Interview questions: HUSSO 2164 Task 2 Interview Questions.docxDownload HUSSO 21

Interview questions: HUSSO 2164 Task 2 Interview Questions.docxDownload HUSSO 2164 Task 2 Interview Questions.docx (Try to imagine having a conversation with an ‘other’ rather than rigid question and answer interview. Use the questions as a prompt for conversation.) Written Consent Form: HUSO2164_Task 2_ Interview Consent Form-1.pdf Download HUSO2164_Task 2_ Interview Consent Form-1.pdf Sample responses This first sample is how you might write the opening section. This is where you tell us a little about your interviewee. Task 2 Sample Opening Section .pdf Download Task 2 Sample Opening Section .pdf This next sample outlines how you might use your interview and additional sources to explore these issues of identity in specific contexts. As above, there are different ways to do this but this should be enough to give you a sense of how one theme (of three or four) might be approached. Task 2 Sample Interview and Analysis Section.pdf Download Task 2 Sample Interview and Analysis Section.pdf Description: In Assessment Task 1 you introduced your ‘Self’. In Assessment 2, you will undertake an interview with an ‘other’ and report back on your findings. To guide this process, we have developed a series of interview questions that correspond to topics that we will be examining between Weeks 5-12. While you do not need to cover every one of these topics, you do need to cover enough of them to accurately capture your interviewee’s thoughts and feelings on these different dimensions of selfhood and identity. As what you are doing here constitutes a beginning-level piece of social research, it is also important that you gain the written consent of your interviewee and protect their identity throughout this exercise. A key way to do this will involve you asking them to choose a pseudonym and referring to them in this way throughout the task. We also ask that you record the content of your interview, but do not submit this as part of the assessment. Having a record of the discussion can help you to review the material later, as the topics (and discussion) will invariably range quite widely. In writing up your interview summary, aim to structure it in two parts. The first, roughly 250 words, should be a general introduction to the person you interviewed. The tone should be like your approach to assessment Task 1. Tell us who this person is (using a pseudonym) and outline some of the key identity markers they use to describe themselves. The remainder of the essay should be a summary of key themes or ideas discussed in your interview. In developing this part of the assignment we also want you to make specific use of course readings from three different weekly topics. For example, this could involve using concepts from a reading to help understand ideas discussed in your interview or perhaps use examples from your interview to explore the strengths and limitations of ideas discussed in a reading. Marking Criteria Provides a clear, succinct and coherent introduction to the ‘other’, outlining a range of identity markers that they use to talk about themselves. Identifies and discusses key themes and ideas arising from the specific interview questions Makes explicit and effective use of concepts, ideas or examples from readings used in at least three different weekly topics to explore relevant interview content. Presents the material in language that is clear, coherent and consistent with appropriate academic writing conventions on spelling, grammar and referencing. Generative AI Tools are not permitted to support completing this assessment as it requires self-reflection. Editing tools such as Grammarly.com are permitted to give your written work a final polish; however, all ideas should be original. Turnitin will be used for similarity checking to ensure that your work is original. Please ensure that your assessments are submitted in PDF or MsWord format. Your submission cannot be read and marked unless it is in a readable format. For further information on RMIT’s position on the use of AI Tools in completing assessments, please see the Academic IntegrityLinks to an external site. policies, procedures and resources. Resources for Conducting Interviews: Top Ten Tips for a Successful InterviewLinks to an external site. (video) Dr. Katy Wheeler, PhD, Senior Lecturer in Sociology of Consumption, and Bethany Morgan-Brett, Lecturer in Psychosocial Studies at the University of Essex, conclude this series on qualitative interview techniques with their top ten tips for a successful interview, including listening, building rapport, monitoring body language, and reflection https://methods-sagepub-com.ezproxy.lib.rmit.edu.au/video/top-ten-tips-for-a-successful-interview?fromsearch=trueLinks to an external site. The Importance of Active Listening During an InterviewLinks to an external site. (Video) Dr. Katy Wheeler, PhD, Senior Lecturer in Sociology of Consumption, University of Essex, discusses the role of active listening when conducting interviews and ways to develop active listening and other interviewing skills. https://methods-sagepub-com.ezproxy.lib.rmit.edu.au/video/what-is-active-listening?seq=1&fromsearch=trueLinks to an external site. Assessment Task 2: Interview Summary and Conceptual Account of Indentity Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeProvides a clear, succinct and coherent introduction to the ‘other’, outlining a range of identity markers that they use to talk about themselves. 