No description available.

Contemporary K-12 education reform policies have focused heavily on the teaching profession through increased accountability measures and decreased job security. In the rhetoric of contemporary reform, teachers are often praised as heroes capable of overcoming any obstacles and at the same time blamed for the perceived failures of public schools. This dissertation examines the impact of such policies and corresponding representations on the lived experiences of K-12 teachers in North Carolina, specifically highlighting the strategies through which teachers gain rhetorical agency within the discursive space of reform. To do so, I apply an analytical frame of public sphere theory and employ a mixed-methods approach that combines archival methods and fieldwork (e.g. participant observation and interviews). This dissertation argues that teachers' discourses provide alternative narratives to the dominant view that modifying the teaching profession is a cure-all for educational problems. I first develop a history of contemporary education reform in North Carolina and argue that within these discourses, teachers are represented as heroes able to do more work with less pay under increased scrutiny. Then, analyzing images of protest signs collected at the May 16 teacher rally in Raleigh, North Carolina, I argue that teachers rhetorically perform their professional identities as student advocates, champions of public educators, and political dissenters. As such, they dismantle dominant representations of their profession and advance a notion of public education that values collaboration, equitability, and the public good. Last, I examine how teachers negotiate the tension between their goals and the constraints of policy, arguing that contemporary reform undermines teachers' expertise. At the same time, teachers devise strategies to work toward their visions of public education. Such strategies include building relationships, being persistent, de-prioritizing policy, and cultivating community. / Doctor of Philosophy / Contemporary K-12 education reform policies have focused heavily on the teaching profession through increased accountability measures and decreased job security. In the rhetoric of contemporary reform, teachers are often praised as heroes capable of overcoming any obstacles and at the same time blamed for the perceived failures of public schools. This dissertation examines the impact of such policies and corresponding representations on the lived experiences of K-12 teachers in North Carolina. To do so, I employ an approach that combines archival methods and fieldwork (e.g. participant observation and interviews), and rhetorical analysis. This dissertation argues that teachers’ discourses provide alternative narratives to the dominant view that modifying the teaching profession is a cure-all for educational problems. I first develop a history of contemporary education reform in North Carolina and argue that within these discourses, teachers are represented as heroes able to do more work with less pay under increased scrutiny. Then, analyzing images of protest signs collected at the May 16 teacher rally in Raleigh, North Carolina, I argue that teachers rhetorically perform their professional identities as student advocates, champions of public educators, and political dissenters. As such, they dismantle dominant representations of their profession and advance a notion of public education that values collaboration, equitability, and the public good. Last, I examine how teachers negotiate the tension between their goals and the constraints of policy, arguing that contemporary reform undermines teachers’ expertise. At the same time, teachers devise strategies to work toward their visions of public education. Such strategies include building relationships, being persistent, de-prioritizing policy, and cultivating community.

This dissertation examines the Hunt circle's public activities and its historical significance in terms of public-sphere theory proposed by Jurgen Harbermas. Recent studies on Romantic literature have attended to how Romantic writers' literary practices were conditioned upon their contemporary history, as opposed to the traditional notion of Romanticism based on an affirmation of individual creativity. Although these studies meaningfully highlight the historicity inherent in seemingly individualistic Romantic texts, they have frequently failed to assess the way in which this historicity of Romantic texts is connected to Romantic writers' own will to engage with public issues by placing too much emphasis on how history determines individuals' activities. In this sense, the notion of public sphere offers a productive theoretical framework by which to read the historicity of Romantic literature without disavowing an individual writer's role in historical proceedings, since it underscores a historical process in which a communal interaction between individuals constitutes a progress of history. By focusing on this significance of public-sphere theory, this dissertation suggests that the Hunt circle, whose members' communal literary practices were aimed at achieving the public good in the tumultuous post-Napoleonic era, serves as a model of this process-based historical theorization. Chapter I examines the significance of public-sphere theory in assessing how the Hunt circle engaged in its contemporary history. Chapter II elucidates the nature of the public sphere that Leigh Hunt's and his circle's activities created and discusses the problems that this public sphere faced in the historical context of the early nineteenth century. Chapter III shows how the Hunt circle exposed a sense of anxiety and instability in the face of the commercialized literary public sphere by examining John Keats's literary practices. Chapter IV highlights Percy Bysshe Shelley's public ideal which aimed for a unified and inclusive public sphere beyond class boundaries and traces how this ideal was frustrated in the ensuing historical proceedings. Chapter V deals with the final phase of the Hunt circle and its disintegration by observing the ways in which Mary Shelley memorialized the Hunt circle for the feminized reading public of the Victorian period. By illuminating the nature of the Hunt circle's activities for the public, this dissertation ultimately aims to reassess how literary intellectuals in the Romantic period struggled to sustain the traditional calling of men of letters in their contemporary public sphere.

