Communication Theory Development (Fall 2025)

From CommunityData
COM500: Communication Theory Development - Department of Communication, University of Washington
Instructor:
Course Meetings: 1:30–3:20p, Mondays & Wednesday, in CMU 242
Course Websites:
Course Catalog Description:
Covers the philosophy behind theory development, discusses the basic components of theories, and reviews significant theoretical contributions in communication from social scientific and humanistic traditions. Introduces students to the process of conceptualization and theory design through reading and discussion of relevant bodies of communication scholarship.

Course Description[edit]

The purpose of this course is to introduce incoming graduate students in the University of Washington’s Department of Communication to the multiple ways scholars theorize about communication. Our department includes faculty who come together from different epistemologies and traditions within the expansive field of communication research. This course helps students come to recognize those epistemologies and traditions, and identify the opportunities and challenges of developing theory in our sometimes separate and sometimes overlapping disciplinary spaces. In addition to introducing different strands of the field’s history and ways of knowing, the course introduces students to some theories developed in the seven graduate areas in the department: communication & difference, communication technology & society, interpersonal communication, journalism studies, organizing & structures, political communication, and rhetoric.

Learning Objectives[edit]

At the end of this course students will be able to:

  • Differentiate and integrate some of the common epistemological and theoretical frameworks employed by communication scholars and in our graduate curriculum;
  • Articulate the key approaches to communication within our own department and situate UW Communication within the field;
  • Identify and interpret key communication concepts, theories, and questions in each of the department’s areas of emphasis;
  • Understand how various domains of scholarship can offer a foundation for one's own scholarship in one or more of these areas.

Note About This Syllabus[edit]

You should expect this syllabus to be a dynamic document, not a contract. Although the core expectations for this class are fixed, the details of readings and assignments will shift based on how the class goes, any guest speakers I arrange, my readings in this area, etc. As a result, there are three important things to keep in mind:

  • Although details on this syllabus will change, I will try to ensure that I never change readings more than six days before they are due. This means that if I don't fill in a reading marked "[To Be Decided]" six days before it's due, it is dropped. If I don't change something marked "[Tentative]" or "[To Be Confirmed]" before the deadline, then it is assigned. This also means that if you plan to read more than six days ahead, contact me first.
  • Because this syllabus is a wiki, you can track every change by clicking the history button on this page when I make changes.

Access to Readings[edit]

Many readings are marked as "[Available through UW libraries]". Most of these will be accessible to anybody who connects from the UW network. This means that if you're on campus, it will likely work. Although you can go through the UW libraries website to get most of these, the easiest way is using the UW library proxy bookmarklet. This is a little button you can drag and drop onto the bookmarks toolbar on your browser. When you press the button, it will ask you to log in using your UW NetID and then will automatically send your traffic through UW libraries. You can also use the other tools on this UW libraries webpage.

Workload[edit]

This class is a five-credit class. According to the UW policy, students should expect to devote about 3 hours per week per credit, on average, across weeks and students. With this in mind, I plan to assign about a book's worth of reading each week. Because we will spend about 4 hours in class and an hour or two on assignments, on average, I expect everybody to read for about 8-10 hours each week (i.e., about one book's worth of reading time). For some people, reading a book's worth of articles will take longer. For some, it will take less. Please let me know if you are consistently spending more than 15 hours a week on the class.

Schedule[edit]

Module I: What is Communication? What is Theory?[edit]

Day 1: Wednesday September 24: Introduction to the Course[edit]

We will review the syllabus together, discuss course expectations, make any necessary adjustments or accommodations, and get to know each other.

Before class, please read chapters 3 and 4 from:

Calarco, Jessica McCrory. 2020. A Field Guide to Grad School: Uncovering the Hidden Curriculum. Princeton University Press. [Available in Canvas] [Available from UW libraries]

You will likely find the rest of the book helpful during your graduate journey. UW libraries currently has the full ebook available at the link above.

