Reflecton Paper One should be a total of 2-4 pages, typed and double-spaced. The – graduate researcher

Reflecton Paper One should be a total of 2-4 pages, typed and double-spaced. The font size should be 12 pt, and the font type should be a standard one like Times New Roman, Arial, or Courier.
Please include the name you’d prefer me to address you by in the top lefthand corner of your paper. No other heading is necessary. No title is necessary for this paper, but please see the next two bullet points for required labelling.
Part One (the Macro Analysis) should be clearly labelled as: Macro Analysis of “American Horse” or Macro Analysis of “Strong Horse Tea” (depending on which short story you choose).
Part Two (the Micro Analysis) should be clearly labelled as: Micro Analysis of “American Horse” or Micro Analysis of “Strong Horse Tea” (depending on which short story you choose).
Part One (the Macro Analysis) should be 1-2 pages (making sure that this section is at least one full page).
Part Two (the Micro Analysis) should be 1-2 pages (making sure that this section is at least one full page).
Part One (the Macro Analysis) should include at least one quote from the lens essay you’ve chosen and at least one quote from the short story”American Horse” or “Strong Horse Tea.”
Part Two (the Micro analysis) should include at least one quote from BIBE with a parenthetical page number citation and at least one quote from the short story “American Horse” or “Strong Horse Tea.”
ASSIGNMENT OBJECTIVE:
The objective of this assignment is to understand how the macro-level United States socio-political contexts shape intercultural communication as well as the micro-level specifics of how individuals with different cultural identities interact with each other. To that end, you will be doing both a macro analysis and micro analysis of an #Ownvoices short story (either Louise Erdrich’s “American Horse” or Alice Walker’s “Strong Horse Tea.” Again, an #Ownvoices story is one in which the author shares one or more marginalized identities (BIBE Rank Target identities) with their fictional main character.
The macro analysis is meant to help you understand the larger structures of systemic and institutional inequities of the United States (political, economic, legal as described by Michelle Alexander) by analyzing how an #Ownvoices story resists these larger systems of oppression and/or what the story reveals about these larger systems of oppression. The readings by Gomez (#Ownvoices representation), Takaki (multicultural education), Renick (systemic oppression of indigenous Native Americans), or Davies (systemic oppression of Black women) are lens essays meant to help you do this macro-analysis.
The micro analysis is meant to help you understand the more specific and individual interpersonal interactions (which are shaped by the larger social, political, and historical context) by analyzing the specific interactions of the fictional characters in an #Ownvoices story and the Rank Role (Agent and Target) dynamics of the characters’ interpersonal interactions. Nieto’s BIBE is meant to help you do this micro-analysis.
ASSIGNMENT OVERVIEW:
Reflection Paper One will be a Two-Part Analysis of an #Ownvoices short story (either Louise Erdrich’s “American Horse” or Alice Walker’s “Strong Horse Tea”).
Part One will be a Macro Analysis (1-2 pages) of the short story (Erdrch or Walker) through a “lens essay” (Gomez, Takaki, Renick, or Davies).
Part Two will be a Micro Analysis (1-2 pages) of the short story (Erdrich or Walker) through the lens of BIBE.
For each part, you will need to support your analysis with a quote from the short story. For Part One, you will also need a quote from a lens essay. For Part Two, you will also need a quote from BIBE.
ASSIGNMENT DIRECTIONS:
First, choose one of the following two fictional #OwnVoices short stories:
Alice Walker’s “Strong Horse Tea”
Louse Erdrich’s “American Horse.”
Please note that you will need to analyze the same story for both the macro-analysis part and the micro-analysis part. Note also that Francisco Jiminez’s “The Circuit” is not one of the options for this assignment.
Directions for Macro Analysis (1-2 pages):
1. For the larger social and institutional macro-analysis, first choose one or more of these “lens” readings:
Sarah Hannah Gomez (#Ownvoices representation)
Ronald Takaki (multicultural education).
Christine Renick (systemic oppression of Indigenous Native Americans as a lens for Erdrich’s story)
Miquel Davies (systemic oppression of Black women as a lens for Walker’s story).
2. Then, use your chosen “lens” readings to either:
Analyze Erdrich’s or Walker’s story for its importance as an #Ownvoices story in resisting larger inequities in education and/or in representation (hint: Takaki and/or Gomez can be used as a “lens” here)
OR
Analyze Erdrich’s or Walker’s for its messages criticizing how larger institutions and structures uphold and perpetuate inequity (hint: Davies or Renick can be used as a “lens” here).
For the macro analysis part, don’t focus on analysis of the behavior, motivations, or interactions of the fictional characters. Instead, do focus on the importance of the #Ownvoices story in resisting the larger social structures of power and/or the larger social messages about institutional power, oppression, and privilege that you think the author intends to convey through their fictional #Ownvoices story.
Please support your analysis with quotes from the fictional story you’ve chosen (Erdrich or Walker) AND the lens text/texts you’ve chosen (Takaki, Gomez, Davies, Rennick).
Directions for Micro Analysis (1-2 pages):
1. For the specific interpersonal micro analysis, first look at the ADRESSING model on p.30 in BIBE (or the ADRRSSINGG model in the Week One Module handout) and identify the specific Rank category(ies) that are active in the #Ownvoices short story (this should be the same story as the one you analyzed in the macro-analysis part). Most likely, there are only a few Rank categories that are active in the entire story and only one or two active in any given interaction. For example, in “The Circuit,” I would identify the three most active Rank categories as national origin, ethnicity/race, and social class culture.
2. Then, each Rank category that is active in the story, identify each character’s Agent or Target Rank Role (if known) in the active Rank category. For example, in “The Circuit,” the following would be the Agent or Target Rank role identifications I would make. In national origin, I would identify Panchito and his family as having a Target Rank membership, and the landowner/boss as having an Agent Rank membership. In ethnicity/race, I would identify Panchito and his family as having a Target Rank membership, and the landowner/boss as having an Agent Rank membership. In social class culture, I would identify Panchito and his family as having a Target Rank membership, and the landowner/boss and Mr. Lema as having an Agent Rank membership.
3. Once you have made these active Rank Category and Rank Role identifications, analyze the Agent and Target Rank Role dynamics in the specific interpersonal interactions between characters.
For this micro-analysis part, don’t focus on the importance of the story or the author’s intended social messages. Instead, do focus on analysis of the interpersonal interactions of the fictional characters. Keep in mind that you will be analyzing Rank Role dynamics rather than Status play.
Please support your analysis with quotes from the fictional story you’ve chosen (Erdrich or Walker) AND Nieto’s BIBE book.