This article was downloaded by: [UQ Library]On: 23 November 2014, At: 10:28Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Quarterly Journal of SpeechPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rqjs20

In the far westWilson B. Paul aa University of DenverPublished online: 05 Jun 2009.

To cite this article: Wilson B. Paul (1943) In the far west, Quarterly Journal of Speech,29:4, 413-419, DOI: 10.1080/00335634309380918

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335634309380918

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information(the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor& Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warrantieswhatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purposeof the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are theopinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed byTaylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor andFrancis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands,costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever causedarising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of theuse of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly

forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

10:

28 2

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

SPEAKING INSTRUCTION IN COLLEGE MILITARY UNITS: FAR WEST • 4 1 3

In the Pre-Meteorology program,speech training during the first 24 weeksis given in classes that meet one hourper week, and with 12 or 13 studentsper section. This permits frequent three-minute talks. For the second 24 weeksstudents are placed in sections of 25each, and continue to meet for one hourper week.

Some work has been done with micro-phones and the public address system.Recording of voices is also part of theprogram.

Of necessity, because the student hadno outside time for preparation, sub-jects are chosen that drew upon thestudent's experience. At each class ses-sion some principle of public speakingis stressed for a few moments at the be-ginning of the class hour.

Such subjects as, "What My HomeTown Is Doing in the War," "MyFriends in the Service," "The Uses ofMeteorology in the War," "Some In-teresting Incident of My Furlough,"have been used with success. The maga-zine Time is subscribed to for the groupso as to help its members keep posted onthe progress of the war. University ofChicago Broadcasts Round Tables havebeen used as the basis of group discus-sions. Use has been made also of Time'sBureau of Special Services for materials,such as, Section IV, "Relations withEurope," as the basis of class discussions.The students are eager to discuss otherproblems, such as, "Private vs. Govern-

mental Enterprise," "Women and thePostwar World."

In Pre-Meteorology the instructor loadis 16 sections. Because of the lack of staffin the Department of Speech, the oralwork in "English" of the V-12 programis being handled by the Department ofEnglish.

CONCLUSION

Instead of a summary of these variousreports, it might serve to conclude thisreport by quoting from a recent com-munication from Eldon L. Johnson, Aca-demic Director of the "C" program inMeteorology, on the nature of the train-ing in public speaking desired. "But itshould be clearly understood by all con-cerned that the work in speech de-scribed in the course outline is in nosense intended as remedial work. It isintended as positive training to improveby practice and criticism the skill of thestudents in spoken composition and ef-fective delivery. Such work is regardedas highly important to the practicaltraining of weather officers. The fact thata student's voice is naturally agreeableor normally effective should not giverise to the view that work in speech isunnecessary for him. Reasonably fre-quent opportunities for practice, both inthe art of clearly organized spoken ex-position and the accompanying art ofeffective delivery and use of the voice,should be regularly provided in CourseV."

III. IN THE FAR WEST

WILSON B. PAULUniversity of Denver

Nineteen colleges submitted data forthis survey.1 Of the various types of mili-

1 For the list of institutions, see Table at the endo£ this article on page 419.

tary units represented, Army Pre-Engineering heads the list with units ineight different institutions. Next are theArmy Air Corps College Training De-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

10:

28 2

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

THE QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF SPEECH

tachment and the Navy V-i2, with fiveunits each. Fourth is the Army Meteoro-logical Training Program with fourunits. Finally, are the following trainingprograms, each having one unit: NavyV-5, Army Technical Training Com-mand Clerical School, Army Pre-MedicSchool, and Army Foreign LanguageSchool. The training in Navy V-5 andthe Clerical School include only tech-nical subjects, and leave no place forbasic courses either in English or speech.

Thirteen of the nineteen schools haveonly one Army or Navy unit, five havetwo each, and one (University of Den-ver) has three Army units under threeseparate commands.

The smallest number of men perweek taking "English" in any institutionincluded in this survey is thirty, and thelargest is 628 (Oregon State). It appearsthat the heaviest load for an instructoris 314 students, where two instructorsteach all the men in the largest unit onany campus (Oregon State).

