As we interact in different capacity in the Culture Centering Approach, one interesting dynamic that continue to play out is the dichotomy between deep and shallow participation. Some group members are deeply engaged and are very clear about the objectives in each phase of the project, and the processes. They are very innovative and always offer unique perspectives for achieving results. On the other hand, some group members seem not to fully grasp the CCA process on the surface, or unclear about necessary steps in each phase of the of the project. But the interesting thing is that while they may seem unsure about the process or may not be creative like the deeply engaged group, there is a sense of ownership and commitment to the project goals. You can decipher their deep commitment to the project through their non-verbal actions e.g. facial expressions, their enthusiasm and interest in the CCA processes during group interactions. Such kind of enthusiasm is worth acknowledging. This dynamic is representative of academic description of explicit and implicit participation. An important lesson I believe is our ability to recognize the enthusiasm in the collective interest and work with both deep and shallow participants. This is an important lesson because failure to acknowledge and recognize the unique contributions of every member might lead to the dismissal of some members as unimportant, a categorization that may negatively impact a CCA project.
In a post made in response to the changes to how my discipline operates made by the Executive Committee of the largest organization of the discipline, the National Communication Association (NCA), one of the editors of a disciplinary journal Rhetoric and Public Affairs (RPA), Professor Martin J. Medhurst, a Distinguished Scholar of the discipline, calls out what he sees as the threat of identity (see below for his full piece published in the journal that he has edited for 20+ years, with 2019 SJR score of 0.27). In what he notes is a threat to the "scholarly merit" of the discipline, Professor Medhurst sets up a caricature of what he calls "identity." In his rhetorical construction of the struggles the NCA has faced over the years to find Distinguished Scholars of colour, he shares with us the facts. So let's look at the facts presented by this rhetor. It turns out, as a member of the Distinguished Scholar community of the NCA, Mr. Medhurst has problems wit...