COM 323
Theory and Research in Small Group Communication
Fall 2014
Classroom: Fell Hall 152
Dates & Times: Mondays, Wednesdays, & Fridays, 1:00 - 1:50 p.m.
Instructor: Kevin R. Meyer, Ph.D.
Email: kmeyer@ilstu.edu
Office Phone: (309) 438-3277
Cell Phone: (309) 299-1961
Office: Fell Hall 426
Office Hours: Mondays 12:00 – 1:00 p.m. & 2:00 –3:00 p.m.; Wednesdays 12:00 – 1:00 p.m. &
4:00 – 6:00 p.m.; or by appointment
Required Readings:
The textbook is required and necessary for successful completion of the course. You may
purchase the textbook from local bookstores, on-line book sellers (ISBN: 9781111346850), or
procure an electronic copy of the textbook at http://www.coursesmart.com
Rothwell, J. D. (2013). In mixed company: Communicating in small groups and teams (8th ed.).
Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Other required readings are available on the course ReggieNet website free of charge. Citations
are included in this syllabus. If you prefer a reading packet, one can be purchased ($12.25 by
cash, check, or Redbird debit card) from Printing Services in the Nelson Smith Building. Packets
are print-on-demand, so call 24 business hours ahead to order (309) 438-3911.
In addition, you should obtain a copy of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological
Association (6th edition).
Course Description and Objectives:
The purpose of this class is to teach you theories, processes, and skills related to competent
communication in a group context. According to the undergraduate catalog, this course is to
cover “theoretical and experimental literature dealing with small group communication
processes.” However, this class is as much a performance class as it is a theory class. We will
explore opportunities for applying those theories in the professional context of our own
classroom and beyond. Thus, this course is designed to accomplish the following objectives:
1. To provide students with a comprehensive knowledge of small group and team
communication theories, processes, and skills.
2. To provide students with the ability to apply conceptual ideas about effective group
discussion techniques to practical communication situations (i.e., in-class activities,
group meetings, cooperative examinations, a group project, and group presentations).
3. To develop students’ communication competence in small group and team settings.
2
Special Needs Accommodation:
I am happy to accommodate any special needs you may have, although I require written
documentation from the Office of Disability Concerns for ongoing accommodations. Any
student needing to arrange a reasonable accommodation for a documented disability should
contact Disability Concerns in 350 Fell Hall, 438-5853 (voice), 438-8620 (TDD).
Academic Misconduct Policy:
Students are expected to be honest in all academic work, consistent with the academic integrity
policy as outlined in the Code of Student Conduct. All ideas are to be appropriately cited in both
oral and written form when borrowed, directly or indirectly, from another source. Inadequate
citation, unauthorized and unacknowledged collaboration, and/or the presentation of someone
else’s work constitutes plagiarism. Students found to commit intentional acts of dishonesty
(including cheating on an exam, falsifying evidence, or plagiarizing a written assignment) will
receive a failing grade in the course and will be referred for appropriate disciplinary action
through Community Rights and Responsibilities. Please note, I am very serious about reporting
academic dishonesty and view it as my professional responsibility; I have never been shy about
enforcing the consequences of this policy. For group assignments, the same principle applies:
intact groups may not plagiarize the work of others outside that group.
Professionalism:
Learning is maximized by reading class materials, note-taking, critical listening, and cognitive
engagement. Professionalism includes listening to others’ opinions (although not necessarily
agreeing with those viewpoints), actively listening to those who are speaking during lectures and
discussion, and working together in a spirit of cooperation. Collectively, we are a team working
together to improve and learn. Each student must be a productive, contributing member of our
team. Be on time for class. Use of any electronic device should not interfere with your ability to
pay complete attention or become a distraction to classmates or myself.
Attendance Policy:
Regular attendance and active engagement are required. Come to class prepared to discuss and
engage in activities associated with the daily readings. Perfect attendance is expected, as your
group members should be able to count on your presence and because by enrolling in this course
you have made a commitment to being present during all class meetings. Being absent deprives
you of valuable discussions and will also prevent you from fulfilling graded in-class
assignments. Historically, there has been a strong correlation between absences and grades; the
more class time that students miss, the lower the grades they tend to earn. Missing one or more
class periods, even if excused, prior to an exam will require the exam’s study guide to be
completed in full, in handwriting, and prior to the group exam; failure to complete the study
guide satisfactorily will result in a 5% deduction from the student’s overall exam score. Missing
more than 3 class periods throughout the semester will result in a 5% deduction from a student’s
overall course grade for each additional unexcused absence.
