Problems of exclusionary research criteria: The case against the “usable knowledge” litmus test for social justice communication research

Communication Studies

Volumn 54, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 438-450

  Olson, Kathryn M ^a   Olson, Clark D ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE   (United States)

^b ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84920481377     PISSN: 10510974     EISSN: 17451035     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10510970309363302     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Argyris, C., 1995. “ Knowledge when used in practice tests theory: The case of applied communication research ”. In Applied Communication in the 21st Century, Edited by: Cissna, K. N., 1–19. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
2. Artz, L., 1998. African‐Americans and higher education: An exigence in need of applied communication. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 26: 210–231.
3. Boyer, E. L., 1990. Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate, Princeton, NJ: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
4. Frey, L. R., 1998. Communication and social justice research: Truth, justice, and the applied communication way. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 26: 155–164.
5. Frey, L. R., Pearce, W. B., Pollock, M. A., Artz, L., and Murphy, B. A. O., 1996. Looking for justice in all the wrong places: On a Communication approach to social justice. Communication Studies, 47: 110–127.
6. Hartnett, S., 1998. Lincoln and Douglas meet the abolitionist David Walker as prisoners debate slavery: Empowering education, applied communication, and social justice. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 26: 232–253.
7. Makau, J. M., 1996. Notes on communication education and social justice. Communication Studies, 47: 135–141.
8. Olson, C. D., and Olson, K. M., Sentencing the sanctuary movement and the rededication of the Statute of Liberty: A contradiction in values. Paper presented at the meeting of the Speech Communication Association. New Orleans, LA. November.
9. Olson, C. D., and Olson, K. M., Striving toward argumentative equality in the public vs. legal arenas: The junction of legal procedures and rhetorical strategies in the sanctuary trial. Paper presented at the meeting of the International Communication Association. Dublin, Ireland. June.
10. Olson, K. M., and Olson, C. D., Reconfiguring justice: The rhetorical impact of the use of the motion in limine in the sanctuary trial. Paper presented at the meeting of the Speech Communication Association. San Francisco, CA. November.
11. Olson, K. M., and Olson, C. D., 1991a. “ Creating identification through the alignment of rhetorical enactment, purpose, and textually implied audience ”. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Argumentation, Edited by: van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., Blair, J. A., and Willard, C. A., 782–789. Amsterdam: International Centre for the Study of Argumentation.
12. Olson, K. M., and Olson, C. D., Closing the gap between rhetorical theory and Critical Legal Studies: Rhetorical dimensions of the judiciary as illustrated by the sanctuary trial. Paper presented at the meeting of the Speech Communication Association. Atlanta, GA. November.
13. Olson, K. M., and Olson, C. D., Ideology and argument evaluation: Competing axiologies in the sanctuary trial. Paper presented at the meeting of the Speech Communication Association. Miami Beach, FL. November.
14. Olson, K. M., and Olson, C. D., 1994. Judges’ influence on trial outcomes and jurors’ experiences of justice: Reinscribing existing hierarchies through the sanctuary trial. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 22: 16–35.
15. Olson, K. M., and Olson, C. D., 1995. “ Ideology and argument evaluation: Competing axiologies in the sanctuary trial ”. In Warranting Assent: Case Studies in Argument Evaluation, Edited by: Schiappa, E., 155–191. Albany: State University of New York Press.
16. Olson, K. M., and Olson, C. D., 2003. Beyond texts and authors: A reader‐centered theory of irony's dual “persuasive” uses Manuscript under review
17. Pearce, W. B., 1998. On putting social justice in the discipline of Communication and putting enriched concepts of communication in social justice research and practice. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 26: 272–278.
18. Pollock, M. A., Artz, L., Frey, L. R., Pearce, W. B., and Murphy, B. A. O., 1996. Navigating between Scylla and Charybdis: Continuing the dialogue on communication and social justice. Communication Studies, 47: 142–151.
19. Wood, J. T., 1996. Social justice research: Alive and well in the field of Communication. Communication Studies, 47: 128–134.