcommunication studies and practice is so broad that there isdanger of becoming isolated in our own specialties and cutoff from effective collaboration with each other. This hasbeen a problem among Jesuit communication specialists inthe past. Some have enthusiastically studiedcommunication and begun work in production, research orteaching, only to become frustrated by their isolation,restricted funding, and seeming lack of interest fromsuperiors and coworkers. I don't know that we can domuch about lack of funds, but gatherings like these canhelp overcome the feeling of isolation and can give eachone the realization of working in common cause with manyothers around the country in an endeavor which is both atthe heart of today's culture and an essential instrument forour spiritual and intellectual work.

'1 I2 6

The CSCC an3 CoopeRanve WoRk

in The AJCUCC

Paul A. Soukup, SiSanta C lara University

This topic, which could as well bear the title, "CommonThemes for Research and Publishing," invites us to thinkabout ways in which we can work together to takeadvantage of what we have in common, particularly whenit comes to research. Three sources of support haveemerged: Loyola University Press, The Centre for theStudy of Communication and Culture at Saint LouisUniversity (CSCC), and our own departments.

One resource could be the Loyola University Press (soonto be renamed Loyola Press). Fr. George Lane, SJ, thedirector of the Loyola University Press, briefly addressedthe group about the Press's current projects and invitedmembers to submit ideas or manuscripts to one or anotherof their divisions. The Lo,ola Press publishes grammarschool and secondary school textbooks, "popularacademic" books on Jesuit themes, materials related toChicago, and materials on religion and spirituality.

Second, the CSCC can be a catalyst in this regard sinceits mission is to facilitate communication research, providesupport, and promote networking. The CSCC maintains agood library, particularly of communicationrelatedperiodicals from around the world. It invites visitingscholars and will provide office space and some supportstaff. The CSCC has identified several areas of researchassociated with our common mission to promote socialjustice, which 'tend to be ignored. It has published reviewson some of them in Communication Research Trends , andit would welcome further work.

While no one wishes to legislate topics of research, hereare some areas that need work: Quality Television (recentlyreviewed in Trends), democratization and communication,non governmental organizations and communication,communication and justice. communication and humanrights (set for a special issue of Communication to coincidewith the anniversary of the Universal Declaration of

2 7 1 2

Human Rights), communication policy studies (forexample, deregulation of telecommunications),communication and pedagogy, service learning in thecommunication curriculum.

Let me make a special plea in regard to the final item.Last year at the SCA convention, I chaired a panel todiscuss this issue. Those of us at the panel decided to seeka publisher who would bring out a book on servicelearning, featuring case studies of what communicationdepartments are doing. If any of your faculty incorporateservice learning, please pass word of this along and Iwould be happy to include their work in the book.

Third, we have great resources within our owndepartments. The AJCUCC can promote greatercooperation or even "friendly competition" to facilitatepeople's research. We might start with a directory offaculty and their research interests so that people wouldknow who to call for ideas or possible collaboration.

[This latter point stimulated a good discussion and anoffer from Creighton to set up a computer list server for thepurpose. In addition, Paul Tipton, SJ, from the AJCUdescribed the AJCU webserver and explained how itwould become available to the AJCUCC group.]

4 3

2 8

Looking Fog a JESUIT, CaThOLIC

loenTrry in Cougse SyLLithi

Mary Ann DanielsonCreighton University

The 1980s have been dubbed the "culture decade."Management gurus such as Tom Peters and RobertWaterman, Jr. opened America's eyes to the possibilities ofcreating and maintaining an organizational culture. Thecultural view of organizations was soon adopted by variousorganizations, to include educational institutions. Schools,colleges, and universities recognized the various culturesthat existed within the institution, the various departments,and the classroom. Staton (1990), in adopting anecological perspective on college/university teaching, alsorecognizes the classroom as having a culture. CitingCondon (1986), she identifies the communication normsand patterns that emerge from classroom interactions asconstituting the culture of the particular classroom.

Under the dialectical perspective of educationalsocialization, teachers and students co-create this classroomculture. According to Gorham (1990), "there is no suchthing as a generic student. Students are active, co-creatorsof the classroom environment" (p. 220). To some extent,students and teachers socialize each other in order to createthis classroom culture. Socialization is traditionallyachieved via communication. Communication (meanings)can be culturally defined as emergent and intersubjectivelycreated/negotiated (Louis, 1983). In other words, from adialectical cultural perspective, teachers and students worktogether to create/negotiate meanings for themselves.

Socialization may take a number of forms: primaryversus secondary and/or various ty pes of secondarysocialization. Whereas, primary socialization occurs frombirth, secondary socialization occurs once we prepare toenter organizations and may take two forms:

--occupational or role socialization and--organizational socialization (Staton-Spicer & Darling,

1986).Occupational socialization refers to the "process by

29 4 4

which a new member to an occupation becomesacquainted with the culture of the occupational group,including the norms adhering to the role which the newmember is to perform" (Corbett, 1980, p. 11). In otherwords, through various sources and experiences, bothstudents and teachers learn what it means to be a "student"or a "teacher." In addition to occupational socialization,once the teacher is hired by a particular school or schooldistrict, or a student is accepted at a particular school, theymust begin to learn the culture of the school (system) inwhich he or she now teaches/learns.

One particular tool that facilitates the socialization ofteachers and students within the classroom environment isthe course syllabi. While it appears to be underutilized (asa socialization tool) in today's classrooms, the coursesyllabi can play a Nie ry real role in classroom socialization(Danielson, 1995). Initial results indicate that coursesyllabi have the ability to transmit role-related and culturalknowledge, initiate dialogue and negotiation, and reduceuncertainty or "surprise." Given the amount of time thatstudents and teachers spend together, it is both appropriateand necessaiy that our research efforts are directed towardclassroom socialization, in general, and course syllabus associalization strategy in particular.

As "there is no meaning without context" (Bateson,1972) and as classroom socialization occurs within aparticular university or college context, we must examinethis larger university or college context. Universities andcolleges may be characterized as public or private, withfurther distinctions based on size, selectivity ofadmissions. etc. Within private colleges and universities,Jesuit institutions stand out as havina a unique presence.Jesuit institutions are not only private, but they tend tosupport basic principles or tenets which include: a rigorouscurriculum (rigorous and imaginative scholarship),personal attention (i.e., cura personalis), integration ofvalues into the curriculum, a solid grounding in the liberalarts, and an emphasis on speaking eloquently and writingclearly (LeMoyne college catalogue with notations fromSanta Clara's admissions materials). It is within this largerenvironment that we, as academicians and scholars,operate.

Does this larger context influence the classroomsocialization and does the course syllabi reflect the

4 53 0

socialization into this larger university context? Answeringthese questions underlie the purpose for this paper whichspecifically explores the role of the course syllabi inclassroom socialization by content analyzingcommunication course syllabi from various Jesuitinstitutions. In this paper, I will provide additionalbackground materials on the socialization process and howit relates to utilization of course syllabi as strategy, answerthree research questions, and discuss the conclusions andimplications of this research.

Secondary SocializationEducational research surrounding the secondary

socialization process is usually characterized by models andstages. The two models used as the general framework foreducational research are the functionalist and dialecticalmodels. The functionalist model viewscommunication-as-action (Staton-Spicer & Darling, 1987),and research via this venue identifies outcomes ofsocialization (i.e., attitude shifts and conformity). AsZeichner (1980) observes, most of the studies within thefunctionalist framework "have emphasized accounts ofhow the individual adjusts to the constraints of socialstructure to the neglect of analyses of the individual's rolein resisting and in transforming the social structure" (citedin Staton-Spicer & Darling, 1987, p. 13). According tothis view of socialization, teachers land students] are theobjects of socialization, the passive receivers ofcommunicative messnes and socialization strategies.

