Q Choose one prompt below: 1. Think about a current or past relationship where you were motivated (professionally, romantically, or friendly) towards getting to know them. This relationship can be one you are currently in or ended. Explain just the relationship development. Analyze the development from the perspective of Uncertainty Reduction Theory. Then compare by analyzing your relationship development from the perspective of Social Penetration Theory. Apply using one of the theory’s assumptions about communication. Which one best resonates with you? 2. Communication Privacy Management. Tell me an interaction where you shared private information with someone where it caused relational turbulence. How did you both navigate, manage, and coordinate the private information? Connect uncertainty reduction when discussing the nature of turbulence. For example, does it change if you know the turbulance coming? Is it possible to do this when it comes to privacy and boundary negotiating? How can we figure out ahead of time if we have different privacy standards than someone who will become a co-owner of our information? Share your opinions on how severe a violation would need to be to end a relationship. Would a breech in confidence spell the end of a friendship, family tie, or romantic relationship? Or does it just change the nature of those relationships? Based on that experience and what you learned in class, what are tips and pointers you would to approach negotiation of private information? 3. Relational Dialectic Theory. Share 1 interaction where you experienced relational dialectics, the relational struggles. Apply 1 dialectic tension focused on the internal and/or external version. 1. Integration and separation 2. Stability and change. 3. Expression and nonexpression. Identify the chain of utterances where dialectical tension can provide an opportunity to work out ways to mutually embrace these struggles. Organizing your paper • Explain using terms and concepts from the one theory you choose. Do not define terms just state the terms to analyze your story. Bold the concepts in your paper. Need a minimum of 4 concepts that best connects to your story. • Organize your paper with a clear thesis statement, strong introduction, body (justify your thesis statement), conclusion, and transitions in between. • Your paper must be 4 pages minimum in content 4.5 maximum. This is a short paper, that means it will be more specific vs general/broad • APA format. Grading See rubric below. Rubric Reflection paper 1 Reflection paper 1 Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOrganization & Development - Clear introduction with thesis and a preview of the main ideas to be discussed. - Conclusion that summarizes the main ideas and provides appropriate closure? - Thesis developed through elaboration and supporting material in the paper’s body? - Paragraphs with clear topic sentences that are adequately developed? 20 to >17.0 pts Accomplished Organization creates fluid and logical progression of ideas. 17 to >15.0 pts Almost there Paragraphs may have minor organizational weaknesses, but overall ideas are organized to create a fluid essay. 15 to >14.0 pts Acceptable Paragraphs typically have some organizational weaknesses, but not enough to continually disrupt meaning. 14 to >10.0 pts Needs work Paper has some paragraphing and/or overall structural weaknesses that disrupt the essay’s fluency. 10 to >7.0 pts Missing Paper usually has a wide variety of structural weaknesses, such as lacking an overall plan, that seriously obscure essay’s meaning. 7 to >0 pts Incomplete Ideas may lack even a simple organizational plan, creating chaotic discourse. 20 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent: Topic and examples Does the paper focus on the assigned topic? Specific interaction used to connect to topic. Focused on 1 prompt. Does the paper adequately provide relevant, clear responses to the each of the directions stated in the guidelines? 30 to >26.0 pts Accomplished Meets all components. Ideas are fully explored with effective examples and analysis. 26 to >24.0 pts Almost there Majority of areas completed.Ideas are explored with good examples and some analysis. 24 to >21.0 pts Acceptable Most components included, missing parts. Ideas may be repeated rather than explored, and development is commonly anecdotal and more general than concrete, sometimes relying on addition of examples with little analysis. 21 to >15.0 pts Needs work Missing many parts.Ideas are sweeping generalities with little or no concrete development, are repeated rather than explored, and consist of anecdotal examples with little or no analysis. 15 to >0 pts Incomplete Missing a majority of components. Ideas are often vague generalizations, marked by statement and restatement. 30 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent: Analysis and Application of concepts 4 concepts minimum highlighted or bold. Are the communication theories and concepts thoughtfully explained and applied, thereby demonstrating an understanding of them? Do you use your story, statements as a source to support own analysis? 30 to >26.0 pts Excellent All 4 concepts thoughtfully explained and applied, thereby demonstrating an understanding of them. Thinking is precise and without serious logical flaws, representing strong analytical reasoning. 26 to >24.0 pts Almost there Majority of concepts thoughtfully explained and applied, thereby demonstrating an understanding of them. Thinking represents good analytical reasoning, though it may have minor flaws or occasionally be imprecise. 24 to >20.0 pts Needs work 2 or more concepts missing or lacks understanding. Though flawed or imprecise, thinking demonstrates some analytical reasoning. 20 to >14.0 pts Needs more work 4 or more concepts missing or lacks understanding. Thinking is generic, flawed, and imprecise; transitions are missing or ineffective; and critical connections are unexplored. 14 to >0 pts Incomplete Majority of concepts missing or lacks understanding. A combination of logical weaknesses demonstrates serous conceptual confusion. 30 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMechanics and Style 4 pages, APA formatting, mechanically sound (spelling, punctuation, grammar), complete sentences. 20 to >16.0 pts Excellent meets all criteria 16 to >12.0 pts Almost there meets majority of criteria, minor edits 12 to >6.0 pts Needs work meets some criteria, missing parts 6 to >0 pts Incomplete major areas missing 20 pts Total Points: 100 PreviousNext