•  
  •  
 

Abstract

This article examines the placement of speech programs within English departments and evaluates the historical, structural, and professional implications of that arrangement. It traces the shared origins of oratory and philology that produced broad English units and explains why some institutions continue to house speech alongside literature, composition, journalism, theatre, and film. The analysis identifies liabilities that arise from disciplinary misunderstanding, staffing of basic public speaking by non specialists, and tenure and promotion reviews that apply criteria from two fields at once. It also notes potential strengths, including exposure to diverse scholarly perspectives and wider publication outlets beyond speech journals. Practical strategies are proposed for professional integration, such as developing seminars in rhetorical theory that serve department needs, expanding publication targets to adjacent disciplines, using grants and interlibrary resources to offset limited collections, and increasing program visibility through public events and collaborations. The discussion concludes that speech professionals can achieve recognition and career growth in English departments by linking disciplinary identity with collegial engagement and by broadening scholarly audiences.

Share

COinS
 

Accessibility Statement

This item was created or digitized prior to April 24, 2027, or is a reproduction of legacy media created before that date. It is preserved in its original, unmodified state specifically for research, reference, or historical recordkeeping. In accordance with the ADA Title II Final Rule, the University Libraries provides accessible versions of archival materials upon request. To request an accommodation for this item, please submit an accessibility request form.