Organizational Communication (4op)

Osaamistavoitteet (Opintojakso)

This course covers various aspects of organizational communication, including theoretical background and practical communication activities. It deals with written, verbal and non-verbal communication, focusing on clarity and appropriateness in all situations.

After completing the course, the students will be able to:

Demonstrate familiarity with theories of organizational communication.
Adapt their communication style according to a range of interpersonal factors, such as relative status, degree of familiarity, and cultural norms.
Use spoken English and non-verbal language effectively in face-to-face communication.
Produce written English texts which meet set norms regarding lay-out, organization, and accuracy.
Learn the basics of public relations

Sisältö (Opintojakso)

What are the essentials for effective organizational communication?
What are internal communications and public relations?
With what communities, groups and individuals do organizations need to communicate?
What factors affect the appropriate degree of formality and level of detail required in both face-to-face and written communication?
What are the different channels, communication vehicles and activities needed?
What discourse types and communication tools are typically used in organizational communication?
How to measure success in communication?

Tenttien ja uusintatenttien ajankohdat

ei mitään

Arviointimenetelmät ja arvioinnin perusteet

Aktiivinen osallistuminen lähiopetukseen ja opetusohjelmia, esitys, tutkimus paperi, kirjallinen työ, suunnittelu web-sivu, jotta CV ja saatekirje, ymmärtää perusteet sisäisen viestinnän, lähetä portfolio.

Arviointiasteikko

0-5

Opiskelumuodot ja opetusmenetelmät

Active participation in class and tutorials, presentation, research paper, written work, design webpage, make CV and cover letter, understand basics of internal communication, submit portfolio.

Oppimateriaalit

http://2012books.lardbucket.org/pdfs/an-introduction-to-organizational-communication.pdf
An Introduction to Organizational Communication
Jason S. Wrench
Narissra Punyanunt-Carter

Opiskelijan ajankäyttö ja kuormitus

Osallistujien tulee osallistua luennoille ja opetusohjelmia

Sisällön jaksotus

Aktiivinen osallistuminen lähiopetukseen ja opetusohjelmia, esitys, tutkimus paperi.

Toteutuksen valinnaiset suoritustavat

ei mitään

Harjoittelu- ja työelämäyhteistyö

Osallistujia kannustetaan suunnittelemaan hankkeita, jotka liittyvät tosielämässä järjestöt

Kansainvälisyys

Kurssilla on osallistujia eri puolilta maailmaa ja kaikki tutkimuksen ryhmät ovat kansainvälisiä

Lisätietoja opiskelijoille

ei mitään

Arviointikriteerit - hylätty (0) (Ei käytössä, kts Opintojakson Arviointikriteerit ylempänä)

This grade represents a failure to grasp what historical thinking is, along with the consequent failure to develop specific thinking skills or abilities or the knowledge and understanding that results from their appropriate use. The student's thinking at the end of the course is as vague, as imprecise, as unreasoned, and as superficial as it was at the beginning of the course. The work does not demonstrate that the student is genuinely engaged in the task of taking charge of his or her thinking. The student does not seem to be able to recognize arguments and their parts or the nature of agreements and disagreements encountered, does not analyze issues clearly; does not show the ability to formulate ideas clearly; does not accurately distinguish relevant from irrelevant considerations; does not show the ability to recognize key questionable assumptions, clarify key concepts, identify relevant competing points of view, reason carefully from clearly stated premises, or trace implications and consequences. The student, in short, does not display discernible reasoning or problem-solving skills. Student may have great difficulty communicating any thinking.

Arviointikriteerit - tyydyttävä (1-2) (Ei käytössä, kts Opintojakson Arviointikriteerit ylempänä)

This grade represents some, but a low level, understanding of what historical thinking is, along with the development of some, but very little, skills or abilities, and very little of the knowledge and understanding that result from their appropriate use. The work at the end of the course, on the whole, shows only occasional thinking skills, but frequently displays uncritical thinking. Though one or two assignments seem reasonably well done, most are poorly done (or all are done at a less than mediocre level). There are frequent lapses into weak reasoning. The student's work rarely demonstrates a mind sensitive to the need to take charge of its own ideas, assumptions, inferences, and intellectual processes. In general, the student's thinking lacks discipline and clarity. The student almost never recognizes arguments or the nature of agreements and disagreements encountered, almost never analyzes issues clearly and precisely, almost never formulates information clearly, rarely distinguishes relevant from irrelevant, rarely recognizes key questionable assumptions, almost never clarifies key concepts effectively, frequently fails to use language in keeping with educated usage, only rarely identifies relevant competing points of view, and almost never shows a tendency to reason carefully from clearly stated premises or recognize important implications and consequences. The D student, in short, rarely displays good reasoning and problem-solving skills, frequently displays weak reasoning and problem-solving skills, and may fail to communicate well.

