在大學裡，已取得學術正當性的學門，通常也是已建制化的學門。這些學門對於 學科的內涵以及入門課應該是什麼的問題，在學術圈內有高度共識。傳播學並非如此 。 作者調查了台港及美國若干傳播學系的入門課，發現內容歧異極大，而且職技訓 練性質濃厚。以「傳播」或「人類傳播」為名的十本教科書，內容相近，承襲了美國 語言傳播學系的傳統，還未反映晚近學術典範的轉移和傳播學兩大傳統合流的思潮。 作者提出了傳播學的學門建造工程構想，主張直指傳播本質，以文化中國為傳播 學入門課的脈絡，掌握我們自己社會變遷的核心概念，傳播學在中文世界才有可能超 英趕美。

　　　　　Academic disciplines which enjoy scholarly legitimacy at a university are very likely also the established disciplines. Their contents of education and the nature of their first course are well structured and practiced by educators of each discipline. This is not the case for a discipline called communication studies. The author surveyed a few dozens of communication-related university departments in Taiwan, Hong Kong and the United States and found that there is a great diversity of courses on offer as their very first course of teaching. Moreover, the first courses are more likely to be job-training in nature. The ten English textbooks examined show a consensus in content overwhelmed by speech communication. Their subject matter reflects no sign of converging the historical rivals between the mass communication school and speech communication school, a trend supposedly signified by a name change of SCA to NCA in 1997. Ways in building the discipline and gaining academic legitimacy for communication studies are suggested. For Chinese scholars who are interested in this endeavor, a cultural-contextual approach to construct the essence of communication for the first course is urged.