COMMUNICATION 5420: READINGS IN GROUP INTERACTION
(6:30-9:00, Thursday, Fall 2005, Hellems 77)
Professor:
Office:
Office Phone:
Email:
Home Phone:
Office Hours:
Dr. Larry Frey
92 Hellems
(303) 492-5600
Larry.Frey@colorado.edu
(303) 444-3335 (Answering Machine Available)
2:30-3:30 Tuesday, 5:15-6:15 Thursday, and by appointment
Introduction
This introductory readings course to the group interaction area of the department focuses on
understanding and analyzing interaction in a variety of groups. Topics examined include
conceptual definitions of “group” and “interaction,” theoretical perspectives explaining group
interaction, methodological practices for studying group interaction, group interaction processes
and practices (e.g., task and relational), mediated group interaction, and group interaction
facilitation and pedagogy. In addition to providing core knowledge about the group interaction
area, students are given opportunities to interact in groups and analyze those interactions using
the relevant scholarly literature.
Course Schedule
August 25
Introduction to the Course
A. Assignments
1. You will be sent on Thursday night after this class via e-mail a detailed list (totaling
about 250 pages) of scholarly journal articles relevant to group interaction, which
should prove useful in this and other group interaction classes. Your assignment is to
contribute 10 additional articles for inclusion on this list. Only articles that include the
term “group” or “team” in the title of the article (or variations on those terms, such as
“subgroups”), focus on human interaction, and are published in English-language
scholarly journals are eligible for inclusion. You must send me those 10 articles via email by the end of Monday, August 29, at the latest. Your articles will be added to this
list and the new list will be resent to all class members. The purposes of this assignment
are to (a) learn how to find articles about group interaction, (b) demonstrate that you can
properly cite articles using the fifth edition of the Publication Manual of the American
Psychological Association, and (c) contribute to the attempt to construct a relatively
comprehensive list of group interaction articles. This exercise may be repeated during
the semester.
2
September 1
Introduction to Group Interaction
A. Readings
Buys, C. J. (1978). Humans would do better without groups. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 4, 123-125.
Anderson, L. R. (1978). Groups would do better without humans. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 4, 123-125.
Kravitz, D. A., Cohen, J. L., Martin, B., Sweeney, J., McCarty, J., Elliott, E., et al. (1978).
Humans would do better without other humans. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 4, 126-127.
Green, R. B., & Mack, J. (1978). Would groups do better without social psychologists? A
response to Buys. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 128-130.
Poole, M. S. (1998). The small group should be the fundamental unit of communication
research. In J. S. Trent (Ed.), Communication: Views from the helm for the 21st
century (pp. 94-97). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Frey, L. R., & Sunwolf. (2005). The communication perspective on group life. In S. A.
Wheelan (Ed.), The handbook of group research and practice (pp. 159-186).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gouran, D. S. (1999). Communication in groups: The emergence and evolution of a field
of study. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), D. S. Gouran, & M. S. Poole (Eds.), The handbook of
group communication theory and research (pp. 3-36). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
B. Discussion Questions/Assignments
1. What is a “group”? What is “interaction”?
2. How does a communication approach differ from other disciplinary approaches to the
study of groups (e.g., psychology or sociology)?
3. Make a list of 5-10 groups to which you belong. How would you characterize those
groups? How are the interactions that take place in those groups similar or dissimilar?
September 8
Group Interaction Theories
A. Readings
Poole, M. S. (1990). Do we have any theories of group communication? Communication
Studies, 41, 237-247.
Poole, M. S. (1999). Group communication theory. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), D. S. Gouran, &
M. S. Poole (Eds.), The handbook of group communication theory and research (pp.
37-70). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Craig, R. T., & Tracy, K. (1995). Grounded practical theory: The case of intellectual
discussion. Communication Theory, 5, 248-272. (Available at
http://comm.colorado.edu/tracy/groundedpt.pdf)
Frey, L. R., & Sunwolf. (2004). The symbolic-interpretive perspective on group dynamics.
Small Group Research, 35, 277-306.
3
Bormann, E. G. (1996). Symbolic convergence theory and communication in group
decision making. In R. Y. Hirokawa & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Communication and group
decision making (2nd ed., pp. 81-113). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lesch, C. L. (1994). Observing theory in practice: Sustaining consciousness in a
coven. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group communication in context: Studies of natural
groups (pp. 57-82). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. (Group 1)
Hollingshead, A. B., Wittenbaum, G. M., Paulus, P. B., Hirokawa, R. Y., Ancona, D. G.,
Peterson, R. S., et al. (2005). A look at groups from the functional perspective. In M.
