Primary Research Paper on the Canterbury Tales and Their Historical

Primary on the Canterbury Tales and Their Historical References - Research Paper Example onal accounts, designed to pass the time on the journey but real people, including authors and kings, and real places such as Flanders, France and of course Canterbury, and a few significant events are mentioned which allow us to fix the work in its time and place. In addition to those verifiable details, it is possible also to read between the lines and see how many of the stories do in fact link to actual historical events, even though they do it through indirect means such as parody or allegory. The choice of Canterbury is significant, and the destination of the pilgrims points to the historical figure of Archbishop of Thomas Becket (1118-1170) who was killed on the orders of King Henry II, largely for resisting royal influence on Church affairs. Tensions between Church and State are a feature of the fourteenth century, and this pilgrimage is dedicated to his memory. One major event in the history of that period casts its shadow on the work: a pandemic of bubonic plague, often called pestilence or â€Å"The Black Death† which raged across Europe in 1348-1349 and killed a third of the population of Europe. Chaucer was born around 1340 and so his memory of this would be a factor in his world view, and certainly he witnessed the devastating effects of the plague on the people around him. The Pardoner’s Tale, the Summoner’s Tale and the Physician’s Tale all speak of disfiguring illnesses and fear of death via this means was a very real fact of life in that time for all those who survived the pandemic. One consequence of the decimation of the population was a sudden change in the economic conditions of the time and even more significantly a re-adjustment of the social structures. The beginning of the century saw periods of over-population and famine, where the landed gentry controlled all the resources but the Black Death changed all that : â€Å"The plague shifted the balance of power dramatically and hastened the end of feudalism as a social and economic

Early Childhood School Essay Example for Free

Early Childhood School Essay Education To Be More was published last August. It was the report of the New Zealand Governments Early Childhood Care and Education Working Group. The report argued for enhanced equity of access and better funding for childcare and early childhood education institutions. Unquestionably, thats a real need; but since parents dont normally send children to pre-schools until the age of three, are we missing out on the most important years of all? B A 13-year study of early childhood development at Harvard University has shown that, by the age of three, most children have the potential to understand about 1000 words most of the language they will use in ordinary conversation for the rest of their lives. Furthermore, research has shown that while every child is born with a natural curiosity, it can be suppressed dramatically during the second and third years of life. Researchers claim that the human personality is formed during the first two years of life, and during the first three years children learn the basic skills they will use in all their later learning both at home and at school. Once over the age of three, children continue to expand on existing knowledge of the world. C It is generally acknowledged that young people from poorer socio-economic backgrounds tend to do less well in our education system. Thats observed not just in New Zealand, but also in Australia, Britain and America. In an attempt to overcome that educational under-achievement, a nationwide programme called Headstart was launched in the United States in 1965. A lot of money was poured into it. It took children into pre-school institutions at the age of three and was supposed to help the children of poorer families succeed in school. Despite substantial funding, results have been disappointing. It is thought that there are two explanations for this. First, the programme began too late. Many children who entered it at the age of three were already behind their peers in language and measurable intelligence. Second, the parents were not involved. At the end of each day, Headstart children returned to the same disadvantaged home environment. D As a result of the growing research evidence of the importance of the first three years of a childs life and the disappointing results from Headstart, a pilot programme was launched in Missouri in the US that focused on parents as the childs first teachers. The Missouri programme was predicated on research showing that working with the family, rather than bypassing the parents, is the most effective way of helping children get off to the best possible start in life. The four-year pilot study included 380 families who were about to have their first child and who represented a cross-section of socio-economic status, age and family configurations. They included single-parent and two-parent families, families in which both parents worked, and families with either the mother or father at home. The programme involved trained parent ¬educators visiting the parents home and working with the parent, or parents, and the child. Information on child development, and guidance on things to look for and expect as the child grows were provided, plus guidance in fostering the childs intellectual, language, social and motor-skill development. Periodic check-ups of the childs educational and sensory development (hearing and vision) were made to detect possible handicaps that interfere with growth and development. Medical problems were referred to professionals. Parent-educators made personal visits to homes and monthly group meetings were held with other new parents to share experience and discuss topics of interest. Parent resource centres, Located in school buildings, offered learning materials for families and facilitators for child care. E At the age of three, the children who had been involved in the Missouri programme were evaluated alongside a cross-section of children selected from the same range of socio-economic backgrounds and Family situations, and also a random sample of children that age. The results were phenomenal. By the age of three, the children in the programme were significantly more advanced in language development than their peers, had made greater strides in problem solving and other intellectual skills, and were Further along in  social development. In fact, the average child on the programme was performing at the level of the top 15 to 20 per cent of their peers in such things as auditory comprehension, verbal ability and language ability. Most important of all, the traditional measures of risk, such as parents age and education, or whether they were a single parent, bore little or no relationship to the measures of achievement and language development. Children in the programme performed equally well regardless of scio-economic disadvantages. Child abuse was virtually eliminated. The one factor that was found to affect the childs development was family stress leading to a poor quality of parent-child interaction. That interaction was not necessarily bad in poorer families. F These research findings are exciting. There is growing evidence in New Zealand that children from poorer socio-economic backgrounds are arriving at school less well developed and that our school system tends to perpetuate that disadvantage. The initiative outlined above could break that cycle of disadvantage. The concept of working with parents in their homes, or at their place of work, contrasts quite markedly with the report of the Early Childhood Care and Education Working Group. Their focus is on getting children and mothers access to childcare and institutionalised early childhood education. Education from the age of three to five is undoubtedly vital, but without a similar Focus on parent education and on the vital importance of the first three years, some evidence indicates that it will not be enough to overcome educational inequity.

