Special issues in communication: the intersections
The prompt gives three topics and then asks how they relate to each other, supplying its own examples. Those cross-cutting questions are the assignment; treating the three as separate sections misses it.
Editorial process
Last reviewed · August 15, 2026
Four issues, and the marks are in how they interact
Read the instruction after the list. Diversity, ethics and technology are the three issues, and then the brief says to include how these issues relate to each other, and supplies four of its own examples to make the expectation unmistakable — how gender differences affect communication, how technology affects communication between cultures, whether diversity affects ethical decisions, how technology affects ethical decision making. Those are intersections, not topics, and a paper organised as three self-contained sections cannot address them, however well each individual section is written. The stronger structure treats the intersections as the sections: one on diversity and technology, one on ethics and technology, one on diversity and ethics. The three individual issues get defined along the way, and the paper ends up making an argument rather than delivering three summaries side by side. Deciding this before drafting saves the rewrite, because the two structures share very few paragraphs.
The matrix is doing separate work and is easy to underestimate. Identifying the research approach typically used for each issue asks you to notice that these subjects are studied differently: intercultural communication leans heavily on ethnographic and qualitative traditions, media effects and technology research on experimental and survey designs, communication ethics on critical and rhetorical analysis. Saying why each field settled where it did — what its questions demand — turns the matrix from a form-filling exercise into part of the argument. The presentation then has a specific instruction worth following: short bullets on the slide with the explanation in the notes. That is the opposite of what most students submit, and since the brief also asks for a summary of the matrix in the presentation, the deck has to carry the research-methods material as well as the topical content, which is easy to forget once the paper is finished and the deck feels like a formality.
Likely learning objectives
Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.
- 01Analyse the intersections between diversity, ethics and technology in communication.
- 02Match a research methodology to the kind of question a subfield asks.
- 03Design slides where the visual and the spoken content do different work.
Read the full question
Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.
Course-wide instructions that accompany this question
You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes. Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages. Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor. The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS Discussion Questions (DQ) Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words. Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source. One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words. I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses. Weekly Participation Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately. In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies. Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work). Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week. APA Format and Writing Quality Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required). Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation. I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition. Use of Direct Quotes I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly. As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content. It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source. LopesWrite Policy For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me. Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes. Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own? Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score. Late Policy The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies. Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances. If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect. I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension. As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading. Communication Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me: Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class. Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.
Turn the brief into deliverables
- 01A 1,050-1,400 word paper addressing the three issues and their intersections.
- 02A completed Communication Research Methods Matrix.
- 03A 10-15 slide presentation with short bullets and explanatory notes.
- 04At least three University Library references in APA format.
Paper, matrix and presentation as one argument
Define the three issues briefly
Establish what each term means in communication scholarship without spending the word budget.
Diversity and technology
Analyse how mediated communication changes intercultural interaction, using the brief's own example.
Ethics and technology
Examine how mediation changes ethical decision making — distance, permanence, audience collapse.
Diversity and ethics
Address whether and how cultural difference bears on ethical judgement in communication.
The matrix and the deck
Match methodologies to each issue with a reason, and build slides where notes carry the argument.
Matching a research approach to each issue
Recommended databases
- University Library communication databases
- Communication & Mass Media Complete
- World Bank ICT overview
- JSTOR
- Your textbook's communication and ethics sections
Search sequence
- 1.Use the University Library as instructed; the brief specifies at least three references from it.
- 2.Search on the intersections rather than the single terms, since that is what the paper is about.
- 3.For the matrix, look at the methods sections of a few papers in each subfield rather than at methodology textbooks.
- 4.Use the World Bank ICT resource the brief links for the technology and access material.
Reference shortlist
These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.
Nothing here is cleared for citation until you have read it.
- 01
Information Technology and Moral Values
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy · 2018
Directly addresses how mediation changes ethical questions, which is the ethics-and-technology intersection.
- 02
Wealth Inequality
Pew Research Center · 2024
The source behind the wealth-gap figures the brief itself quotes, so the post can cite the data rather than the brief's paraphrase of it.
- 03
About Adverse Childhood Experiences
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention · 2024
The evidence base for how adverse experiences affect learning and school performance, which is the section of this script that needs data rather than sentiment.
- 04
Implementing Electronic Health Records in Primary Care Using the Theory of Change: Nigerian Case Study
JMIR Medical Informatics · 2022
A cross-cultural technology implementation study, useful evidence for the diversity-and-technology section.
Review before submission
Common mistakes
- Organising the paper as three separate sections, which cannot answer the intersection questions.
- Filling in the matrix without explaining why each field uses the approach it does.
- Putting full sentences on slides and leaving the notes empty.
- Omitting the matrix summary from the presentation, which the brief requires.
Submission checklist
- Does the paper address the intersections, not just the three topics?
- Does the matrix explain why each approach fits its issue?
- Are slide bullets short with the explanation in the notes?
- Is the matrix summarised in the presentation and are three references cited?
Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read our academic-integrity policy.
Written by
Aaron Bishop
MA, Education
assignment interpretation and research-methods coaching across disciplines
Aaron leads the EssayCrackers editorial desk. He works on how assignment briefs are read — what a rubric is actually asking for, and where students most often answer a different question than the one set.
Reviewed by
Dr. Nathan Cole
PhD, Rhetoric & Composition
Argumentation and thesis development
Nathan teaches first-year composition and directs a university writing center. He reviews EssayCrackers guides for argumentative soundness and citation accuracy.