SMC Core Curriculum Course Proposal Form Fall 2014
Electronically submit this course form and attachments to the Chair of the CCC by October 1.
Please submit a separate proposal for each desired learning goal.
1. Name of Proposer: Makiko Imamura
2. Email address: mi2@stmarys-ca.edu
3. Department/Program of Proposer: Communication Department
4. Name of Department/Program housing the course: Communication Department
5. Name(s) of Program Director/Department Chair (if not the proposer): Dan Leopard
6. Course Acronym, Number and Title: COMM106 Intercultural Communication
7. Proposal is for All Sections of the course: YES
Proposal is for instructor’s section(s) (Pathways to Knowledge only): Makiko Imamura
8. Course Prerequisites (if any): NONE
9. Unit Value of Course: Full (i.e., 1) Unit
10. Mark with an X the Learning Goal for which the course is being proposed. (Please submit a
separate proposal for each desired goal.)
Pathways to Knowledge (at most one)
Artistic Understanding – Artistic Analysis only: ____
Artistic Understanding – Creative Practice only: ____
Artistic Understanding – Both Artistic Analysis and Creative Practice: ____
Mathematical Understanding: ____
Scientific Understanding: ____
Social, Historical, Cultural Understanding: _x___
Christian Foundations: ____
Theological Explorations: ____
Engaging the World (as appropriate, generally zero to two)
American Diversity: ____ (Note: COMM106 has been designated to American Diversity.)
Common Good: ____
Community Engagement: ____
Global Perspectives: ____
11. Expected Attachments:
a) Syllabus: Current course syllabus, expected to contain a course description and learning
outcomes. The course’s learning outcomes must include coverage of the Learning
Outcomes associated with the Core Curriculum Learning Goal for which the course is
being proposed.
b) Teaching and Learning: A narrative that explains how the course will guide students
toward achieving each Learning Outcome and how coursework (e.g., papers, exams,
http://www.stmarys-ca.edu/core-curriculum-committee
videotaped presentations) will be used to measure student achievement of each
Learning Outcome. Please address the outcomes directly and one by one.
Additional Guidelines:
a) While courses and individual sections within courses may vary, the Core should provide
relatively consistent experiences. Thus our expectation is that each section of a Pathway to
Knowledge course will satisfy all the corresponding learning outcomes. We also expect that
the features of any syllabus submitted are sufficiently generic to faithfully represent all
sections of the course. The CCC relies on department chairs and program directors to
oversee a reasonable degree of uniformity in how its courses address the learning
outcomes.
b) We encourage departments and programs to develop courses so that an Engaging the World
goal can apply to all sections (in which case we will expect a representative syllabus). We
also welcome proposals from individual instructors.
c) Any course approved for the Core must provide data for the assessment of Core Curriculum
learning goals at an institutional level. Via this proposal a chair/program director agrees to
oversee the submission of the student work necessary for the assessment of the learning
goals, and that his/her instructors of Core courses will participate in assessment exercises,
if asked. Similarly, if the proposal is from an instructor, that individual agrees to oversee
submission of work from appropriate sections of their course.
d) (Legal and Logistical Workshop) Each instructor of a Community Engagement (CE) course
must participate in a workshop each year before the course is taught. This workshop will
outline the logistical and pedagogical support the College will be providing to CE courses, as
well as provide updates on any legal or regulatory requirements of community-involved
courses. At the workshops, instructors will be provided information about legal and
logistical paperwork that must be completed by stated deadlines in order to ensure that
each CE course / experience can run safely and effectively.
e) (Pedagogical Workshops) Each instructor of a Community Engagement (CE) course is
required to have training in the pedagogy of Community Engagement. Faculty who have
studied the pedagogy of CE or taught such courses in the past are invited to submit those
experiences to the Community Engagement Working Group as evidence of qualification. For
faculty without previous CE experience or training, CILSA provides regular workshops each
semester that will assist the instructor in integrating the community engagement learning
outcomes into their course. (These workshops are also available for faculty who wish a
refresher.)
f) Faculty interested in determining whether a more permanent Engaging the World
designation is appropriate for their course may apply for a one-year “provisional”
designation. Please contact the chair of the CCC and/or chair of the Working Group for
details.
http://www.stmarys-ca.edu/core-curriculum-committee
SMC Core Curriculum Course Proposal Form
Supplement 2: Teaching and Learning
Proposer: Makiko Imamura
Department: Communication
Course: COMM106 Intercultural Communication
Applied Designation: Social, Historical, Cultural Understanding
a) Syllabus: Current course syllabus containing a course description and a list of learning
outcomes. The course’s learning outcomes must include coverage of the Learning Outcomes
associated with the Core Curriculum Learning Goal for which the course is being proposed.
