The Ph.D. degree in Communication involves the student with three separate committees (though membership in the committees may overlap): (1) the Advisory Committee assists in the process of establishing a student's plan of study and offers the General Area Examination, (2) the Dissertation Project Committee offers the dissertation area, methods, and prospectus examinations, and (3) the Dissertation Examining Committee (appointed by the Graduate Dean) offers the dissertation examination.
I cheerfully serve on all these sorts of committees, but my service is conditioned upon the following preferences and stipulations.
1. There should be some reason for my service on a Ph.D. committee other than my appointment as a regular member of the Graduate Faculty in Communication. That is, a reason for my service should be capable of expression with reference to the subject matter or methods employed in the dissertation. My areas of expertise are history of rhetorical theory, textual criticism, and pragmatics (including speech acts and ethnography of communication). My areas of competence are history of public discourse, argument theory, and persuasion theory.
2. I believe that a holder of the Ph.D. in rhetoric and political culture should understand the whole range of rhetorical studies. Accordingly, to secure my continuing service in a Ph.D. advisory committee in this area, at a minimum, students must present either course work in their plan of study or previous preparation in the following subject matters: ancient, medieval, renaissance, modern, and contemporary rhetorical theory (9 credit hours or equivalent); the history of American public discourse from the seventeenth century to the present (9 credit hours or equivalent); and rhetorical criticism (conceived as a method and corpus of research, 6 credit hours equivalent).
3. When I am an examiner in the general area examination, the dissertation area examination, or the methods examination, my questions will be limited by general rubrics only (for example, history of rhetorical theory, ancient rhetorical theory, textual criticism).
4. Unless I am a student's advisor, I do not wish to express particular evaluation of a student's prospectus prior to the Dissertation Project Committee meeting designed for this purpose.
5. Unless I am a student's advisor, I do not wish to express particular evaluation of a student's dissertation or its individual chapters prior to the Dissertation Examining Committee meeting designed for this purpose.
6. Except in the most extraordinary circumstances, I will not participate in a Ph.D. committee meeting on any day for which I am not compensated by the University.