Title Quote: SpiceyNoodleSoup
As I write this, students in their Project Teams are far along in their internal dynamics – my comments today reflect back upon where we were nearly two weeks ago, when the small group plummet began. Inevitably, there was confusion. Nonetheless, in fairly short order the new structure of the class emerged, with students ‘nexting’ from the (traditional school-learning) self-focused individual phase into a collaborative ‘oh we’re really in this together’ team phase.
The first team-building assignment (5:3) asked students to read each other’s summaries of a variety of articles on the topic of “exhaling” and my lecture on “nexting.” The idea was to work with (textbook author) John Stewart’s metaphor of interpersonal communication as breathing: as a live, organic process with the qualities of a chicken/egg mutual dynamic. Which comes first (for instance), the team project assignment or the orientation of students to the fact of a project? I continue to teach in the mode of a reflective practitioner, designing the curriculum as a reflective conversation between me with the knowledge demonstrated by students (singly and in aggregate). The second team-building assignment (6:1/6:2) involved reading John Robison’s book, look me in the eye, and figuring out how to continue (now, in the midst of all this complexity and confusion and comprehension).
Note: for kicks (and
to protect anonymity, and
preserve grammar)
I have made everyone’s gender female.
(!)
First, the mechanics: model responses were provided by DeliverMeSummer (for 5:3) and Shiny Ginger (for 6:1/6:2) yet every student made important and insightful contributions. I cannot mention everything (there is simply too much!), so what follows are what struck me as highlights: either for their power of summary or their significance in pointing to present (current, active) dynamics. A different person would select an alternative set of highlights (some quotes/paraphrases might overlap, but definitely others would not, and the overall picture would have a distinctive quality no matter how much commonality exists).
The Gymnasium (as I’ve adapted her blogname to reflect my sense of her foundational contributions to our class as a group), wrote: “Just when I thought I knew enough to successfully communicate, I realize I can still learn much more…” JohnnieDrama is rather more explicit:
you will see the ulterior motives which Steph decided not to express to us. She needed to butter us up before she bamboozled us with group projects.
Cake problematizes the conspiracy theory, arguing that if I had intentionally misled everyone, then I would be guilty of stereotyping. Or maybe Cake meant all of you would be guilty of stereotyping?! Cake also names the power dynamic: “because Steph controls our grades . . . we did as she told us.” I omitted part of Cake’s statement (notice the ellipses), because I suspect the sheer fact of The Grade carries the most influence. Evidence of this power continues to roll in via email and the in-class logistics thread, with pleas not to be held accountable for teammates’ less than ideal performance, or penalized for missing assignments (every one has a good reason, of course), or because of problems with the technology . . .
What I want to highlight is the obedience factor. (From this you can now extrapolate my general critique of most public education.) Hmmmm. The omitted part of Cake’s critique now becomes relevant: “…and she knows what she’s doing…” Well, thank you (I think!), but let me clarify: I do not “know” in the sense of being able to predict without error but perhaps I do “know” on the basis of training and experience. I know the structure that schooling imposes, and I know the roles students are trained to take. I trust your intelligence, too.
So, I am not surprised that President Makalele (for instance) can summarize,
“We have learned the tie-ins with active listening, nexting and consequentiality and as a result, more and more people are realizing what to look for in respect to these three ideas when reading something they are going to respond to. The first blog posts contained for example, instances of nexting but nobody knew that they were doing it.”
or that OuterBodyBoi can come up with her own metaphor:
“Communication is like fencing. You have to set things up correctly in order to harness true power and effectiveness.”
Well, if I have “misled” you to this point of harnessing true power and effectiveness (!) I guess I am doing my job alright, eh? 
Masr describes why this online mode of studying interpersonal communication enables such deep learning:
“While online, you have the advantage of being able to read what you’re interlocker says as many times as you please, and than using nexting on your own time.”
There’s a typo in that sentence which is amusing because of its truth: once you begin communicating with someone (or refuse to do so) you are locked into a relationship of some kind. The “kind” is where interpersonal communication allows us latitude: we can move by establishing new positions, finding different orientations, discovering alternative perspectives. On the basis of this interrelational social fact, interpersonal communication theorists can claim that our interlocutors make us who we are.
The parameters of identity are fixed by who we communicate with (and who we don’t), as well as by how we conduct the communication process. Recognizing a pattern of redundancy, for instance, as SABoy did with the limited range for expressing emotion presented by our deeply-americanized textbook, becomes impossible if one is only always communicating within an homogenous group. Consequentially, expressing emotion in “an American way” (if I can make a rather large leap here for the purposes of illustration) makes one “American” more than, for instance, the originary fact of citizenship that is supposedly ascribed at birth. This is one basis for how/why discrimination remains a real problem: identity is ascribed (by others) as much (and sometimes moreso) than the avowals we make for ourselves.
