Week 4 Blog: Who Am I as a Communicator

Surprises

 There were few surprises about the similarities and differences between how I evaluated myself as a communicator and how my husband and a friend evaluated me.  The results of all of the assessments done by my friend were also the same as mine. The fact that my score for the Listening Styles Profile was the same despite who completed the survey seemed to indicate that I am a People-Oriented listener, however, I thought the definition of the Action-Oriented listener was a better fit. I think that the thing that surprised me the most was that the results were so similar despite who completed the inventory.  I really expected that my own perspective of my communication skills would have been different from the perspective of that of my husband and friend. 

Insights

One insight about communication that I gained this week is that while the inventory assigned a specific score based on how others and I answered the questions, I feel that I could see myself across the entire range of possibilities depending on the situation.  A second insight is that I have made progress in becoming a better communicator by improving my listening skills.   This is something that I have made a concerted effort to do.  O’Hair & Wiemann (2012) tell us that an empathetic listening style is associated with showing care and avoiding judgment.  The results of the Listening Styles Profile validate that I have made progress in this area.  Had I completed these scales several years ago, I think the results would have been very different.

Professional & Personal

As a result of the Application assignment, I have a better insight into and deeper awareness of my own communication strengths and weaknesses in both professional and personal settings.  I discovered that I need to make the same kind effort in personal communications that I do when I am in a professional setting.

Reference

O'Hair, D., & Wiemann, M. (2012). Real communication: An introduction. New York New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s

Week 3 Blog

I do find that I communicate differently with people from different groups and cultures.  If is someone that I know well I am more comfortable and am more likely to use slang and tease and joke more.  Professionally, I communicate differently based on the audience.  In a large group of other early childhood professionals, I am more likely to use acronyms and jargon that I know others in the group will be familiar with.   I work at a bilingual preschool program. Several of the teachers and many of the parents speak Spanish.  I speak more slowly, use simpler words and listen very carefully.  We have a Spanish-speaking cook at the program where I work.  My Spanish is very limited and so I find that I must rely on lots of gestures to communicate effectively with her. 

The first strategy that I could use to help me communicate more effectively is to improve my listening skills.   When talking with Spanish speaking parents, I tend to be nervous about my limited ability to speak Spanish and so it is sometimes difficult to stay focused on listening.  I also tend to be very businesslike and so I have found that I need to stop, listen carefully and give all of my attention to the person who is speaking. 

The second strategy that I could use would be becoming more other-oriented.  As Bebee, Bebee & Redmond (2011) point out, “focusing on others rather than yourself… is an important way to enhance your interpersonal competence” (p. 111).  According to Bebee, et al. (2011), becoming other-oriented involves taking into account “the other person’s thoughts, values, background, and overall perspective” and to “put yourself into someone else’s place emotionally and consider what that person is feeling” (p. 112).  As Gonzalez-Mena (2010) reminds us, “it’s uncomfortable to begin questioning what we already know, but it’s important to do so when working in an early childhood setting that includes diverse families you don’t see eye to eye with” (p. 36). 

The third strategy that I can use is related to body language. Since taking this class, I have become much more aware of my body language.  I am careful to ensure that my body language is communicating my interest in what the other person is saying.  I turn towards the other person, am careful not cross my arms, nod, smile and watch carefully to use the amount of direct eye contact that the speaker is comfortable with. 

Reference:

Beebe, S. A., Beebe, S. J., & Redmond, M. V. (2011). Interpersonal communication: Relating to others (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Chapter 4, "Interpersonal Communication and Diversity: Adapting to Others" (pp. 85–114)


Retrieved from https://class.waldenu.edu/bbcswebdav/institution/USW1/201420_02/MS_MECS/EDUC_6165/Week%203/Resources/Resources/embedded/beebe_ch4.pdf

Gonzalez-Mena, J. (2010). 50 strategies for communicating and working with diverse families. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

"Understanding and Appreciating Cultural Differences" (pp. 36–38)