With the exception of Army Pre-Flight detachments, all groups attendEnglish classes from one to three sessionsa week over a period of twelve to thirty-six weeks. The Aircrew students havea more concentrated program, with fromthree to six class meetings a week for aperiod of three to twelve weeks. Groupsthat take the course in three weeks at-tend six sessions weekly. If the courseis larger, there are fewer sessions perweek.

Upon entering the English classroomfor the first day's teaching of an Aircrewgroup not long ago, the instructor caughtone of the students writing on the black-board, "We ain't got no need of. . . ."The section marcher called, "Attention,"and the student, with a guilty look,jumped back into position. After themen were seated the instructor asked,"You ain't got no need of what?" "Eng-lish, sir," was the reply. This young man

expressed the reaction of many a soldieror sailor who fails to see the aims ofEnglish and speech, and who fails tosee the functional value of skill in di-rect accurate communications to thoseactively engaged in national defense.

I

This survey indicates that most of thesupervisors of English and speech haveset up specific and clear aims for thecourses offered, yet the representativesfrom some institutions feel that the com-manding officers should be more specificin their instructions to the colleges anduniversities involved. One Army Mete-orology school has received no clear state-ment from the commander in spite ofthe fact that the Academic Committeefor Pre-Meteorological Training of theArmy Air Forces' Weather Directoratehas prepared both a "Suggested Outlineof Speech Training for Meteorologists"and a "Topical Outline" for a course incommunications.2

The Pre-Flight command calls fortraining to 1) improve speaking ability,2) improve writing ability, and 3) im-prove the ability to comprehend andremember written material. One institu-tion has built and integrated a coursearound the four basic phases of com-munication: speaking, writing, listening,and reading, relating each to the dy-namic functioning of an individual as aflyer and as a leader holding the respon-sible position of an officer.

About half of the colleges and univer-sities reported aims comparable to thoselisted by the University of Oregon forits Pre-Engineering students: "Militaryleaders should 1) organize available data,2) develop ideas interestingly and con-vincingly, and 3) communicate messages

2 The speech training outline was prepared byFranklin Knower, and the "Topical Outline," CourseV—"Communications in the 'B' Program"—was pre-pared by Theodore Morrison, Consultant, Army AirForces.

4i4-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

10:

28 2

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

SPEAKING INSTRUCTION IN COLLEGE MILITARY UNITS: FAR WEST 415

in a way to get appropriate action." Therepresentative who reported for StanfordUniversity summarized objectives as fol-lows: "In general, the aims and objec-tives would be the same as those for anycollege course in extemporaneous speak-ing." The University of Colorado is theonly institution to list, "taking part inorganized discussion," as a specific aim,but five institutions include discussionin their courses.

As the objectives indicate, most report-ing institutions interpret "English" tomean both spoken and written forms.The University of Montana considers"English" for the Army Air Force stu-dents to mean, "reading, writing, publicspeaking, free discussion, vocabulary,"and the University of New Mexico con-siders the term "Oral English" in theirV-12 Naval curriculum to mean, "paneldiscussions, oral reports, exercises inreading and interpretation."

Eight institutions reported an integra-tion of work in speech and English; threeattempt to give two courses that dove-tail; and nine present two distinct coursesby dividing the time allotted for "Eng-lish." Six schools that have no Depart-ments of Speech have divided the workin at least one of their military detach-ments, and three that have separate de-partments have integrated the oral andwritten work. On the other hand, sixinstitutions with separate departmentshave kept the fields apart in their mili-tary curricula. Five that have no De-partments of Speech have integrated thepublic speaking, reading, and writinginto a unified course. Apparently thetype of departmental organization hashad little to do with the degree to whichthe oral and written aspects of militarycommunications are combined.