Our surprise guest – thank you John, for being here! – muses:
It’s worth considering whether a person like me – with communication challenges that result from some kind of neurological difference – would have benefited from a class like this, long ago.
In face-to-face versions of this course and others, I have had students with Asperger’s Syndrome. My experience is that they have benefited, and their presence intensifies the learning for everyone. Including me The challenge of mediating the differences that are brought into view by people who do not follow the norms is (in my opinion) the point of interpersonal communication as well as being its disciplinary contribution to human society.
Sunday August 10, 2008 at 11:57 am
The message in the article: Dialogue’s Basic Tension by Karen Zediker and John Stewart that is being conveyed here is that when we have moments of dialogue, the people involved in said dialogue maintain one primary tension. The one between “letting the other happen to me while holding my own ground” In other words when we let the other happen to me, you are letting someone happen to you or influence you. “Holding my own ground” on the other hand takes place when in the moment of primary tension of dialogue the person holds their ground by asserting himself or herself.
When we read other peoples work that may be of some interest to us we are being influenced by said comments to a certain extent. This also depends on how a person is exhaling and appropriate style of nexting. For example in order to be influenced, hence we let the other happen to me we may need to at least agree with what is being said. On the other hand if we don’t agree we tend to hold my own ground. Specifically all our past discussions with teams and classmates may have influenced how we responded.
Sunday August 10, 2008 at 1:01 pm
The article: Dialogue Basic Tensions is represented through out Stephanie’s lecture. I found my self relating the article to this lecture the most when Stephanie described everyone’s concern about their grades, and the confusion that was present early on with the group work. For instance many of us experienced confusion with all of the new technology that we had to learn when we started this class, but we ‘let the other happen to us.’ Meaning that we learned as quickly as we could how to use the technology, and we had an open-mind to it. We care about our grades, therefore we know that if we do not pick-up on all of the new technology that we have to use in this class we will not succeed. It is certainly stressful when we have to learn all of this with out visual instructions, but we knew we had to get through it. Many of us ‘Held our own ground’ early on in the group project. As we were concerned about our grades being affected by other people’s performances and what not. We shared our concern whether it be via email or the logistic’s discussion. Although we probably knew that our grade was not going to change because we contacted our professor about our concern, we wanted the professor to know that we were worried. We did not just ‘let the other happen.’ By letting everything just follow its own course and not taking any stand on it, we would have been letting the other happen to ourselves. When it comes to our grades we are all obviously very concerned, everyone wants to do well! We get overwhelmed and sometimes panic, but we usually hold our ground in ways of trying to take action or staying strong in determining our opinions on evaluating our efforts. This continues to be a chain, because after we contact our professor about our grades, she will respond with the reality.. Whether or not we agree with the response, it is what it is. And we at this point typically have to let the other happen to us. This is because our professor has much more knowledge about how to teach and assess a class than we do, and we have to trust that however they do that is the right and most efficient way.
Sunday August 10, 2008 at 1:02 pm
It’s great to see how seamlessly these lectures, readings, and analyses flow together – Steph’s new lecture “nexted” beautifully from my 7.3/8.1 response and blog post. Steph writes, “This is one basis for how/why discrimination remains a real problem: identity is ascribed (by others) as much (and sometimes moreso) than the avowals we make for ourselves.” Yes, very true. I think this refers to both the chicken and the egg ☺ (and perhaps falls on the same conceptual “continuum” that seems to govern passive-aggressive, tensionality, and others). To clarify, our identities in conversation are partly “ascribed” – that is, they are assigned by others’ expectations – but at the same time, they are “avowed” – or what/how we see ourselves in relation to our own expectations (but also the expectations of others).
In his most recent post, Beaver32 remarks, “We all take things in differently because we come from different backgrounds.” This is an important reality to keep in mind when thinking about our assumptions about and expectations for others, as well as ourselves. Our respective experiences and backgrounds undoubtedly shape and contribute to how we view and interact with others – and, thus, how our identities come to be (again, both the chicken and the egg). Commsyr09 echoes this observation in her entry, stating, “… when we are interacting in a dialogic manner both parties are imparting their understandings simultaneously to the person they are having a dialogue with and both people leave the situation changed due to this.” I love that she uses the word simultaneously because it suggests the notion that both are happening at the same time – one in accordance with the other.
And SAboy82, you’ve referenced this ever-shifting continuum in your comment when you wrote, “When we read other peoples work that may be of some interest to us we are being influenced by said comments to a certain extent.” We enter an encounter with our pre-existing “self” – the very self that finds a particular comment interesting. When we find and interpret that interesting comment, we think about what we want to say – using these “ascribed” and “avowed” expectations dictated by the situation and whom exactly we are conversing with – and use these influences to formulate of our response. And when we speak of consequentiality (or the lingering impact of an event or communication on our “self”), we speak of both what is “ascribed” – or assigned by what is outside of our control – and avowed – that which is made by holding our own.
