DPLS 774su08 The Art and Practice of Dialogue

DPLS 774 - The Art & Practice of Dialogue
Summer 2008                                  3 Credit

Professor: Chris Francovich, Ed.D.
Office Phone: (509) 323-3592
Office hours: Please call or email for an appointment
email: francovich@gonzaga.edu
Meeting Logistics:  Wednesdays 6 - 10 pm.  Room TBD
Meeting Dates:  June 25, July 2, 9, 16, 23, 25 (Fri), 30

Course Overview
This course is concerned with the praxis of dialogue. From the theoretical perspective we will look at dialogue through philosophical, psychological, sociological & physiological lenses. The course readings will suggest a movement from broad social, historical, and philosophical perspectives on communication, meaning, and community to focused inquiry into subjective and intersubjective aspects of communication and meaning. The topics of identity, role, self, other, and object will be discussed. This trajectory will encompass global, organizational, and personal perspectives on dialogue. There is throughout the readings an emphasis on the phenomenological and subjective position of the self and a focus on the development of responsibility of that self to the world. We will also engage in an ongoing dialogue separate and apart from the theoretical and intellectual approach to the topic.

This ‘practice’ of dialogue is an open ended and radical approach to communication that focuses as much or more on the subjective phenomena of being in community (the dialogue circle) as it does on what is actually said by people that choose to speak. The process can be disconcerting on a number of levels.  Please realize is that there is no ‘one’ definition of what dialogue is or isn’t – consequently a sense of uncertainty and ambiguity about the process is likely. Many people that experience this form of dialogue may feel an acute and sometimes uncomfortable sense of self-awareness and self-consciousness arising out of the protracted silence that often occurs. This can result in reactivity and judgment about the process, the course, and the facilitator. The point of this practice is first to realize the phenomena of our own social conditioning and then begin to understand how this conditioning affects our social interaction. The practice of dialogue can help undo some of the conditioning that keeps us from authentic, respectful, and engaged interaction. 

Course Structure
This course is composed of reading, writing, class discussion, lecture, group activities, and sustained radical dialogue. We will form small working groups during the first class that will remain intact throughout the course. These groups or cohorts will serve multiple functions. Among them are:
·         Content & process support - group participants will have an opportunity to discuss readings, past discussions, and class assignments.
·         Paper review and editing - Prior to turning in your completed paper you should have one or more of your colleagues read and critique your penultimate draft in a structured editing activity. The DPLS course paper rubric will be introduced and used as the context for this joint editing process. It is recognized that underlying good writing is both clarity of thought and an adequate grasp of concepts and frameworks. These forums used in conjunction with my own critique of student work will assist in the development of sound scholarship. Most 4 hour classes will open with an overview of the readings. Small group discussions of course notes and readings will then follow. We will generally take a 20-30 minute break. Following the break we will engage in an approximate 2 hour dialogue. It is also my habit to prepare interpretive notes of the readings and make them available on Blackboard prior to class. I use these notes to frame my ideas for conversation we meet. I also hope that my interpretations inspire students to interpret and analyze the readings from their own perspectives. I may prepare a number of slides based on my notes to stimulate discussion and/or communicate concepts and ideas.  

Expectations, Assignments, & Grading
·         Please read all assignments and my course notes posted on Blackboard. These notes are meant to be an initial factor in the reading triangulation strategy that involves the author(s) work, your interpretation of that work, my interpretation, and finally our collective interpretation. This process is much more effective when all participants commit to doing the reading.
·         Participants will be expected to attend all class sessions. If you miss a class please inform me via email or phone prior to the missed class. Missing more than two classes will result in an incomplete and require either taking the class again or auditing it at some future time. (Participation - 10% of grade)·         Participants will be expected to complete a pre-course reading and writing. Read Robert Grudin’s On Dialogue and write a short response. To be turned in by the first day of class. Details are on the Blackboard site under the Assignments link. (15% of grade). This book is out of print but available through Amazon and a number of other resellers in both used and new form. The bookstore will also have copies available but you might call them prior to dropping by to pick a copy up.
·         Participants to keep a reflective journal of each class session to be completed as soon after each class as possible. These journal entries should be emailed to me. (7.5% of grade). Please see Blackboard for more specific guidelines.
·         Reading Notes – see assignments section on Blackboard (7.5% of grade)
·         Write a summary paper on a topic related to our course readings or dialogue practice. You have wide latitude in choosing your topic but are urged to maintain a scholarly tone, use the DPLS Red Book and APA formats, and keep the DPLS Course Paper Rubric in mind. I would like to see a deep reflection on dialogue. The paper should not exceed 15 pages in total.  (40% of grade). This paper is due Thursday July 31^st. Please plan ahead for this as I will have limited time to read papers prior to the due date for grades and a summer trip I am planning.
·         Participation in the dialogue is assessed only to the extent that you show up and maintain the principles discussed. There will be no assessment based on what you say or don’t say. The point of the dialogue process isn’t necessarily to say anything. (20% of grade)

