Fluent Essays

https://youtu.be/R1vskiVDwl4 This is a youtube video: 10 ways to have better communication / Celeste Headlee Answer the following questions from the video: After reviewing the communication rubric: (uploaded) Identify 1 communication skill that you believe to be a strength before engaging in the simulation. Identify 1 communication skill that you believe to be an area for growth before engaging in the simulation. Your discussion response must be 200 words. You must also reply to a classmate's post (response must be at least 100 words). Keep in mind that you will not see other student's replies until you first post a reply. Therefore you should have one initial reply and one reply to a classmate's post are required. Discussion must be completed by ..... Appendix H: Communication Rubric The following is a sample rubric that can be used to score collaboration simulations.   How effectively did you utilize responsive listening in the simulation?  Ineffective               1  Needs Development  2   Proficient                3  Exemplary             4  I forgot to paraphrase what the  other party said. I used  language/tone that could have  come across as  argumentative/judgmental. I  provided unsolicited advice.  I did not use  paraphrasing as much  as I could have and/or  my paraphrasing was  not accurate and  tended to be long  winded. I did not use  clarifying questions. I  forgot to summarize  the overall  goals/concerns of  conversation.  I occasionally used  paraphrasing that was  accurate and brief. I  reflected on the  person’s feelings before  speaking. I used many  clarifying questions  throughout. I  summarized the overall  goals/concerns of  conversation.  I used paraphrasing  that was accurate and  brief at appropriate  intervals (i.e., not  interrupting or  dominating). I reflected  on the person’s feelings  before speaking. I used  some clarifying  questions appropriately  throughout. I  summarized the overall  goals/concerns of  conversation.    How effectively did you utilize follow‐up questioning in the simulation?  Ineffective               1  Needs Development  2   Proficient                3  Exemplary             4  How effectively did you utilize positive turn‐taking in the simulation?  Ineffective               1  Needs Development  2   Proficient                3  Exemplary             4  Our conversation was  very one‐sided;  dominated by one  person. The other party  rarely spoke, there was  no wait time used.  Interruptions were often  and frequent.     One person dominated  our conversation; limited  back‐and‐forth exchanges  were had. Inadequate  wait time was used.  I  interrupted more than I  should have.  Our conversation could  have been more  balanced; overall there  was a decent amount of  back‐and‐forth  exchanges. I used  adequate and  appropriate wait time.  I  interrupted the other  party at least 2 times.    Our conversation was  balanced; equal back‐ and‐forth exchanges  were had. Parties  involved were able to  express themselves in an  equal manner. I used  adequate and  appropriate wait time to  encourage the other  person to respond.   I did not put much  thought in my  questioning; hardly any  follow‐up questions were  used.   I used few questions,  often those questions  needed to be restated or  rephrased in order to be  clear; very few follow‐up  questions.    I used quality questions  most of the time, but  sometimes had to be  restated or rephrased in  order to be clear;  sometimes used follow‐ up questions.   I used concise, clearly  phrased questions; made  use of follow‐up  questions to achieve  conversation outcomes.       How effectively did you use non‐confrontational language in the simulation?  Ineffective               1  Needs Development  2   Proficient                3  Exemplary             4  I used language that was  emotionally charged  and/or defensive. I used  “You” statements  regularly to describe  sensitive situations.   I used language that created  a misunderstanding, but  was able to clear it up. I  occasionally used “You”  statements to describe  sensitive situations.     I used clear, concise, and  inclusive language. I  used a mix of “I” and  “You” statements to  describe sensitive  situations.     I used clear, concise, and  inclusive language. I  used mostly “I”  statements when  describing sensitive  situations. I grounded  strengths and weakness  in the ultimate outcome  of our students’ success.     How was my body language in the simulation?  Ineffective               1  Needs Development  2   Proficient                3  Exemplary             4  I did not use eye contact,  had very little movement  or gestures, tension and  nervousness was obvious  (i.e., arms crossed, sighs,  eye rolls).  I displayed minimal eye  contact, had very little  movement or gestures,  and displayed mild  tension (i.e., arms  crossed, sighs, eye rolls).   I consistently used direct  eye contact, made  movements and/or  gestures that enhanced  positive articulation,  displayed little or no  tension.     I consistently used  positive nonverbal signals  and cues to communicate  I was interested and  invested in the  conversation. Made  movements and gestures  that enhanced positive  articulation, displayed  pose and no tension.     