Sunday August 10, 2008 at 2:34 pm
Sports08 brings up a good point regarding course grades and the tension surrounding them. I am going to play Devil’s advocate here… sorry.
This class is all about communicating with others (obviously), but more importantly, this class is about fair and proper communication. I am going to make the assumption that (since this class is so specialized in its topic) most people are taking this course because it sounded interesting to them in terms of course material (I know I did). That being said, we can now make the assumption that you really want to learn how to be (in an ideal situation) a better interpersonal communicator for you own self-benefit. These are two assumptions that cannot be normally made for college courses that are: 1. prerequisites for other, more interesting, courses
2. static, non-fluid, courses – usually science courses like Chemistry or Physics, where the class has no chance to refute ideas or have dialogues (as defined by Stewart and Zediker) with the professor
3. Large intro-type courses where a simple groundwork is being laid – sometimes also used as a “weeding-out” technique
No, what’s different about this course is that most, if not all, of us have a genuine interest and an auto-actualized want to learn from this course.
All that being said, why should grades matter? I know that this might be easy for me to say because this is going to be my last official course for my Bachelor’s degree, and the outcome of this course (barring a failure) will not affect my transcript. Even a D- in this course would only lower my GPA by .01 point. Regardless, though, whether your want for success in this course is based on grades or just a natural desire for the topics at hand, because of those assumptions that were made earlier, the tension around grading should be negligible.
Don’t do it for the grades – it will make you go crazy if you get a B instead of an A – do it for the want to learn how to communicate….
[More to come later...]
Sunday August 10, 2008 at 3:55 pm
Steph said something very poignant in this post above: interpersonal communication theorists can claim that our interlocutors make us who we are. So does that mean that our interlocuters/listeners/exhalers/nexters define us because they can define our actions (if we, as communicators, also practice nexting)?
Well if that is the argument in play, then I have something to add… In my blog post about my team (Great Debates lead to the Greatest Ideas) I basically did a roll call of all my group mates and made flash judgments about them without any hesitation regarding the consequences of my actions. In DeliverMeSummer’s response post she says “After looking back over [JohnnieDrama’s] entry, I’m curious to see if we are fulfilling the roles he described. Furthermore, I wonder if we are fulfilling (or will fulfill) the roles he described because he described them as such (Does this make sense? It’s the chicken-or-the-egg phenomenon).”
Well technically, according to what Steph has said about our interlocuters creating us and shaping who we are, then its really not a chicken and egg paradox. It is clear that the chicken (being me) came before the egg (the personalities that I have just created for my teammates). But then DeliverMeSummer goes on to say that “obviously, I cannot speak to the accuracy of [JohnnieDrama's] descriptions of other teammates, but he nailed my personality!” So perhaps I just got lucky with dictating who DeliverMeSummer is, or perhaps I am the chicken…
Ahh but the plot thickens. Perhaps I am not the chicken – and so ensues my argument against myself as being the chicken, but rather a mere cog in the paradoxical analogy of the “chicken and the egg.” DeliverMeSummer, always wanting to better the group and further our progress, poses direct and specific questions to each of her teammates in the final paragraph of her blog. One such astutely asked questions is for commsyr09. DeliverMeSummer informs the reader that I describe commsyr09 as my “argumentative counterpart,” which can almost be read as a jab at commsyr09 (if you have been following the blogs/discussion boards). It appears that DeliverMeSummer is subtly trying to prod commsyr09 into a debate-like situation with me, which is what I want – thus me describing commsyr09 as such.
So we have a dichotomy in our direct example of the chicken-and-the-egg. Yes I am the chicken for DeliverMeSummer, but commsyr09 does not see me as so. Maybe our interlocuters don’t define who we are. Maybe we, as rational-thinking people, define our interlocuters by only communicating certain types of things to certain types of people… What are you, the chicken or the egg?
Sunday August 10, 2008 at 5:25 pm
I agree with what MemphisBurns says in his blog. It doesn’t seem like anyone wants to be in charge. In a group, I tend to be one of the people who lets others delegate work for her, and that seems to be the case with the others in my group. It is true that we are reluctant to ask things of each other; no one wants to say “Everyone has to be online at this time, no matter what.” This is partially because we don’t know each other, and partly because we can’t ask each other to change each others’ schedules when we know our own obligations are important to us. I also liked how MemphisBurns quoted Stewart and Zediker regarding some communication as a “series of monologues.” That is definitely what is going on in our case. We all post at separate times, never as a dialogue.