Expectations and Assessment
Assessment of doctoral work in leadership studies is challenging. Interdisciplinary work dealing with complex and sometimes contested theories and concepts requires (from my perspective) a tolerance for uncertainty, ambiguity, and contingency. I am also struck by the need for a high degree of self-directed behavior on the part of doctoral students and candidates. I would like my teaching style, assessment policy, and rubrics to support and facilitate self-direction.However, behind my questions about assessment and uncertainty in evaluating anyone in an absolute manner there does reside (in my view) a set of skills that serve to hold and shape work with language in a complex world. I believe we need a grammar, syntax, and semantics of clarity, coherence, depth, and breadth. My assumption at the beginning of the term is that all of the students in this course possess the requisite skills, talents, and propensities needed to be clear, cogent, and complete. I admit that the standards I refer to are objectively stated and subjectively enacted. My assessment will be based on the quality and content of expressed thought as exhibited in both written assignments and classroom presentations and participation.

Grading Criteria for Written Work (adapted from the DPLS Academic papers rubric)Content Criteria:
The content of papers should reflect the level and style of content in readings and discussions. There is an expectation that doctoral students will reach outside of their comfort zone in terms of appropriation of ideas, concepts, and frameworks. The substance of papers and other writings will be weighed against the general level of discourse in class meetings and the style and density of expression of the readings.

Thought and Expression Criteria
Student writing should raise vital questions or issues, formulating them clearly and precisely. I will be looking for evidence of breadth and depth and the insightful, in-depth analysis of complex ideas. Main points should be developed and supported  with relevant information and references that are appropriately incorporated.The organization and logic of your writing is critical. The expectation is for well focused, well organized, and well reasoned conclusions. The writing should flow with the reader not  getting lost or having to work to determine what you are saying. There is also an expectation that your writing/thinking has an open and inclusive character when exploring alternative systems of thought, recognizing and assessing, as appropriate, their assumptions, implications, and/or practical consequences.

Technical Criteria
Your writing should be clear and demonstrate a high level of vocabulary through careful word choice. Sentences should be constructed skillfully and purposefully. Transitions between paragraphs and sections are important and will evaluated for their efficacy in weaving your concepts, themes, and purposes together. Summaries and conclusions are also vital elements of good writing and will be evaluated based on their appropriateness and effectiveness.Of course grammar, punctuation, and spelling are expected to be flawless. Careful proof reading of your paper is a basic expectation. Papers, unless otherwise noted are to be completed in APA style. References should be cited properly within the text and a complete reference list must be provided. Appropriate use of headings will also be noted.
Point/Grade correspondence:
95-100%     = A
90-94.99%  = A-
85-90%       = B
80-84.99%  = B-

Required Texts
These books should all be available in the bookstore by the first day of class. As mentioned above Grudin (and the rest actually) are available on Amazon or another online bookseller (ABE books, Albris, etc.)
Anderson, R., Cissna, K. N., & Arnett, R. C. (Eds.). (1994). The reach of dialogue: Confirmation, voice, and community. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press Inc.
Arnett, R. C., & Arneson, P. (Eds.). (1999). Dialogic civility in a cynical age: Community, hope, and interpersonal relationships. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Bohm, D. (1996). In Nichol L. (Ed.), On dialogue. NY, NY: Routledge.
Buber, M. (1970). I & Thou (W. Kaufmann Trans.). New York: Simon & Schuster.
Grudin, R. (1996). On dialogue: An essay in free thought. New York, New York: Houghton Mifflin.
Isaacs, W. (1999). Dialogue and the art of thinking together. New York, New York: Doubleday.

Other Readings will be provided via hardcopy or on Blackboard

Friedman, M. (1999). The interhuman and what is common to all: Martin Buber and sociology. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 29(4), 403.

Other Suggested Texts on Dialogue (these are in no way ‘required’ text - just suggestions for further reading):
Dialogue: Theorizing Difference in Communication StudiesEdited by Rob Anderson, Leslie Baxter & Kenneth Cissna (2004)Sage Publications. Thousand Oaks, CA

From Debate to Dialogue: Using the Understanding Process to Transform our ConversationsDeborah Flick - 1998 Orchid Publications. Boulder, Colorado

Communication & Community: Implications of Martin Buber's DialogueRonald C. Arnett  (1986)Southern Illinois University Press. Carbondale, Illinois

The Martin Buber - Carl Rogers DialogueRob Anderson & Kenneth N. Cissna (1997)State University Press of New York (SUNY).

Thought as a System David Bohm 1992Routledge. New York

Between Man and ManMartin Buber (2002) Routledge. New York

Knowing and the KnownJohn Dewey & Arthur F. Bentley (1949/1976) Greenwood Press