Late Work and Incomplete Grade Policy:
All assignments are expected at the beginning of class on the due date. If you are unprepared to
deliver a presentation on your assigned day or do not come to class on an exam day, you will
forfeit your points for that assignment. An automatic 10% of the points possible will be deducted
3
from late papers, with an additional 10% deducted for each 24 hours the paper is late. In the case
of documented university excused absences, written assignments, examinations, and
presentations should be completed prior to the absence. As a general rule, incomplete grades will
not be given.
Examinations:
As COM 323 is a group-based course, the exams will consist of both an individualaccountability and cooperative-group assessment. Each student will be assigned to an Intact
Group for the duration of the semester and take cooperative exams with their group. Exams are
closed book/closed notes. All group members will be given a copy of the exam, but only one
copy will serve as the group’s official answer sheet. Multiple-choice questions will have four
possible answers (anywhere between zero to four answer options may be correct). One point is
deducted for every error of omission or commission on the multiple-choice questions. True-false
items follow standard form, but will require a written explanation/correction of any false answer.
Two points are deducted for every wrong answer on the true-false items, and one point is
deducted for false answers missing an appropriate explanation/correction. Any group member
not present for the cooperative exam or arriving after it has begun must take the cooperative
exam separately from the group, receiving whatever grade is earned (often significantly lower
than the group score).
Individual accountability is determined by a second exam (consisting of the same question
format) given to all group members who work separately without the benefit of group
interaction. The combined grading scale is as follows:
100 – 95% on individual exam = group exam score plus 20 points
94 – 90% on individual exam = group exam score plus 10 points
89 – 85% on individual exam = group exam score plus 5 points
84 – 75% on individual exam = group exam score
74 – 70% on individual exam = group exam score minus 5 points
69 – 65% on individual exam = group exam score minus 10 points
64 – 60% on individual exam = group exam score minus 20 points
59 – 50% on individual exam = group exam score minus 30 points
49 – 0% on individual exam = group exam score minus 40 points
Group Project Paper:
Each Intact Group will conduct a civic engagement project. Groups must approve their project
with me. Groups should find a civic, social, or political issue, cause, or campaign for their
project. For example, finding a not-for-profit organization that needs a fundraising campaign
would be one potential project. Other possible ideas include creating a communication campaign
to raise awareness about a social, health, educational, or political issue. First, groups will
research, investigate, and conduct interviews to guide the project. Next, groups will conduct their
project and collect data assessing the results of the engagement project. Finally, groups will
present their results to the class and document their results in a final paper. Please note that
raffles are illegal and use of organizational logos requires explicit permission.
The Group Project Paper should follow APA style, 6th edition. The paper should be typed
double-spaced in 12 point plain Times New Roman font, with 1 inch margins on the sides, top,
4
and bottom. A header should indicate your group name and page number at the top of each page
(i.e., “Griffey Stars 1”). A title should appear, centered, on the top line of the first page. No title
page should be included. Your paper should be a minimum of 10 full pages, excluding the
references page. The paper should describe the engagement project, what was accomplished, and
present assessment data documenting the results of the project. Use level headings to help
organize the paper. More explanation of the guidelines for the projects will be discussed in class.
The grading rubric is posted on ReggieNet. All group members will receive the same score,
unless voted less than a 100% share by other group members. Any student wishing to vote
another group member less than a 100% share of the group score must email me the specific
share percentage and a detailed rationale justifying the percentage (i.e., didn’t complete work,
absent from meetings, failed to participate fully in the assignment, etc.). Emails must be received
no later than 24 hours following the assignment due date, and will be kept confidential.
Group Presentations:
Each Intact Group will make two presentations. Grading rubrics used to evaluate the
presentations are posted on ReggieNet.
The Group Fishbowl Discussion will involve your group discussing the assigned chapter
contents and related examples on your assigned discussion day. All group members should be
equally involved. The discussion should last approximately 15 minutes.
The Group Project Presentation should last approximately 15 minutes. All group members
should be equally involved and present the material in a collaborative style. Your task is to
present the results of the group project to the rest of the class using visual aids and oral delivery.
All group members will receive the same score, unless voted less than a 100% share by other
group members. Any student wishing to vote another group member less than a 100% share of
the group score must email me the specific share percentage and a detailed rationale justifying
the percentage (i.e., didn’t complete work, absent from meetings, failed to participate fully in the
assignment, etc.). Emails must be received no later than 24 hours following the assignment due
date, and will be kept confidential.