As Steph mentioned in her post, most of us are concerned about our grades. When we miss an assignment or are confused about the technology, we often email her to explain our situation. Sports08 says in her post “We care about our grades, therefore we know that if we do not pick-up on all of the new technology that we have to use in this class we will not succeed.” I have had a hard time with the technology in this class. I often have trouble finding what I am looking for among all of the links, posts and discussions. By the time I follow all of the links and read the various posts, I sometimes forget what the assignment is actually about. Otherwise, I think the material is very interesting.
Sunday August 10, 2008 at 5:48 pm
There are a few concepts in this course that are, more or less, abstract – if not conceptually then certainly in practice. I feel some people are naturally adept at perceiving them in action in a variety of situations. This is continually re-confirmed for me because in reading my peers’ work on every assignment, I come across an example I had previously overlooked. Sports08’s comment to this lecture described very well how “basic tensions” shaped our early encounters as a team. In the framework of a class, our primary concern is the grade we will receive for the work. This simple driving force was mostly responsible for the state of conversation initially amongst groups. Our eagerness to ensure that all members were on the same “page” with each other, while each completing individual work, caused some frustration and some panic. Zediker and Stewart speak of how a lot of communication is dialogic. They have a great quote on the matter that I included in my post Word to your “other”. I feel at the beginning we were all in a monologic state of mind trying to accomplish a dialogic process, and this was just the type of intentional “wrench in the gears” Steph had in mind…I think. Sports08 parallels this basic tension to that which we experienced individually while trying to acclimate ourselves to the format and structure of this course, which I will admit was alien to me. Indeed, some of us had to let the other happen to us when learning the ropes of COMM 250, and just as an in-breath must have an out, some of us had to hold our ground during the initial team process. Reflecting on this makes me recall some courses I have taken in systems thinking. The light-speed primer of systems thinking is that our actions our shaped by patterns of behavior we have, and that those patterns of behavior are reinforced by mental models we have of the way things are or “should be”. These mental models are in place because of systemic structures in our environment. The systemic structure here is a class for which we must receive credit. This puts in place a mental model of adequate work earning a corresponding grade. This reinforced a pattern of behavior that is to be concerned only with what affects one’s grade, which led to the action of frustrated and somewhat panicked initial conversation.
Sunday August 10, 2008 at 6:31 pm
The article basic tension by karen Zediker and John Sterwart says we use the term “dialouge to refer to a particular kind of quality of communication that happens when the people involved are presented to each other as persons-as unquie, reflective, choosing, valuing, thinking and feelings beings.
Steph talks about how all of our assignment that we have done so far and how they have prepared us to communicate with each other. It helps us think about other people feelings when we are responding to each others post. We must do that because we all take things differently. All of our lives have been shaped differently because we all come from different cultures. So you have to take all that into consideration before you respond to someone else post that’s when we use the skill nexting. Nexting is the biggest concept in this class it has applied to everything we have done since day one. We have been trying to build relationships with each other so we try to think of what were going to say so we won’t kill the conversation we want to keep it going so we can open up with each other and make a strong connection. We all must continue to work on our commuincation skils it will help us in this class but mostly in our overall lives.
Sunday August 10, 2008 at 6:41 pm
First, I find the title of this post a little bit amusing (conspiracy and structure). I only found it amusing after I read the actual post and apparently the people who are suspicious of some sort of communication class conspiracy haha. I’m not to sure exactly on how you misled us, or why anyone would think that we have been misled. I think I might be missing something. This is a communication class, it seems like something to be expected that group projects will take place.
JohnieDrama made a great point, as how it can be safe to assume that we all want to take this course, possibly because its $1,000 dollars extra. While it would be nice to imagine that everyone is here primarily to learn about communication and has far more concern about the knowledge that will be gained, its more logical that the grade that we will be recieving is the main driving force in what we do in this class. Just as JohnieDrama said, for me, it doesn’t really apply simply because my grade here will have little effect on anything, therefore I’m here to read, to understand, and to benefit.
While now, its difficult for myself or any of my teammembers to asses the tentions in our dialogue, simply because little/no dialogue has taken place so far. But I’m sure in the next few days, there will be dialogue occuring between us.
Sunday August 10, 2008 at 7:26 pm
A course on learning how to communicate, I never thought I would take such a class. I’ve always found myself involved in different groups, clubs, and sport teams where I have been the one in charge. I’ve noticed how my peers always seemed to look at me when they looked for leadership. This has given me confidence on my ability to communicate, but I now see how at times I have been mislead by this sense of confidence (too much “holding my own ground” I guess). There is always room to improve (on pretty much everything). Learning how to communicate in this online environment has had its benefits but its faults as well.