S. Poole & A. B. Hollingshead (Eds.), Theories of small groups: Interdisciplinary
perspectives (pp. 21-62). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Propp, K. M., & Nelson, D. (1996). Problem-solving performance in naturalistic
groups: A test of the ecological validity of the functional perspective.
Communication Studies, 47, 35-45. (Group 2)
Johnson, S. D., & Long, L. M. (2002). “Being a part and being apart”: Dialectics and
group communication. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), New directions in group communication
(pp. 25-41). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kramer, M. W. (2004). Toward a communication theory of dialectics: An
ethnographic study of a community theatre group. Communication Monographs,
71, 311-333. (Group 3)
Meyers, R. A., Berdahl, J. L., Brashers, D., Considine, J. R., Kelly, J. R., Moore, C., et al.
(2005). Understanding groups from a feminist perspective. In M. S. Poole & A. B.
Hollingshead (Eds.), Theories of small groups: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp.
241-267). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kees, N. L. (1999). Women together again: A phenomenological study of leaderless
women’s groups. Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 24, 288-305. (Group 1)
Poole, M. S., Seibold, D. R., & McPhee, R. D. (1996). The structuration of group
decisions. In R. Y. Hirokawa & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Communication and group
decision making (2nd ed., pp. 115-146). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sunwolf, & Seibold, D. R. (1998). Jurors’ intuitive rules for deliberation: A
structurational approach to communication in jury decision making.
Communication Monographs, 65, 282-307. (Group 2)
Putnam, L. L., & Stohl, C. (1990). Bona fide groups: A reconceptualization of groups in
context. Communication Studies, 41, 248-265.
Lammers, J. C., & Krikorian, D. H. (1997). Theoretical extension and
operationalization of the bona fide group construct with an application to surgical
teams. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 25, 17-38. (Group 3)
B. Discussion Questions/Assignments
1. Everyone should read the first four articles by Poole, Craig and Tracy, and Frey and
Sunwolf; groups then are responsible for the articles to which they are assigned. Groups
should prepare a 5-10-minute overview of the theory and the accompanying research
study (with a handout for all class members), and facilitate a 5-10 minute discussion
about the theory.
2. Question to consider include: What is a “theory”? What are the criteria by which “good
theories” ought to be judged? What are the basic premises of the theories of group
4
interaction being explored in this session? What are the similarities and differences
between those theories?
September 15
Quantitative Methods for Studying Group Interaction: Experiments,
Surveys, and Interaction Analysis
A. Readings
Poole, M. S., Keyton, J., & Frey, L. R. (1999). Group communication methodology: Issues
and considerations. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), D. S. Gouran, & M. S. Poole (Assoc. Eds.), The
handbook of group communication theory and research (pp. 92-112). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Hirokawa, R. Y. (1988). Group communication research: Considerations for the use of
interaction analysis. In C. H. Tardy (Ed.), A handbook for the study of human
communication: Methods and instruments for observing, measuring, and assessing
communication processes (pp. 229-245). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
B. Discussion Questions/Assignments
1. What are some important issues associated with methodologically studying group
interaction?
2. What are the fundamental purposes of experiments, surveys, and interaction analysis?
3. What are the strengths and limitations of each of these quantitative methods for studying
group interaction?
September 22
Qualitative Methods for Studying Group Interaction: Ethnography
The Bonaventure House Case
A. Readings: Qualitative Methods for Studying Group Interaction: Ethnography
Frey, L. R. (1994). The naturalistic paradigm: Studying small groups in the postmodern
era. Small Group Research, 25, 551-577.
Dollar, N. J., & Merrigan, G. M. (2002). Ethnographic practices in group communication
research. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), New directions in group communication (pp. 59-78).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
B. Readings: The Bonaventure House Case
Adelman, M. B., & Frey, L. R. (1994). The pilgrim must embark: Creating and sustaining
community in a residential facility for people with AIDS. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group
communication in context: Studies of natural groups (pp. 3-22). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Frey, L. R., Adelman, M. B., Flint, L. J., & Query, J. L., Jr. (2000). Weaving meanings
together in an AIDS residence: Communicative practices, perceived health outcomes,
and the symbolic construction of community. Journal of Health Communication, 5, 5372.