The dialectical model of socialization, on the other hand,views communication-as-interaction or transaction(Staton-Spicer & Darling, 1987). Under this approach,socialization is viewed as a dynamic process and assumesthat individuals are active constructors of their ownexperiences. Research under this model includesocialization strategies, selection of socialization agents,and personal strategies to meet individual needs.

Consistent with previous streams of teacher socializationresearch and congruent with my personal views oncommunication and socialization, I have chosen tosubscribe to the assumptions of the dialectical model. Inmy view, socialization is a process, dynamic and complex.Sonic researchers (e g , fless, 1993) have gone so far as toutilize Venn diagramN to depict the dynamic processes of

3 1 4

organizational socialization. According to Hess (1993),socialization "involves many processes that overlapchronologically, regress at times, form spirals, and fit intomultiple categories'. (p. 196). Therefore, at a minimum,we should consider socialization from a process ordialectical perspective. In particular, we can considersocialization as a process of seeking information to reduceuncertainty.

Socialization as Uncertainty' ReductionBased on the theoretical work of Berger (1987) and

Berger and Calabrese (1975), Staton-Spicer and Darling(1987) apply uncertainty reduction theory (URT) to theprocess of socialization. Specifically, they argue thatsocialization occurs as a communication process of seekinginformation to reduce uncertainty about the role oroccupation, but also about the organization or culture.

Classroom socialization can now be refrained as thecommunicative process by which individuals attempt toreduce uncertainty about themselves, their roles, and theirmembership in a particular organization (classroom).Teachers and students, therefore, engage in thesocialization process so as to reduce uncertainty or the"surprises" associated with their role and the organization(Louis, 1980). The methods that are utilized may vary, butone possible method for creating meanings within theclassroom context is the course syllabus.

Syllabus as Socialization StrategySyllabi are "course documents developed by instructors

primarily to communicate to students the structure andprocedures for courses" (Wulff & Nyquist, 1990, p. 249).Syllabi function to inform students of the scope of thework, to identify the sequence the work will follow, and todescribe the tasks by which success will be determined(Saunders, 1978: as cited in Civikly, 1990, p. 60). Due tothe nature of their functions, syllabi tend to be distributedthe first day of class. As a result, the course syllabi associalization strategy is grounded in the encounter stage ofsocialization.

Upon encounter. or the first meeting, the course syllabienables students to determine "the nature of the class,expectations for participation, written work (including duedates), class procedures and policies, and a sense of the

47 32

person who is the teacher" (Civikly, 1990, p 61). In otherwords, the syllabi provides socialization content;specifically, role-related (e.g., what they needed to do,expectations about their participation/role in the class) andcultural (e.g., how the class was to be conducted, thelearning styles employed, etc.) learnings.

This content, according to Friedrich and Cooper (1990)is especially important. Based upon interviews with anumber of students, Friedrich and Cooper (1990)categorized the types of information that students typicallysought their first day of class. The three types ofinformation were course coverage, course rules, andteacher personality. These three types of informationcorrespond with the findings of Civikly (1990), andreinforce what many of us may have already known:Students are as interested in the person teaching the courseas in the content of the course.

Initial research results, while not directly exploring therole of course syllabi as socialization strategy, seem tosupport the conclusion that a well-constructed syllabi cansatisfy the very real desires of students to know about thecourse content, classroom rules, and teacher expectations.To the extent that the syllabi can transmit role-related andcultural knowledge, it is contributing to the classroomsocialization process.

The syllabi can further contribute to the classroomsocialization process by serving as a contract (analogous tothe psychological contract operating in organizations) andby reducing classroom uncertainties. The syllabus ascontract can serve as the document by which the classroompractices, expectations, and norms are discussed andcodified. Any later ambiguities of meanings can beresolved by examining the contract that exists between theparties.

The syllabus as contract should allow for dialogue andnegotiation. Students as active agents (co-creators) of theculture should participate in the construction andcodification of the practices and expectations. This is notto say, however, that students should ultimately (singly)determine the course content or standards for the course.Rather, it should be an interactive process by which theinstructor works with the students to develop the course (ormodify the syllabus) so as to make the course as relevantand meaningful as possible.

_Avmer"

My work with students enrolled in Success Prep, anemployability miming program, demonstrates that allowingstudents to assist in setting the "normative" culture for thegroup can and does work. At the beginnin2 of the term,the group determines the rules for the class. While theteacher may introduce ideas, the students are equal partnersin the proces.i. Rules for classroom behavior haveincluded: only one person talking at a time, no chewinggum (a rule of the facilities we were using), treat others asyou would like to be treated, and the teacher is not alwaysright. Equal participation often increases the groups'"ownership" in the class and increases their "investment" inits success.

The course syllabus can also contribute to socializationby reducing uncertainty or minimizing the amount of"surprise" that one experiences, especially the first day ofclass. According to Friedrich and Cooper (1990),uncertainty can be reduced in one of three ways: passivestrateilies, active strategies, and interactive strategies. Eachof these three strategies can be evident in a course syllabus.

A passive strategy requires that information be gatheredthrough indirect means such as unobtrusive observation.The course syllabus can serve as a passive strategy in thatthe students can observe the teacher as s/he explains thesyllabus. According to Civikly (1990), students develop apositive view of the teacher's investment of time andenergy when they see the syllabus the teacher has created.Additional passive sourc...s of information could includeattendance policies and office hours (i.e., "open" or"closed" door policy). Each of these items sends a signalto the student about the type of course it will be and thetype of teacher you will be.

An active strate'zy requires the individual to interact withothers to gain information. The syllabus, as distributed,gives the students and their coursemates the informationthey will need to answer each others questions.Additionally, students can and will learn from observingand following the lead of their coursemates. (See theSocial Information Processing Model 1Salancik & Pfeffer,19781 for a fuller discussion of the role of peers inprocessing !organizational, environmental) information).

Finally, interactive strategies require the student todirectly interact with the primary source of information inorder to reduce uncertainty. The teacher's style and

4 9 3 4BEST COPY AVAIIABLE

manner may indicate the degree to which s/he is open toquestioning. To the degree to which the teacher iscomfortable, s/he should employ immediacy behaviors(e.g., eye contact, establishment of appropriate distances,smiling). Immediacy behaviors should decrease thestudent's anxiety in approaching the teacher. The greaterthe communication between the teacher and student, themore interactive the socialization process.

Theoretically, it appears that course syllabi have a veryreal role in classroom socialization. Initial results indicatethat course syllabi have the ability to transmit role-relatedand cultural knowledge, initiate dialogue and negotiation,and reduce uncertainty or "surprise." Given the potentialof course syllabi as socialization strategy, this paper movesbeyond the theoretical to examine actual course syllabiutilized in communication(s) departments at Jesuituniversities and colleges.

To date, no one has really analyzed the specificcategories of materials on course syllabi, especially atJesuit institutions. Therefore, this research asks thefollowing two questions:

RQ1: What information is included on communicationcourse syllabi?

RQ1a: Do course s Ilabi reflect the presence or absenceof the Jesuit, Catholic identity of the institutions? Becausaof prior socialization (educational) experiences, studen sand teachers do not enter the classroom tabula rast .Therefore, it is important to explore what they may ')ebringing into the classroom in the form of expectations.Specifically,

RQ2: What might students/teachers expect from theinstitution, faculty, and/or classroom based on materialsprovided by the Admissions Office? Because this studywas not able to directly survey students or faculty,materials that a freshman student or newcomer facultymight receive were used as the basis for expectations.Additionally, as there are no previous studies in this area,research questionS' rather than hypotheses were posed.

