COM2006 Week 4 Project RubricCourse COM2006-Interpersonal C

COM2006 Week 4 Project Rubric
Course: COM2006-Interpersonal Communication SU01
Criteria
No Submission
0 points
Emerging (F
through D Range)
(6-7)
7 points
Satisfactory (C
Range) (7-8)
8 points
Proficient (B
Range) (8-9)
9 points
Exemplary (A
Range) (9-10)
10 points
Criterion Score
Described the
conflict
situation

/ 10Student did not
submit
assignment
Work does not
meet assignment
expectations;
shows little or no
understanding of
assignment
concepts
Assignment
partially meets
expectations
with minimal
depth;
demonstrates a
limited
understanding of

the assignment
concepts
Assignment
meets
expectations
with all
components
being addressed;
demonstrates
the ability to
evaluate and
apply key
assignments
concepts
Assignment
exceeds
expectations
with exceptional

depth; presents
all requirements
of the
assignment;
demonstrates
the ability to
evaluate, apply
and synthesize
key assignment
concepts
Criteria
No Submission
0 points
Emerging (F
through D Range)
(6-7)
7 points
Satisfactory (C
Range) (7-8)
8 points
Proficient (B
Range) (8-9)
9 points

Exemplary (A
Range) (9-10)
10 points
Criterion Score
Criteria
No Submission
0 points
Emerging (F
through D Range)
(6-7)
7 points
Satisfactory (C
Range) (7-8)
8 points
Proficient (B
Range) (8-9)
9 points
Exemplary (A
Range) (9-10)
10 points
Criterion Score
Analyzed the
conflict using

the conflict
process stages
/ 10Student did not
submit
assignment
Work does not
meet assignment
expectations;
shows little or no
understanding of
assignment
concepts
Assignment
partially meets
expectations
with minimal
depth;
demonstrates a

limited
understanding of
the assignment
concepts.
Assignment
meets
expectations
with all
components
being addressed;
demonstrates
the ability to
evaluate and
apply key
assignments
concepts
Assignment
exceeds

expectations
with exceptional
depth; presents
all requirements
of the
assignment;
demonstrates
the ability to
evaluate, apply
and synthesize
key assignment
concepts
Criteria
No Submission
0 points
Emerging (F
through D Range)
(6-7)
7 points
Satisfactory (C
Range) (7-8)
8 points

Proficient (B
Range) (8-9)
9 points
Exemplary (A
Range) (9-10)
10 points
Criterion Score
Criteria
No Submission
0 points
Emerging (F
through D Range)
(6-7)
7 points
Satisfactory (C
Range) (7-8)
8 points
Proficient (B
Range) (8-9)
9 points
Exemplary (A
Range) (9-10)
10 points
Criterion Score

Discussed the
reasons or
sources of the
conflict
/ 10Student did not
submit
assignment
Work does not
meet assignment
expectations;
shows little or no
understanding of
assignment
concepts
Assignment
partially meets
expectations
with minimal

depth;
demonstrates a
limited
understanding of
the assignment
concepts
Assignment
meets
expectations
with all
components
being addressed;
demonstrates
the ability to
evaluate and
apply key
assignments
concepts

Assignment
exceeds
expectations
with exceptional
depth; presents
all requirements
of the
assignment;
demonstrates
the ability to
evaluate, apply
and synthesize
key assignment
concepts
Criteria
No Submission
0 points
Emerging (F
through D Range)
(6-7)
7 points

Satisfactory (C
Range) (7-8)
8 points
Proficient (B
Range) (8-9)
9 points
Exemplary (A
Range) (9-10)
10 points
Criterion Score
Criteria
No Submission
0 points
Emerging (F
through D Range)
(6-7)
7 points
Satisfactory (C
Range) (7-8)
8 points
Proficient (B
Range) (8-9)
9 points
Exemplary (A
Range) (9-10)