5
September 29
Individuals and Group Interaction
Group Identity Construction: Managing Group Boundaries and Borders
Group Interaction Development
Contextual Effects on Group Interaction
A. Readings: Individuals and Group Interaction
Shaw, M. E. (1981). Group dynamics: The psychology of small group behavior (3rd ed.).
New York: McGraw-Hill. (Chapter: “Personal Characteristics of Group Members”)
Keyton, J., & Frey, L. R. (2002). The state of traits: Predispositions and group
communication. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), New directions in group communication (pp. 99120). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
B. Readings: Group Identity Construction: Managing Group Boundaries and Borders (Tales
from the Home, Hood, and Childhood) (Group 2)
Abrams, D., Hogg, M. A., Hinkle, S., & Otten, S. (2005). The social identity perspective
on small groups. In M. S. Poole & A. B. Hollingshead (Eds.), Theories of small
groups: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 99-137). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Conquergood, D. (1994). Homeboys and hoods: Gang communication and cultural space.
In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group communication in context: Studies of natural groups (pp.
23-55). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Petronio, S., Jones, S., & Morr, M. C. (2003). Family privacy dilemmas: Managing
communication boundaries within family groups. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group
communication in context: Studies of bona fide groups (2nd ed., pp. 23-56). Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Buchalter, R. (2003). Negotiating (im)permeable neighborhood borders. In L. R. Frey
(Ed.), Group communication in context: Studies of bona fide groups (2nd ed., pp. 5782). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Sunwolf, & Leets, L. (2004). Being left out: Rejecting outsiders and communicating group
boundaries in childhood and adolescent peer groups. Journal of Applied
Communication Research, 32, 195-223.
C. Readings: Group Development (Group 3)
Arrow, H., Henry, K. B., Poole, M. S., Wheelan, S., & Moreland, R. (2005). Traces,
trajectories, and timing: The temporal perspective on groups. In M. S. Poole & A. B.
Hollingshead (Eds.), Theories of small groups: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp.
313-367). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Farrell, M. P., Schmitt, M. H., & Heinemann, G. D. (2001). Informal roles and the stages
of interdisciplinary team development. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 15, 281295.
Brock, B. L., & Howell, S. (1994). Leadership in the evolution of a community-based
political action group. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group communication in context: Studies of
natural groups (pp. 135-152). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6
Wheelan, S. A., McKeage, R. L., Verdi, A. F., Abraham, M., Krasick, C., & Johnston, F.
(1994). Communication and developmental patterns in a system of interacting groups.
In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group communication in context: Studies of natural groups (pp.
153-178). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
D. Readings: Contextual Effects on Group Interaction (Group 1)
Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell, D. F. (1988). Beyond task and maintenance: Defining external
functions in groups. Group and Organization Studies, 13, 468-494.
Parrish-Sprowl, J. (2003). Indexing the Polish transformation: The case of Eco-S from a
bona fide group perspective. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group communication in context:
Studies of bona fide groups (2nd ed., pp. 291-305). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Barge, J. K., & Keyton, J. (1994). Contextualizing power and social influence in groups. In
L. R. Frey (Ed.). Group communication in context: Studies of natural groups (pp. 85105). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Houston, R. (2003). In the mask of thin air: Intragroup and intergroup communication
during the Mt. Everest disaster. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group communication in context:
Studies of bona fide groups (2nd ed., pp. 137-156). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
D. Discussion Questions/Assignments
1. Everyone should read the articles listed by Abrams, Hogg, Hinkle, and Otten;
Conquergood; Arrow, Henry, Poole, Wheelan, and Moreland; and Anonca and
Caldwell; groups then are responsible for helping to discuss the set of articles to which
they are assigned.