Day 2: Monday September 29: Histories of the Field (Speech Communication)[edit]

  • National Communication Association.” In A Century of Communication Studies: The Unfinished Conversation, edited by Pat J. Gehrke and William M. Keith, 1–25. New York: Routledge. [Available in Canvas]
  • Gunn, Joshua, and Frank E. X. Dance. 2014. “The Silencing of Speech in the Late Twentieth Century.” In A Century of Communication Studies: The Unfinished Conversation, edited by Pat J. Gehrke and William M. Keith, 64–81. New York: Routledge. [Available in Canvas]
  • Eadie, William F. 2011. “Stories We Tell: Fragmentation and Convergence in Communication Disciplinary History.” Review of Communication 11 (3): 161–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/15358593.2011.578257. [Available from UW libraries]

Day 3: Wednesday October 1: Histories of the Field (Mass Communication/s & Journalism)[edit]

Day 4: Monday October 6: What is Communication?[edit]

  • Lasswell, Harold D. 1948. “The Structure and Function of Communication in Society.” In The Communication of Ideas. The Institute for Religious and Social Studies. [Available in Canvas]
  • Carey, James W. 2008. “A Cultural Approach to Communication.” In Communication as Culture: Essays on Media and Society, Revised Edition, 11-28. New York: Routledge. [Available in Canvas] [Available from UW libraries] [n.b., UW libraries have the full book, but the formatting is less good than this chapter.]
  • Peters, John Durham. 1994. “The Gaps of Which Communication Is Made.” Critical Studies in Mass Communication 11, no. 2 (June): 117–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/15295039409366891. [Available in Canvas]
  • Silvio Waisbord’s UW Colloquium in Spring 2017 (Note: Although the video 1hr 20m, the talk itself is only 31m. There are no slides so you should be able to listen on the go). [Available free online]

Optional Readings:

  • Shannon, Claude Elwood, and Warren Weaver. 1969. The Mathematical Theory of Communication. University of Illinois Press. [Available from Instructor]
  • Waisbord, Silvio. 2019. Communication: A Post-Discipline. Polity. (Intro & Chapter 1) [Available in Canvas]

Day 5: Wednesday October 8: What Is Theory? (Social Sciences)[edit]

  • Abbott, Andrew. 2004. Methods of Discovery: Heuristics for the Social Sciences. New York, New York: W. W. Norton. Read Chapter 1 Part I-II (3-26); Chapter 4 (110-136); Chapter 5 (137-161); & Chapter 6 (162-210). [Available in Canvas]

Day 6: Monday October 13: What Is Theory? (Humanities)[edit]

Module II: Epistemologies Underlying Communication Theory[edit]

Day 7: Wednesday October 15: What is Communication Theory? Epistemological Foundations[edit]

Day 8: Monday October 20: Social Scientific Perspectives[edit]

  • Miller, Katherine. 2005. “Post-Positivist Perspectives on Theory Development.” In Communication Theories: Perspectives, Processes, and Contexts, 32–45. Boston, Massachusetts: McGraw-Hill. [Available in Canvas]
  • McLeod, Jack, and Zhongdang Pan. 2005. “Concept Explication and Theory Construction.” In The Evolution of Key Mass Communication Concepts: Honoring Jack M. McLeod, edited by Sharon Dunwoody, Lee B. Becker, Douglas M. McLeod, and Gerald M. Kosicki, 13–38. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. [Available in Canvas] [Note: the whole chapter is available to you, but you are just expected to read pages 13-38.]
  • Swedberg, Richard. 2012. “Theorizing in Sociology and Social Science: Turning to the Context of Discovery.” Theory and Society 41 (1): 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-011-9161-5. [Available from UW libraries]
  • [Example] Kramer, Adam D. I., Jamie E. Guillory, and Jeffrey T. Hancock. 2014. “Experimental Evidence of Massive-Scale Emotional Contagion through Social Networks.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111 (24): 8788–90. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1320040111. [Available from UW libraries]
Optional Readings

Day 9: Wednesday October 22: Interpretive Perspectives[edit]

  • Miller, Katherine. 2005. “Interpretive Perspectives on Theory Development.” In Communication Theories: Perspectives, Processes, and Contexts, 46–59. Boston, Massachusetts: McGraw-Hill. [Available in Canvas]
  • Charmaz, Kathy. 2014. “Chapter 1: An Invitation to Grounded Theory.” In Constructing Grounded Theory, 2nd ed., 1-21. Sage. [Available in Canvas]
  • Geertz, Clifford. 1973. “Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture.” In The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays, 3-30. New York, NY: Basic Books. [Available from UW libraries]
  • [Example] Philipsen, Gerry. 1975. “Speaking ‘like a Man’ in Teamsterville: Culture Patterns of Role Enactment in an Urban Neighborhood.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 61 (1): 13. 9305255. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335637509383264. [Available from UW libraries]

Day 10: Monday October 27: Humanities Perspectives[edit]

Day 11: Wednesday October 29: Critical Perspectives[edit]

Module III: Areas of Studies in the UW Department of Communication[edit]

Day 12: Monday November 3: Interpersonal Communication[edit]