10 points
Criterion Score
Discussed
strategies that
would have
more
effectively
managed the
conflict for a
better
outcome
/ 10Student did not
submit
assignment
Work does not
meet assignment
expectations;
shows little or no

understanding of
assignment
concepts
Assignment
partially meets
expectations
with minimal
depth;
demonstrates a
limited
understanding of
the assignment
concepts
Assignment
meets
expectations
with all
components

being addressed;
demonstrates
the ability to
evaluate and
apply key
assignments
concepts
Assignment
exceeds
expectations
with exceptional
depth; presents
all requirements
of the
assignment;
demonstrates
the ability to
evaluate, apply

and synthesize
key assignment
concepts
Criteria
No Submission
0 points
Emerging (F
through D Range)
(6-7)
7 points
Satisfactory (C
Range) (7-8)
8 points
Proficient (B
Range) (8-9)
9 points
Exemplary (A
Range) (9-10)
10 points
Criterion Score
Wrote in a
clear, concise,
and organized
manner;

demonstrated
ethical
scholarship in
/ 10Student did not
submit
assignment
Numerous issues
in any of the
following:
grammar,
mechanics,
spelling, use of
slang, and
Some spelling,
grammatical,
and/or structural
errors. Some
errors in APA

formatting
(citations and
Minor errors in
grammar,
mechanics, or
spelling in the
initial posting.
Minor errors in
APA formatting
Minor to no
errors in
grammar,
mechanics, or
spelling in both
the initial post
and comments to
Criteria

No Submission
0 points
Emerging (F
through D Range)
(6-7)
7 points
Satisfactory (C
Range) (7-8)
8 points
Proficient (B
Range) (8-9)
9 points
Exemplary (A
Range) (9-10)
10 points
Criterion Score
the accurate
representation
and attribution
of sources (i.e.,
APA format);
displayed
accurate

spelling,
grammar, and
professional
vocabulary
incomplete or
missing APA
citations and
references. If
required for the
assignment, did
not use course,
text, and/or
outside readings
(where relevant)
to support work.
references). If
required for the
assignment,

utilizes sources
to support work
for initial post
but not
comments to
other students.
Sources include
course/text
readings but
outside sources
(when relevant)
include non-
academic/authori
tative, such as
Wikis and .com
resources.
(citations and
references). If

required for the
assignment,
utilizes sources
to support work
for both the
initial post and
some of the
comments to
other students.
Sources include
course and text
readings as well
as outside
sources (when
relevant) that are
academic and
authoritative
(e.g., journal

articles, other
text books, .gov
web sites,
professional
organization web
sites).
others. APA
formatting is
correct. If
required for the
assignment,
utilizes sources
to support work
for both the
initial post and
the comments to
other students.
Sources include

course and text
readings as well
as outside
sources (when
relevant) that are
academic and
authoritative
(e.g., journal
articles, other
text books, .gov
web sites,
professional
organization web
sites).
Total / 50
Overall Score
No Submission
0 points minimum

Emerging (F through D Range)
35 points minimum
Satisfactory (C Range)
40 points minimum
Proficient (B Range)
45 points minimum
Exemplary (A Range)
50 points minimum
Stress Management
Stress does affect how and why we communicate. The old adage
is when you squeeze an orange, you
get orange juice. Using this metaphor, what happens when we
are squeezed or stressed? Oftentimes,
the result is that our patience is tested and we react and speak
without thinking. Anger is often about
deeper issues than what we are arguing about. For example, it is
common to feel stressed when we feel
that there are too many demands on us—time, money,
caretaking, problem solving, and so on. When
we are stressed, our body and mind suffer and it is harder to
have constructive and supportive
conversations.

Since it is a given fact that you will always have some stress in
your life, the question is how to manage
your stress so that it doesn't affect your health and your
relationships. The �rst place to start is to
recognize that you have the control and ability to manage your
own stress. Although the stressful
circumstances may be caused by another person, only you can
manage your stress. Stress is a reaction
to perceived and real problems.
Referring back to con�ict and problem solving, remember that
the problem you name is the problem
you set out to solve. This gives you a key tip for managing
stress. If you feel more stressed by assessing
the problem as unsolvable or debilitating, then you can work at
reframing the problem.
Reframing is an effective way to manage stress. For example,
ask yourself—is this particular problem
or issue a mountain or a mole hill? Your self-talk or how you
think about a problem in�uences how you
feel about the problem. For example, when you say to yourself
that you really hate traf�c and that a
traf�c jam makes you feel angry, the words that you choose to
describe the traf�c give you stress.
Instead, if you say that you don't like being stuck in traf�c but
you can use the time to listen to your

favorite music, then your stress will be lessened. Positive self-
talk is a key for managing stress.
So what is positive self-talk? First, you need to be aware of
what you are saying to yourself. Examine
the word choices that you use to describe the problem. Ask
yourself, can you reframe or reword your
description of the problem? You feel you have control or don't
have control over the situation because
of the words you use. For example, when you think of a
situation as "would have," "could have," or
"should have," you are thinking about the issue in the past
tense. The fact is that it is impossible to
"could have," "would have," and "should have" in the present
moment. You can't go back and redo the
action. Using this type of language can make you feel helpless
and, as a consequence, feel stressed and
depressed. Reframing in this case would be to substitute the
past tense verbs with the present and the
future tense.
For example, Maria is a stockbroker in a major brokerage �rm.
She gets tremendous pressure from
management to bring in substantial new clients. Recently, Maria
received a call from Diane, who is
looking for investment. Maria explained to Diane that her �rm
has a managed investment plan that will