As it has been mentioned above, we all started the class like we would start any other, with the simple intention of getting a good grade. Of course the subject seemed interesting (and it is), but my focus was to get in and out with a good grade. I see now how all these concepts have changed (some more than in others) the way we all communicate with each other and how we communicate in our everyday lives. We seem to be more attentive, caring, and careful when responding to each other. Having these conversations in a classroom would have been much different because of the “image” that we all tend to protect when speaking “face to face”. I’ve noticed how students in classrooms really don’t pay much attention to each other’s comments or ignore them, there isn’t a sense to “hold your ground” and possibly embarrass yourself. We are also not very “open to the openness” of others in a classroom environment. Sadly, students just want to go to class, get credit for it, and pass it (hopefully with a good grade). This online environment, along with the “open” conversations that we all have, has allowed us to really try these new communication concepts without having to worry about looking bad or embarrassing ourselves (especially with our Fake Names).
So what isn’t working? I would have to say the understanding of some of these concepts. I agree with what Memphisburns mentions above “There are a few concepts in this course that are, more or less, abstract – if not conceptually then certainly in practice.” Even when the lectures are online, giving us the opportunity to read them as many times as we like, sometimes I need it in a different “wording” in order to fully understand the concept. Reading confusing material over and over is not helping me understand it and can be frustrating at times. This is when a “face to face” conversation with the professor or classmates can be beneficial.
Overall, I would have to say that I have been surprised by the level of writing that I have seen in the class. It seems like most of us are taking these different concepts at a personal level when we write about them, which is good for a “real” conversation (expressing the tension of “holding you own ground”). I feel that what we have learned so far has made us aware of the tension of “being open to the openness of others”. For example learning how to listen in a successful manner, “nexting”, and being aware of the stereotypes that we all practice without knowing it, has made our communications encounters less selfish than what they would have been when we started this course.
Sunday August 10, 2008 at 7:42 pm
So far reading this lecture and everyones responses to it I have come to the realization that we are all grasping these concepts collectively. Everyone seemed to have responded to the idea of the grades being a large factor that caused tensions within the groups. Sports08 brings up the point that we are concerned that the fate of our grade in this class is partly in the hands of one of our teammates. They say, “Many of us ‘Held our own ground’ early on in the group project. As we were concerned about our grades being affected by other people’s performances and what not.” This scares me a bit too, its understandable that people are having issues communicating because of the different schedules everyone has. Its not the work ethic im worried about with my team but rather the fact that we have no common times to talk. I feel as though this is creating some “basic tension” already because when we have to read other peoples blogs or responses and cannot contact them to find where it is or they didnt do the assignment we have to suffer the consequences. Again, I don’t hold that against the person themselves but rather on the online class style with teams and chat rooms and what not. I like the idea of teams and group work but when it affects my own grade then I begin to dislike it. Memphisburns also comments on the idea of relying on other people for your grade as scary. They say, “Our eagerness to ensure that all members were on the same “page” with each other, while each completing individual work, caused some frustration and some panic.” I think that we all agree with this concept collectively so im sure there will be a collective solution.
Sunday August 10, 2008 at 7:59 pm
I’m getting a lot more than I planned on from this course, which is kind of a strange thing to say because I was really sure what to expect (if that makes any sense?). I guess I thought I’d learn how to become a more effective communicator, but I didn’t realize that I would be reflecting so much on my own IPC. Not sure if I thought it would just be a type of “manual” or “guidelines” to improve my communication or what-but I wasn’t planning on learning so much and putting it to practical use immediately. Building relationships with our “teams” has demonstrated in concrete examples what we are learning and how it actually works, especially around “nexting” and “tension” in our dialogues. The whole idea of “nexting” is not something that I ever gave much thought to before this class and didn’t realize how it is something that we are constantly engaging in, either consciously or unconsciously.
My most valuable lessons so far was learning how to let others control the “tension” in dialogue. In order to do that I had to let go of the “tension” line and let someone else hold the ropes. Primary tensions are mentioned in the article on “Dialogue’s Basic Tension” by Zediker and Stuart. They say that “our own communication experiences have taught us that moments of dialogue emerge most often when the people involved maintain one primary tension-the one between letting the other happen to me while holding me own ground….this means that you let someone happen to you when they allow who they are-especially their differences from you-to touch ,connect with, and influence you.” This I learned in our teams. In order for me to accomplish some of the things necessary with the assignments I needed to sit back and “inhale” what others were saying. I felt intimidated by being so lost about how to navigate through this course at times-but allowed myself to let go of the ropes and have someone lead me.