October 6
Discourse Analysis of Group Interaction
Special Guest: Dr. Karen Tracy
A. Readings
Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on conversation (Vol. 2, G. Jefferson, Ed.). Oxford, United
Kingdom: Blackwell. (Chapters: “Introduction,” “Lecture 1: Doing ‘Being Ordinary,’”
and “Lecture 4: Storyteller as ‘Witness’; Entitlement to Experience”)
Tracy, K. (in press). Feeling-limned talk: Conduct ideals in the Steinberg succession
meeting. In F. Cooren (Ed.), Interacting and organizing: Analysis of a board meeting.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Tracy, K., & Dimock, A. (2004). Meetings: Discursive sites for building and fragmenting
community. In P. J. Kalbfleisch (Ed.), Communication yearbook (Vol. 28, pp. 127164). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. (Available at:
http://comm.colorado.edu/tracy/meetings.pdf)
7
October 20
Relational Groups and Group Interaction
A. Readings
Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. Garden City, NY:
Anchor Books. (Chapters: “On Face-Work: An Analysis of Ritual Elements in Social
Interaction” and “The Nature of Deference and Demeanor”)
Keyton, J. (1999). Relational communication in groups. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), D. S. Gouran,
& M. S. Poole (Eds.), The handbook of group communication theory and research
(pp. 192-222). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Barker, V. E., Abrams, J. R., Tiyaamornwong, V., Seibold, D. R., Duggan, A., Sun Park,
H., et al. (2000). New contexts for relational communication in groups. Small Group
Research, 31, 470-503.
Rogers, C. (1970). Carl Rogers on encounter groups. New York: Harrow Books. (Chapter:
“The Process of the Encounter Group”)
Cline, R. J. W. (1999). Communication in social support groups. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), D. S.
Gouran, & M. S. Poole (Assoc. Eds.), The handbook of group communication theory
and research (pp. 516-538). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cawyer, C. S., & Smith-Dupre’, A. (1995). Communicating social support: Identifying
supportive episodes in an HIV/AIDS support group. Communication Quarterly, 43,
243-258.
October 27
Task Group Interaction
A. Readings: Traditional Conceptions
Hirokawa, R. Y., Erbert, L., & Hurst, A. (1996). Communication and decision-making
effectiveness. In R. Y. Hirokawa & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Communication and group
decision making (2nd ed., pp. 269-300). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hirokawa, R. Y., & Salazar, A. J. (1999). Task-group communication and decision-making
performance. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), D. S. Gouran, & M. S. Poole (Eds.), The handbook
of group communication theory and research (pp. 167-191). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
B. Readings: Expanded Conceptions
Barge, J. K. (2002). Enlarging the meaning of group deliberation: From discussion to
dialogue. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), New directions in group communication (pp. 159-177).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Meyers, R. A., & Brashers, D. E. 92002). Rethinking traditional approaches to argument in
groups. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), New directions in group communication (pp. 141-158).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Tracy, K., & Standerfer, C. (2003). Selecting a school superintendent: Sensitivities in
group deliberation. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group communication in context: Studies of
bona fide groups (pp. 109-134). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. (Available at:
http://comm.colorado.edu/tracy/schoolsuperintendent.pdf)
8
November 3
Group Interaction in a Mediated World
Special Guest: Dr. Michele Jackson
A. Readings
Jackson, M. H., & Poole, M. S. (2003). Idea generation in naturally occurring contexts:
Complex appropriation of a simple group procedure. Human Communication Research,
29, 560-591.
Meier, C. (2003). Doing “groupness” in a spatially distributed work group: The case of
videoconferences at Technics. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group communication in context:
Studies of bona fide groups (2nd ed., pp. 367-397). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Powell, A., Piccoli, G., & Ives, B. (2004). Virtual teams: A review of current literature and
directions for future research. Advances in Information Systems, 35, 6-36.
Scott, C. R. (1999). Communication technology and group communication. In L. R. Frey
(Ed.), D. S. Gouran, & M. S. Poole (Assoc. Eds.), The handbook of group
communication theory and research (pp. 432-472). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Scott, C. R. (2003). New communication technologies and teams. In R. Y. Hirokawa, R. S.
Cathcart, L. A. Samovar, & L. D. Henman (Eds.), Small group communication: Theory
and practice (pp. 134-147). Los Angeles: Roxbury Press.
November 10
Group Interaction Facilitation, Pedagogy, and Social Change
A. Readings
Sunwolf, & Frey, L. R. (2005). Facilitating group communication. In S. A. Wheelan (Ed.),
The handbook of group research and practice (pp. 485-509). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Sunwolf, & Seibold, D. R. (1999). The impact of formal procedures on group processes,
members, and task outcomes. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), D. S. Gouran, & M. S. Poole
(Assoc. Eds.), The handbook of group communication theory and research (pp. 395431). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Frey, L. R. (1999). Teaching small group communication. In A. L. Vangelisti, J. A. Daly,
& G. W. Friedrich (Eds.), Teaching communication: Theory, research, and methods
(2nd ed., pp. 99-113). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Broome, B. J. (in press). Facilitating group communication in protracted conflict
situations: Promoting citizen peace-building efforts in Cyprus. In L. R. Frey (Ed.),
Facilitating group communication in context: Innovations and applications with
natural groups: Vol. 1. Facilitating group creation, conflict, and conversation.