oversee Diane's funds and invest according to a designated
investment risk formula. Diane is
interested in the details until Maria told Diane that this
managed account has a 2% fund charge each
year. Diane is put off because she has also been talking to
another �rm that has the same type of plan
but that �rm is only charging 1% a year.
Due to this difference, Diane decides to invest a substantial
amount of money in the other �rm. Diane
consults Maria again about investing a much smaller amount
from another account. She also explains
to Maria why she has selected the other �rm to invest the larger
amount of money. Maria is visibly
upset because her �rm would have matched the fund charges
since the amount was large. Maria is also
upset because she had not asked Diane how much she had to
invest. Maria had assumed that Diane
only had a small amount to invest. Even though Maria had
regretted that she did not have this
conversation with Diane earlier, she reframed the situation by
suggesting to Diane that she can invest
the smaller amount with her �rm using similar parameters and
track which �rm provides a better

return.
Diane is impressed with this solution and decides to open an
account with Maria's �rm. Maria is visibly
relaxed with the idea that now she has a chance to win Diane's
business. If Maria had stayed in the
"would have," "could have," or "should have" frame, then Diane
could have easily walked away.
Reframing changed the situation from the past tense to the
future. We can always change our actions
in the future.
The key to reframing is to catch what you are thinking and
examine the words that you are choosing.
For example, the word "can't" implies powerlessness. Saying "I
can't" to yourself creates resistance and
lowers self-esteem. Catch yourself when you think "I can't" and
ask yourself why not. Many authors
and positive psychology writings talk about the power of
af�rmations or statements that you
repeatedly and habitually say to yourself.
For example, instead of "I can't," �nd statements that reframe
the issue into positive and make an effort
to repeat these af�rmations regularly. Positive af�rmations
need to be constructed in the present
tense and have personal meaning for your situation or feelings.
For example, if you are looking for

someone to share your life with and have been feeling lonely
and unlovable, you could say to yourself,
"I am now enjoying the loving attention of my partner who I
respect and love and who respects and
loves me." Though these statements may sound like wishful
thinking, when you can in�uence your own
sense of empowerment or can think using positive af�rmations,
you can, in turn, lessen your stress and
be a more constructive and supportive communicator.
Nurturing vs. Toxic Relationships
Relationships are created, maintained, and even dissolved
through communication. Beebe et al. (2017)
explain that relationship forming and maintaining is done by
both partners who decide on the merits or
drawbacks using a cost–bene�t analysis. In other words, the
estimated costs of the relationship are
weighed against the estimated bene�ts of the relationship to
determine whether you stay in or leave a
relationship. That being said, how do you explain why someone
would stay in a toxic relationship?
First, this discussion about toxic relationships implies more
than relationship challenges or failures to

have needs met in the relationship. Toxic relationships are
characterized as having some elements of
harm to either or both partners. Harm may be in the form of a
mental or physical abuse or an
emotional damage.
Now, let's examine different behaviors and communications that
can characterize a toxic relationship.
Beebe et al. (2017) identify several factors—deceiving,
jealousy, criticizing, discon�rming, withdrawing,
and abusing both mentally and physically. Oftentimes, there is
also relational violence in toxic
relationships. These authors also claim that "acts of relational
violence communicate anger,
frustration, lack of control, and disregard for a partner and the
relationship, while instilling fear and
engendering retaliation, counterattacks, and subversion" (Beebe
et al., 2017, p. 283).
Obviously, there is a degree of severity in a toxic relationship,
which is determined by the degree of
harm to one or both of the people involved. Even when there is
a signi�cant degree of harm, sometimes
people chose to stay in the relationship. Why?
The social exchange theory is an interpersonal communication
theory about costs and bene�ts that
may help you understand what is happening. Thibault and