Current Writing Pedagogy Essay -- English Writing Teacher Student

The student who is preparing for preservice or inservice teaching in any field must answer two crucial questions: â€Å"What is learning?† and â€Å"What is teaching?† The student preparing to teach writing must also answer the question, â€Å"What is the purpose and the value of writing?† Writing is a subject area in which the teacher cannot easily state why writing itself is valuable or what purposes are served by learning the â€Å"art and craft† of writing, except as a tool for communication in other subject areas. In his article â€Å"Who’s Afraid of Subjectivity,† Robert P. Yagelski (1994), offers some answers to these questions about knowledge, education, and writing, as well as addressing related questions concerning individuality. Current writing pedagogies value writing and writers in different ways. Yagelski compares the underlying epistemology of expressivist approaches with postmodern epistemological theory. Expressivist theories claim that knowledge is found within the individual, and writing is a form of self-discovery. â€Å"Process-oriented† writing instruction is connected with this pedagogical approach. Postmodern theorists define knowledge as the fluid, shifting, and selective perceptions of reality that are tied to particular times, places, and cultures. Proponents of postmodern theories claim that expressivist practices reproduce ideologies that conceal both power structures and the position of students within these structures. Such practices are also thought to reduce awareness of social differences related to gender, class, and race between individuals in the classroom. By encouraging only constructive criticism and harmonious group work, expressivist teachers avoid confrontation over rea l-world issues. For postmodernists, writing is... ... rather than, in Keats’ words, â€Å"remaining content with half-knowledge,† and I think that an epistemology and a pedagogy that embraces paradox is rather well suited to the postmodern world. References Keats, John. Letter dated Dec.21st, 1817. Cited in The Penguin Dictionary of Literary Terms and Literary Theory (1991) by J.A. Cuddon. New York: Penguin. Kluth, Paula. 2000. â€Å"Community-Referenced Learning and the Inclusive Classroom† Remedial & Special Education 21.1 (Jan/Feb): 19-26. Macrorie, Ken. 1988. The I-Search Paper. Portsmouth,NH: Boynton-Cook Phelps, T.O. 1992. â€Å"Research or Three-Search?† English Journal 89.1: 76-78. Yagelski, Robert P. 1994. â€Å"Who’s Afraid of Subjectivity: Postmodernism and the Composing Process.† Taking Stock: The Writing Process Movement in the 90’s, edited by Lad Tobin and Thomas Newkirk. 203-217. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Acadamic Misconduct

