Book for paper. Adler: Interplay Ronald B. Adler; Lawrence B. Rosenfeld; Russell

Book for paper.
Adler: Interplay
Ronald B. Adler; Lawrence B. Rosenfeld; Russell F. Proctor II
The process of interpersonal communication
More book options
Analysis Paper – I Am Assignment on Self-Perception
Step 1
The first step in the “I am” exercise is for you to get you in touch with how you perceive yourself. You should begin by first completing the I am interactive grid (this file is actually a PowerPoint slide so you can move the words. You can also use this file if you want to print it as a pdf – I am grid (pdf printable) based on how you perceive the 16 words represent you. On the left side is the least like you of all 16 words, and on the right-hand side is the most.
Step 2
Next, give a grid to a minimum of three people (the more people you ask, the more you’ll learn), choosing participants who have differing vantage points on your life (i.e., mother/boyfriend; close friend/casual friend; co-worker/family member). Make sure they are not all family or intimate relationships – mix of gender, age, culture, etc. Ask them to construct a configuration (using the same format that you did for yourself) that typifies you as they see you. Request that they be as honest as possible. You might not want to sit and watch while they complete it, but instead leave the room, or send it to them electronically. After they complete it (and this is VERY important), discuss with them their rationale for the rankings they made (please do so in a supportive tone; your goal is to learn, not defend!). You want to find out why they chose to put the words where they did. Please see the grading rubric for more specifics about this.
Step 3
Finally, you will write a paper that synthesizes your overall comparisons (similarities and differences) between all of the grids completed, connecting them with course concepts. I’m looking for more than mere description of what others tell you, as you will be expected to provide a copy of the grids completed as well. So this is not a “report” (i.e. my brother put that I was shy…). I want you to engage in analysis, using course concepts to make sense of the data you collect. [Word to the wise: The most common comment made when grading them is: “NEED TO TIE IN COURSE CONCEPTS.” Keep this in mind as you write your paper.] You will also need to share the reasons why people put the words where they did (from the interviews) and at the end of the paper fully explained in at least one paragraph.you should share what changes (if any) you would make if completing your grid again and moving forward in your life; if no changes would be made then explained why.
Issues you might want to include:
What part did filters of perception and meaning play in this assignment?
You probably sent the grids to the respondents with some expectations of how they would rank you. Did their rankings match your expectations?
Variations Encouraged… Here’s a Few Examples:
Purpose
The purpose of this assignment is to find out how others perceive you and to compare and contrast their perceptions with your own. You will complete it in three steps, as outlined below.
Possibilities
Feel free to run additional variations on this exercise. Some of my favorites include:
“Turnabout is Fair Play”: Construct a configuration of the people who ranked you (and see if their evaluations of you have an impact on the way you assess them!).
“Two Heads are Better (or Worse) Than One”: Ask two or more people to work together on a configuration of you (and get ready for the sparks to fly!).
“Twice Removed”: Construct a configuration of how you think another person perceives a third person (the permutations on this are mind-boggling!).
Submission Expectations
Please be sure to provide examples and specifics from the various configurations you collect, as well as from your interactions with the people who help you complete this assignment. Your paper will be kept confidential; feel free to be as candid as is comfortable for you.
I am expecting a 3-5 page paper. Please use conventional APA formatting – double-spacing, 1-inch margins, and 12-point fonts. I expect college-level writing and presentation: in other words, proper punctuation, spelling, and syntax; complete sentences and paragraphs; no white-out, handwritten corrections, or typos. Failure to attend to these matters will result in a lowered grade. Having said that, this assignment is not so much a report or a research paper as it is a personal inventory and analysis. As a result, it is appropriate (and recommended) to use first-person singular pronouns (I, me, my, mine) in describing what you experienced and learned. Avoid impersonal or collective pronouns (you, it, we)–speak for and about yourself.
Turnitin is used for the reflections to detect any similarities to past Turnitin submissions. Once you submit your work, please look at the report that comes up, and make changes accordingly. The higher the percentage, the greater the amount of text in the submission that was highlighted as matching against information in Turnitin’s repositories.
blue (no matching words)
green (one matching word – 24% similarity index)
yellow (25-49% similarity)
orange (50-74% similarity)
red (75-100% similarity)
Success Tips
A final note: I encourage you to begin early on this project so you have time to collect adequate data and write the paper with high quality.