Two sample syllabi from the most recent semesters are attached (see Supplement 1: Syllabi and
Schedules). COMM106 Intercultural Communication is typically taught by either Scott
Schönfeldt-Aultman (see Fall 2013 Syllabus) or Makiko Imamura (see Fall 2014 Syllabus).
While the two instructors have different expertise (i.e., qualitative and quantitative), both
instructors share the same course description and objectives, use the same textbook, and
include social scientific approach to teaching intercultural communication.
b) Teaching and Learning: A narrative that explains how the course will guide students toward
achieving each Learning Outcome and how coursework (e.g., papers, exams, videotaped
presentations) will be used to measure student achievement of each Learning Outcome.
Please address the outcomes directly and one by one.
Overview of Course Content and Assessment
COMM106 is designed to provide students with theoretical and practical knowledge
about the relationship between culture and communication in diverse social contexts in
contemporary American society (i.e., late 20th-21st century). Culture is broadly defined to
include various group memberships, such as ethnicity, race, nationality, socio-economic status,
gender, and sexual orientation. Students explore their own identities and those of others,
examine the impact of these identities on their daily communication behaviors and
interpretation of media, and enrich their understanding of privilege, inequality, and social
injustice that we experience and observe in everyday situations. At the completion of this
course, students are expected to be able to provide theoretically grounded explanations of
intercultural communication behaviors and relational outcomes, to critically evaluate theories
and literature on intercultural communication, and to conduct a project using the
methodologies used in the discipline of communication (i.e., broadly defined social scientific
approach; see also Learning Outcome 3 section). Therefore, this course fulfills the Social,
Historical, and Cultural Understanding Learning Goal of “understand[ing] how to place today’s
world in a meaningful context and to arrive at sufficiently complex explanations for current
social arrangements.” From a practical standpoint, theoretical knowledge helps students
improve their intercultural communication and relational skills. Hence, this course is
structured to enrich students’ understanding of “what it has meant and means to be a human in
http://www.stmarys-ca.edu/core-curriculum-committee
relationship with others,” particularly in various intercultural contexts (Social, Historical,
Cultural Understanding Learning Goal).
In general, assessment of students’ work in this course includes paper assignments,
reflection assignments, group project, quizzes, and exams. Paper and reflection assignments
provide students with opportunities to demonstrate their understanding of the learned
theories and concepts either by gathering observational data or by engaging in autoethnographic reflections of intercultural experiences. Quizzes and exams are used to help
students establish accurate understanding and practical applications of the learned theories
and concepts. The following section will address how each learning outcome for teaching and
learning is achieved in this course.
Learning Outcome 1 (i.e., examine human activity in particular periods or places from a social,
cultural or historical perspective)
COMM106 primarily focuses on, but not limited to, social and cultural perspectives in
understanding our everyday intercultural communication behaviors (see Fall 2014 Syllabus
Learning Outcomes 1, 2, & 7; Fall 2013 Syllabus Learning Outcomes 1, 2, & 11). The majority of
course content adheres to the broadly defined cultural and social group memberships, such as
ethnic, racial, and national, religious, and sexual orientation groups. Students examine their
cultural and social group identities, cultural values (e.g., individualism-collectivism),
communication behaviors (e.g., communication accommodation, use of verbal and nonverbal
languages, and conflict management styles), and relational outcomes (e.g., friendship formation,
romantic relationship development, etc.). In addition, this course provides opportunities for
students to examine the historical influences on cultural stereotypes and intercultural relations
as they learn Intergroup Contact Theory and Social Identity Theory. Finally, as a way to
promote intercultural awareness and to enhance our understanding of human activity in an
intercultural context, this course introduces the functions of the Intercultural Center and study
abroad opportunities. In another version of the course, students examine homophobia,
microaggressions, intercultural relationships and intercultural transitions, with attention to
context and social justice. Students read a range of material, including, for example, Johnson (on
cisgender privilege), and bell hooks and James Baldwin (regarding whiteness in relation to
African American experience). Students also explore and discuss the role of histories of U.S.
marginalized people and the experience of whiteness in the United States. These and other
themes are engaged by students in films, such as Ethnic Notions, The Color of Fear, and Mirrors
of Privilege. In the past two iterations of this version of the class, students have partnered with
the Intercultural Center, assisting in research to benefit the IC.
Learning Outcome 1 is assessed primarily in the reflection and paper assignments
followed by quizzes and exams. The reflection assignments often take auto-ethnographic data
to analyze one’s own place in a multicultural society, and the paper assignments tend to focus
on gathering of observational data (e.g., interviews, survey, media and textual products).
Through these assignments, students build in-depth understanding of their cultural and social
group identities, cultural values, communication behaviors, and the consequences of
communication behaviors on human relationships in contemporary American society.