Academic misconduct is described as academic integrity violation for the unfair advantage of oneself or unfair academic advantage or disadvantage to others in academic community, academic misconduct can be a plagiarism, cheating, and collusion but not limited. The other academic misconduct activities such as not obeying academic staff directions regarding assessments and group work submissions, falsifying reports, having/spreading examination materials without unit teacher permission, arranging someone to do assessment work all these included as academic misconduct.If an allegation arises towards a student and if it’s proven in an investigation then student has to face penalties under student academic misconduct policy. In this essay we going to discuss in brief about plagiarism, cheating, collusion and academic misconduct procedural process depending on minor or substantial misconduct when allegations arise and appeal for the student.As per UWS policy Plagiarism is defined as an â€Å"act of presenting material as one’s own without appropriate acknowledgement that constitutes plagiarism, not the intension of the student when doing so†, for example when student submits work in which words or ideas are presented as their own as intentional or unintentional without proper acknowledgment of the original author such as website, other students work, lecture, journal article or book.Cheating is described as any attempt to give or obtain assistance in a formal academic exercise such as examination, without due acknowledgment such as speaking to other students during examination, carrying any information materials such as textbooks, using electronics devices such as mobile, Bluetooth any other items which are prohibited by examination supervisor. Collusion is where two or more people engage in plagiarism, cheating or encourage others to do so.According to UWS Academic misconduct policy there are Minor misconduct and substantial misconduct. A Minor misconduct is determine by the university as a minimal threat to integrity of the student assessment in writing such as lack of referencing or academic requirements. A substantial misconduct is determine by the university as a major threat to integrity such as, when a student repeats minor misconduct activities intentionally, any allegations in the examination and any allegations related to collusion.In the process of investigating the allegations unit teacher, unit coordinator, Dean, school academic committee and student academic committee will be involved. in the first stage of Investigation process and hearing of academic misconduct, If unit teacher or examination supervisor believe that there is any academic misconduct happened, and they have evidence or reasons to support, teacher of the unit will report to unit coordinator with relevant documentation by signed copy or email, then with in five working days unit coordinator will send copy of allegation to the Dean.The dean, will advise unit coordinator to do investigation, and then unit coordinator and unit teacher decides to do further investigation, unit teacher will notify the student and invite for meeting in writing by post and email. Student can attend meeting with fellow student or university academic staff member or a student welfare officer. Meeting will be organised between 8 – 15 working days after on invitation letter despatch date. Student must respond to the invitation with in seven working days date of despatch whether he / she will attend the meeting or not.The decision will be made on the allegation even in the student absence. If unit coordinator decides that the allegation is not substantial he / she will dismiss it. Other penalties like refer to academic counselling, student require to re-submit assessment task after re-submission unit coordinator makes a decision on the marks and grades student may get zero marks. If the unit coordinator determine its substantial he/ she will be referred to relevant dean for decision.After going through all the process as discussed earlier in which case the unit coordinator will send the invitation letter to student for meeting with dean. After meeting if dean decides it’s not substantial dean will dismiss the allegation. When dean decides the allegations substantial then dean can penalise student such as recommend to counselling, ask for re-submission of work, if required student has to sit for exam again, dean will decide marks and grades. If dean judges that the allegation very substantial or too serious then dean refers that allegation to SAC (student academic committee).After going all the process as discussed above, student will have meeting with SAC members. After meeting if SAC decides if allegation are true it will take any action of dean penalties or combination of them, or suspend the student from university minimum period of 6months not more than 12 months, or dismiss the student for minimum of 12 months not more than 24 months in this case student has to apply for readmission or SAC can suspend the student permanently from the university.A student can appeal against the unit coordinators decision when student considers that the decision was made against the procedural fairness or when student not agreeing with allegations or when student considers that there is a substantial new evidence which was not available previously to unit coordinator or when student considers the penalty imposed by unit coordinator was too severe. Student must appeal within 15 days with evidence in writing to dean from the date of the letter advising of unit coordinators decision.It is the responsibility of every student to respect and obey the policy of UWS for academic misconduct to maintain academic integrity among academic community, when allegations were proven the student has to face severe penalties imposed by university academic committee besides the appeal options for student, The best option for students is to work hard on their own and get help when needed from academic teachers before submitting any academic work.

