Interviewing non-Westerners & customs

Interviewing an individual from a non-Western culture and its practices

For this assignment, you will need to interview an individual who identifies with a non-Western and/or non-Judeo-Christian culture. This interview can be in person, over the phone, or by email. This may be someone you know personally or that you locate through a local cultural center, club, religious organization, or even an embassy or consulate.

You need to obtain permission from this individual to list their contact information in your paper in the event that your instructor needs to verify your work. During your interview you should ask the following questions: What do you identify as the most important or distinct practices of your culture? How are gender roles addressed in your culture?

How is social power, authority, or social roles in a hierarchy expressed in your culture? In class, we learned that in “honor-oriented societies,” worth comes from one’s role or group membership, and in “justice-oriented societies,” worth comes from what one does or doesn’t do. What is the role of honor/shame in your culture? Are honor/pride and dishonor/shame important concepts in your culture?

After your interview, write a 500-750-word paper summarizing and reflecting on the responses you received. What did you learn from this exchange? How did your perceptions change? Based on your discussion, how do you think your culture is perceived by others? You should incorporate at least three concepts from Chapters 12, 13, or 14 of your textbook in your response.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion. https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login - GCU library my password is Queen1981$ and my GCU login name is: AAlonso11 @ my.gcu.edu

Criteria	Percentage	Unsatisfactory (0.00%)	Less Than Satisfactory (65.00%)	Satisfactory (75.00%)	Good (85.00%)	Excellent (100.00%)	Comments	Points Earned
Content	70.0%
Summarize the responses you received.	25.0%	No summary or reflection on the interview responses is given.	Summary and reflection on the interview responses is vague or incomplete.	Summary and reflection on the interview responses are mostly clear and appropriate.	Summary and reflection on the interview responses are clear and strong.	Summary and reflection on the interview responses are clear, comprehensive, and masterfully compared.

What you learned and how your perceptions changed.	25.0%	No description of what was learned from this exchange or how personal perceptions were changed was given.	Explanation of what was learned from this exchange and how personal perceptions were changed is vague or inappropriate, with little or no support from the textbook.	Explanation of what was learned from this exchange and how personal perceptions were changed is mostly clear and appropriate, with some support from the textbook.	Explanation of what was learned from this exchange and how personal perceptions were changed is clear and insightful, with mostly strong support from the textbook.	Explanation of what was learned from this exchange and how personal perceptions were changed is clear, insightful, and comprehensive, with exceptional support from the textbook.

How is your culture perceived by others?	20.0%	No explanation of how writer’s culture may be perceived by others is given.	Explanation of how writer’s culture may be perceived by others is vague or inappropriate.	Explanation of how writer’s culture may be perceived by others is mostly clear and appropriate.	Explanation of how writer’s culture may be perceived by others is clear and insightful.	Explanation of how writer’s culture may be perceived by others is is clear, insightful, and comprehensive.


Organization and Effectiveness	20.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose	7.0%	Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.	Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.	Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.	Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.	Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

Argument Logic and Construction	8.0%	Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.	Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.	Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.	Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.	Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)	5.0%	Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.	Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.	Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.	Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.	Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.


Format	10.0%
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)	5.0%	Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.	Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.	Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.	Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.	All format elements are correct.

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)	5.0%	Sources are not documented.	Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.	Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.