II

One of the most vital questions con-fronting supervisors who plan the work

in English and speech for military unitsis, What general areas of subject mattershould be covered? In its combinedcourse, the University of Nevada coversfour divisions:

1. Grammar, pronunciation2. Organization and content of themes and

speeches3. Authoritative speech—one-fourth to one-

half of time spent on speeches, withemphasis on getting on feet for all classcommunications in all courses

4. Reading comprehension '

Similarly, Arizona State Teachers Col-lege at Tempe covers three general areasin their integrated English course for theAir Corps:

1. Speech—through the medium of paneldiscussions, ten members to the panel,three minutes to the speakera. Organization of concise three-min-

ute talksb. Improvement of articulation, pro-

nunciation, and anything else thatcan be improved in the very brieftime allotted

2. Writinga. Structure of the paragraph (concen-

tration on this)b. Punctuationc. Sentence structured. Grammar (the least possible)

3. Comprehensive readinga. Assigned readingsb. Class discussions or quiz over mate-

rials

The supervisor for speech training inAST Basic Engineering in the Universityof Denver reported,

The Army syllabus suggests that the workfocus upon "development of self-confidenceand ability to think on one's feet; develop-ment of sound habits of brevity, correct pro-nunciation and enunciation, conciseness ofexpression, and organization of material; de-velopment of oral flexibility, elimination ofmonotone habits, undesirable mannerismsand affectations." The core to these, skills inthe University of Denver takes a personalityapproach with an emphasis upon eliminatingimpulsiveness, inarticulateness, self-centered-ness, and eliminating the concentration upon

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

10:

28 2

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

THE QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF SPEECH

words instead of meanings. The developmentof objectivity with a dynamic outlook upon"facts" and a consciousness of abstracting,becomes a point of departure for the work invocal and bodily control, in assembling andorganizing materials. Assignments and criti-cisms are given in a manner to make thespeaker aware of his mechanisms of misevalu-ation from which his speech behaviour oper-ates.

In the V-12 at the University of NewMexico, a definite content theme is fol-lowed in their integrated course in pub-lic speaking and English. The supervisorof this program states, "We have oralreports upon such figures as WilliamPenn, Roger Williams, and BenjaminFranklin." This plan is not unlike thatof the Colorado College V-12 programwhich builds about half of its perform-ance units around Thomas H. Huxley'sAutobiography and Selected Essays.

The Oregon State College "SpeakingFrame" for engineers in the Army Spe-cialized Training Program adapts its per-formance activities as suggested in theirfirst classroom program outline:

1. Types of speeches given to be thoseadapted to military situationsa. Speeches given for purposes of orien-

tationb. Speeches given in course of military

instructionc. Speeches given in connection with

public contacts2. Speech subjects used to be those of vital

concern to those in military service3. Content of speeches to be coordinated

as much as possible with other courses inthe AST program

4. According to the AST program, thecourse is to cover broadly the whole fieldof public speaking

Available data indicates that mostmilitary speech activities in the West aredesigned to contribute to the students'immediate war effort, or to a better un-derstanding of their country and itsallies. The Colorado State College plansfor its Army Pre-Engineering unit illus-trate this trend:

We are planning to use one of the recom-mended volumes of reading selections. Thiswill be used in conjunction with the HistoryDepartment. We shall use some of theseselections as points of departure in planningspeech programs. The speeches by the stu-dents will deal a good deal with Americanhistorical documents and traditions. Wemight call it Americanism.

Three types of text materials are usedfor the combined Speech-English coursesin the schools studied—one for composi-tion, one for reading,comprehension, andone for public speaking. Seven of thereporting institutions use no text for thespeech classes. One presents its materialby "direct communication" and six usemimeographed materials. One of the lat-ter colleges expects to adopt a text soon.Four different speech texts were re-ported: Barnes, Speech Handbook; Brig-ance and Immel, Speech for MilitaryService; Monroe, Principles of Speech,Military Edition; and Thompson, Hand-book of Public Speaking.

Il lTwelve institutions use mechanical

aids in speech instruction. One otherdirector indicated that his school woulddo so if equipment were available; butanother felt that "the time spent wouldbe futile," and still another that theyhave "no time for mechanical aids."

One university (Denver) has usedphotography and recording, a public ad-dress system, and a mirrophone, but isdiscontinuing the use of photographyand recording because of limited timeand because of the frequent unexpectedshifting of its aviation students beforethe planned schedule is completed. Fourinstitutions use mirrophones, six use re-cordings, two utilize public address sys-tems, and two rely on charts and models.In addition to these mechanical aids, theUniversity of Denver and Oregon StateCollege both use their Speech Clinics forstudents in military courses.

