write minimum 1250 words based on the instructions

NO PLAGIARISM! (turnitin check)

So far in this course, we have examined models of communication, levels/types of meaning, and the features of theory which make communication theorizing a distinctive type of knowledge and activity.

In this paper, you will use the case “Teaming Up for Change” by Maryanne Wanca-Thibault and Adelina Gomez (linked here). In this case, you’ll see several interesting issues; the primary task of this paper is to consider how different models of communication can help you better understand an issue from that case.

Please follow these steps:

A. STATE THE ISSUE AND PARTICIPANTS

The case is about the creation of the “DVERT” team in the Castle Springs Police Department. The case describes issues the team confronted (and helpfully labels them “The Issues” talked about in a meeting), as well as the results of a consultancy’s audit. There are several tensions and challenges presented, though you may choose to consider an issue not presented in the case (and maybe even not likely that it would have been understood as a concern by the participants). Considering the case, address the following in the first part of your essay:

1. What’s Worth Studying Here? What issue/phenomenon/problem (i.e., what thing that’s happening) do you find mysterious, frustrating, or compelling in the case—in other words, what’s your interest in examining this case (beyond the fact that we’re making it the basis of the assignment)?
2. Who/What is Making This Happen? Present your understanding of how the issue/phenomenon/problem is being/had been created: What meanings are generating the issue at hand? (And keep in mind that the members of the DVERT team, and also the consultants, have participated in producing those meanings—they’re not simply happening to) Another way to think of this is to ask the following: “To understand the meanings creating the issue/phenomenon/problem in this case, we would need to know _______.” You might fill in that blank by saying that those meanings are the product of the people and their personal characteristics (and their fields of experience, including the relationships they have created), by the roles they play, by the messages exchanged, by the context (including history), by the organization’s policies, and the like. Here you should be specific about what is participating in communication, in your view.

B. CONSIDER THE EVENT FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE 2 MODELS OF COMMUNICATION

You will look at the issues from the perspective of the 2 models of communication described in class (linear and transactional). First, describe how you might explain what is happening in the case from the perspective of a linear model of communication (i.e., to what would such a model direct your attention, given the issue and participants you’ve identified?). Then, address how a transactional model might shape your thinking. This is where your enumeration of who/what is making the issue/phenomenon/problem happen (from above) becomes important: The elements you consider to be creating the meanings that comprise the tension (that make the issue/phenomenon/problem happen) should be part of at least one of your models of communication. Draw at least two comparisons between these two perspectives—these comparisons can also involve critiques of the ability of one model to explain the event in comparison to the other.

C. ADDRESS THE CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING THEORY

Finally, focus on the criteria for evaluating theory that are discussed in Chapter 3 (pp. 56-58). Though it might be a stretch to call the results of your efforts in the second section a theory as we’ve defined it in this class, the aim of that section is to try to explain what happened in the case. If you were forced to choose, which one of those criteria seems like the most important consideration in evaluating an explanation of this event? Why? How would it evaluate your explanation?

Paper Logistics

Your paper should be around 6 pages (roughly 1250 words, with 12-point font, one-inch margins, and double-spacing)—we’re not, however, going to grade this on whether you hit the page/word target. It does not count use of a title page or references. This is an academic paper, meaning the tone and writing style should be more formal and professional—and clearer in idea development and evidence for your claims—than the discussion posts.

See the course Assignment Guidelines, and use APA style for all references. (Links to an external site.)

Your paper will be evaluated on its demonstration of accurate understanding and successful application of course material (see the grading rubric below). Where effective and appropriate, you are encouraged to quote from course materials to support your claims (you must cite course resources in APA). Your paper will also be evaluated based upon its use of good writing style: One that is clear, well-organized, persuasive, and reflects correct use of spelling, grammar, punctuation, and word-choice.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Here’s a sample paper that can help guide your writing. It’s from a former semester where the assignment was similar to (but not exactly the same as) this assignment, and the case was dramatically different. This isn’t a perfect paper by any means, but it gives you an idea of what the completed assignment can/should look like, so use it in whatever way would be helpful for you.

You will use this paper as the foundation for your next one, so I suggest taking the time to do this well the first time and set yourself up for success.

CRAFT

This assignment calls on you to practice these elements of your Communication CRAFT:

• Creativity: Writing is, in itself, a creative process
• Relational
• Analytical: Analyze and understand a case through multiple perspectives
• Flexible: As in life outside the classroom, you are asked to assess issues from multiple viewpoints
• Transformative

OBJECTIVES

• To understand the distinctions between transmissive and constitutive conceptions of human communication and how they characterize communication theories
• To gain insight into the challenging process of generating, assessing, and using communication theories