NlethodsParticipants

Directors of Admissions and Chairpersons in theCommunication(s) Departments at 15 Jesuit institutior swere contacted and asked to provide the informational

35 50

packet given newcomers and departmental missionstatements and course syllabi respectively. Thirteen of thefifteen Directors of Admissions supplied the requestedmaterial for a return rate of 87%. Because some of theJesuit institutions have more than one communication(s)department, se\ enteen letters Were addressed to thechairpersons at fifteen institutions (these 15 institutionswere identified as the institutions which actually hadcommunication(s) departments). Seven chairpersons (7/17for a return rate of 41%) provided both their departmentalmissions and a numbers of course syllabi (range 7-69).The differential response rate may have been caused by thetiming of the requests. Letters were sent in mid-May.While admissions staff were still at work, manydepartmental chairs may hake already left for the summeror been on vacation when the request was sent.

ProceduresAdmissions materials were read and reviewed without

benefit of a preexisting cateuorization structure. With noavailable categorization system for required admissionspackets materials, the author identified the repetitivethemes and unique claims made by the individualinstitutions. No attempt was made to create a taxonomy ofadmissions materials, although the materials sent wereamenable to further analysis.

Likewise, the course syllabi were examined with nopreconceived categories of information. Categories wereallowed to emerge naturally from the data (syllabi). Titlesof categories were derived from the syllabi themselves.Once the catewrization system was established, each of the157 syllabi were reanalyzed via the newly established

,categorical system. Statistical analysis was limited todescriptive statistics, primarily numerical averages.Additionally, the number of pages in each syllabus wascounted. All statistical results are noted as percentages andreflect institutional averages.

ResultsAs newcomer students' and faculty's expectations may

be formed by introductory materials and may influencefaculty in their construction of the syllabus, researchquestion two will be addressed first. Results, of thereview of Admissions materials, reflect a clear, identifiable

51 3 6

Jesuit theme as modified by the unique geographicalcharacteristics of the various institutions (See Appendix Afor a listing of selected excerpts.)

The Jesuit theme was predominant in the literature andincluded strains of tradition, ideals, philosophy, andvalues. Le Moyne College and Marquette Universitypromote themsel \ es as a "Catholic college founded inJesuit tradition" and "education in the Jesuit tradition"respectively. Regis University advertises itself as "Jesuit.That, in a single, word, speaks volumes about the characterof Regis University. . . .our focus on Jesuit tradition. . .is

sharper than ever. You can see it in the sense ofexploration that sets the tone throughout our varied andexciting curriculum."

Jesuit education claims more than a century of Jesuittradition. Member institutions also claim to reflect Jesuitideals, philosophy, and values. These ideals, philosophy,and values include: "the Jesuit ideal of creatingintellectually challenging and religiously generous youngmen and women" (Boston College); "personal attention ofa distinguished faculty, who strive to help students develophabits that will enable them to continually seek and findanswers" (Fordham University); "challenging academicexpectations" (John Carroll University); and "curapersonalis, academic excellence, rigorous and imaginativescholarship, affirmation of its Catholic identity, andcelebration of diversity and dialogue" (Santa ClaraUniversity).

These common themes are modified, however, by theunique characteristics of the various institutions. Forexample, Fordham University advertises its dual identity: aJesuit institution of higher learning and a New Yorkinstitution. Santa Clara University promotes itself asCalifornia's oldest college while the University ofDetroit-Mercy self-identifies as Michigan's largest CatholicUniversity. These unique characteristics often prompt thevarious institutions to make unique claims. For example,Xavier University is "no Brand Y [institution!". (Not to beoutdone)The "Madison Avenue types" (of FordhamUniversity) advertise that "every moment of your classexperience here is designed to expand your ability to thinkcritically and to understand the vital connections that linkwhat you learn in the classroom to the world outside it."John Carroll University goes even further, Ewe are] "Jesuit

n3 7 4.,

to the core. . .John Carroll isn't Jesuit in name alone-butin spirit, in quality, in reality."

In summary, institutional materials promote an image ofJesuit traditior., heritage, and values where newcomers willbe met by a dedicated, quality faculty who are concernedfor the development of the whole person. Faculty arehighly trained, highly qualifiedteacher-scholars-practitioners who are accessible,interested, and talented. Given th,-,..se recurring verses ofthe overall Jesuit theme, it is reasonable to see how studentand/or faculty enter the campus and classroom with certainexpectations, which when combined with prior anticipatorysocialization, affect organizational s(xialization.

The classroom syllabi, which may also affectorganizational sociahzation, tended to include twelvecategories of information, although specific informationvaried across and within institutions . The twelve generalcategories of information (See Table 1 for completesummary.) included: the instructor's name, office phone,home phone, office location, office hours, description ofthe course, required text,:. educational goals for the course,course requirements, policies and procedures, grading(standards and/or requirements). and a course outline(week-by-week description of course activities).

Additional materials that were unique to various syllabiincluded: E-mail addresses, specific assignmentrequirements, sample papers, course structure and/orformat; instructional aids and rrielhods, explicit courseexpectations (e.g., class participation, open to visits withstudents outside of the classroom), teaching philosophyand personal notes (e.g.. following one instructor's homephone number and address was the message: I am not theTinman, I do have a heart).

While there were some universal standards, such asinstructor's name, across all institutions, there were alsosome institutions that had relatively consistent formats(i.e., over 85% of all syllabi contained the same elements)for their syllabi. Three institutions that had a relativelyconsistent format included: Fordham University,University of Loyola-Chicago, and Creighton University.Other institutions (such as Gonzaga University, MarquetteUniversity, and Santa Clara University) had greatervariability between individual instructors' syllabi. Despiteinternal differences and consistencies, each institution

53 3 8

appeared to present a particular image.For example, Gonzaga Uniersity tended to emphasize

course structure over accessibility to students. While 84%of the faculty listed an office phone number, only 59%listed office hours and only 75% listed the office location.So, it appears that students are implicitly encouraged to calltheir professors at the office rather than visit the office orcall at home (only 6% listed home phone numbers).Creighton University also tended to emphasize aspects ofthe course over accessibility as less than 80% of syllabilisted an office phone, location, and/or hours. In contrast,Marquette University tended to emphasize both coursestructure and accessibility.

The average length of course syllabi was 3.1 pages(range 1-15 pages).

While Gonzaga University's and Fordham University'saverage length was below the overall average, length ofsyllabi was not indicative of completeness. For example,while Fordham University averaged 2.57 pages (theshortest of the six institutions), seven of the 12 categoriesappeared in 100% of the syllabi. Length of syllabi waspurely a quantitative measure and did not appear to reflectthe quality of the syllabi.

In summary, Jesuit institutions are both similar anddistinct. The similarities and differences are noted in bothAdmissions materials and course syllabi. While twelvecategories of course syllabi emerged as consistentrequirements, not all dimensions of syllabi were equallyaddressed within or across institutions. Inclusion of theinstructor's name, text/readings, and a course outline weremost frequently listed (over 90c7c of all syllabi) with officephone and location, grading and course requirementsfollowing at over 80-90% of all syllabi. Office hours and adescription of the course/course purpose were listed in70-79% of all syllabi. Course policies, educational goalsand objectives, and twine phone wei ... all listed in less than60% of the syllabi.

Finally, while the Jesuit nature of the various institutionswas clearly addressed in the Admissions materials, it didnot appear in any recognizable form in the syllabi. This isnot to say that the Jesuit values are not addressed in coursecontent over the semester; rather, there was no categoricalmention of the nature of the institution, the department, orthe departmental mission statement (which should ideally

3 95 '1

hnk or bridge the departmental offerings to the institution).