Individual Reflection and Research Paper:
The Individual Reflection and Research Paper should be typed double-spaced in 12 point plain
Times New Roman font, with 1 inch margins on the sides, top, and bottom. A header should
indicate your full name and page number at the top of each page (i.e., “Kevin Meyer 1”). A title
should appear, centered, on the top line of the first page. No title page should be included. Your
paper should be a minimum of 10 full pages, excluding the references page. In the paper, you
will reflect on your experiences working in your group this quarter. Your paper should integrate
specific terminology from the textbook where appropriate; be sure to cite both Rothwell and
applicable PDF readings as well as a minimum of four outside sources (journal articles found in
Milner Library’s “Communication and Mass Media Complete” database). The paper and
references should follow APA style, 6th edition. The grading rubric is posted on ReggieNet.
The purpose of the paper is to give you a chance to discuss your group experiences this semester
by describing specific examples that you felt were important or from which you learned.
Furthermore, the idea is to also pull back from those specific examples by talking about how
terminology and concepts or theories from the required readings and outside sources would
5
apply to or inform your experiences. However, you are welcome to disagree with these sources
or take a different position than the “party line” advocated by the textbook. I am looking for you
to share your experiences as well as your feelings and opinions about those experiences while
using terminology from the field and comparing your experiences to the concepts and theories
we have discussed. Be sure to compare your experiences in ad hoc groups to your intact group.
You will need to apply at least one small group theory covered in this class to your intact group
experiences. Finally, you need introduction and conclusion paragraphs as well as several
paragraphs in the body of the paper, organized by using level headings. So, write well and
proofread carefully, honestly and insightfully sharing and analyzing your group experiences.
Course Assignments and Grades:
The grading scale is as follows: A= 100-90%; B= 89-80%; C= 79-70%; D= 69-60%; F= 59%
and below. Percentages will be calculated based on points earned from:
Examinations
Points Possible/Your Points
First Examination
100
/_____
Second Examination
100
/_____
Third Examination
100
/_____
Final Examination
100
/_____
Written Assignments
Group Project Paper
100
/_____
Individual Reflection and Research Paper 100
/_____
Presentations
Group Fishbowl Discussion
25
/_____
Group Project Presentation
50
/_____
Research Pool Participation
10
/_____
(The pool is at: https://sites.google.com/site/isucomresearch/)
Total
685
/_____
Additional Assignments for Graduate Students:
Graduate students taking this course for graduate credit must complete two additional
assignments: Teaching a Lesson (50 points) and writing a Research Proposal (50 points). Thus,
there are 785 total points possible for graduate students. First, graduate students must develop a
lesson plan including an experiential activity for one class period, and then teach that lesson plan
to the undergraduates. Negotiate exact dates with me by the end of week two. Second, graduate
students must produce a research proposal (approximately 20 pages of text) for a study
investigating small group communication. The research proposal should include a title page,
abstract, literature review, research questions and/or hypotheses, partial methods section, and
complete references list in APA style, 6th edition.
6
Citations for required readings, posted on ReggieNet (listed in the order we read them):
Marshall, J. (2010, September 30). How to measure the wisdom of a crowd: A group’s
interactions drive its intelligence more than the brain power of individual members. Discovery
News. Retrieved from http://news.discovery.com
Miller, G. (2010, October 1). Social savvy boosts the collective intelligence of groups. Science,
330, 22. doi: 10.1126/science.330.6000.22
Woolley, A. W., Chabris, C. F., Pentland, A., Hashmi, N., & Malone, T. W. (2010, October 29).
Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science, 330,
686-668. doi: 10.1126/science.11931147
Miller, K. (2005). Communication theories: Perspectives, processes, and contexts (2nd ed.).
Boston, MA: McGraw Hill.
Bormann, E. G. (1972). Fantasy and rhetorical vision: The rhetorical criticism of social reality.