Be sure to check the grading rubric below for details on how the paper will be assessed.
Rubric
I Am Assignment: Self-Perception
I Am Assignment: Self-Perception
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCourse concepts
Terms from class specifically and accurately integrated into your analysis (you should highlight or underline the course terms to illustrate your clear understanding of utilization AND include page #’s for each course term used). Infuse 8 separate concepts for maximum points.
20 to >15.0 pts
Excellent
Had a least 8 separate course concepts distinctly highlighted/underlined and included a page number for each.
15 to >10.0 pts
Good
Had between 6-7 course terms, and/or did not cite the page numbers clearly from the text or highlight/underlined the terms.
10 to >5.0 pts
Acceptable
Had between 4-5 course terms, and/or did not cite the page numbers clearly from the text or highlight/underlined the terms.
5 to >0.0 pts
Needs Improvement
Had between 2–3 course terms, and/or did not cite the page numbers clearly from the text or highlight/underlined the terms.
0 pts
Unacceptable
Did not clearly include course terms.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBreadth of analysis
Thorough analysis within and between configurations of the 16 words (focus on more than 2-3 words; but not more than 8).
15 to >10.0 pts
Excellent
Focused on 4-8 words total – participant’s differences and/or similarities between grids.
10 to >5.0 pts
Good
Focused on 2-3 or 9-10 words total – participant’s differences and/or similarities between grids.
5 to >0.0 pts
Needs Improvement
Focused on only one word or more than 12 words total – participant’s differences and/or similarities between grids..
0 pts
Unacceptable
Did not include any words or included all of them.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSpecific examples
Plenty of examples from the configurations others constructed of you (for example “when I asked my mom why she put shy as least she said…”). Not just why you think the person put the words where they did. Remember – the interview with the other person is critical.
15 to >10.0 pts
Excellent
Shared from all participants’ direct responses and rationales.
10 to >5.0 pts
Good
Shared from two participants’ direct responses and rationales.
5 to >0.0 pts
Needs Improvement
Referenced one participant’s response and rationale.
0 pts
Unacceptable
Did not use any participant examples.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeParticipants
The more the better, representing a variety of different roles in your life (need to have 3 or more not all from family or intimate relationships – mix of gender, roles, etc. – to receive all 15 points – if you have 1 or 2, you’ll get less) – the more the better! Include their “I Am” charts in your materials.
15 to >10.0 pts
Excellent
Had at least 3 participants representing a variety of role constructs.
10 to >5.0 pts
Good
Had at least two participants or they were not diverse enough.
5 to >0.0 pts
Needs Improvement
Had only one participant, thus a the variety of roles is not represented.
0 pts
Unacceptable
No participants interviewed, thus omitted from the analysis.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFormatting and Mechanics
3-5 pages (3 FULL pages min, 5 pages max); APA format with cover page that includes 12-point font; Times New Roman; 1-inch margins; double-spaced; clearly written sentences and paragraphs; proper spelling, grammar, and punctuation exhibited
15 to >10.0 pts
Excellent
Well written and properly formatted.
10 to >5.0 pts
Good
Missing one aspect from this category.
5 to >0.0 pts
Needs Improvement
Missing two aspects from this category.
0 pts
Unacceptable
Missing three or more aspects from this category.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeClarity of Subjective Self
Avoidance of words/phrases such as “right,” “wrong,” “real me,” “true self,” “knows me best,” etc. Remember – this is their perception and no one “knows you best” and there is no “real you”.
10 to >5.0 pts
Excellent
Clearly understood concept – the self is not objective.
5 to >0.0 pts
Needs Improvement
Exhibited some confusion.
0 pts
Unacceptable
Used terms that illustrated the self is more objective.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplained plan moving forward
Shared what changes (if any) you would make if completing your grid again and moving forward in your life; if no changes would be made then explained why. Need to fully explain this in at least one paragraph. If you say “I need to work on my confidence” then explain how you plan to do that.
10 to >5.0 pts
Excellent
Addressed feedback from participants related to one’s self-perception and provided explanation of future action or inaction.
5 to >0.0 pts
Needs Improvement
Addressed some feedback from participants related to one’s self-perception and provided limited explanation of future action or inaction.
0 pts
Unacceptable
Made no connection between participants’ feedback related to one’s self-perception and/or did not provide any explanation of future action or inaction.
10 pts
Total Points: 100