4i6

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

10:

28 2

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

SPEAKING INSTRUCTION IN COLLEGE MILITARY UNITS: FAR WEST 417

In spite o£ criticism of the lecturemethod by many military men and someeducational authorities, eight schools uselectures freely in their programs, andthree devote one-third of the time to thismethod. In one university all lecturesare limited to ten or fifteen minutes.- Onthe other hand, six institutions have lit-tle or no lecturing to military students.

Perhaps one of the chief reasons forusing the lecture method is the extremelylimited amount of time allowed the stu-dents for preparation. Only one institu-tion (University of Colorado) found thatstudents in service have "the usual timefor preparation." The longest period oftime specifically stated is "one hour'spreparation for the one hour in speechclass." The following quotations mirrorthe preparation problem:

Practically no study time outside class, max-imum of thirty minutes a day.

Students are allowed approximately fifteenminutes' study for each hour's recitation pe-riod.

Two hours a week for study.Only class time; no time for outside prep-

aration.All work must be done in "contact" hours,

which means in the hours we meet them inclass.

This situation forces instructors to de-velop techniques that will bring maxi-mum efficiency in a limited time. FromOregon State College comes this report:

We have been forced to a technique forstreamlining and packing a course. Everyhour's program is outlined in detail andplaced before the student in mimeographedform at the beginning of the hour. So manyminutes are allotted to each phase of theprogram, and the speeches delivered aretimed to the second with a stop watch. Allassignments are presented in detail in mim-eographed form. In other words, there is nodilly-dallying.

From the University of Coloradocomes this suggestion:

[We have adopted] the usual techniquesof mass production: Efficiency in use of timein class; and, because of the large number ofstudents, all devices we can think of to savework. For example, I use objective tests asteaching devices chiefly, and grade them inclass. We use score sheets or criticism blanksto save discussion time. We are forced to usethe techniques of short speeches and read-ings.

In the Army Air Force College Train-ing Detachment in the University ofDenver where English and speech aretaught in one course, two or three exer-cises are embodied in one assignment.For example, one lesson is planned inthis manner: After a short introductionby the instructor, an essay is read orallyby members of the class; three previouslyprepared outlines of the essay, illustrat-ing three outline types, are examined inorder to develop an understanding oforganization and outline form; then thestudents prepare outlines of their ownfor themes which they will write duringthe next class period. Thus, in one classperiod, the aviation students practiceoral reading for clarity and comprehen-sion, study techniques of organizing,learn to think quickly and practice or-ganizing their own knowledge or writtenexpression. Such a method demands care-ful planning and the utilization of everyminute of the class period, but is of greathelp in overcoming that obstacle thrownup by a shortage of study time.

Where speech and English are taughtin separate units, the relative proportionof time granted each varies greatly. Insome cases, 50 per cent of the time isdevoted to speech. On the other hand, inone college where a member of the De-partment of English supervises the pro-gram (Arizona State Teachers College atFlagstaff), it is felt that no time can bespared for speech even though there is awell-trained speech instructor on thestaff.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

10:

28 2

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

4 i 8 THE QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF SPEECH

IVAvailable data indicate that the co-

operation between Departments of Eng-lish and Speech in attempting to produceefficient courses of study for army andnavy students is on the whole admirable.The speech teachers plan the speechwork and the English teachers plan theEnglish work, as a usual thing. Four mili-tary programs are supervised by Depart-ments of Speech, and one is supervisedjointly by both the departments ofSpeech and English. In one universitythe speech teacher is acting as coordina-tor for the entire Army program on hiscampus. In a few cases teachers from de-partments other than the two consideredin this study are instructing. In thesesituations, lesson plans are prepared bythe departments supervising the courses.

With the exception of two institutionsinvolved in this study, the administra-tions appear to have marshaled the best-trained men available for developing anefficient "English" course. But in thesetwo universities the Departments ofSpeech were ignored in setting up theprogram. A professor from one Far West-ern school said, "Our English head is-conceited enough to assume full respon-sibility." In this institution a few mili-tary students have arranged to takespecial work in the Department ofSpeech, in addition to the required Eng-lish course. In the other university towhich I have referred, the Department ofEnglish which was given supervision or-ganized the entire course without con-sulting members of the Department ofSpeech, or securing their cooperation inany way. Fortunately for the war effort,such situations appear to be rare in theWestern states.