  • Cappella, Joseph N. 1987. “Interpersonal Communication: Definitions and Fundamental Questions.” In Handbook of Communication Science, 1st edition, edited by Charles R. Berger and Steven H. Chaffee, 184-238. SAGE Publications. [Available in Canvas]
  • Burleson, Brant R. 2010. “The Nature of Interpersonal Communication: A Message-Centered Approach.” In The Handbook of Communication Science, 2nd Edition, edited by Charles R. Berger, Michael E. Roloff, and David R. Roskos-Ewoldsen, 145-163. Sage Publishing. [Available from UW libraries]
  • Solomon, Denise Haunani, Leanne K. Knobloch, Jennifer A. Theiss, and Rachel M. McLaren. 2016. “Relational Turbulence Theory: Explaining Variation in Subjective Experiences and Communication within Romantic Relationships.” Human Communication Research 42 (4): 507–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12091. [Available from UW libraries]
Optional readings
  • Braithwaite, Dawn O., Paul Schrodt, & Kaitlin E. Phillips. 2022. “Meta-theory and Theory in Interpersonal Communication Research.” In Engaging Theories in Interpersonal Communication: Multiple Perspectives, 3rd ed., edited by Dawn O. Braithwaite & P. Schrodt, 1–23. Routledge. [Available via UW Libraries] [Available in Canvas]

Day 13: Wednesday November 5: Political Communication[edit]

Optional readings

Day 14: Monday November 10: Rhetoric[edit]

Day 15: Wednesday November 12: Communication & Difference[edit]

Day 16: Monday November 17: Journalism Studies[edit]

Optional reading
  • Schudson, Michael. 2003. “Does News Matter? (Media Effects Part I).” In The Sociology of News. W. W. Norton & Company.

Day 17: Wednesday November 19: Organizing & Structures[edit]

Day 18: Monday November 24: Communication Technology & Society[edit]

Optional readings

Module IV: New Frontiers[edit]

Day 19: Wednesday November 26: Habermasian Public Spheres & Theory in Engaged Scholarship[edit]

Note: These topics were selected based on requests from the class based on our conversations over the quarter.

Day 20: Monday December 1: Styles of Theorizing[edit]

Note: These topics were selected based on requests from the class based on our conversations over the quarter.
Optional Readings

Day 21: Wednesday December 3: Final Presentations[edit]

The entire class will be devoted to final presentations.

Everybody will have 20 minutes to present. Each presentation should be between 8-12 minutes and absolutely not longer than 15 minutes. I expect most people will use slides, but walking through posters could work too. I'm open/flexible, and you're welcome to be creative.

Assignments[edit]

Your assignments consist of three groups of projects: (1) weekly response papers and participation in class discussion, (2) a small number of colloquium reports (likely 3), and (2) a final research project. Your grade in the course will be assessed in the #Grading and Assessment section of this page.

There will be no exams or quizzes. Unless otherwise noted, all assignments are due at the end of the day (i.e., 11:59pm on the day they are due).

Reading Responses[edit]

Deliverables
(1) Post a new message in the appropriate the discussion board in Canvas; (2) Respond to at least one of your classmates before class.
Due Date
(1) the day before class before 6pm (on any day with reading); (2) the day of class by 10am (on a day with reading)
Maximum length
500 words

For each day of class, you are expected to write a response to the readings for that day. In terms of content, reading responses offer you an opportunity to engage the readings by identifying common or conflicting premises, thinking through potential implications, and/or critiquing the claims being made. Note that reading responses should not simply repeat the authors’ arguments, but should instead interpret, analyze, synthesize, or counter them. A good response paper will include minimal summarizing, at most, and focus more on responding to ideas. Justify your reflections with evidence from the text and beyond; for example, don't just say what you wonder about or find interesting without explaining why you find it interesting. At the end of your reading responses, you should include at least two questions about the readings that you would like the class to discuss.

In addition to posting your response to the discussion board, please read all of your classmates’ responses before class. These reading responses will serve as a starting point for class discussion each day, so you are expected to use them in that way during class sessions.

Response papers should be no longer than 500 words (one single-spaced page), and must be posted to the dedicated Canvas discussion board by 6pm the day of before class' (i.e., on Sundays and Tuesday). Please respect this maximum to manage the workload for yourself and others. So everyone will have a chance to incorporate them into their readings, After you post your reflection, please read all of your classmates’ responses before class and briefly respond to a minimum of two of your classmates’ posts before 6pm on the day of class and nominate at least one question for discussion.