When I reflect upon my own IPC I realize that I typically control the tension lines in my regular communications. I’m used to being in a position of “pushing”. My motive seemed to be to keep the conversation flowing. Now I’m realizing that maybe it was my way of controlling the conversation, commonly known to me as talking over other people. As Steph says in her lecture regarding “nexting”, Steph’s comments., “The point is that we are always and forever joining conversations in the middle, and there are a lot of people who want to influence how the conversation turns out.” It made me think about how often that also occurs when we are communicating with each other and through wordpress in this class.
On the concept of “tension”, Cakeisalie said “my teammates seem to all be willing to do what it takes to get the assignments done with the least amount of friciton.” Cakeisalie’s comments. I think that we are all on the same page and want things to go smooth, individually and collectively. We are actively demonstrating that through our on going communications. It is seen in our desire to help each other and willingness to communicate ad clearly and as openly as we can. This is what has reduced the chances of the wrong type of tension from our group. Outerbodyboi wrote about how there seemed to be a type of mutual respect in the air for our team and said, “Sometimes you can‘t speak your mind without getting on someone‘s nerves.” outerbodyboi’s comments.
I know what he means, I don’t want to offend anyone with my IPC. Through my communications in posts and chat I try to be careful and thoughtful of my choice of words. I don’t want to exhale something that could be misinterpreted and alienate myself from anyone in the group. Outerbodyboi(from the same link) continues on to say “I am curious to see how long this behavior lasts, and I think it could be there for the remainder of the group.” I don’t think there’s anything that would make it change either. I honestly feel that we are headed in the right direction and feel lucky to engage in this learning experience with my teammates.
Sunday August 10, 2008 at 8:16 pm
The article “Dialogue’s Basic Tension,” by K. Zediker and J. Stewart, tells of the essential “basic tensions” necessary for a truly dynamic dialogue. Gym411 provided a nice summary of the article’s description of “tensions.” They say that “these “tensions” are “holding my own ground” and “being open to the openness of others”. If one of these “tensions” does not exist in the effort to communicate then the attempt to dialogue can be considered unsuccessful. There must be a certain balance between the two.” Gym411 also identified several examples of tensions among team three members most notably: “[Spiceynoodlesoup] started his blog by saying: “All of my teammates recognized the importance of being “open” when workings as a group.” This is his way of “holding his ground”; by expressing that all the teammates shared his own idea as well. Spiceynoodlesoup then was “open to the openness of others” by explaining everyone’s point of view.” Their analysis shows that they are comfortable with the material and “holding their own ground” in terms of expressing their agreement with the material and teammates.
Other team three member Saboy82 shares their thoughts saying the “team’s basic tensions based on their weblogs give out the vibe that everyone is “letting the other happen to me” more than “holding my own ground” I say this because it seems that everyone is has similar views with each other.” Spiceynoodlesoup agrees commenting that they feel the team is “more oriented toward the “letting the other happen to me” end of the tension continuum.”
We seem to all be grasping this material very well
and I too feel a general consensus with my teammates and what the Zediker and Stewart’s article describes. This experience of communicating between monitors and never meeting one another face-to-face indeed provides challenges but this is what creates some of these tensions and opportunities for dialogue and learning as a team. I also feel as though Steph’s structure of ambiguity (students not knowing how each piece we write will come into future assignments) in steering the course along helps us to objectively learn from our past communications.
Sunday August 10, 2008 at 9:27 pm
Having read through much of my classmates writing on the various concepts we have discussed in this course, it is pretty clear that we all share an interest and desire to learn more, and put our new knowledge into action. As a group, we have put our “nexting” skills to the test as we reply to lectures and each other’s analyses. We are all constantly aware of “self disclosure” and “self presentation” every time we post on our weblogs and discussion threads for all to read. It is genuinely awesome to take a class that pertains to day- to- day life as greatly as this one.
As Steph did point out, however, and many agreed, we are not solely focused on the material in this course, rather our academic standing and grades are of great concern to us all. It is virtually impossible, at least for me, not to worry about how I am doing on assignments. I feel as though my performance on evaluations done by instructors gives an impression of how much I am taking out of the class. In addition, it creates a form of judgment, a way to tell a teacher how much that particular student cares, what their work ethic is like, their abilities. While every person is different, and many of us struggle with outside interferences and setbacks, I cannot help but assume this is how educators use assignments. It is for these reasons that I find myself struggling a bit in this particular course.
I am really enjoying learning about Interpersonal Communication. I have taken what I am studying, and integrated into my daily life, and that is something I am both grateful for and proud of. However, I am technologically challenged, and have been struggling a great deal with including links, weblog posting, among other things, and it worries me. Aside from my grade suffering, which is an obvious reason for my concern, I also feel as though it hinders learning when a student is so consumed with the intricate details of a homework submission. The group work, on the other hand, I am looking forward to continuing, and growing from.