10 Pts Excellent (HD) Introduction is clear, succinct, and engaging, effectively setting the context for the ‘other’, while providing a comprehensive, insightful outline of a wide range of identity markers. Includes statement of consent. 9 Pts Excellent (HD) Introduction is clear, succinct, and engaging, effectively setting the context for the ‘other’, while providing a comprehensive, insightful outline of a wide range of identity markers. Includes statement of consent. 8 Pts Excellent (HD) Introduction is clear, succinct, and engaging, effectively setting the context for the ‘other’, while providing a comprehensive, insightful outline of a wide range of identity markers. Includes statement of consent. 7.8 Pts Very Good (DI) Introduction is clear and concise, effectively introducing the ‘other’ and their identity markers. Outlines a range of identity markers used by the ‘other’ with good clarity and coherence. Provides statement of consent. 7.2 Pts Very Good (DI) Introduction is clear and concise, effectively introducing the ‘other’ and their identity markers. Outlines a range of identity markers used by the ‘other’ with good clarity and coherence. Provides statement of consent. 6.8 Pts Good (CR) Introduction is adequately clear and provides a basic overview of the ‘other’ and their identity markers. Outlines a satisfactory range of identity markers used by the ‘other’, with some minor gaps or inconsistencies. Provides statement of consent. 6.2 Pts Good (CR) Introduction is adequately clear and provides a basic overview of the ‘other’ and their identity markers. Outlines a satisfactory range of identity markers used by the ‘other’, with some minor gaps or inconsistencies. Provides statement of consent. 5.8 Pts Satisfactory (PA) Introduction is somewhat clear but lacks conciseness or coherence in presenting the ‘other’ and their identity markers. Outlines a limited range of identity markers used by the ‘other’, with notable gaps or vagueness. Provides statement of consent. 5.2 Pts Satisfactory (PA) Introduction is somewhat clear but lacks conciseness or coherence in presenting the ‘other’ and their identity markers. Outlines a limited range of identity markers used by the ‘other’, with notable gaps or vagueness. Provides statement of consent. 4.8 Pts Not Satisfactory (NN) Just Introduction is unclear, lacks coherence, or fails to effectively introduce the ‘other’ and their identity markers. Provides an inadequate or incomplete outline of identity markers used by the ‘other’. Does not provide statement of consent. 2.5 Pts Not Satisfactory (NN) Clearly Introduction is unclear, lacks coherence, or fails to effectively introduce the ‘other’ and their identity markers. Provides an inadequate or incomplete outline of identity markers used by the ‘other’. Does not provide statement of consent. 0 Pts No marks Does not draw upon interview materials to describe other person. Does not provide statement of consent. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeIdentifies and discusses key themes and ideas arising from the specific interview questions 10 Pts Excellent (HD) Provides a comprehensive and well-developed discussion that showcases critical analysis, connections, and interpretations of ideas arising from the interview questions. 9 Pts Excellent (HD) Provides a comprehensive and well-developed discussion that showcases critical analysis, connections, and interpretations of ideas arising from the interview questions. 8 Pts Excellent (HD) Provides a comprehensive and well-developed discussion that showcases critical analysis, connections, and interpretations of ideas arising from the interview questions. 7.8 Pts Very Good (DI) Demonstrates solid understanding, identifies relevant key themes, provides well-rounded discussion with good analysis, connections, and interpretations. 7.2 Pts Very Good (DI) Demonstrates solid understanding, identifies relevant key themes, provides well-rounded discussion with good analysis, connections, and interpretations. 6.8 Pts Good (CR) Good account of themes and ideas arising from interview, although room for improvement in terms of the breadth and depth of the account. 6.2 Pts Good (CR) Good account of themes and ideas arising from interview, although room for improvement in terms of the breadth and depth of the account. 5.8 Pts S