Crisis Communication – Ken Lachlan, Ph. D. Essay Paper

i Left the link in the comment already.
Should be an essay for that audio
listen the audio before the essay
https://www(dot)youtube(dot)com/watch?v=jUN9M9SecvU&list=PLOdNHnO133ew8_r32U16yaou_OrGRc39s&index=10
How to structure your reflection paper:
 Summarize the podcast you’ve chosen. You should talk briefly about who was interviewed, their background, the topics they’ve covered, and some of the ideas that they have put forward. For Podcast interviews with some personal conversation, try to focus this summary on the communication and research material discussed. If the podcast has supplemental material (e.g. from Dr. Stifano but not from the guest/speaker) you can mention this as well. This summary should show that you’ve listened to the podcast in its entirety and identified the key points and main ideas. The summary should be between 1-2 paragraphs.
 Second, identify which aspects of this conversation you think were most important. You should identify and discuss a minimum of 3 different aspects of the conversation. Talk about how these ideas impact communication, and how they impact our daily lives. Use this as an opportunity to think about your communication and interactions and your experiences to the material discussed in the podcast and course. You should also connect content in the Podcast to material we are covering in the course. This section should range from 3-4 paragraphs.
 Third, what questions does this conversation raise for you? Talk in some detail about what other things you’d like to understand about this topic, and what questions you’d like to ask the guest. Why did you select these questions? Is there anything else you would like to mention about this topic? Show that you have thought deeply about the content of the podcast and its relation to the course. This section should range from 1-2 paragraphs.
 Finally, what were your personal impressions of the Podcast? Did you like or dislike the episode? Did you like or dislike the ideas and concepts put forward? Why? Give reasons for your opinions, including connections to the field of communications. This section should be limited to 1paragraph.

COMMPENDIUM REFLECTION ASSIGNMENT COMM 1000 As part of your work for this course, you are required to complete three short reflection papers on three different episodes of your choice of the COMM 1000 podcasts. The podcasts are conducted and produced by Dr. Stephen Stifano, who is a Professor in the Department of Communication at UCONN. The podcast reflections are worth 50 points each (150 points total), representing 15% of your grade. See the course syllabus for complete details and policies about the assignment. For each of the three reflections:  You will write a 2-3 page paper (double-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman font, 1-inch margins).  You will submit the paper via HuskyCT. Each podcast will have its own assignment. All papers will be submitted through SafeAssign. The assignment will be due at 11:59 PM seven days after the podcast is posted.  Assignments turned in less than 48 hours-late (from the deadline) have the potential to earn half-credit (the awarded grade divided by two). After 48 hours, ZERO credit will be awarded. How to structure your reflection paper:  Summarize the podcast you’ve chosen. You should talk briefly about who was interviewed, their background, the topics they’ve covered, and some of the ideas that they have put forward. For Podcast interviews with some personal conversation, try to focus this summary on the communication and research material discussed. If the podcast has supplemental material (e.g. from Dr. Stifano but not from the guest/speaker) you can mention this as well. This summary should show that you’ve listened to the podcast in its entirety and identified the key points and main ideas. The summary should be between 1-2 paragraphs.  Second, identify which aspects of this conversation you think were most important. You should identify and discuss a minimum of 3 different aspects of the conversation. Talk about how these ideas impact communication, and how they impact our daily lives. Use this as an opportunity to think about your communication and interactions and your experiences to the material discussed in the podcast and course. You should also connect content in the Podcast to material we are covering in the course. This section should range from 3-4 paragraphs.  Third, what questions does this conversation raise for you? Talk in some detail about what other things you’d like to understand about this topic, and what questions you’d like to ask the guest. Why did you select these questions? Is there anything else you would like to mention about this topic? Show that you have thought deeply about the content of the podcast and its relation to the course. This section should range from 1-2 paragraphs.  Finally, what were your personal impressions of the Podcast? Did you like or dislike the episode? Did you like or dislike the ideas and concepts put forward? Why? Give reasons for your opinions, including connections to the field of communications. This section should be limited to 1paragraph. Grading for Reflection Paper: Each reflection will be evaluated on the rubric bellow. Please keep in mind that a sufficient reflection will receive a passing grade (around 35/50), while an exceptional reflection will receive a high to near-perfect grade (46/50 to 50/50). For questions or clarifications, please don’t hesitate to contact me. COMMPENDIUM REFLECTION GRADING RUBRIC Unacceptable Lacking Acceptable Thorough Exceptional Podcast Summary (aprox. 