Kelley (1952), in their seminal book, The
Social Psychology of Groups, explain that people estimate what
rewards and costs they would incur
from the outcomes of interpersonal interactions and situations.
People have a natural tendency to
increase rewards or move toward situations that seem to have
rewards and move away from situations
that are estimated to incur costs. Therefore, in case of toxic
relationships, why someone stays in a
severe toxic relationship may be better understood if viewed by
the social exchange theory.
In this case, the injured person may be staying in the
relationship because the cost of leaving is
perceived to be higher than the cost of staying. If this is the
reason, then there is a greater tendency to
avoid interaction with the relationship partner or �ght back by
engaging in a similar toxic behavior,
thereby creating a circular pattern that is often hard to break. It
is advisable for people in these types
of toxic relationships to get professional help to either break the
toxic communication patterns or help
the harmed party leave the relationship.
If the relationship is only mildly toxic and has not escalated to
severe relational violence, then there is
a chance that the relationship could be saved. In order to
develop a more nurturing relationship, both

parties need to be committed to being open and honest and have
a great desire to save the
relationship. The �rst step is the honest disclosure of what has
happened and how and why each
person feels the way he or she does. Acknowledging the
transgression(s) is the starting point. The
second step is starting the process of forgiveness.
Forgiveness is seen as necessary for relationship repair
(Waldron & Kelley, 2005). Forgiving
communication is about authentically communicating one's
intentions and interpretations and by
listening to his or her partner even though it may be hurtful or
uncomfortable. Fishbane (1998)
advocates a dialogic approach to couple's therapy because most
often couples enter the therapy
polarized and disconnected. Couples can also become
disenchanted because of the end of the
"honeymoon period" where "love is blind" and couples are in
the phase of their relationship where
�aws are not obscured and idealized images are fractured.
Oftentimes, the cause of couples disconnecting with each other
can be precipitated by a transgression,
such as in�delity or lies or any hurtful acts or talk, and usually
by the time couples come to therapy, all

they can see is their own pain. The same thing can happen to
people in friendships where harmful acts
and miscommunication can cause people to pull away. Turning
away from another, for whatever
reason, further entrenches the person in the "I" focus steeped in
the emotions of being wronged by
another. It is only when the person, who has been transgressed,
can move past how he or she was hurt
or betrayed, he or she can truly see another and begin to relate
in relation and start the process of
repairing the relationship (Fishbane, 1998). These ideas pose
forgiveness as having a dialogic
orientation.
Metaphorically, conceptualizing the act of forgiveness as a
dance implies that both parties contributed
to the act of transgression in some way and that both parties are
important to forgiveness, and, thus,
framing forgiveness as intersubjective or the experience of it
emerging from both persons in the
relationship, rather than framing the process of forgiveness as
being unidirectional action—
transgressed granting transgressor forgiveness. Dialogue, rather
than a typical rhetorical situation
where one is persuaded to adopt another's belief, idea, or point
of view, focuses on meeting the other

person where both are focused on how to repair the damaged
relationship and discovering new
meanings or ideas of how to forgive together (Brown, 2011).
References:
Brown, L. (2011). It's not just about you: A dialogic approach
to forgiveness. Con�ict &
Communication Online, 10(1), 12–25.
Fishbane, D. M. (1998). I, thou, and we: A dialogical approach
to couples therapy. Journal of Marital
and Family Therapy, 24(1), 41–58.
Thibault, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1952). The social psychology
of groups. New York, NY: John Wiley &
Sons.
Waldron, V., & Kelley, D. (2005). Forgiving communication as
a response to relational transgressions.
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22(6), 723–742.
Week 4 Project $15.00
Task: Submit to complete this assignment
Overdue - 19 hours ago
Conflict Management
In this assignment, you will analyze an interpersonal conflict.
This conflict can be an actual situation that you have
participated in or observed or from a conflict situation that you
watched in a film or a television show. In your analysis, you
will need to:
Step One:
Describe the conflict situation.

Describe the characters involved.
Provide a brief description of the background of the conflict.
Relay the conflict conversation and outcome.
Step Two:
Analyze and describe the conflict by identifying what has
happened in the different stages of the conflict:
Source
Beginning
Middle
End
Aftermath
Step Three:
Describe reasons or sources of the conflict such as incompatible
goals, scarce resources, or interference.
Step Four:
Regardless of the outcome, describe the strategies that either
party or both people involved could have used to more
effectively manage the conflict.
Submission Details:
Provide your answers in a 3- to 4-page Microsoft Word
document.
Power Affecting Communication
Let's look at how power affects communication. Beebe, Beebe,
and Redmond (2017) describe
interpersonal power as "the degree to which a person is able to
in�uence or control his or her
relational partner" (p. 231). In a perfect world, each relationship
partner would have equal degrees of