VEvaluations of the success of military

courses in speech and English varygreatly. One instructor said his reaction

is, "Futility because of lack of time,"whereas one Dean said, "Excellent pro-gram for army students." From NewMexico College of Agriculture andMechanic Arts came this statement: "Wefeel that we should make the most ofwhatever slight opportunity we aregiven. It seems to be the general con-sensus of our faculty that the programas a whole attempts to cover too much.The English Department certainlyagrees."

The reaction to the Engineeringspeech program in Oregon State Collegesuggests several problems to be over-come:

In theory the total program is fine; and Ibelieve the Speech Department could make avery valuable contribution. But, as it is atpresent, the time allotted to us is whollyinadequate. Also the classes are too large-ranging from twenty-four to twenty-eight innumber. The official teaching load is fourteenhours in class; and that is too much, par-ticularly in view of the large classes and thefact that they are all one-period classes. Thestrain on the instructor, if he be conscien-tious, is terrific. At best, it is "factory" edu-cation, with the instructor-student relation-ship reduced to the minimum.

In contrast, members of the staff in theUniversity of Colorado feel that the mili-tary program has made a definite con-tribution. One of them wrote: "We feelthat the program is meeting the need wehave had for a long time around here.We hope to make it permanent and areplanning accordingly."

Perhaps the keynote to the various re-actions to speech and English trainingfor military men was sounded by thisstatement received from the Universityof Montana:

It is not going too badly. Our men learn agood deal. We do not bother men or instruc-tors with frequent tests; the men learn whatthey can. We are not insistent on coveringa certain "field" or "getting over" certainsubjects. We deal with the men as we findthem, as realistically as we can.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

10:

28 2

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

SPEAKING INSTRUCTION IN COLLEGE MILITARY UNITS: SOUTH

TABLE I

4'9

Institution

English andSpeech

Departmentsseparate

Writing andspeakingtaught

separately

Amount oftime

devoted tospeaking

Use of publicaddress system,

recording ormicrophone

Use oflecturesystem

i. Arizona State TeachersCollege, Flagstaff

2. Arizona State TeachersCollege, Tempe

3. Brigham Young4. Colorado College5. Colorado School of Mines6. Colorado State College7. Colorado State College of

Education*8. East Oregon College of

Education9. New Mexico College of

Agriculture and Mechan-ic Arts

10. Oregon State College11. Stanford:

EngineeringPre-medics

12. California3

13. Colorado:EngineeringNavy V-12

14. Denver:AircrewEngineeringForeign area and languageschool5

15. Montana16. Nebraska3

17. Nevada18. New Mexico

Navy V-12Meteorology

19. Oregon

Yes

Yes

YesNoNoNoNo

Yes

No

YesYes

YesYes

Yes

NoYesNoNo

No

Yes

No

YesNoNoYes

No speaking

No

Yes

YesYes

Yes

YesNo

NoYes

Yes

No

. NoYesYes

"None as such."(Elective courseoffered)

a/5

1/6 •

1/3None

2 /9

1/8

1/7

1/31/5

1 / 2

1/3

1 / 2

No. (Yes, inelectivecourse)

No

NoNoNoYes

No

Yes

YesNo

Yes

YesNo

No

Yes' Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

YesYesLittleYes

No

•LittleLittle

Yes

LittleYes

No

Yes

No

3 Data incomplete.* Technical Training Clerical School gives military correspondence, no speaking.5 English work has not yet begun.

IV. IN THE SOUTH

C. M. WISELouisiana State University

IAside from scattered items of personal

knowledge, the main data for the prep-aration of this report comes from aninquiry sent out to some 120 colleges anduniversities in the South. Thirty of these

sent replies. Of these thirty, only threereported the allocation to speech of asmuch as one-third of the available timeallotted to "English." Other institutionsmentioned fractions ranging downwardfrom one-sixth to one-fifteenth. Only five

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

10:

28 2

3 N

ovem

ber

2014