DiscussionGiven that,both students and teachers enter the classroom

with preconceked notions of what "higher education" is orshould be like. they bring anticipations or expectations withthem to the classroom (general anticipatory socialization).Additionally, as most university newcomers receive somebasic infonnation about the institution, these students andfaculty will also be bringing specific organizationalexpectations w ith them. One expectation may involve theJesuit difference. Additional expectations may be derivedbased on the unique characteristics of the variousinstitutions.

Once lac tilt) and students enter campus and/or theclassroom, these expectations will meet the orLmnizational"reality." These organizational experiences will result inmet, unmet, or oermet expectations. Met expectations areoften not e en consciously noted as the experiences fitwithin the mdix idual's range of expectations. Bothovermet and unmet expectations may cause surprise. but itis usually the unmet expectations that are problematic.Unmet expectations represent negative surprises and reflecta less than necessary socialization process to the universityand/or classroom.

The course syllabi can serve as a mechanism for theongoing socialization of students to the various institutions,departments. and/or classes. Based on the results of thissurvey, howex er. it appears that the course syllabirepresents a missed opportunity for on-going classroomsocialization. The current review of syllabi emphasizerole-related know ledge (e.g., course requirements,grading, or text) over cultural knowledge (e.g., learningstyles, class format): yet, the course syllabi lifts thepotential to socialize students to both aspects of classroombehavior.

The course syllabi as contract also varies within andacross institutions. While inclusion of all twelve categoriesis encouraged, the minimal information necessary for acontractual basis is the role-related learning items such asinstructor's name, texts/readings. course requirements,grading, policies, and course outline. While not allcategories are equally represented in our sample, theseitems tended to appear more frequently than cultural

4 0

5 b BEST COPY AVAILABLE

learmngs The growing emphasis on syllabi as contractsmay also be an explanatory factor in the emphasis we see in

our current syllabi (i.e., role-related learning over culturallearnings).

Ideally, for assessment purposes, however, the coursedescription, purpose, and educational goals should also beincluded. This inclusion allows students to gauge theirlearning in a course and subsequently assess the course andthe teaching of the course. That is, were the students ableto accomplish what the course promised? The inclusion ofeducational goals also allows instructors to evaluate whichmaterials to include, how to best present those materials,and the best methods of evaluating educational objectivesIn essence, the explicit stating of educational goals allowsboth parties the opportunity to continually assess thelearning occurring in the class(room).

Given the conclusions derived from this stndy and theperceived potential of syllabi as a tool for socialization, thefollowing -re offered as recommendations:

-as a minimum include all twelve categories as yourstandard syllabus format,

-increase the amount of cultural information explicitlyshared in the syllabus,

-occasionally compare your course syllabi with collegecatalogues and admissions materials, and

-consider incorporating the departmental missionstatement into course syllabi.

The inclusion of all twelve categories better guaranteesthe inclusion of both role-related and cultural learnmgs in

socializing students and faculty. Improvements in thestandard syllabus would include more cultural orteacher-related knowledge. Types of teacher-relatedknowledge that have been included in syllabi includeinstructor bios, "Who is this guy in the front of theclassroom?", and personal teaching philosophies,expectations, or biases.

Additionally, to better relate what happens m theclassroom to the larger university context, departmentalchairs and/or faculty should review college cataloguematerials and general admissions materials. Are we, as adepartment, living up to our college or university claims?Are we challenging our students? Are we accessible? Are

we concerned with development of the whole person?These are questions that only individual departments can

'36

answei As departmental mission statements shouldaddress what is being done at the departmental level andhow those acti. nies contribute to the overall mission of theinstitution. the inclusion of departmental missionstatements on course syllabi may remind faculty and informstudents how this course "fits into the larger Idepanmental,college, and/or university) picture." Through thedepartmental mission statement, students and faculty canrealize that they are participating in something larger thanclassroom learning: they are preparing each other for life.

While these suggestions promise to be useful, theirgeneral applicability are limited by the size of the study, theuniqueness of the Jesuit institutions, and the investigator'slack of actual contact with students and faculty. Forexample, the cultural learnings may be greater than reportedif the% are erh.111% shared when faculty discuss thesyllabus or answer student's questions about themselves(neither of which could be detennined in the current study 1.

Additionally, future research needs to be conducted tobetter determine the outcomes (effects) of syllabi onclassroom socialization, performance, and/or satisfaction.In the final analysis. however. the study of course syllabias socialization strato..:y is One area of research kk hereteaching can truly inform research. and research can trulyinform teaching.

ReferencesBateson, fti)k t(I an e(ologx of mind New York:

Ballantme.Berger, C. R. (1987). "Communicating under uncertaint)." In

NI. E. Rololf & CI. R. %hiller (Eds.), Imerpeoonal proioseA Newdirectiom in corn/thou, aa(m re.sc(lrch (pp. 39-62). Newhury Park.CA: Sage.

Berger. C'. R.. & Calabrese, R. J. (1)75). Some explorations ininitial Interaction and heond: Toward a developmental theory ofinterpersonal commumcauon." human Communication Rocarch, 1,99-112.

Civikly, J. NI. (1990). "Creating a new course." In J. A. Daly,G. W. Friedrich, & A. L. Vangelisti (Eds.), Teachingcommunication fheon...re.Nearch, and methods (pp. 53-63).Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Condon, J. C. (1986). "The ethnocentric classroom." In J. M.Civikly (Ed.), ('ommuni«aing in college clawooms (pp. 11-20).San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

4 2

Corbett, H D (1980) "Using occupational socialization research

to explain patterns of influence during student teaching." The Journal

of Teacher_Education. 31. 11-13.Danielson, NI. A. (1995, April). The role of the course syllabi in

classroom socialization. Paper presented at the annual meeting of

the Central States Communication Association, Indianapolis, IN.Friedrich, G. W., & Cooper, P. (1990). "The first day." In J. A.

Daly, G. W. Friedrich, & A. L. Vangelisti (Eds.), Teachingcommunication: Theory...research. and methods (pp. 237-246).Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Gorham, J. (1990). "Individual differences in classroom

dynamics." In J. A. Daly, G. W. Friedrich, & A. L. Vangelisti

(Eds.), Teaclung communtcauon: _Theory, research, and methods (pp.

207-222). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbauin.

Hess, J. A. (1993). " Assimilating newcomers into anorganization: A cultural perspective." Journal of AppliedCommunication Research, 21, 189-210.

Louis, M. R. (1980). "Surprise and sense making: Whatnewcomers experience in entering unfamiliar organizational settings."Administrative_Science Quarterly, 25, 226-251.

Louis, M. R. (1983). Organizations as culture-bearing milieux.

" In L. R. Pondy, P. J. Frost, G. Morgan, & T. C. Dandridge (Eds.),Organizational_symboltsm (pp. 39-54). Greenwich, CN: JAI Press,

Inc.Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). "A social information

processing approach to job attitudes and task design." Administrative

Science Quarterly. 22, 427-456.Staton, A. Q. (1990). "An ecological perspective on

college/university teaching." In J. A. Daly, G. W. Friedrich, & A. L.

Vangelisti (Eds.), Teaching_communication: Theory. research.andmethods (pp. 39-52). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlhaum.

Staton-Spicer, A. Q., & Darling, A. L. (1986). " Communication

in the socialization of preservice teachers." Communication

Education, 35, 215-230.Staton-Spicer, A. Q., & Darling, A. L. (1987). "A

communication perspective on teacher socialization." Journal of

Thought. 22, 12-19.Wulff, D. H., & Nyquist, J. D. (1990). "Instructional tools." In

J. A. Daly, G. W. Friedrich, & A. L. Vangelisti (Eds.), Teachingcommunication: _I heory, research, and methods (pp. 249-266).Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Appendix A: excerpts from admissions materials

5 c'43 "

Boston CollegeJesuit ideals of creating intellectually challenging and religiously

generous young men and women.Primacy of teaching in the Jesuit scheme of education lives on in

the policies and traditions that shape faculty encounters with students.Faclt N ailabil ity to students-in class, office hours. etc.