Arviointikriteerit - hyvä (3-4) (Ei käytössä, kts Opintojakson Arviointikriteerit ylempänä)

This grade represents some, though modest understanding of what historical thinking is and the demonstrated ability to use those thinking skills in drawing conclusions about the subject matter of this class, along with the development of some skills or abilities and some of the knowledge and understanding that result from their appropriate use. On the whole, however, the work is inconsistent and spotty (or mediocre). The work at the end of the course shows some emerging thinking skills, but some pronounced weaknesses as well. Though some assignments seem well done, others seem poorly done; (or all are done at a mediocre level). There are more than occasional lapses into weak reasoning. The student's work on occasion demonstrates a mind beginning to take charge of its own ideas, assumptions, inferences, and intellectual processes, but occasionally seems to lack needed discipline and clarity. The student sometimes recognizes arguments and their parts, sometimes analyses issues clearly and precisely, sometimes formulates information clearly, sometimes distinguishes relevant from irrelevant considerations, sometimes recognizes key questionable assumptions, sometimes clarifies key concepts effectively, sometimes uses language in keeping with educated usage, sometimes identifies relevant competing points of view, and sometimes shows a general tendency to reason carefully from stated premises, as well as occasional recognition of important implications and consequences. More frequently, however, these important skills are lacking. In short, the 3 student only occasionally displays (clearly communicates) good reasoning and problem-solving skills. The Grade of 4
This grade represents discernible achievement in grasping what historical thinking is and in using thinking to draw conclusions about the subject matter of this course, along with the clear development of a range of skills or abilities and the accompanying knowledge and understanding that result from their appropriate use. The work at the end of the course is, on the whole, clear, precise, and well-reasoned. The student's work demonstrates a mind beginning to take charge of its own ideas, assumptions, inferences, and intellectual processes, but occasionally seems to lack needed discipline and clarity. The student often recognizes arguments and their parts, often recognizes the kinds of agreements and disagreements she or he encounters, often analyzes issues clearly and precisely, often formulates information clearly, typically distinguishes relevant from irrelevant considerations, often recognizes key questionable assumptions and clarifies key concepts effectively, usually uses language in keeping with educated usage, identifies relevant competing points of view, shows a general tendency to reason carefully from clearly stated premises, and recognizes important implications and consequences. Occasionally, however, these important abilities are lacking. The 4 student, in short, displays good reasoning and problem-solving skills. Perhaps one major distinction between the 4 and 5 student is in the breadth of the ideas and information to which the student has applied these thinking skills and the consistency with which they use them in drawing conclusions.

Arviointikriteerit - kiitettävä (5) (Ei käytössä, kts Opintojakson Arviointikriteerit ylempänä)

This grade represents significant achievement in grasping what historical thinking is, along with the clear development of a range of historical thinking skills or abilities and the application of those skills or abilities to the major issues of the course. The work at the end of the course is almost invariable clear, precise, and well-reasoned. The student's work again and again demonstrates a mind at work in taking charge of its own ideas, assumptions, inferences, and intellectual processes. The student routinely recognizes arguments and their parts, recognizes the nature of the agreements and disagreements encountered, analyzes issues clearly and precisely, formulates information clearly, distinguishes relevant from irrelevant considerations, recognizes key questionable assumptions, clarifies key concepts effectively, uses language in keeping with educated usage, identifies relevant competing points of view, reasons carefully from clearly stated premises, and shows sensitivity to important implications and consequences. The A student, in short, displays superior reasoning and problem-solving skills and communicates clearly and accurately. Furthermore, the A student has applied these thinking skills to the broadest possible sweep of questions, ideas, and information contained within the course, and, as a result, has developed a rich understanding of the major issues of the course (having considered the ideas and information from a broad array of sources), has developed the ability to defend historical conclusions with extensive evidence and reasons, and has developed the ability to recognize the major remaining questions and the problems one faces in drawing any particular conclusions.