My dissertation focuses on nineteenth-century American literature texts that engage with ruins and monuments. Traditionally, this interaction has been treated as a formal curiosity for literary critics, but this project argues interarts literature carries important implications for public sphere theory, especially in cases when an author writes about nationalist architecture and iconography.

This study seeks to understand public and institutional uptake of the public hearing genre. More specifically, this study examines how public hearing genre conventions are established and how those conventions inform and often govern tensions that arise in public discourse about a contested environmental project. In my research, I analyzed a corpus of public comments from two Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) 401 Water Quality Certification public hearings that were held in August 2017 and hosted by Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VA DEQ). Additionally, I conducted interviews with 13 community members and two state representatives who spoke at one of the two hearings. This approach led me to several important findings. Most significantly, I found that while many community members understood VA DEQ's stated purpose of the public hearings, they prepared comments that spoke to an entirely different purpose because they were responding to a different kind of problem than that of VA DEQ. This finding is crucial to understanding the other tensions and ideas of consensus that occur among citizens and VA DEQ representatives since the kind of problem informs the uptake of the public hearing and the overall interpretation of the public hearing genre. My dissertation thus argues that there are ways we might reimagine ideas of effectiveness, consensus, and the public hearing genre, specifically in the case of the 401 Public Hearings and more generally in other public hearings where public discourses center on a contested environmental project like the MVP. / Doctor of Philosophy / This study examines the role and effect of public hearings and the tensions that sometimes arise within them. More specifically, I analyze transcripts from the two 401 Water Quality public hearings about the Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP). These hearings occurred in August 2017 and were hosted by Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VA DEQ). Additionally, I conducted interviews with 13 community members and 2 state representatives who spoke at one of the two hearings. This approach led me to several important findings. Most significantly, I found that while many community members understood VA DEQ's stated purpose of the public hearings, they prepared comments that spoke to an entirely different purpose because they were responding to a different kind of problem than that of VA DEQ. This finding is crucial to understanding the other tensions and ideas of consensus that occur among citizens and VA DEQ representatives since the kind of problem informs how people prepare for and engage with the public hearing and the overall interpretation of the public hearing as a genre. My dissertation thus argues that there are ways we might reimagine ideas of effectiveness, consensus, and the public hearing genre, specifically in the case of the 401 Public Hearings and more generally in other public hearings where public discourses center on a contested environmental project like the MVP.

abstract: This dissertation examines contemporary issues that 18 (im)migrant university students faced during a time of highly militarized U.S.-Mexico border relations while living in Arizona during the time of this dissertation research. Utilizing critical race theory and public sphere theory as theoretical frameworks, the project addresses several related research questions. The first is how did (im)migrant university students describe their (im)migrant experience while they lived in the U.S. and studied at a large southwestern university? Second, what can (im)migrant university student experiences tell us about (im)migrant issues? Third, what do (im)migrant university students want people to know about (im)migration from reading their story? Three conceptual constructs, each composed of three categories, that described the different (im)migrant experiences in this study emerged through data analysis. The first of these conceptual constructs was the racialized/ing (im)migrant experience that categorically was divided into systemic exclusions, liminal exclusions, and micro-social contextual exclusions. The second concept that emerged was the passed/ing (im)migrant experience where (im)migrant university students shared that they felt they had a systemic pathway to citizenship and/or that their immigration authorization gave them privilege. This concept was also categorically divided into systemic inclusions, liminal inclusions, and micro-social contextual inclusions. The last concept was the negotiated/ing (im)migrant experience, which described ways that (im)migrant university students negotiated their space/place in the public sphere while attending a large, public university in Arizona. As with the other two concepts, three categories emerged in relation to negotiated/ing (im)migrant experience: systemic negotiations, liminal negotiations, and micro-social contextual negotiations. It is (im)migrant university student experiences that give individuals a better understanding of the complexities that surround immigration. The (im)migrant narratives also highlight that inclusion and exclusion from the public sphere is a complex and dynamic process because all (im)migrant students, including U.S. citizens, experienced moments of inclusion and exclusion from the U.S. public sphere. / Dissertation/Thesis / Doctoral Dissertation Communication 2016

