Control of Syntax and Mechanics
Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Pages:5-10 Instructions:
Control of Syntax and Mechanics
Task
- Understanding Critical Reflectionof one’s cultural self: please begin by watching the video, Why is Critical Reflection Important
- Writing the Essay: When you are ready, please respond to the following prompt
1 Describe: In your reflection of your past communication experience with others, what can be one critical incident you can identify and describe? [Hint: according to our textbook, Intercultural Learning(Jones, et al., 2018), a critical incident is one that “disrupted or made you re-think your assumptions” (p. 26), or one that doesn’t align with a theory/concept you learn from the class. This critical incident, you may interact with people from either the culture you most identify with, or other cultures, as long as this critical incident made you re-think your assumptions of your cultural self.] Please then identify the other critical incident we discuss in class in detail and some reason why you think the comparison between the two incidents might be meaningful. In other words, do they share something in common, which remain different in other aspects?
2 Interpret: can you provide at least two version of interpretation for both critical incidents you identified?
3 Verify: For both critical incidents, test your interpretations by consulting someone familiar with the cultural norm, value or worldviews relevant to the critical incident; you can also find resources (news articles, news interview clips, academic research, government report etc.) that can be your source of verification. Your reference can either confirm or reject your interpretations.
4 Explain: After your verification, you can explain your new understanding of both incidents, by connecting your interpretation with theories and concepts that you have explored in this course.
In your own critical incident, what words have you used and what do these indicate about your perspective of the experience? What assumptions have you noticed in your original description and where might they have come from? What does your description reveal about your values, beliefs or awareness of power? What does this tell you about your cultural-self and others’ cultural practices? [Hint: this is the most critical step and please make sure to cite the theories and concepts you plan to reference here. Please make sure to be as thorough and convincing as possible in your explanation.]
Relating to the other critical incident you intend to compare your own with, how did the person reacted during the incident? How did they make sense of their experience? Does one, or both of the interpretations you provided resonated in some way with how they reacted while on the spot? What does their reaction and interpretation tell you about their cultural-self?
To compare and contrast your critical incident and the other one, what might they share in common? What makes them different? Can you explain, using your understanding of the theories and concepts you referenced earlier, to account for such commonalities or differences?
- Reconstruct:This field note report revisits an important concept, cultural awareness. We learned that cultural awareness “involves not simply knowing something of the nature of culture, or learning about the culture of others. It involves developing a deep and critical awareness of our own cultural selves and our position in relation to issues such as cultural imperialism and racism (Jones, et al., 2018)”.
Looking back at the steps, what does this reflection mean for yourself and your future intercultural communication experience? what new understandings about yourself and others might you share at the end of this reflection? What might you do differently next time in similar situation? How would you describe your position in relation to cultural imperialism, racism or privilege, in view of this analysis?
Your field note should be 1,000-1,500 words and will be evaluated using the category of “Content Development”, “Sources and Evidence” and “Control of Syntax and Mechanics” from the Written Communication VALUE rubric.
Your field note is evaluated using the category of “Content Development”, “Sources and Evidence” and “Control of Syntax and Mechanics” from the Written Communication VALUE rubric.
Completion of the Field Note demonstrates the learning of the following outcomes:
Define culture and explain its elements;
Describe the characteristics of intercultural competency and apply to various intercultural situations;
Define ethnocentrism and bias and explain their influence on perception of self and others;
Identify and critically analyze one’s own cultural identities and worldview in relation to intercultural interactions.
RUBRIC
Excellent Quality
95-100%
Introduction 45-41 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Literature Support
91-84 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Methodology
58-53 points
Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score
50-85%
40-38 points
More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.
83-76 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.
52-49 points
Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality
0-45%
37-1 points
The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.
75-1 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.
48-1 points
There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow Analyze the Water Footprint Results