Reading responses will be assessed based on the following four-item rubric:

  • Demonstrating fluency in the full range of assigned readings: Your response should show that you have carefully read the assigned readings for the day. Do you refer to and quote from the assigned texts? Do you draw connections or point to contradictions across the readings, placing the readings in conversation with each other? Although you do not need to give every article equal attention, it will be hard to establish that you have read the material if you only mention one of the assigned articles.
  • Engaging in critical thinking: Your reading response should offer insightful critical remarks about the assigned readings, make unique and edifying discoveries about the relationship between theories introduced in the readings, apply the concepts you find in the readings to your own research interests or to current events, and/or extend the points made in the readings in important ways.
  • Supporting class discussion: Your response should attempt to support our discussion. Concretely, this means that your write-up must include at least 2 question that could be used to prompt discussion in class. Be prepared to introduce that question to the class discussion as well as respond thoughtfully to your classmates’ discussion prompts in class—whether or not you have nominated them for discussion. You will also be expected to respond in the forum to nominate a classmates question for discussion.
  • Communicating clearly and on time: Your response should be well written, largely (or entirely) free of stylistic errors, and submitted before the deadline.

Colloquium Reports[edit]

As a graduate student, you are expected to attend research talks that are sponsored by the department and assess the work that you see presented there, whether the speaker is in your chosen area or not. This class is designed to help you learn to do that.

For the purposes of this class, you are expected to watch these talks and then write up a report on the speaker’s development of theory in their research presentation. Each report should be 800-1200 words in length, and should identify the epistemological assumptions under which the researcher is operating, as well as discuss the strengths and weaknesses in their theory use and/or theory building. They will be due on the Friday of the week after each talk (i.e., about 10 days after the talk).

There is actually only one colloquium scheduled for the fall, so I'm going to assign a second talk by our department's newest faculty members in a different on-campus seminar series:

Both talks should be recorded, but I strongly recommend you attend both in person.

Final Project[edit]

Presentations of paper due dates
December 3 (last day of class)
Paper due date
Friday, December 12, 2025 at 11:59pm PDT via Canvas
Maximum Length
4500 words of text, excluding references (~15-18 pages double-spaced)
Deliverables
Turn in the appropriate Canvas dropbox

In your final project, I'm asking you to identify a communication topic or issue that is of scholarly interest to you and consider how all four of the epistemological approaches to theorizing introduced in the course (that is, the post-positivist, interpretive, humanities, and critical research paradigms) can be used to better explain, understand, complicate and critically intervene in it.

Examples of topics or issues used in successful final papers in COM 500 in the past include:

  • Motivating effective and sustainable collaboration across difference;
  • The portrayal of Asian-Americans in contemporary television and film;
  • The progressive workplace brand as a corporate public relations strategy;
  • Communication of voter fraud conspiracies in the U.S.;
  • Supportive communication practices around anticipated prolonged life stressors.

Your analysis should evaluate the various ways in which the epistemologies and common ways of theorizing within them can be compared by assessing how your selected topic/issue has been and could be theorized within each epistemology. In writing your essay, identify the commonalities as well as the most salient differences between the epistemologies you select; the aims, values, and assumptions of each; the theory-development practices in communication scholarship they reflect; and the implications of these commonalities and differences for theorizing this issue/topic. Draw on material that we read about epistemologies and specific areas as appropriate.

A successful final paper will not simply tell us what other scholars have said. An excellent paper will demonstrate fluency with the material we have covered in class by engaging critically, creatively, and synthetically. Although it is fine to briefly review the literature on the topic or issue you have identified, keep in mind that I am going to assess your work exclusively in terms of how you engage with the course material in proposing new projects around your chosen subject from each of the four research paradigms. Please format your papers and all references according to the latest version of a style guide commonly used in communication research, such as APA or Chicago Style.

In addition to the written papers, students will each give an oral presentation outlining their final paper work during the final week of the quarter. You are expected to use slides to assist in that presentation. Your instructor and classmates will provide feedback that will help you shape and improve your paper.

Grading and Assessment[edit]

The writing rubric section of the detailed page on assessment gives the rubric I will use to evaluate both your #Weekly Response Papers and your #Final Projects.

Your participation in the course will be assessed using my detailed User:Benjamin Mako Hill/Assessment#Participation Rubric. Please also pay close attention to the section on maintaining participation balance.

I have put together a very detailed page that describes the way I approach assessment and grading—both in general and in this course. Please read it carefully I will assign grades for each of following items on the UW 4.0 grade scale according to the weights below:

  • Reading Responses: 30%
  • Participation in class discussion: 20%
  • Colloquium reports: 15%
  • Oral presentation of final paper: 5%
  • Final paper: 30%

Administrative Notes[edit]

Office Hours[edit]

Office hours will be appointment—I'm usually available via chat during "business hours." You can view out my calendar and/or put yourself on it. If you schedule a meeting, we'll meet in the Jitsi room (makooffice). You will get a link to the room through the scheduling, although you should be able to find it by navigating through https://meet.jit.si.