Watching Days of Our Lives

I had to watch several shows before finding one that would work for this class.  I tried watching a show Nickelodeon, which seemed to be geared toward preteens, but found that it was just too predictable.  I also tried That 70s Show, but also found it to be very predictable.  It was very easy to tell what was going even without listening to the sound.  I decided to try watching a soap opera Days of Our Lives.  When watching the show without listening to the sound, it seemed that a priest was having an affair with a woman.  It also seemed that a young woman was either plotting with an older man or that the older man was counseling her.  Most of the other relationships were par for the course for soap operas.  There were 2 girls who were plotting against another girl over a boy.  There was also an estranged mother and son.  There were a wide variety of emotions and feeling displayed by the characters that were easy to read even without the sound.  Emotions and feelings the characters displayed included:  happiness, sadness, anger, disappointment, sympathy, and concern.

When watching the show with the sound, I found that for the most part, I had correctly interpreted the relationships and emotions. There were 2 relationships that I had misinterpreted.   The first was the relationship between the priest and the woman.  As it turned out, the woman was the mother of the priest and that was why they were kissing and hugging.  The other relationship that I had misunderstood was the one between the young woman and the older man.  The man was the woman’s father who was helping her with a problem she was having. 

This assignment gave me the opportunity to see how well I could interpret communication without actually hearing the words that people were using.  It was much easier to correctly interpret the emotions displayed than it was to accurately “read” the relationships between the characters.  Based on this experience, I have a better understanding of the limitations of only using nonverbal communication to make assumptions.  As O’Hair & Wiemann (2012) pointed out, “nonverbal communication is often ambiguous (p. 129) and so advise us to “regard nonverbal behavior as cues to be checked out rather than as facts” (p. 130). 

Reference

O'Hair, D., & Wiemann, M. (2012). Real communication: An introduction. New York New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s

Communication & Collaborating in the Early Childhood Field -WEEK 1

For me, the person who comes to mind as someone who demonstrates competent communication is a former supervisor and the specific context is when we met for supervision meetings.   According to O’Hair & Wiemann (2012), competent communication “ is more concerned with process, which measures the success of communication by considering the methods by which an outcome is accomplished” (p. 14). My former supervisor exemplified that ability to focus on the process.  One of the most effective behaviors that this person exhibited during these meetings was the ability to really listen to what I said.  She was truly present and it was obvious that I had her full attention.  Her body language, reflective questions and thoughtful answers all created an environment that made me feel safe, valued and heard. As O’Hair & Wiemann (2012) point out, “From the process perspective, it is better to optimize outcomes for both partners than to fulfill the specific goals of either one:  mutual satisfaction is used as the gauge of success” (p. 16).   My former supervisor was careful about the pacing of the conversation.   She was able to sense when to move on to another topic. She was gifted at asking questions and was careful about how and when she offered information or opinions.  She also did a good job of following the National Communication Association Credo for Ethical Communication principle that states “we strive to understand and respect other communicators before evaluating and responding to their messages” (p.  15).  This principle is closely related to the statement made by O’Hair  & Wiemann (2012) “Successful communicators usually have a high degree of cognitive complexity.   This refers to the ability to consider multiple scenarios, formulate multiple theories, and make multiple interpretations when encoding and decoding messages” (p. 24).  This person could easily be considered a successful communicator using the information from O’Hair & Wiemann and the principles outlined in the National Communication Association Credo for Ethical Communication.

The behavior that I would most like to emulate is her ability to truly listen.  This ability has many positive outcomes.  This ability to truly listening builds trust by conveying the message that what is being said is valued and understood.  It also offers the chance to show respect for the speaker and the opportunity to develop the high degree of cognitive complexity both of which are traits of an effective communicator.  So often, I find that I am thinking about what I am going to say rather than being truly present in the moment and really listening to the other person.  

Reference:

O'Hair, D., & Wiemann, M. (2012). Real communication: An introduction. New York New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s