Creighh,nJesuit differenceCredo of CreightonMission w hich highlights the Catholic, Jesuit nature of Creighton,

which exists for students and learning.

FordhainJeNuit inNutt.tion of higher learnmgNev. 'fork institution

in(mh..nt iii our L lass expelieni.e here is designed to expandsour ahli It \ to think criticall and to understand the %nal connectionsthat link %1/4 hat .ou learn in the classroom to the world outside it.

Scrvinc Jesuit ideals f, e , personal attention old distinguishedfaculty. ho strl C to help students develop habits that will enablethem to continual!. to seek and find answers)

John Carro(ll 00 >ears ol Jesuit education.

Jesuit to the ;:ore.. ..John Carroll isn't Jesuit in name alone-hutin spirit, in qualit),, in reality.

Jesuit influence is particularly evident in the classroom (e.g.challenging academic expectations, look inward to develop personally,sociall). and intellecivally)

85% of faculty hold terminal degreeFaculty are a% ailable to students.

LeMoyneCatholic college founded in Jesuit traditionFive Jesuit tenets94% of facult have terminal degrees.

Loyola- Marytno antCatholic comprehensive university...dedicated to the ideals of

liberal education and the tradition of cura personalis.

MarquetteEducation in the Jesuit tradition

Develops the total person. Aeachcs students how to think.formation, nol just information.

RegisJesuit. That, in a single word, speaks volumes about the character

of Regis University. .. .our focus on Jesuit tradition. . is sharperthan ever. You can see it in the sense of exploration that sets thetone throughout our varied and exciting curriculum.

Educating the whole person on "how we ought to live" (3sem inars)

85% of faculty hold doctorate; 90% hold terminal degrees

Santa ClaraCalifornia's oldest collegeFive Jesuit tenets

Spring 11111Jesuit Catholic heritageJesuit educational philosophyCatholic, Jcsuit tradition...we blend a Jesuit values oriented

education with a liberal arts, humanities-based curriculum.Three tenets: students first; committed teachers; challenging

educational experience

University of Detroit-MercyMichigan's largest Catholic UniversityWhy a Catholic University? Traditional values, and academic

excellence90% of faculty hold terminal degrees

University of San FranciscoJesuit education featured on the coverCommitted to the highest standards of learning and scholarship in

the American Catholic, Jesuit tradition.

XavierNo Brand Y.Jesuit values. . . .fold our Jesuit mission into the classroom.75% of faculty hold terminal degreesStudent/laculty ratio: 16 to 1

4 5

60

(7)

Tab

le 1

1n4,

rnj

rno

Na.

sps

p,a4

e a

/j4

nstr

nam

e

los)

Jfic

etr

pf.

eph

one

phyn

e kx

at

ho,jf

s

It4,

r

1,4

,,t

s 4

,j,,

!

C")

Loyo

la-C

h.4

2610

08/

Si

9.3

(30

8/W

O5.

393

6710

010

0

Krc

ioet

re4

2 3

100

9145

86Pf

,50

f

For

dham

2 57

100

10e

010

010

0'4

f's-,

10

Cre

qhro

n5

0089

1956

7810

01

San

ta C

lara

4 68

9785

3859

8279

8 2

1159

79

Ove

rall

avg

31

098

88'3

8279

7693

5279

6 5

8290

Nivacy an3 Conp3ennatrry

As Primal_ Issues In CoRpoizaTe

Communlcarnons

Thomas A. SchickCommunication Arts Department

andIda Critelli Schick

Graduate Program in Health Services AdministrationXavier University

IntroductionIn discussing with our students the ethics of professional

communications, we try to establish norms that preservethe integrity of the communication process, giving high

priority, for example, to truth telling. However, evenbefore considering the norms of truthfulness, we need toconsider ethical norms for preserving legitimate privacyand confidentiality.

While all communicators face ethical considerations of

whether certain information may or should becommunicated, we are considering here specificallycommunicators within organizations,* for example, public

relations practitioners.This paper searches for the basis of ethical norms that

should guide a communicator in dealing with private orconfidential corporate information and knowledge.

The specific ethical problems are framed, on one hand,by professional codes that require practitioners to respectthe confidentiality of employer or client information, and,

on the other hand, by reported on-the-job conflicts inwhich an employer or client may require a practitioner toprevent the publication of certain sensitive information.

In our search, we will distinguish two kinds of corporateinformation, entrusted and originated; and for each of these

we will consider the principles according to which acorporation must or may hold information confidential. In

our discussion we will affirm that a corporation exercises

moral responsibility, and we will identify specificstakeholders who might have interest in corporate

47 6'2

information.

Corporate information and knowledgeWe want to begin with the broadest possible definition

and understanding of corporate information andknowledge. We are talking about all information foundwithin a corporation, information about the corporation,information collected and gathered by the corporation, orinformation developed by the corporation, including files,procedures for operations, records of business activity.

Excluded from this discussion is knowledge of thecorporation developed by third parties from theirobservations of organization activity. A corporation may beconcerned about this third-party information, may react toits dissemination, and may even seek to suppress it, but thecorporation cannot control the information.

What we focus on is information and knowledge overwhich a corporation directly exercises full control byinternal management decisions. This information existswithin the corporation in one of two ways: it is entrustedby others, or it is originated by the corporation itself.

Entrusted personal informationEntrusted information is provided to the corporation by

another; it has the following characteristics.1. It is required/requested by the corporation; the

corporation does not have it.2. The request/requirement is met by another; the

corporation acquires it and does not develop it.3. The information itself is revelatory: it tells the

corporation something about the other entity.4. There is an implicit or explicit agreement that the

information provided is to be kept confidential. Thisagreement establishes a relationship between the individualand the corporation, and the corporation now becomes thetrustee or steward of that individual's information.

The purpose of sharing this information with thecorporation is that both the individual who entrusts theinformation and the corporation will mutually benefit.

There are se% eral categories of individuals who may findit mutually beneficial to share such information with thecorporation. Clients may do so, to achieve benefits forthemselves, e.g., better service. On the other hand, thecorporation w ill also achieve a benefit, e.g., to meet

63 4 8

organizational objectives in serving clients. Job applicantswill reveal information about themselves in order to beconsidered for a position. The corporation will benefit byhaving information needed to make good staffingdecisions.

This information, if it remains in the corporation's files,rarely remains untouched. That is, client informationgrows with additional research. If the job applicant is nothired, application information is removed usually after oneyear. If the applicant becomes an employee, then her file isenhanced through the various job moves, job descriptions,performance appraisals, etc., that become part of theemployee's personnel record.

Before we can consider the corporation's responsibilitywith regard to this entrusted mwerial, we must clarify themeaning of some key terias, namely, privacy,confidentiality and secrecy.

1. Privacy is control of another's access to oneself; thatis, one can grant or deny access to oneself (e.g., one'sthoughts, opinions, attitudes, access to one's body also).

2. Confidentiality means to grant another access toinformation about oneself or to one's ideas, emotions,attitudes, or in the case of medical care, access to one'sbody, and at the same time extracting from the other, apromise (implicit or explicit) not to reveal this informationto a third party.

3. Secrecy is a term which includes both privacy andconfidentiality; it means keeping something hidden tooneself or only a few others (dictionary definition).

Let us now look at the foundations for privacy andconfidentiality. There are legal foundations. First,Constitutionally, the Fourth Amendment, which guaranteesprotection against search and seizure, forms the foundationfor the right to privacy against government intrusion. TheFourth Amendment refers clearly to tangible property, butis also extended to the intangible, that which is "proper tothe person."