Zediker and Stewart discuss the matter of influence at tension in dialogue. We either are “letting the other happen” or we are “holding our own ground.” We either allow others to completely influence our thoughts, words, and actions, or we assert ourselves and remain true to our original beliefs. I find it essential to strike a balance when working and communicating with others. Our team work is going to depend upon and agreed tolerance and acceptace of one another’s thoughts and viewpoints, without completely losing sight of our own values and opinions. Thankfully, my fellow teammates have all been cooperative, helpful, and on the same page about respect, assistance, and success in our assignments. Grant2U, for example, expressed a desire for all things to go smoothly, and how it has been great thus far that we have all been willing to both ask for and provide help to each other. Cakeisalie shared that the group all seems to be ready and willing to do what it takes to complete our tasks. It is really nice to work with people who want to do well, but also to genuinely want to work together to accomplish our goals.
Sunday August 10, 2008 at 9:55 pm
The article by Zediker and Stewart was informative and reflective. The theory of emotions and holding your ground can be interesting to observe between individuals and small groups. What is more intriguing is being aware of the process happening before you.
“By studying different sorts of tension in communication we can relate this to our group work and have an understanding of something such as ‘holding our ground’ when working together, by saying what we think will work best even if that is going against what someone else may think. It is all part of working together and learning a common-ground of negotiating to work well as a group.” http://sports08.wordpress.com/
Even though we are working in groups for our coursework or for our careers we need to be conscious of our style of communication. “if I feel as though I am being polite to somebody from another culture, I may actual be seeming rude or inferior” (4:3 Sports 08 2008 7/30/08 9:51pm). Sports08 will also bring to the table an awareness of how, having never met in person, we are essentially all strangers and will continue to be after the end of the class, yet together we are in a unique situation of learning to and are able to share experiences and emotions with each other.
I continue to reiterate what I have said several times to be open and respectful of persons and situations.
Sunday August 10, 2008 at 10:16 pm
I agree with what Grant2u have said “I guess I thought I’d learn how to become a more effective communicator, but I didn’t realize that I would be reflecting so much on my own IPC. Not sure if I thought it would just be a type of “manual” or “guidelines” to improve my communication or what-but I wasn’t planning on learning so much and putting it to practical use immediately.” The learning method of this class is a new experience for me, and I am glad not only I am learning the new skills but getting used to with how to use them in my own communication with the others. There are times that when I feel I am not following or understanding the methods, I often get ideas from reading how the other classmates have written on their blogs or discussion thread. I use the “nexting” skill from reading professor’s lectures, comments, or blog posts of classmate to help my understanding of class materials.
There is definitely a tension going on when we think about the method of this class. For each assignment, we try our best and our knowledge to explain our thoughts into written words, and we often post them on the blogs or discussion thread for the others to read. The way we post the assignments on the blogs or discussion thread, we are showing our “self-disclosure” or “holding my own ground” to the other people. If someone decides to read the post or leave comments are showing “letting the other happen to me”. In the beginning of the class, our instructor had let us to create our own blogs, and asked us to post our assignments in the discussion thread. I was not sure about the reason behind that method. If we were only expected to finish the assignments on time and getting good grades, she would not have asked us to follow her method. However, I think I understand why she had let us to follow that method now. By posting our assignments for all to read, we are actually trying to create dialogues to one another. From those dialogues, we get chances to learn about each others, and have better understanding about the class materials when we get confused. Also, we are learning how to apply the communication skills that we have studied in this class to practice in the real communication.
Sunday August 10, 2008 at 10:27 pm
I really like the point made by Steph in this section: “once you begin communicating with someone (or refuse to do so) you are locked into a relationship of some kind.” This is very true because there is no getting out of it. It’s like in Seinfeld when Elaine says “hi” to a stranger who lives in her building but after a while he doesn’t acknowledge her anymore. She is all the sudden hurt by his lack of effort in their relationship. But in reality, the only relationship they had was the casual “hi” anyway.
Many people have admitted to being serious about the group assignment because it affected their grade, and so they hounded the teacher about other people’s lack of commitment. But for me, I was more motivated to get things going with the group out of a fear that I would let my group members down. I didn’t want to be the scapegoat or to be the reason that someone else didn’t get an A. Grades really don’t motivate me. I’ve had semesters where I did poorly as far as grades, but I felt that I learned more than I did in previous (“successful”) semesters.