Quarterly Journal of Speech, 58, 396-407. Retrieved from http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/RQJS
Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory: Action, structure, and contradiction in
social analysis. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Pina e Cunha, M., Rego, A., & Clegg, S. R. (2010). Obedience and evil: From Milgram and
Kampuchea to normal organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 97, 291-309. doi:
10.1007/s10551-010-0510-5
Dimitroff, R. D., Schmidt, L. A., & Bond, T. D. (2005). Organizational behavior and disaster: A
study of conflict at NASA. Project Management Journal, 36, 28-38. Retrieved from
http://www.pmi.org
Packer, D. J. (2009). Avoiding groupthink: Whereas weakly identified members remain silent,
strongly identified members dissent about collective problems. Psychological Science, 20, 546548. Retrieved from http://www.psychologicalscience.org
Marques, A. C. S., & Maia, R. C. M. (2010). Everyday conversation in the deliberative process:
An analysis of communicative exchanges in discussion groups and their contributions to civic and
political socialization. Journal of Communication, 60, 611-635. doi: 10.1111/j.14602466.2010.01506.x
Ogungbamila, B., Ogungbamila, A., & Adetula, G. A. (2010). Effects of team size and work
team perception on workplace commitment: Evidence from 23 production teams. Small Group
Research, 41, 725-745. doi: 10.1177/1046496410376306
Abdel-Monem, T., Bingham, S., Marincic, J., & Tomkins, A. (2010). Deliberation and diversity:
Perceptions of small group discussions by race and ethnicity. Small Group Research, 41, 746776. doi: 10.1177/1046496410377359
Cleveland, C., Blascovich, J., Gangi, C., & Finez, L. (2011). When good teammates are bad:
Physiological threat on recently formed teams. Small Group Research, 42, 3-31. doi:
10.1177/1046496410386245
Schilpzand, M. C., Herold, D. M., & Shalley, C. E. (2011). Members’ openness to experience
and teams’ creative performance. Small Group Research, 42, 55-76. doi:
10.1177/1046496410377509
Wiedow, A., & Konradt, U. (2011). Two-dimensional structure of team process improvement:
Team reflection and team adaptation. Small Group Research, 42, 32-54. doi:
10.1177/1046496410377358
7
Tentative Schedule
Week 1
M, Aug. 18
Topic
*Introduction to Course and Syllabus
*Philosophy of the Course
(rationale for activities, projects, presentations, and examinations)
*Small Group Communication Concepts overview
Assignments Due
*Read Syllabus
*Purchase Textbook
*Bookmark
ReggieNet course site
W, Aug. 20
*Arm Wrestling Activity
*Formation of Intact Groups for the Semester
*Definitional Drawing Activity
*Small Group Communication Theory overview
*Download PDF
readings from
ReggieNet or buy a
reading packet
F, Aug. 22
*Group Synergy Activity (NASA)
*Aggregate versus Group Scores
*Collective Intelligence Study
*How to Read Journal Articles
*Read Marshall
(2010)
*Read Miller (2010)
*Read Woolley et al.
(2010)
Week 2
M, Aug. 25
Topic
*“Group Oral Presentations.”
*“Critical Thinking Revisited: Arguments and Fallacies.”
*Problem Solving
*Mindtrap Activity
*Nine Dots Activity
*Scissors and Rope Activity
Assignments Due
*Read Appendix A &
B in Rothwell (2010)
W, Aug. 27
*Straw Bridge Activity
*Assign Group Fishbowl Presentation Dates
*Assign Group Project Presentation Dates
*Assign Teaching a Lesson Dates (grad students only)
*Deadline for
Approval of Group
Projects
*Bring tape and
straws
F, Aug. 29
*“Communication Competence in Groups.”
*Individualism and Collectivism
*The Island Activity
*Read Chapter 1 in
Rothwell (2010)
Week 3
M, Sept. 1
Topic
*NO CLASS (Labor Day)
Assignments Due
W, Sept. 3
*“Groups as Systems.”
*Difficult Group Members
*The Procedure Activity
*Read Chapter 2
F, Sept. 5
*“Group Development.”
*Influence of Size Activity (in ad-hoc groups)
*Read Chapter 3
8
Week 4
M, Sept. 8
Topic
*Metatheory
*Metatheoretical Considerations
Assignments Due
*Read Miller (2005)
W, Sept. 10 *Additional Theories Applicable to Small Group Communication
*Group Synergy Activity (Earthquake)
F, Sept. 12
*Review for First Exam
*Group Examination Procedures and Preview
*Hindsight Test (Rothwell PowerPoint)
Week 5
M, Sept. 15
Topic
***FIRST INDIVIDUAL EXAMINATION
Assignments Due
W, Sept. 17 ***FIRST COOPERATIVE EXAMINATION
F, Sept. 19
*Review Exam Results
*Popular Small Group Communication Theories
(Social Exchange, Systems, Symbolic Convergence,
Structuration, and Functional theories)
*Read Bormann
(1972)
*Read Giddens
(1979)
Week 6
M, Sept. 22
Topic
*“Developing the Group Climate.”
*Reactions to Defensive and Supportive Communication
Assignments Due
*Read Chapter 4
W, Sept. 24 *“Roles and Leadership in Groups.”
*Trivia Activity
*Read Chapter 5
F, Sept. 26
*“Obedience and Evil: From Milgram and Kampuchea to Normal
Organizations.”
*Watch Phillip Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Study and Stanley
Milgram’s Obedience to Authority video
*Ad-Hoc Discussion Groups
*Read Pina e Cunha
et al. (2010)
Week 7
M, Sept. 29
Topic
*“Developing Effective Teams.”