Second, there is a common law basis. Warren andBrandeis (1890) in their Harvard Law Review article wereamong the first to enunciate this basis. They state: "Thecommon law secures to each individual the right ofdetermining, ordinarily, to what extent his thoughts,sentiments, and emotions shall be communicated toothers." This is the right of the individual to be let alone.

4 96 4

The principle which protects this right is in reality "not theprinciple of private property, but that of an inviolatepersonality." For Warren and Brandeis the common lawbasis for privacy is not the principle of private property butof private personality.

The philosophical foundation for privacy andconfidentiality is the autonomy of the human person.Autonomy means essentially self rule. An autonomousperson is one who freely acts in accordance with aself-chosen plan (Beauchamp and Childress, 1994).However, individuals cannot act autonomously unlessothers respect that autonomy, thus establishing the primafacie ethical principle of respect for autonomy. Minimally(or negatively), that means not interfering. Positively, thismeans enablin,g others to act autonomously, for example,by providing them with the information they need to makedecisions. The principle of respect for autonomy can bestated: "Autonomous actions should not be subjected tocontrolling influences by others" (Beauchamp andChildress, 1994).

Respect for autonomy is the primary justification for theright to privacy. The right to privacy is integral toautonomous decision making. It is throud privacy that onecontrols one's personal environment. By choosing to grantor deny access to oneself, one can make different decisionsaccordingly. One has different options in each case.

A second philosophical basis for privacy is that it is aprecondition for love, friendship and trust. It provides thecondition, the environment, within which love, friendshipand trust can occur. Fried (1970) says it well: "Byconferring this right, privacy creates the moral capitalwhich we spend in friendships and in love."

One spends this moral capital also in establishing trust.For instance, in health care, a patient would not reveal herown and her family's health history, and she would notreveal herself bodily to a physician and other clinicians, ifshe were not secure that this acce.,s would be respected bybeing maintained in confidence.

Additionally, "developed" personal information, such asfound in personnel files, also requires the highestconfidentiality. It is descriptive of the employee, of theemployee's term with the corporation, of others'evaluations of her work. So, there is a special, personalrelationship of the employee to that information about her.

6 b5 0

There is also a corporate relationship to that information, inthat the manager represents the corporation in her actions.However, even from a legal perspective, corporations arevery cautious not to share this information with others,e.g., potential employers. And from an ethical perspective,this information is private and confidential.

The same discussion of developed personal informationcould be applied to entrusted client information, such as apatient's medical record.

Entrusted personal information and its expansioncontinue to belong to the individual person. It does notbelong to the corporation, even though the corporation mayown the physical files on which the information is writtenor stored. Corporations cannot use this information astheir own.

But privacy and confidentiality are not absolute. Theymay be superseded by other priorities. For example, ifthere is an issue of public safety or of public good, then theindividual's right to privacy (or the entrustingorganization's right to confidentiality) may be supersededby these concerns. The corporation may have an obligationto reveal in virtue of a higher good and a superior principle.

Ethical responsibilities of a corporationIn our discussion of entrustedinformation, we have

accepted that corporations have ethical obligations ofconfidentiality. In this paper we accept three principlesabout corporations:

I. Corporations have no ontological reality beyond theirconstituencies.

2. In most cases, however, corporate actions are notsimply reducible to individual actions. Corporate action ismore importantly identifiable as the aggregate of individualactions, which are transformed as each action mixes withother actions and with other input and interpretations ofcorporate goals, directives, etc.

3. Corporate actions would be described as secondaryactions, which are distinguished from the primary actionsof individuals. However, corporations can act morally orimmorally (Donaldson and Werhane. 1988).

As morally responsible, corporaiions can enter intoagreements to maintain confidentiality, to restrict access tocertain information whether entrusted or originated, or toreveal information. The corporation as secondary moral

5 16

agent controls information and knowledge through theprimary actions of its managers and other agents.

Originated informationWith this identification of the ethical responsibility of a

corporation, and having considered a corporation'sobligations of confidentiality toward entrusted information,let us consider now the corporation's rights or obligationsto control access to "originated" information. What can acorporation ethically communicate, and what can it ethicallyconceal, or keep secret?

Originated knowledge or information is what isdeveloped by the corporation, through its businessoperations, including "industrial processes, lists ofcustomers, market data, and research proposals"(Beauchamp and Bowie, 1993). This would includekno.vledge protected by patents and copyrights, but alsofinaacial information, and the realm of nonpublicinformation referred to as trade secrets.

This is information about which corporations are oftenvery secretive, keeping information to themselves, andonly reluctantly giving up what is pried from their.. Whilecorporate secrecy may be disconcerting, there is nothingintrinsically unethical about keeping a secret, as Bok(1984) points out.

To assess the ethics of corporate secrecy, we must bothlook at the kind of information being kept secret, andconsider those from whom ti!e corporatior/ tries to ke,;:p theinformation secret.

There are many 1.,t.nies interest(;c1 in corporateinformation, and many who claim some right to corporateinformation. Let us consider two nonehclusive, sometimesoverlapping, categories of these stakelders, c, publics.

First, there are "decisional" staker,,klers. hese are theeasiest to identify, because by some specific decision eachhas established a formal, definable relationship to thecorporation, such as stockholders, employes, customersand vendors.

Second, there are what we might call "societal"stakeholders. These are individuals or groups who areimpacted by the corporation, or who can be or will beimpacted by the corporation, not by any decisions on theirown part, but because of decisions by the corporation.

Let us consider now the basis on which a corporation can

6 7 5 2

make any claim to Justify concealing information from anyof these stakeholders. Does a corporation have a right torestrict access to originated information?

On one hand, we miaht aigJe that originated informationis the property of a private entity, the corporation, whichhas a right to use its property any way it wishes, even bykeeping it secret. Information, then, is proprietary; and thecorporation owns the information (Velasquez, 1992).

On the other hand, it is possible to argue "that knowledgeand information are 'the common heritage of mankind"(Giunta and Shang, 1993-94); all knowledge andinformation "belong" to society. This is the perspectivemany developing nations take even with regard to new andoriginal knowledge that is internationally "protected" bycopyrights and patents.

That all knowledge and information should primarilybenefit society seems especially true of corporateknowledge, since the "business enterprise is an organ ofsociety" (Drucker, 1972), and its purpose "must lie outsideof the business itself." Corporations are chartered bypublic authority in order to achieve a societal benefit.Corporations continue to exist "only by public consent"(Golden, 1968), in so far as they fill their social purposes.

Social benefit is, in fact, the specific rationale forgranting copyrights and patents. For example, the U.S.Constitution (Art. I, Sec. 8) assigns Congress the power"to promote the progress of science and useful arts," and asa means to this end, Congress is to grant "exclusive rights"of patent and copyright. The history of the development ofcopyright and patent recognizes that knowledge is for thebenefit of mankind (Wincor and Mandell, 1980).

However, what copyright and patent also recognize arethe realities of human dynamics. As motivation to achievethe benefits for society, individuals need some exclusiveuse and beneTit from their works of original creation.Likewise, corporations need to be granted an exclusive useof the knowledge they develop, in order that they can fulfilltheir maximum benefits for society.

The specific information and knowledge that a

corporation can legitimately keep secret is that which isessential for the corporation to operate in the interest ofsociety, and to provide its unique service to the public.This specifically is the nonpublic information that isessential for a corporation to be competitive,

63 68

Concerning originated organizational information, then,we can conclude that a corporation not only may keepcompetitive information secret, but must restrict access tosuch information, in order to maintain fidelity to itself andto its mission, for the benefit of society. The information acorporation keeps secret must truly be competitive, asdefined in trade secret laws, and as established in courttests of trade secrets. Specifically, the information may netbe generally known or in use by others, .and thecorporation must make reasonable efforts to keep the tradesecret information secure.