Learning Outcome 2 (i.e., demonstrate an understanding of theories of human behavior,
relations, culture, or institutions; or interpretations of historical causation and change)
http://www.stmarys-ca.edu/core-curriculum-committee
COMM106 is taught as a theory based content course. Thus, it is expected that students
learn the major theories of intercultural communication and that they can provide explanations
and interpretations of their everyday communication behaviors using an appropriate
theoretical framework (see Fall 2014 Syllabus Learning Outcomes 4 & 5; Fall 2013 Syllabus
Learning Outcome 8 & 9). For example, students are expected to provide explanations to their
intercultural communication experiences by using Hofstede’s taxonomies (e.g., IndividualismCollectivism) as a framework to understand the sources of cultural differences that influence
every day communication behaviors of people from various national cultures. Students also
learn that the cultural differences in the fundamental value orientations influence
communication modes (i.e., high-low context communication). In addition, the cultural and
communication differences are discussed and analyzed in relation to cultural adaptation (e.g.,
Acculturation Model), conflict management, and relationship development. Furthermore,
several other theories and models that describe the impact of social and cultural identity on
communication behaviors (e.g., Communication Accommodation Theory, Social Identity
Theory, Common Ingroup Identity Model) are threaded in this course. In a broader scope,
students are expected to apply critical cultural perspective to analyze the power dynamic
between nations (e.g., postcolonial theory) and cultures within a nation (e.g., mainstream and
co-culture). Overall, theories covered in this course encompass human behavior (e.g.,
communication accommodation theory, microagression, and conflict styles), relations (e.g.,
contact hypothesis), culture (e.g., Hofstede’s taxonomies, bell hooks) as well as interpretations
of historical causation and change (e.g., postcolonial theory).
Similar to Learning Outcome 1, Learning Outcome 2 is assessed primarily in the
reflection and paper assignments followed by quizzes and exams. Students have opportunities
to articulate their understanding of these theories in the reflection and paper assignments. In
addition, quizzes and exams assess the accuracy and depth of students’ understanding of the
theories. Typically, multiple choice and true/false questions are designed to assess the accuracy
of understanding, while short answer/essay questions are designed to assess the depth of
understanding.
Learning Outcome 3a and 3b (i.e., employ social science or historical methodology to collect
and interpret evidence about the social world)
Two components of Learning Outcome 3 are explicitly and implicitly encompassed in
COMM106 (see Fall 2014 Syllabus Learning Outcomes 4 & 11; Fall 2013 Syllabus Learning
Outcomes 5). In the discipline of communication, intercultural communication is studied from
various meta-theoretical perspectives (i.e., functionalist, interpretive, and critical approaches).
The course textbook is written from these three perspectives and makes it clear about the
epistemological and axiological assumptions and the leading theoretical frameworks guided by
each of these perspectives. The discipline of communication categorizes these perspectives
under a broad umbrella of social scientific inquiry (i.e., fits between science and humanities).
Social scientific approach in the field of communication values systematic gathering and
analysis of quantitative and qualitative data. Specifically, the quantitative communication
research utilizes survey predominantly, whereas the qualitative communication research
gathers data from interviews, ethnography, auto-ethnography, and textual and visual evidence.
Guided by the definition of social science in the field of communication (i.e., both science and
humanities), COMM106 employs either quantitative or qualitative methods of inquiry
depending on the semester. In a semester when the instructor pays particular attention to the
http://www.stmarys-ca.edu/core-curriculum-committee
quantitative methods of inquiry, students are expected to gather data based on a survey or
interviews and analyze the data with a statistical procedure or thematic analysis. In a semester
when the instructor pays attention to the qualitative methods of inquiry, students are expected
to gather data based on interviews, auto-ethnographic observations and reflections, and textual
and media products. These types of data will be analyzed by systematically applying rhetorical
or critical frameworks learned in class. As a result, students are expected not only to gain
general knowledge about the interdisciplinary methodological approaches in intercultural
communication but also to learn how to gather, analyze, and interpret the information they
obtain from the survey, interviews, auto-ethnography, and textual and media products.
Learning Outcome 3 is assessed predominantly in the reflection or paper assignments
(see sample assignments in the Supplement 1). The paper assignment assesses students’
learning in terms of their ability to choose a topic, conduct library research and identify
quantitative and qualitative research articles, write a sufficient literature review on the topic,
choose a method of inquiry, collect and analyze a small set of data (e.g., survey, interviews,
auto-ethnographic observations and reflections), and interpret their observations. The
quantitative data is analyzed using a statistical procedure for close-ended survey, and the
qualitative data is analyzed using a content/thematic analysis or rhetorical/critical theory.
Students are also asked to synthesize their analysis by providing implications to the society we
live in. In particular, when students engage in auto-ethnographic inquiry, they are expected to
analyze their observations and experiences in cultural, social, historical, and political contexts.
http://www.stmarys-ca.edu/core-curriculum-committee