power in the relationship, but reality shows us that the power
equation is not equal. So how does one
person in the relationship gain more power over the other
person? One usually overpowers another
because the other person is dependent on his or her partner's
ability for ful�llment of his or her needs.
Personal needs can range from the basics of food, shelter, and
money to emotional needs, such as
affection, love, sex, and intimacy. One person can also have
power over another in the relationship if
the other person relies on his or her partner for self-image. In
other words, if the relationship is a
de�ning factor for someone's self-esteem, this can cause
dependency and a driving factor to stay in the
relationship.
Power differences can cause con�icts in relationships.
According to Baxter and Montgomery (1996),
relational con�ict is not an either-or situation but it is a
management of ongoing dialectical tensions.
Dialectical tensions are two opposing desires either in one's self
or between two people.
For example, John and Anita have been married for about a year
and �nd themselves frequently having
small arguments. John wants to devote more time to himself,
and Anita desires spending more time

together. This can be described as a dialectical tension of
separateness and togetherness. Envision a
rubber band—the more Anita pushes to do things together, the
more John pulls away. John often
retreats to his "man cave" to work on his car when Anita
suggests an outing together. Since Anita's job
provides the majority of income for the household, she feels
more entitled to get what she wants. This
feeling of entitlement comes across in her communication with
John and often causes John to retreat.
Although differences in power exist in all relationships, the
power balance may shift as circumstances
and needs shift. According to Baxter and Montgomery (1996),
dialectical tensions are ongoing and
relationships are processes with dialectical tensions. In the
example of John and Anita, how can they
manage their dialectical tension? Notice that the question is
how to manage and not how to resolve.
How can the couple negotiate both closeness at times and
separateness at times? Constructive
communication is the key to help manage relationship con�icts
due to dialectical tensions.
In the example of John and Anita, constructive communication
would start with focusing on the
problem to be solved. Both John and Anita need to assertively
explain how the other partner's actions

affect them. The focus should also be on discussing what is
important for each partner and how these
needs can be met. Underlying this discussion should also be
recognition of the shared values that they
have as a couple.
In addition, Anita needs to recognize that her entitlement
responses re�ect her power over John in
their relationship. Relationship power differences should be
recognized and neutralized. In other
words, Anita needs to recognize that John's needs are as
important as her own. It is important to
discuss their power issues so that they can proceed to have a
constructive conversation about how to
meet both their needs. Constructive communication helps each
person understand about the other
person's values and brings new insights into and solutions for
the relationship con�icts.
Reference:
Baxter, L. A., & Montgomery, B. M. (1996). Relating:
Dialogues & dialectics. New York, NY: Guilford
Press.

Role of Power
Symmetrical Relationship
Role of Power How Power Affects This Relationship
Both people in this type of relationship have the
same orientation toward power. Both desire
power, or both want to avoid power.
When you are in a symmetrical relationship
where you both want to relinquish power to the
other person, decision making becomes an
issue. If neither person is willing to take control
or claim power over the situation, then
problems can arise. This type of relationship
then becomes a submissive symmetrical
relationship. If, on the other hand, both people
want to take control, then the relationship is a
competitive symmetrical relationship.
Competitive Symmetrical Relationship
In this type of relationship, both people want to
take control or have power in the relationship.
Each person in the relationship wants to control
the other or the situation. In this type of
relationship, having power is the person’s goal.

When each person in the relationship wants to
control the other person or the situation, then
the relationship is about who can get his or her
way. The goal is to have power over the other
person or situation. In this relationship,
cooperation and negotiation become very
difficult; however, these are not impossible.
Submissive Symmetrical Relationship
In this type of relationship, power is to be
avoided. Both people in the relationship want to
avoid taking control of the situation or making
decisions. Power in this case is unwanted by
both parties.
When both people in the relationship want to
avoid having power over the other or the
situation, then it is hard, if not impossible, to
make decisions or move forward in a situation.
Both people can flounder and struggle with
indecisiveness in this type of relationship.
Page 1 of 1
Interpersonal Communication
©2014 South University

COM2006 Week 4 Project RubricCourse COM2006-Interpersonal C

COM2006 Week 4 Project RubricCourse COM2006-Interpersonal C

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to COM2006 Week 4 Project RubricCourse COM2006-Interpersonal C

Similar to COM2006 Week 4 Project RubricCourse COM2006-Interpersonal C (20)

More from LynellBull52

More from LynellBull52 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

COM2006 Week 4 Project RubricCourse COM2006-Interpersonal C