Language use during school board meetings: Understanding controversies of and about communication

Journal of Business Communication

Volumn 44, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 111-136

  Castor, Theresa ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN PARKSIDE   (United States)

Author keywords

Meetings; Metacommunication; Problem formulation; School boards; Social constructionism

Indexed keywords

EID: 34047194917     PISSN: 00219436     EISSN: 15524582     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0021943606298828     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Baxter, L.A. (1993). Talking things through and putting it in writing: Two codes of communication in an academic institution. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 21, 313-326.
2. Bennington, A.J., Shetler, J.C., Shaw, T. (2003). Negotiating order in interorganizational communication: Discourse analysis of a meeting of three diverse organizations. Journal of Business Communication, 40, 118-143.
3. Burr, V. (1995). An introduction to social constructionism. London: Routledge.
4. Buttny, R. (1993). Social accountability in communication. London: Sage.
5. Buttny, R. (2004). Talking problems: Studies of discursive construction. Albany: State University of New York.
6. Carbaugh, D. (1988). Cultural terms and tensions in the speech at a television station. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 52, 216-237.
7. Carey, J.W. (1988). Communication as culture: Essays on media and society. New York: Routledge.
8. Castor, T.R. (2005). Constructing social reality in organizational decision-making: Account vocabularies in a diversity discussion. Management Communication Quarterly, 18, 479-508.
9. Cooren, F. (2004 a). The communicative achievement of collective minding: Analysis of board meeting excerpts. Management Communication Quarterly, 17 (4). 517-551.
10. Cooren, F. (2004 b). Textual agency: How texts do things in organizational settings. Organization, 11, 373-393.
11. Craig, R.T. (2005). How we talk about how we talk: Communication theory in the public interest. Journal of Communication, 55 (4). 659-667.
12. Craig, R.T., Tracy, K. (1995). Grounded practical theory: The case of intellectual discussion. Communication Theory, 5, 248-272.
13. Cunliffe, A.L. (2001). Managers as practical authors: Reconstructing our understanding of management practice. Journal of Management Studies, 38, 351-371.
14. Cunliffe, A.L. (2002). Social poetics as management inquiry: A dialogical approach. Journal of Management Inquiry, 11, 128-146.
15. Deetz, S. (1992). Democracy in an age of corporate colonization. Albany: State University of New York Press.
16. Deetz, S. (1995). Transforming communication transforming business: Building responsive and responsible workplaces. Creskill, NJ: Hampton.
17. Gephart, R.P., Steier, L., Lawrence, T. (1990). Cultural rationalities in crisis sensemaking: A study of a public inquiry into a major industrial accident. Industrial Crisis Quarterly, 4, 27-48.
18. Gergen, K.J. (1985). Social constructionist inquiry: Context and implications. In K. J. Gergen K. E. Davis (Eds.), The social construction of the person (pp. 3-18). New York: Springer-Verlag.
19. Gergen, K.J. (1999). Social construction in context. London: Sage.
20. Haas, T., Deetz, S. (2000). Between the generalized other and the concrete other: Approaching organizational ethics from feminist perspectives. In P. M. Buzzanell (Ed.), Rethinking organizational and managerial communication from feminist perspectives (pp. 24-36). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
21. Holman, D. J., Thorpe, R. (Eds.). (2003). Management and language: The manager as practical author. London: Sage.
22. Howell, W.G. (2005). Introduction. In W. G. Howell (Ed.), Besieged: School boards and the future of education politics (pp. 1-23). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
23. Jabs, L.B. (2005). Communicative rules and organizational decision making. Journal of Business Communication, 42, 265-288.
24. Katriel, T. (1986). Talking straight: Dugri speech in Israeli Sabra culture. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
25. Katriel, T., Philipsen, G. (1981). What we need is communication: Communication as a cultural category in some American speech. Communication Monographs, 48, 301-317.
26. Leeds-Hurwitz, W. (1995). Introducing social approaches. In W. Leeds-Hurwitz (Ed.), Social approaches to communication (pp. 3-20). New York: Guilford.
27. Mathews, D. (1996). Is there a public for public schools? Dayton, OH: Kettering Foundation Press.
28. Mehan, H. (1983). The role of language and the language of role in institutional decision making. Language in Society, 12, 187-211.
29. Meyer, J.W., Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340-363.
30. Milburn, T., Kenefick, J., Lambert, A. (2005). Facilitating communication during a board of directors' retreat: Enacting change at a family center. In L. Frey (Ed.), Facilitating group communication volume 2: Facilitating group task and team communication (pp. 63-88). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
31. Miller, L. (1994). Japanese and American meetings and what goes on before them: A case study of co-worker misunderstanding. Pragmatics, 4, 221-238.
32. O'Connor, E.S. (1997). Discourse at our disposal: Stories in and around the garbage can. Management Communication Quarterly, 10, 395-432.
33. Owen, W.F. (1984). Thematic metaphors in relational communication: A conceptual framework. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 49, 1-13.
34. Palmeri, J. (2004). When discourses collide: A case study of interprofessional collaborative writing in a medically oriented law firm. Journal of Business Communication, 41 (1). 37-65.
35. Schn, D.A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
36. Shotter, J. (1984). Social accountability and selfhood. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
37. Shotter, J. (1993 a). Conversational realities: Constructing life through language. London: Sage.
38. Shotter, J. (1993 b). Cultural politics of everyday life: Social constructionism, rhetoric and knowing of the third kind. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
39. Shotter, J. (1998). An organization's internal public sphere: Its nature and its supplementation. In B. G. O. Palshaugen, D. Ostergerg, J. Shotter (Eds.), The end of organizational theory? Language as a tool in action research and organizational development (pp. 131-146). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
40. Shotter, J. (2000). Wittgenstein and the everyday: From radical hiddenness to Nothing is hidden; From representation to participation. Journal of Mundane Behavior, 1 (2). Retrieved December 29, 2006, from http://mundanebehavior.org/index2.htm
41. Shotter, J. (2004). Expressing and legitimating 'actionable knowledge' from within 'the moment of acting.' Concepts and Transformation, 9 (2). 205-229.
42. Shotter, J. (2005). ' Inside the moment of managing': Wittgenstein and the everyday dynamics of our expressive-responsive activities. Organization Studies, 26 (1). 113-134.
43. Shotter, J. (2006). Understanding process from within: An argument for withnessthinking. Organization Studies, 27 (4). 585-604.
44. Simon, H.A. (1976). Administrative behavior: A study of decision-making processes in administrative organizations (3 rd ed.). New York: The Free Press.
45. Strauss, A., Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
46. Tracy, K. (1995). Action-implicative discourse analysis. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 14, 195-215.
47. Tracy, K. (1997). Constructing an academic book review [Review of the book Conversational realities: Constructive life through language]. Human Studies, 20, 117-123.
48. Tracy, K., Ashcraft, C. (2001). Crafting policies about controversial values: How wording disputes manage a group dilemma. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 29, 297-316.
49. Tracy, K., Muller, H. (2001). Diagnosing a school board's interactional trouble: Theorizing problem formulating. Communication Theory, 11, 84-104.
50. Tracy, K., Standerfer, C. (2003). Selecting a school superintendent: Sensitivities in group deliberation. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group communication in context: Studies of bona fide groups (pp. 109-134). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
51. Zarefsky, D. (1993). Value arguments in policy decisions: The problem of integration. In C. Conrad (Ed.), The ethical nexus (pp. 217-229). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.