1-2 paragraphs) 2: Shows minimal, if any, evidence that the author listened to and comprehended the podcast. 4: Some clear, major flaws and/or omissions in the summary. More effort needed to indicate that the author paid attention to the podcast. 6: Mostly summarizes the podcast, though summary may lack some important details. 8: Summary covers the podcast thoroughly without any major omissions of the important details. 10: Excellent summary of the podcast that is both thorough and wellstructured, making it abundantly clear what occurred in the episode. Identification of Important Aspects (aprox. 3-4 paragraphs) 2: No important points are identified clearly (or at all); no Connection to course concepts. 4: Important points are somewhat unclear, and discussion of these points is either sparse or outright missing. Minimal or no connection to course concepts. 6: Important points from the talk are selected, though discussion of these important points may not be comprehensive. Important points may not be well connected to the course. 8: Is clear and wellreasoned in selecting important points from the talk. Connects important points to some aspects of course. 10: Does an excellent job of selecting important points from the talk. Important points are connected seamlessly to course concepts, showing a holistic understanding of how the podcast episode fits with the field of communication. Reflection Questions Raised by Podcast (aprox.1-2 paragraphs) 2: Questions are offtopic, unrelated, or insufficiently relevant to the field of communication. No or minimal effort is displayed through the questions presented. 4: Questions show little relevance to the topic discussed in the podcast, and do not indicate significant effort on the part of the author. Questions may be confusing. Discussion of related concepts may be missing. 6: Questions are relevant to the topic discussed in the podcast, though justification/set-up for these questions may be a bit ambiguous. Some discussion of related concepts, which may not be particularly compelling. 8: Questions are thorough and interesting, with some justification/set-up. Discussion of related concepts is relevant, somewhat interesting, showing effort on the part of the author. 10: Questions are thorough, interesting, novel, and thoughtful, and demonstrate a deep amount of thought on the part of the author. Justification/set-up for questions is clear. Discussion of related concepts is eloquent, interesting, and thorough. Personal Impressions (aprox. 1 paragraph) 2: Personal impressions are either missing or lacking in detail. Minimal (or no) evidence that the author listened to and comprehended the podcast. 4: Impressions are not well connected to the podcast discussion or the field of communication. Reasons for these impressions may be lacking in detail. 6: Impressions are relevant to the podcast and the field of communication. Reasons for these impressions are presented with some detail, though more focused commentary could help better explain these impressions. 8: Impressions are highly relevant to the podcast and field of communication. Reasons for these impressions are thorough and help support the author’s opinions. It is clear that the author has reflected thoroughly on the podcast. 10: Impressions are highly relevant to the podcast and field of communication, with clear reasoning to support the author’s opinions. Author has clearly reflected on the podcast and its relation to the course. Overall, it is evident that the author has a firm grasp of the topic, the discussion, and its place in the field of communication. Writing 1: Severe grammatical or spelling errors are a distraction to the reader. Writing not acceptable for a college-level course. 2: Significant number of grammatical or spelling errors. Writing is unclear in areas, with flaws that make the paper somewhat difficult to read. 3: Paper shows a few grammatical or spelling errors. Writing is somewhat clear, with some issues present that may be distracting. Flaws do not ruin the paper, but could be improved. 4: Paper is mostly free of grammatical or spelling errors and is written clearly, showing a competent grasp of writing. Some small flaws may be present. 5: Paper is free of grammatical or spelling errors, clear, eloquent, and shows an excellent grasp of writing that makes the paper a pleasure to read. Organization & Structure 1: Paper is highly disorganized, which represents a major distraction to the reader. Structure is deeply flawed and unacceptable for a college-level course. 2: Paper is disorganized in areas, which is somewhat distracting to the reader. Structural issues are present that detract for the paper. Several ideas seem misplaced, creating significant confusion for the reader. 3: Organization is decent, though some flaws are present. A few structural issues are present, and some ideas are misplaced or poorly presented, causing some distraction for the reader. 4: Paper is well organized with supporting ideas mostly flowing logically from one to the next. Some small structural issues may be present, though they do not distract from the paper. 5: Exceptionally well organized. Paper follows a clear, logical structure that makes it easy to read. No structural issues, and all ideas fit logically with one another.
Grading for Reflection Paper:
Each reflection will be evaluated on the rubric bellow. Please keep in mind that a sufficient reflection will receive a passing grade (around 35/50), while an exceptional reflection will receive a high to near-perfect grade (46/50 to 50/50). For questions or clarifications, please don’t hesitate to contact me.