Religious Accommodations[edit]

Washington state law requires that UW develop a policy for accommodation of student absences or significant hardship due to reasons of faith or conscience, or for organized religious activities. The UW’s policy, including more information about how to request an accommodation, is available at Religious Accommodations Policy. Accommodations must be requested within the first two weeks of this course using the Religious Accommodations Request form.

Student Conduct[edit]

The University of Washington Student Conduct Code (WAC 478-121) defines prohibited academic and behavioral conduct and describes how the University holds students accountable as they pursue their academic goals. Allegations of misconduct by students may be referred to the appropriate campus office for investigation and resolution. More information can be found online at https://www.washington.edu/studentconduct/ Safety

Call SafeCampus at 206-685-7233 anytime–no matter where you work or study–to anonymously discuss safety and well-being concerns for yourself or others. SafeCampus’s team of caring professionals will provide individualized support, while discussing short- and long-term solutions and connecting you with additional resources when requested.

Use of AI Tools[edit]

Unless otherwise noted, work submitted for this course must be your own. Unless otherwise specified, using generative AI tools, such as ChatGPT, when working on assignments is forbidden. Using generative AI outside of specified tasks will be considered academic misconduct and subject to investigation.

The assignments in this class have been designed to challenge you to develop creativity, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills. Using AI technology will limit your capacity to develop these skills and meet the learning goals of this course.

If you have any questions about what constitutes academic integrity in this course or at the University of Washington, please contact me to discuss your concerns.

Please note that I do not consider grammar/spellchecking a prohibited use of AI.

Text adapted from: UW sample syllabus statements.

Academic Dishonesty[edit]

This includes cheating on assignments, plagiarizing (misrepresenting work by another author as your own, paraphrasing or quoting sources without acknowledging the original author or using information from the internet without proper citation), and submitting the same or similar paper to meet the requirements of more than one course without instructor approval. Academic dishonesty in any part of this course is grounds for failure and further disciplinary action. The first incident of plagiarism will result in the student’s receiving a zero on the plagiarized assignment. The second incident of plagiarism will result in the student’s receiving a zero in the class.

Disability Resources[edit]

If you have already established accommodations with Disability Resources for Students (DRS), please communicate your approved accommodations through their processes at your earliest convenience so we can discuss your needs in this course.

If you have not yet established services through DRS, but have a temporary health condition or permanent disability that requires accommodations (conditions include but not limited to; mental health, attention-related, learning, vision, hearing, physical or health impacts), you are welcome to contact DRS at 206-543-8924 or uwdrs@uw.edu or disability.uw.edu. DRS offers resources and coordinates reasonable accommodations for students with disabilities and/or temporary health conditions. Reasonable accommodations are established through an interactive process between you, your instructor(s) and DRS. It is the policy and practice of the University of Washington to create inclusive and accessible learning environments consistent with federal and state law.

Mental Health[edit]

Your mental health is important. If you are feeling distressed, anxious, depressed, or in any way struggling with your emotional and psychological wellness, please know that you are not alone. College can be a profoundly difficult time for many of us.

Resources are available for you:

Other Student Support[edit]

Any student who has difficulty affording groceries or accessing sufficient food to eat every day or who lacks a safe and stable place to live and believes this may affect their performance in the course is urged to contact the graduate program advisor for support. Furthermore, please notify the professors if you are comfortable in doing so. This will enable us to provide any resources that we may possess (adapted from Sara Goldrick-Rab). Please also note the student food pantry, Any Hungry Husky at the ECC.

Credit and Notes[edit]

This syllabus is the work of many people—more people, in fact, than I even know. This will be the fifth time I have taught this course at UW and it has been taught or co-taught by Leah Ceccarelli, Carmen Gonzalez, Patricia Moy, LeiLani Nishime, Valerie Manusov, Christine Harold, Ralina Joseph, and Kirsten Foot during the time period that I've been at UW and, I'm sure, by many others before. This syllabus is typically "past down" and reflects the work of all of these people. It also includes feedback from the Graduate Program Committee and from other UW Department of Communication faculty on an ad hoc basis.

Previous versions I have taught include:

Retrieved from "https://wiki.communitydata.science/index.php?title=Communication_Theory_Development_(Fall_2025)&oldid=278647"
Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported
Powered by MediaWiki