Relationship Between Culture and Communication Questions

Posted: January 20th, 2023

For this assignment, you will explore the relationship between culture and communication. In her definition of culture, Bevan (2020) states it is the collective set of customs, values, beliefs, and norms of a group of people. In this paper, you will explore how culture creates customs of verbal and nonverbal communication and then explore two other themes covered in Bevan. Ultimately, you will discuss how paying attention to culture can help us improve as communicators.
In your paper,

Explain two points detailing why it is so important to be aware of culture when thinking about communication, utilizing Bevan.
Explain how culture shapes verbal and nonverbal communication, utilizing Bevan.
Describe the relationship between culture and two other themes that are central to culture from this list, utilizing Bevan:

Gender(Chapters 2 and 3)
High versus low context cultures (Chapter 3)
Dominant cultures versus co-cultures (Chapter 3)
Individualism and collectivism (Chapter 3)
Perceptual filters (Chapter 3)

NOTE: If you’d like to supplement your points by learning more about the roles of race or class in communication, please use one or more of the videos in the “Resources” box in the upper right corner to assist you. This is not required, but can enrich your paper.

Explain how paying attention to culture can help a person improve as a communicator, utilizing Bevan and, if you choose, one of the supplemental videos you watched.

The Culture and Communication paper

Must be 750 words (three double-spaced pages) in length (not including title and references pages) and formatted according to APA Style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center’s APA Style (Links to an external site.) resource.
Must include a separate title page with the following:

Title of paper
Student’s name
Course name and number
Instructor’s name
Date submitted

Rubric for Research Paper

 
 
Outstanding – 20pts
Good  – 15pts
Fair – 10pts
Unacceptable – 5pts

 
Outline
 
Excellent section headings, indicative of a steady “flow” to the overall paper. Topics and subtopics clearly indicated.
Professional looking.
Good section headings, indicative to a steady “flow” to the overall paper. Topics clearly indicated, could use more subtopics.
 
Fair section headings, indicative that the paper has “flow”. Topics and subtopics not clearly indicated. Unclear organization of thoughts.
 
Disorganized appearance.
Relevant topics missing or incorrect, paper has no indicative “flow”.
Not professional.

Abstract
 
Highly informative, complete and easy to understand. Appropriate vocabulary is used.
Abstract makes you want to read the paper.
Informative, complete and understandable. Appropriate vocabulary is used.
Somewhat informative and understandable.
 
Not very informative or understandable.
 

Structure
 
Thesis is clear, easy to find, and appropriate to the assignment.
Thesis is supported by the rest of the paper.
Paper contains a “roadmap” for the reader.
There is a logical “flow” to the topics/arguments. Conclusion follows clearly from the arguments presented.
Thesis is clear and appropriate.   Thesis fairly well supported.
Paper is fairly well organized.
Conclusion follows from the rest of the paper.
Thesis is fairly clear.
Inconsistent support for thesis. Paper weakly organized. Conclusion is acceptable.
Thesis unclear and/or inappropriate.
Thesis not supported.
Paper is not organized. Conclusion doesn’t follow from the rest of the paper.

Research
 
The evidence comes from a wide variety of valid sources. The bibliography is complete and reflects appropriate sources.
 
The evidence comes from the minimum valid sources. The bibliography is complete.
Valid sources are inconsistently used.  The bibliography contains minor formatting errors.
 
Multiple sources cited  incorrectly.
Bibliography missing.
 

Critical
Thinki
 
ng
Arguments are pertinent to the topic.
Arguments are logical, supported with evidence. The key arguments have been made – no major points have been left out.
Arguments are
pertinent to the topic.   Arguments are fairly logical and reasonably supported.
Most key arguments have been made.
Arguments are not consistently pertinent, logical, or supported. Few key arguments have been made.
Arguments not pertinent. Arguments rarely, if at
all, logical and supported.
Almost no key arguments have been made.