Assignment Instructions Instructions Review Groupthink PowerPoint...

Assignment Instructions

Instructions

Review Groupthink PowerPoint - http://www.slideshare.net/stevebshore/groupthinklecutrefinal

Requirements:

Consider the following:

This assignment is designed to help you understand Groupthink more effectively and be able to cite historical examples to support this concept.  

Write a 1 – 2 page paper.

Illustrate the concept of Groupthink

Include at least 3 famous historical examples that fit the definition provided in the PPT above.

 

SPECIFICS

Please note – 1 – 2 pages should be content; your cover page and reference page are in addition to the content.

Sources:

Reference at least 3 scholarly/peer-reviewed journal articles.

Do not use our text as any of the “scholarly” sources.

Your research sources must be from the APUS Online Library. 

Wikipedia or any other blog-type site is not a valid source for this paper 

Format:

Follow APA guidelines to format your research paper.

Your assignment is due no later than Sunday, 11:55 pm ET.

 

Shore, S. (2010). Groupthink. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/stevebshore/groupthinklecutrefinal

 

APUS Online Library Resources that you should find helpful include:

Summon: http://apus.libanswers.com/a.php?qid=637029

Online Library Tutorial Center: http://www.apus.edu/Online-Library/tutorials/index.htm

Library Answers to Frequently Asked Questions: http://apus.libanswers.com/

Supplemental References:

Aldag, R. J., Fuller, S. R. (1993). "Beyond fiasco: A reappraisal of the groupthink phenomenon and a new model of group decision processes". Psychological Bulletin, 113(3), 533–552.

Dattner, B. (2011). Preventing groupthink. Retrieved July 10, 2013 from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/credit-and-blame-work/201104/preventing-groupthink

Ferraris, C., & Carveth, R. (2003). "NASA and the Columbia disaster: decision-making by groupthink?". Proceedings of the 2003 Association for Business Communication Annual Convention.

Mindtools (2013). Avoiding fatal flaws in group decision-making. Retrieved July 10, 2013 from http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_82.htm

Moorhead, G., Ference, R., Neck, C. P. (1991). "Group decision fiascoes continue: Space Shuttle Challenger and a revised groupthink framework". Human Relations, 44 (6), 539–550

Packer, D. J. (2009). "Avoiding groupthink: whereas weakly identified members remain silent, strongly identified members dissent about collective problems". Psychological Science, 20(5), 546–548.

Rose, J. D. (Spring 2011). "Diverse perspectives on the groupthink theory – a literary review". Emerging Leadership Journeys, 4(1), 37–57.

Note: Refer to specific assignment for any specific instructions such as number of
sources to include, content pages, etc.
APUS Assignment Rubric 100 – 200 Courses
Level Purpose / Audience Total
Points
Points
Earned
Beginning The writing fails to meet the minimum requirements of the
assignment. It offers little insight into the subject and has
serious flaws in logic and omissions in evidence.
5
Developing The writing meets the minimum requirements of the
assignment. It offers insight into the subject through basic
logic and the presentation of ideas based on some
evidence.
10
Accomplished The writing clearly goes beyond the minimum
requirements of the assignment. It attempts to engage
the reader through originality and presentation of complex
ideas.
15
Exemplary The writing engages the reader with an original approach
to the subject. It may encompass conflicting ideas and
inspires the reader to contemplate the relationship of
complex ideas.
20
Level Thesis and Support Total
Points
Points
Earned
Beginning The writing may need a more clearly articulated thesis
and/or appropriate related subordinate ideas. Fuzzy logic
may be evident and adequate supporting evidence is
lacking.
5
Developing The writing has a clear thesis and related subordinate
ideas supported by clear thinking and appropriate
evidence. Logical arguments may be one-sided or
incomplete.
10
Accomplished The writing has a clearly articulated thesis supported by
appropriate evidence and sound logic. Minor gaps in logic
and argument may appear.
15
Exemplary The writing has a clearly articulated original thesis and
subordinate ideas supported by reliable and relevant
evidence based on original research.
20
Level Organization Total
Points
Points
Earned
Beginning The writing is noticeably lacking in organization. There is
no clear introduction nor conclusion and ideas are neither
carefully nor fully developed. Supporting evidence is
clearly lacking.
5
Developing The writing demonstrates rudimentary organization and
logical structure, but ideas may be more fully developed
and supported by more appropriate evidence.
10
Accomplished The writing is organized logically and flows well. An
introduction and conclusion are evident, but transitions
may be smoother.
15
Exemplary The writing flows smoothly and logically from a well- 20