abstract: At their cores, both rhetoric and public sphere theory have conceptualized how membership in public and counterpublic settings, as well as participation in public life and discussion, is cultivated, shared, contested, and shaped. Previous case studies on publics and counterpublics have looked at the experiences of individuals and collectives who enact practices in rhetorical invention that mark participation in public life. Much of public sphere scholarship focuses squarely on seasoned individuals in positions of authority and decision making in mainstream publics. Conversely, counterpublic spheres focus on the labor of individuals who have extensive experience in articulating discursive practices in response to dominant publics. However, a quietude that has permeated much of rhetoric and public sphere scholarship comes by way of the absence of youth-based voices in the public sphere. It is these same youths who are expected to lead the very publics that claim to represent them, yet do not afford them a mode of participation or agency in their own right. Given that studies in critical and vernacular rhetoric invest significant inquiry into the ways that marginalized communities enact responses towards dominant and mainstream ideologies, it is necessary to consider how these youthful perspectives contribute to rhetoric and the public sphere writ large. In an effort to inform the rhetorical tradition of its potential in accounting for the voices of youth, this study explores the ways in which youth speak, perform, and embody the various ways in which they belong to a public sphere. Through fieldwork in the LGBTQ youth organization One n’ Ten, I aim to speak to the ways in which rhetorical scholarship can begin to move towards a rhetoric of youth in public life. In this field, I utilize the concepts of enclaving and imagining in counterpublic spheres to examine the practices, discourses, and values that give rise to a queer counterpublicity that emboldens LGBTQ youth to speak and act in a way that honors their identities. Moreover, I draw on theories of critical and vernacular rhetorics to make sense of how One n’ Ten provides youth with opportunities to enact rhetorical agency conducive toward participation in public and counterpublic spheres. Finally, I discuss implications pertaining to how the experiences of young individuals stand to substantially inform theories in public, counterpublic, critical, and vernacular rhetorics, all of which contain opportunities to represent the experiences of both LGBTQ youth and youth writ large as members of public life. / Dissertation/Thesis / Doctoral Dissertation Communication Studies 2018

No description available.

I spåren av de senaste årens debatt om antropogen klimatpåverkan har en ny litterär genre vuxit fram: ”klimatböcker”. Dessa böcker fyller den viktiga funktionen att kommunicera problemet till allmänheten. I denna uppsats undersöker jag tre svenskspråkiga klimatböcker och analyserar hur författarna, med olika utgångspunkt, tilldelar ansvaret att minska koldioxidutsläppen. Gemensamt för böckerna är synen på klimatfrågan som ett politiskt problem som kräver politiska lösningar. Författarna placerar både det individuella och det kollektiva ansvaret inom den demokratiska ordningen. Jag problematiserar detta genom att relatera till teorier om den offentliga debattens brister. / Following the last few years of public debate on anthropogenic climate change, a new literary genre has emerged: ”climate books”. These books have the important role of communicating the problem to the general public. In this paper I analyze three Swedish climate books with regards to how they assign responsibility for mitigating climate change. The books regard the climate issue as a political problem requiring political solutions. The authors place the individual and collective responsibility within the democratic order. I problematize this by relating to limitations in public sphere theory.

This study aims to provide a deeper insight on how the communication is used in capacity building and how it affects the socially constructed power structures using theories of Critical Discourse Analysis and the Public Sphere Theory. Through qualitative research methods, the data collected will position the analyzed material in the theoretical framework mentioned before. The study is conducted in co-operation with the Swedish civil society organization Olof Palme International Center, together with the Kosovar non-governmental organization Syri I Vizionit. It includes observation and analysis of the Active Citizenship project. The project relates to the CDA, as it involves the context of social and communicative structures based on the effects of capacity building on micro level.This work includes a Written Essay, based on scientific research and theories, and a Visual Representation in from of a documentary based on the topic of this essay i.e. communicative processes impact on capacity building (e.g. see appendix 7).