Overall how effectively did you build rapport in the simulation?  Ineffective               1  Needs Development  2   Proficient                3  Exemplary             4  The other person  remained hostile or timid  I am not sure how the  other person felt. It was  The other person  appeared willing to work  Overall I believe I built a  positive relationship with  in the conversation. There  did not appear to be trust  or respect. The other  person appeared  uncomfortable and/or  unsatisfied.    hard to read. They  seemed neutral.   with me and satisfied  with our conversation.   the other party. There  was mutual respect and  trust established. All  parties were encouraged  to work with each other.  The other person  appeared comfortable  and satisfied with the  conversation.     How effective were you in understanding the other person’s perspective in the simulation?  Ineffective               1  Needs Development  2   Proficient                3  Exemplary             4  I do not have evidence of  the other person’s  perspective from our  conversation. The  conversation was one‐ sided.  I have some evidence of  the other person’s  perspective from our  conversation. The  conversation was mostly  one‐sided. I did not ask  questions to understand  the other person’s  perspective.    I think I know what the  other person’s  perspective was in the  conversation.  My  questions were general;  but I can infer how the  other person felt from  their responses.   I can clearly state what  the other person’s  perspective was in the  conversation. I asked  welcoming questions to  make the other person  feel comfortable sharing  how they felt.      Driver, M. K., Zimmer, K., & Murphy, K. (2018). Using Mixed Reality Simulations to Prepare Preservice Special  Educators for Collaboration in Inclusive Settings. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 26, 57‐77.   Appendix I: Peer Feedback Form What went well? Name three specific examples with the corresponding timestamps. What is an area to improve upon? List one specific example and explain why. Provide a suggestion for next steps to grow in this area. What was your overall take-away from watching this video? Identify something that that stood out to you and will influence your practice. Final comments/words of encouragement: Appendix J: Full Scenario for Simulation Specialist (Hits/Misses) The following simulation scenario is intended for the Simulation Specialist that is running the scenarios in a simulated environment. Target behaviors for simulation/role play: The below “hits” represents strategies that we would like to see the teachers display. The below “misses” refer nonpreferred teacher behaviors. When teachers… Adult avatars will… HIT HIT  Remain calm and professional throughout the duration of the meeting.  Use person-first and asset-based language.  Inquire about and affirm students’ cultural, religious, family, intellectual, and personal experiences.  Explain student progress and areas of support in clear layman terms. Explanation is not overly technical, and checks for parent/guardian understanding are in place.  Balance discussion of student strengths and student needs.  Attempt to build respectful relationships with family members.  Solicit input from family members to inform instructional supports and services.  Allow conversational "space” for family members to ask questions, seek clarification, and share concerns and personal insights.  Affirm the importance and value of family member input.  Demonstrate aspects of effective communication including: o Positive turn-taking o Responsive listening o Follow-up questioning o Respond positively and with interest. o Share additional information about Harrison. o Engage in problem-solving to decide on appropriate supports and services that might improve Harrison’s reading fluency. o Volunteer to provide extra practice at home. o Ask the teacher questions about instruction, school services, and supports. o Show appreciation for the teacher’s attempts to build a relationship. o Non-confrontational language o Warm body language o Rapport building o Seek to understand the other’s perspective MISS MISS If teacher is not engaging and/or is not prepared, it is realistic to assume family members might disengage or become upset or angry during the meeting. This might include the teacher making assumptions, seeming disinterested or that they are just checking off boxes/that they don’t really want to be in the meeting, or using abrasive or derogatory language (intentionally or unintentionally). Play off the participant as they develop their communication and collaboration strategies. If teacher is not engaging and/or is not prepared, it is realistic to assume family members might disengage or become upset or angry during the meeting. This might include the teacher making assumptions, seeming disinterested or that they are just checking off boxes/that they don’t really want to be in the meeting, or using abrasive or derogatory language (intentionally or unintentionally). Play off the participant as they develop their communication and collaboration strategies.