Mahwah, NJ: Hampton Press.
Harter, L. M., Sharma, D., Pant, S., Singhal, A., & Sharman, Y. (in press). Catalyzing
social reform through participatory folk performances in rural India. In L. R. Frey &
K. M. Carragee (Eds.), Communication activism: Volume 2.Media and performance
activism. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
9
Palmer, D. (in press). Facilitating consensus in an anti-globalization affinity group. In L. R.
Frey & K. M. Carragee (Eds.), Communication activism: Volume 1. Communication
for social change. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
D. Discussion Questions/Assignments
1. Everyone should read the first three essays; groups then are responsible for discussing
the article to which they are assigned.
December 1
The Psychodynamic Perspective on Small Groups
Special Guest: Dr. Richard Kettner-Polley, Editor, Small Group Research
A. Readings
McLeod, P. L., & Kettner-Polley, R. B. (2004). Contributions of psychodynamic theories
to understanding small groups. Small Group Research, 35, 353-361.
McLeod, P. L., & Kettner-Polley, R. (2005). Psychodynamic perspectives on small groups.
In M. S. Poole & A. B. Hollingshead (Eds.), Theories of small groups:
Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 63-98). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Polley, R. B. (1992). Introduction. In G. C. Homans, The human group (pp. xxv-xxxi).
New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
December 8
Group Presentations
Coursework
1. Individual Papers (35%; 10%, 5%, 20%, respectively): The following papers are due on the
dates indicated:
A. September 22: A 5-7-page essay (not counting references) that addresses the question, “To
what extent do the contemporary theories of group interaction that we examined meet the
criteria posed by Poole for ‘good’ theories (e.g., inspiring the imagination, posing puzzles
that are really interesting, and linking their studies to pressing social questions)”?
B. October 20: A 3-5-page review of a classic group interaction text, chosen from the list
provided. You must obtain my approval (via e-mail) for the text selected from the list, on a
first-come-first-served basis, with one text per person assigned.
C. November 10: A 10-15-page paper that does one of the following options:
1. Analyzes the interactions of your project group with respect to concepts, theories, and
interaction processes/practices examined in this course and that demonstrates
knowledge of relevant group interaction literature. (Note: You should keep a log of
significant events in the life of your group for the purposes of this paper).
10
2. Provides a critical review of an area of group interaction and directions for future
research. [Note: If the group project involves such a critical review, this paper must
examine some other area of group interaction.]
2. Group Project (25%): You will be a member of a project group that culminates in a formal
oral presentation to the rest of the class on December 8. Your group may choose to do
anything that is feasible within the time available and that helps to become a “real-life” group
that can be subjected to critical analysis. In all cases, the oral presentation must demonstrate
knowledge of relevant group interaction literature. Although some time may be provided
during class for group meetings, it will be necessary for members to devote out-of-class time
to this group project. Here are some possible suggestions for relevant group projects:
A. An in-depth study of the interaction processes of some ongoing group, on or off campus.
You must, of course, secure the consent and cooperation of this group and its members to
be observed, interviewed, and/or complete questionnaires
B. A lecture/demonstration on some aspect of group interaction
C. A critical review of an area of group interaction and a proposal for a research study (or an
actual research study conducted, which requires approval by the Human Research
Committee at the University of Colorado at Boulder)
D. A group action enterprise, such as attempting to bring about change in a community,
performing some type of community service, or sponsoring a campus program/workshop
3. Final Examination (20%): The final examination is scheduled for Thursday, December 15,
10:30 a.m.-1:30 p.m. Please do not make arrangements to leave before that day, as no early
examination will be given.
4. Participation (20%): This grade is distributed equally between classroom participation (i.e.,
completing in-class participation assignments and contributing to class discussions by
offering your viewpoint and asking relevant questions) and participation in the group project.
At the end of the semester, self-evaluation, peer evaluation, and professor evaluation will be
used to evaluate your participation in the group project. I will determine your classroom
participation grade.