I have been e-mailing and checking up because I don’t want it to appear as though I am not taking the class seriously. If I was a teacher and half o the class wasn’t doing the work, I would feel as though I was failing. It’s always a good thing for the effort to be going both ways, and the work completed shows me that I am doing my part. (It makes me sleep better at night lol)
At first I thought that the group project was too abstract and unclear. Now I am beginning to see the bigger picture, as we allowed the whole thing to unfold the way that it has. As far as my group is concerned, they didn’t give those vibes out that there was finger pointing or tension. If there was, I didn’t feel it. But like I said before and some of my teammates agree, there is very little aggression in any of the interactions we’ve had. This is not always a good thing, as t becomes the opposite of dynamic; one-dimensional. In he article “Dialogue’s Basic Tension,” by K. Zediker and J. Stewart it drives home the point that, “The most important thing about poles in dialogue is that they are in tension, and this means that both ends of the continuum are transformed by their interrelation.” I do have to admit that I am scared to open up because there is a chance that my opinion on something will be offensive to others, and also it’s an educational class, and it’s hard to say where the line in the sand is drawn.
Sunday August 10, 2008 at 10:47 pm
This assignment is a little tough to do and it’s creating tension, and not the dialogic kind. The problem is that three out of five of my teammates didn’t do the assignment, or didn’t post it in a place where I could find it. Seeing as how this assignment seems to be a reactionary assignment this is going to make things a little hard! But here we go.
I feel that due to our interactions so far that Grant2u and I look at the other as a definite equal, each with their own flaws, but that is to be human. I feel that the conversations we have always seem to reach the tension that is described in Zediker and Stewart’s reading. We let the other happen to us because we’ve been in the other person’s shoes before. I’ve been that wide-eyed, deer-stuck-in-headlights person over technology before, and I’d assume it’s only fair to assume she’s felt overwhelmed by some assignments (what student hasn’t?). The other has always seemed to hold firm in their position, never letting the other person throw them off guard. If someone stumbles while you’re trying to help them, you need to be the one keeping them from falling flat on their face and help them help themselves stand up again. It’s a little over the top, but it’s definitely how I felt when I was lost on a homework assignment that she helped me with.
It’s a little hard to experience the “letting the other happen to you” online, but I feel that my example above works.
It seems that as I visited to post my reply onto the page officially, that my teammates have provided their input, and seeing as how the assignment is due in about 10 minutes, I don’t feel I could sufficiently provide feedback worth putting in without being late.
Sunday August 10, 2008 at 10:53 pm
After responding to Zediker and Stewart’s article and thinking about it in terms of Steph’s post, I realized that dialogic tensions are much deeper in this setting than others. Perhaps it is because we need to work in a group and all dialogically communicate to one another or because of the constraints of working online. We are put in a setting (if we can even call it that) to attempt communication with four or five additional people we have never even seen face to face and produce an end product. Because of this though, we are skipping passed the necessary “tensions” of allowing the other to happen and truly absorbing your interlocurs qualities.
With that all said, I strongly believe that without the knowledge we have acquired through the class thus far, we would be much more behind in communicating. What we have learned has allowed for us to further our communicating abilities, but barriers still exist. It is difficult to even consider these true barriers in commuication because this particular class is so different than most effective communication environments. For me, scheduling and technological difficulties have been the most troubling because when I find myself in need of help – I am not sure, how, when, or to whom to communicate this to. Is this a flaw in my “nexting” abilities or anticipating abilities? This has definitely posed “tension” not the kind that was spoken about in the article but definitely tension nonetheless!
Monday August 11, 2008 at 10:29 am
I agree with commsyr09, I think the constraints of working online with people we have never met make it difficult to communicate. There is a lot of socialization that happens face to face that does not happen when one is online. However I think the idea of being able to read and reread peoples thoughts and comments makes it more effective when communicating and getting down to bare essentials of the project.
I also agree with commsyr09 that because communication is the focus of the class we have a better understand of what to expect when responding to questions. I think the biggest problems with this class is that I always seem to be confused about what to do and I could look though tons of logistic posts to try and find an answer or just guess. I feel like part of this course is to not just read about communication but actually do it. I just simply do not have all day to keep checking blackboard for answers to questions so many times I just take a penalty and submit the work late so I can see what other people have written.
If this class where a little bit more structured so that I could see all of the assignments ahead of time and even do some of them ahead of time I would probably be in a better place. I understand now that this cannot happen because lots of the assignments build on each other. I would be able to complete work early on days that I know I will not have internet access. I am away many weekends. I didn’t realize the course would be set up the way it is. I feel like a big part of leaning interpersonal communication is being able to find a way to communicate through the hold ups. This kind of comes down to my ability to communicate problems I am having. I tend to just keep my mouth shut and do what I can to get by. Being more vocal to the members of my team might help this out.
Friday August 15, 2008 at 1:18 am
Your blog is interesting!
Keep up the good work!
Saturday August 16, 2008 at 10:52 pm
[...] “Well technically, according to what Steph has said about our interlocuters creating us and shaping w….” [...]
Sunday August 17, 2008 at 12:33 am
[...] “Well technically, according to what Steph has said about our interlocuters creating us and shaping w….” [...]