*Creativity in Work Teams
Assignments Due
*Read Chapter 6
W, Oct. 1
*“Organizational Behavior and Disaster: A Study of Conflict at
NASA.”
*“Avoiding Groupthink: Whereas Weakly Identified Members
Remain Silent, Strongly Identified Members Dissent About
Collective Problems.”
*Read Dimitroff et al.
(2005)
*Read Packer (2009)
F, Oct. 3
*Watch The Deep Dive video on IDEO
*Ad-Hoc Discussion Groups
*Review for Second Exam
*Group Project Update Reports
9
Week 8
M, Oct. 6
Topic
***SECOND INDIVIDUAL EXAMINATION
Assignments Due
W, Oct. 8
***SECOND COOPERATIVE EXAMINATION
F, Oct. 10
*Review Exam Results
*Choosing a Roommate Activity (in ad-hoc groups)
*Collective Inferential Error Activity
*False Dichotomies Activity
Week 9
M, Oct. 13
Topic
*“Everyday Conversation in the Deliberative Process: An Analysis of
Communicative Exchanges in Discussion Groups and Their
Contributions to Civic and Political Socialization.”
Assignments Due
*Read Marques &
Maia (2010)
W, Oct. 15
*“Effects of Team Size and Work Team Perception on Workplace
Commitment: Evidence from 23 Production Teams.”
*Fishbowl Guidelines and Expected Audience Behavior
*Read Ogungbamila
et al. (2010)
F, Oct. 17
*Groups Meet to Conduct Civic Engagement Projects
*NO CLASS (SSRC meeting)
Week 10
M, Oct. 20
Topic
*“Group Discussion: Defective Group Decision Making and Problem
Solving.” (Group Fishbowl)
Assignments Due
*Read Chapter 7
W, Oct. 22
*“Group Discussion: Effective Decision Making and Problem
Solving.” (Group Fishbowl)
*Read Chapter 8
F, Oct. 24
*“Power in Groups: A Central Dynamic.” (Group Fishbowl)
*Read Chapter 9
Week 11
M, Oct. 27
Topic
*“Conflict Management in Groups.” (Group Fishbowl)
Assignments Due
*Read Chapter 10
W, Oct. 29
*“Technology and Virtual Groups.” (Group Fishbowl)
*Read Chapter 11
F, Oct. 31
*Review Guidelines for Group and Individual Papers
*Review for Third Exam
*Group Project Update Reports
*Outside sources for
Individual Paper due
Week 12
M, Nov. 3
Topic
***THIRD INDIVIDUAL EXAMINATION
Assignments Due
W, Nov. 5
***THIRD COOPERATIVE EXAMINATION
F, Nov. 7
*Review Exam Results
*”Deliberation and Diversity: Perceptions of Small Group
Discussions by Race and Ethnicity.”
*Read Abdel-Monem
et al. (2010)
10
Week 13
M, Nov. 10
Topic
*“When Good Teammates are Bad: Physiological Threat on Recently
Formed Teams.”
Assignments Due
*Read Cleveland et
al. (2011)
W, Nov. 12
*“Members’ Openness to Experience and Teams’ Creative
Performance.”
*Read Schilpzand et
al. (2011)
F, Nov. 14
*“Two-Dimensional Structure of Team Process Improvement: Team
Reflection and Team Adaptation.”
*Read Wiedow &
Konradt (2011)
*Draft of Group Paper
due
Week 14
M, Nov. 17
Topic
**Begin Group Project Presentations
Assignments Due
**Group Paper due
W, Nov. 19
**Finish Group Project Presentations
F, Nov. 21
*NO CLASS (NCA conference)
*Draft of Individual
Paper due
Week 15
M, Nov. 24
Topic
*NO CLASS (Fall Break)
Assignments Due
W, Nov. 26
*NO CLASS (Fall Break)
F, Nov. 28
*NO CLASS (Fall Break)
Week 16
M, Dec. 1
Topic
*Begin watching 12 Angry Men
Assignments Due
**Individual Paper
due
W, Dec. 3
*Finish watching 12 Angry Men
**Research Proposal
due (grad students
only)
F, Dec. 5
*Review procedure for Final Exam
*Course Evaluations (bring #2 pencil)
*Synthesis and Reflection (ad-hoc discussion groups)
**Research Pool
Participation due
Finals
Week
?, Dec. ?
Topic
Assignments Due
***FINAL EXAMINATION in Fell Hall 152
***?:00-?:00 ?.m. (date and time TBA by Registrar)