However, in keeping competitive information secret, acorporation cannot ethically use a claim of trade secrecy towithhold information to which non-competitor stakeholdershave a clear moral right.

For example, decisional stakeholders have made concretedecisions that establish their specific relationships to thecorporation, and they continue to make decisions thatmaintain these relationships. As autonomous persons,decisional stakeholders have a basic right to informationthat they need to make informed decisions in the areas oftheir specific relationships to the corporation. Thecorporation and its managers cannot ethically withholdsuch information, and may have a positive obligation toreveal such information.

Let's take stockholders as an instance. Sole proprietors,as owners, have a right to know everything about theorganizations they own. By owning shares, stockholdersare legally owners of the corporation; but they do notexercise ownership authority, power, or prerogatives, sotheir right to corporate information can be more narrowlylimited to their specific relationship to the corporation,namely, that of being "investors." It is properly asinvestors that they have a moral claim on corporateinformation, the information a prudent investor would useto decide whether to sell or buy a corporation's securities.

This is legally what the SEC requires concerning thedisclosure of material information, the "timely" release ofinformation, and the prohibition of insider trading.

Also with regard to other decisional stakeholders, such asemployees or customers, the corporation cannot ethicallywithhold information that is directly relevant to thedecisions these persons make to begin or maintain theirrelationships as employees or customers.

u

As with SEC requirements, so there are workplaceright-to-know laws, and content and labeling requirements,which employees and customers need. These legalrequirements codify some of corporations' ethicalobligations to inform decisional stakeholders, but they donot exhaust the ethical obligations.

Moving to a consideration of societal stakeholders, wefind individuals who are impacted by corporate activities,and who have a moral claim on corporate information, inorder that they can evaluate the extent of the corporation'simpact on them, in terms of benefits and harms. We canalso argue that society has a general right to informationneeded to give or deny the "public consent" by whichcorporations exist.

With regard to societal stakeholders, however, a majorconcern for the corporation is always the question of wholegitimately exercises society's claimed right of access tocorporate information. While ethically a corporation cannotcompletely withhold information about its impact onsociety, it can reasonably be allowed to exercise caution inlegitimizing the authority of specific individuals or groupswho claim to exercise society's rights to information.

How, for example, should a corporation deal with claimsfor corporate information from government, from variousinterest groups, or from the media? These are questionsthat continue to invite much further consideration andinvestigation.

Ethical norms for organizational communicatorsEven at this point, however, it may be possible to outline

some ethical norms organizational communicators mightfollow in dealing with the confidentiality and secrecy ofcorporate information.

1. An organizational communicator must treat entrustedinformation with the highest level of confidentiality. He orshe must not communicate such information without theinformed consent of those whose information it is; and thecommunicator should not even access entrustedinformation without clearly legitimate reasons and properapproval.

2. With regard to originated information, anorganizational communicator must recognize a prima facieduty to the employer, based on an implied or written"contract," created by the practitioner's agreement to work

5 5 70

for that employer. This duty to employer requires carefulattention to confidentiality of all originated information,especially competitive information, as designated by theemployer.

3. A communicator must take care not to betrayconfidential information to a competitor or another whowould or could use it to the disadvantage of the employer.

4. A communicator must take care that confidentialinformation may not be used by oneself or by any other forpersonal advantage, even if the employer suffers no harm.

5. An oreanizational communicator, however, mustrecognize his or her obligation, as a primary agent, toexercise personal responsibility in regard to confidentialinformation, or assertedly confidential information, even ifthe corporation or those in authority in the corporation failto follow ethical practice. One cannot be relieved of moralresponsibility by the directions or the omissions ofsecondary moral agents, whether corporate or personal.This may mean:

a. lf, in the matter of entrusted information, thecorporation does not adequately protect such information,the individual practitioner cannot be a party to the ethicalviolation.

b. lf, in the matter of originated information, thecorporation -- in the name of competitive information --withholds from legitimate stakeholders, information towhich they have a moral right, the individual practitionercannot be a party to the ethical violation.

c. In both a. and b. above, ethical decisions by theindividual communicator may include one or more of thefollowing: 11 trying to effect ethical action on the part of thecorporation, 2) refusing to participate in the unethicalaction, 3) severing his or her relationship with theemployer, 4) blowing the whistle.

Appendix: Entrusted corporate informationIn addition to entrusted personal information and

originated corporate information, it is obvious there is athird category of information in the corporate context, sinceinformation may also be entrusted to a corporation byanother corporation, in order to achieve some mutualbenefit. For example, a corporation wishing to dobusiness with another often must respond to a Request forInformation (RF1) or a Request for Proposal (RFP), which

71 5 6

may ask for detailed information about the vendororganization. The entrusting organization has a right toconfidentiality of its information. RFIs and RFPsgenerally contain a specific statement that the contents ofresponses will not be shared v. ith competitors in the RFPor RFI process.

Any personal information disclosed in the RFI/RFPprocess would be subject to the ethical principles forentrusted personal information. Non-personal informationentrusted by one organization to another must also be heldconfidential, because of the right of the entrustingcorporation to maintain its competitiveness and continuedexistence, by protecting information essential to itsoperations.

The ethical principles guiding this situation are theproperty rights explored in the discussion of originatedinformation, and additionally the principles of trust andpromise-keeping that are necessary for the continuation andprosperity of commerce in any society. From theseprinciples, a corporation has an obligation to restrict accessto non-personal information entrusted by another ization,and must treat such information confidentially.

* This paper uses the w ords "corporation" and "corporate" to indicate

any organization, even though not all organizations are corporations.

References

Beauchamp, T. L. and N. E. Bowie: 1993, Ethical Theory andBusiness, 4th cd. (Prentice-Hall, Englewood cliffs, NJ).

Beauchamp, T. L. and J . Chiklress: 1994, Principles 'lmedical

Ethics (Oxford University Press, New York), pp. 406-4Ly.

Bok, S.: 1984, Secrets: On the Ethics of Concealment andRevelation (Vintage Books, Ncw York).

Donaldson, T.: 1982, Corporations and Morality (Prentice-Hall,

Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Donaldson, T. and L. E. Preston: 1995, 'The Stakeholder Theory of

the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications', Academy of

I igement Review 20(1), 65-91.uonaldson, T. and P. H. Werhane: 1988, Ethical Issues in

Business: A Philosophical Approach (Prentice-Hall, Englewood

Cliffs, NJ).Drucker, Peter F.: 1972, Concept of the Corporation, 2nd ed. (John

Day, New York).

57 '72

Feldman, NI. J.: 1994, 'Toward a Clearer Standard of ProtectableInformation: Trade Secrcts and the Employment Relationship', HighTechnology Law Journal 9(1), 151-183.

French, P.: 1976, 'The Colporation as a Moral Person', AmericanPhilosophical Quarterly 16, 207-215.

Fried, C.: 1990, 'Privacy: a Rational Context', in M. D. Ermann,M. B. Williams, C. Gutierrez, Computers, Ethics, and Society(Oxford University Press, New York), pp. 51-63.

Fried, C.: 1970, Anatomy of Values: Problems of Personal andSocial Choice (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).

Gibson, K.: 1995, 'Fictitious Persons and Real Responsibilities',Journal of Businem Ethics 14, 761-767.

Giunta, T. K. and L. H. Shang: 1993-94, 'Ownership ofInformation in a Global Economy', George Washington Journal ofInternational Law and Economics 27(2), 327-358.

Golden, L.L.L.: 1968, Only by Public Consent: AmericanCorporations Search for Favorable _Opinion (Hawthorn Books, NewYork).

Sadler, C. P.: 1984, "Comment: Federal Copyright Protection andState Trade Secret Protection: the Case for Partial Preemption', TheAmerican University Law Review 33, 667-692.