University Notes (Arranged alphabetically)
A. Classroom Behavior Policy: Students and faculty each have responsibility for maintaining an
appropriate learning environment. Students who fail to adhere to such behavioral standard
may be subject to discipline. Faculty has the professional responsibility to treat all students
with understanding, dignity and respect, to guide classroom discussion and to set reasonable
limits on the manner in which they and their students express opinions. Professional courtesy
and sensitivity are especially important with respect to individuals and topics dealing with
differences of race, culture, religion, politics, sexual orientation, gender variance, and
nationalities. See polices at http://www.colorado.edu/policies/classbehavior.html and at
http://www.colorado.edu/studentaffairs/judicialaffairs/code.html#student_code.
11
B. Disabilities: If you qualify for accommodations because of a disability, please submit to me a
letter from Disability Services in a timely manner so that your needs may be addressed.
Disability Services determines accommodations based on documented disabilities (303-4928671, Willard 322, http://www.colorado.edu/disabilityservices).
C. Honor Code: All students of the University of Colorado at Boulder are responsible for
knowing and adhering to the academic integrity policy of this institution. Violations of this
policy may include: cheating, plagiarism, aid of academic dishonesty, fabrication, lying,
bribery, and threatening behavior. All incidents of academic misconduct shall be reported to
the Honor Code Council (honor@colorado.edu; 303-725-2273). Students who are found to be
in violation of the academic integrity policy will be subject to both academic sanctions from
the faculty member and non-academic sanctions (including but not limited to university
probation, suspension, or expulsion). Other information on the Honor Code can be found at
http://www.colorado.edu/policies/honor.html and at
http://www.colorado.edu/academics/honorcode/.
Academic dishonesty in the form of cheating or plagiarism in all its forms—from using the
ideas, organization, supporting sources, or words of another (including other students) without
giving credit to the original author, to allowing or paying another person to write a paper for
one’s own benefit, to purchasing and using a pre-written paper for course credit, as well as
using another person’s paper available on the internet—will result in a grade of “F” for the
assignment, an “F” for the course, and referral to student judiciaries. Papers submitted by any
student, written in part or in whole by someone other than that student, shall be considered to
constitute fraud under the University Honor Code, and result in the assignment of a grade of
“F” for the course. In addition, it is required that the work you complete for all course
assignments be original. Unless you have my explicit permission, you are not allowed to
submit work that you have completed or are completing for assignments in either this or any
other course. Academic misconduct on an examination also results in course failure and
referral to student judiciaries.
The development of the internet has provided students with historically unparalleled
opportunities for conducting research swiftly and comprehensively. The availability of these
materials does not, however, release students from appropriately citing sources where
appropriate or applying standard rules associated with avoiding plagiarism. Specifically, I am
expecting to review papers written by students drawing ideas and information from various
sources (cited appropriately), and presented generally in the student’s words after careful
analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. An assembly of huge blocks of other individuals’ existing
material, even when cited, does not constitute an appropriate representation of this
expectation. Uncited, plagiarized material shall be treated as academically dishonest, and the
paper will be assigned a grade of “F” as a result. If you are confused as to what constitutes
plagiarism, review the UCB Honor Code on this topic, or see me.
D. Observance of Religious Holidays and Absences from Classes or Examinations: Campus
policy regarding religious observances requires that faculty make every effort to reasonably
and fairly deal with all students who, because of religious obligations, have conflicts with
scheduled examinations, assignments, or required attendance. In this class, I will make every
12
effort to accommodate all students who have such conflicts with scheduled examinations,
assignments, or attending class, provided students notify me well in advance of the scheduled
conflict. If an assignment is due on a religious holiday, I will provide the opportunity for it to
be due on another day. Classes missed to observe a religious holiday will not be counted as an
absence with regard to the participation evaluation.
E. Sexual Harassment: The University of Colorado Policy on Sexual Harassment applies to all
students, staff, and faculty. Sexual harassment is unwelcome sexual attention. It can involve
intimidation, threats, coercion, or promises to create an environment that is hostile or
offensive. Harassment may occur between members of the same or opposite gender and
between any combinations of members in the campus community: students, faculty, staff, and
administrators. Harassment can occur anywhere on campus, including the classroom, the
workplace, or a residence hall. Any student, staff, or faculty member who believes s/he has
been sexually harassed should contact the Office of Sexual Harassment (OSH) at 303-4922127 or the Office of Judicial Affairs at 303-492-5550. Information about the OSH and the
campus resources available to assist individuals who believe they have been sexually harassed
can be obtained at: http://www.colorado.edu/sexualharassment/.