'Trade Secret Misappropriation: A Cost-Benefit Response to theFourth Amendment Analogy': 1992, llarvard Law Review 106,461-478.

Velasquez, M. G.: 1992, Business Ethics: Concepts and Cases, 3rded. (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).

Warren, S. D. and L. D. Brandeis: 1890, "The Right to Privacy',Harvard Law Review 4(5), 193-219.

Werhane, P. H.: 1985, Persons, Rights, and Corporations(Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).

Wincor. R. and I. Mandell: 1980, Copyright, Patents andTrademarks: The Protection of _intellectual and Industrial Property(Oceana Publications, Dobbs Ferry, NY).

7 35 8

FoizahaesNew YoRk CITy SemesTeR

Ron JacobsonFordham University

The New York City Semester is a new FordhamUniversity program that allows communications studentsfrom other colleges and universities to come live, study,and get internship work experience in the nation's largestmedia market. The program seeks to take advantage of thecity's national and international prominence in severalmedia industries, including advertising, book publishing,broadcasting and cable, magazine publishing, andmusic/recording.

For example, New York City is the home of Children'sTelevision Workshop and the corporate headquarters ofTime Warner, Capital Cities ABC, and many more. It isalso the home to, among other entities, the Freedom Forumfor Media Studies at Columbia University, the Museum ofTelevision and Radio, the Museum of the Moving Image,and the SONYwonder Technology Lab exhibit.

Student internship sites in Spring and Summer of 1995included As the World Turns (soap opera),Good MorningAmerica (promotion division, on-line division),Globalvision, Greenwillow Children's Books (Wm.Morrow), HBO, M. Shanker Publications (Food Artsmagazine), Marinex Communications (Castingmagazine; Trouble & Attitude, a CD-Rom magazine), SonyPictures (advertising and promotions),Sports Illustrated forKids,The Conan O'Brien Show, 20th Century Fox(publicity and promotions), Ungaro Fashion (publicity &promotion), USA Cable Network, WABC-TV(news/sports), WNET-TV (PBS), and WOR-AM Radio(talk radio).

As part of The New York City Semester, communicationstudents participate in a weekly Media Seminar, duringwhich they share and analyze their internship experiences.For homework, students keep journals and do weeklyassignments related to their work activities (e.g.,organizational histories of their host companies), and

59 74

present research papers that integrate formal academicknowledge with their practical media-related interests andactivities. Seminar discussions focus on integrating thestudents' experiences with academic discourse on mediainstitutions and practices.For example, during one session students discussed

gender and the workplace, within the context of theircommon reading of The Girls in the Balcony: Women,Men and The New York Times; in which reporter IlanRobertson documents historically the struggle to eildgender discrimination at The New York Times.Communication-related resources of the city are alsoutilized for the Media Seminar, including field trips andguest presentations.

For more information about The New York CitySemester, call Dr. Ralph Meyer, Director, at1-800-NYC-TERM.

THE TOP TENreasons why students should consider

a semester in New York City

10. Auditions for Stupid Human Tricks on The Late Showwith Dave.9. NY mirrors ideal student living conditions: It's the citythat never sleeps -- and rarely does its laundry.8. Frequent Central Park sightings of John F. Kennedy Jr.7. Two St. Patrick's Day parades6. NYC is home to Comedy Central, Woody Allen, and afew hundred thousand bozos waiting to be discovered orrediscovered --just ask anyone named Joey.5. Get all your news in a New York Post headline ( e.g.,6/94 "Police Squeeze On.4. George Steinbrenner, Leona Helmsley, and DonaldTrump hey, it's a great place to learn about capitalismrun amok.3. Greenwich Village isn't in Greenwich and it isn't avillage, but its still puts Dollywood to shame.2. Take enough taxicab rides and we waive your secondlanguage ccurse requirement.1. Good old-fashioned stress-free living..., in the Jesuittradition.

1-,3 60

Mission STaTemenT

CenTize Forz The Sruay op

'Communicarion ana CuLTuize

The Centre is an international Jesuit center at St. LouisUniversity which collects, summarizes and does researchon communication and culture, which it then shares and

explores with various publics -eccelsiastical, academic andprofessional

Medieval Stained Glass and Today's TVMedieval Christians not only learned about religion from

the Church, but received many of their mental images andsymbols from its stained glass windows, statues andsermons. Modern Christians still get much from thosesources, but by far the greatest source of all symbols andimages for Christians and everyone else is the massmediathe press, radio, movies and especially television.Television can be thought of as the moving, speaking"stained glass windows" of the modern world.

Centre for the Study ofCommunication and Culture

CSCC is a research agency with a practical mission: tohelp Catholics in particular, other Christians and all peopleof good will find a path through the "forest of symbols"that is today's massmediated culture.

Where is the CSCC and What Is Its Job?CSCC was established by the Society of Jesus (The

Jesuits) in London, in 1977, and moved to Saint LouisUniversity in 1993. The Centre has a mandate to study andreflect on communication of all kinds in dialogue withscholars and media practitioners worldwide, in order to:

-Digest what communication researchers are saying aboutcommunication and its effect on people,

-Make that knowledge available to communicators,scholars and decisionmakers in an understandable and

61 6

usable form,-Promote research which is of special interest to the

Church and to other religiously motivated people,-Promote reflection and dialogue within the Christian

Community about the ethical, moral ,and religiousimplications of today's communication environment,

-Encourage ecumenical and interfaith dialogue concerningreligion, human dignity and the modern media ofcommunication.

How Does the Centre Accomplish Its Mission?To help do all this, the Centre carries on the followingactivities:

-PERIODICAL PUBLICATION: CSCC publishes aquarterly journal, Communication Research Trends, tobroaden understanding of the state of the art in relevantareas of communication research around the world. Trendsis read by people in about 70 countries. Another,publication, Communication and Religion, discusses moredirectly religious topics.

-CONFERENCES: CSCC sponsors and cosponsorsconferences, seminars and other meetings, in various partsof the world, to promote dialogue on communication issueswith moral, religious and social implications.

-LIBRARY: The Centre's highlyfocused10,000volume communications library, now integratedwith the 1,200,000volume Saint Louis University librarysystem, is freely accessible to all scholars interested inexploring the human dimensions of communication.

-VISITING SCHOLARS: Since its founding in 1977,the Centre has hosted more than 170 scholarsinresidencefor periods varying from one week to two years, enablingthem to use its library and other resources in a favorableresearch environment.

-BOOK PUBLICATION: Independently or incollaboration with others the CSCC has produced booksand developed book series emphasizing the humandimensions and implications of the mass media. Thesenow total more than 50 titles. They include the

77 6 2

"Communication and Human Values" series, published bySage Publications, with the collaboration of the WorldAssociation for Christian Communication, and a newseries, "Com in unication, Cul lure and Theology," with

Sheed and Ward.

-MEDIA EDUCATION: The Centre has promoted andencouraged research, writing, and other activities toeducate members of the media audience, both young and

old, in the most constructive ways to use the mass media.

-NETWORKING: To accomplish all this in the mosteffective way, CSCC needs collaborators in all countries.We send them our publications. They send us informationabout their own work and about other research going on in

their part of world, as well as keeping us supplied withbooks and periodicals on communication from theircountries. If they have questions, we answer them, or find

someone who can.

Who Helps?CSCC is part of Saint Louis University, which provides

office space and facilities, and meets many of the Centre's

financial needs. The University also helps the Centre

develop project proposals and raise funds to coveroperating expenses.

But the University has its teaching, education, health

care, and many other activities to support, as well.

Therefore, the CSCC needs additional help from its friends

to have enough resources to accomplish its missioneffectively.

78

6 3

9 BEST COPY AVAILABLE