Resilience: Problem Solving and Child

Explain why resilience is so important CYP 3. 3 6. 2 SCMP2 1. 3 CYP 3. 3 6. 1 CYP 3. 3 6. 4 CYP 3. 3 6. 3 What is resilience? Resilience is the ability to adapt to adversity and cope with living in spite of stresses. Building resilience is building the ability to bounce back and adapt to all kinds of adversity, including trauma, tragedy, threats, setbacks and stress.Children at some time in their lives will experience stress and trauma, but by building resilience, children are better able to manage stress and feelings of anxiety and uncertainty. Resilience is important because it is the human capacity to face, overcome and be strengthened or even transformed by the adversities of life. And adversity affects us all at some time in our lives. Resilient children: find ways to solve their problems xercise control over negative thoughts and take responsibility for choosing how to act and feel are more likely to have people to talk to and confide in when something worries them have inner s trength, social and inter-personal skills, and skills in communicating effectively require parents and carers to model resilient behaviours and help promote resilience through words, actions and the environment, in which they are being raised like to try new things, enjoy a challenge need supervision, support and boundaries feel they can succeed ersist with a task and persevere have a sense of optimism believe their contribution can make a difference to an outcome like helping people possess a sense of fun. Ways we can raise a childs' confidence, resilience and well-being Resilience draws on aspects of a child's characteristics including temperament and the environment in which they are raised and supported. It also includes people and opportunities that help build resilience, for  example independence, autonomy and problem solving. Strategies for building resilience can be learned over time.Learning to think positively and in perspective means a child can not only cope with probl ems and setbacks. It also means children have opportunities to learn how to build strengths that protect and promote well-being. To overcome adversity and build resilience, children ideally require: unconditional love and acceptance some autonomy over their lives trusting relationships with significant adults feelings of independence secure relationships and strong role models to help foster friendships and commitment a safe and stable environment self-confidence and faith in themselves and their world.All these things help to build resilience. Helping to promote resilience A child's ability to build resilience is dependent on their age and stage of development. Babies and toddlers have limited physical and emotional competence compared with eight-year old. However, helping a child to feel secure and confident can begin at birth. For babies and toddlers: Provide safety, security, stability and nurture–physically, verbally and emotionally. Rock, stroke, soothe and cuddle often . Use words of comfort to calm. Allow babies freedom to explore in safety. Encourage toddlers to calm themselves.Model optimistic and resilient behaviour. Talk with toddlers and preschoolers about what adversity and setbacks mean. Reinforce a child's faith in their own problem solving skills. Set limits for behaviour and label the behaviour, not the child. Offer explanations regarding rules and discipline. Praise the accomplishment of tasks and milestones. Encourage independence. Help your child to recognise feelings and develop language to express emotions. Build on the security of trusted relationships. Source appropriate picture books from your local library. Know and work with your child's temperament.Help your child stick to a daily routine. For preschoolers and older children: Give unconditional support, nurturing and encouragement. Encourage and help your child practise calming strategies. Model self-esteem, confidence and optimism. Talk about appropriate behaviours. Encourag e independent thought and action. Build on developing an emotional vocabulary and how to label feelings. Help your child to understand their own temperament and why they might react in a certain way to a particular situation. Practise effective ways to resolve conflict at school or in the playground.Talk about ways that a child can seek help and assistance if needed. Spend time every day talking, discussing and sharing what's happening in your child's life. Model and teach attitudes of empathy and ways of caring. Explain that all behaviour has consequences. Provide comfort in stressful situations. Praise completed tasks, work well done, perseverance, desired behaviours. Discuss accepting responsibility for behaviour and why discipline is imposed to limit some behaviours. Clarify expectations, rules and regulations (especially for school).Accept that failure happens and talk about ways your child can overcome feelings of failure and try again. Discuss and support emerging independenc e and autonomy as your child develops, and how this balances out with age-appropriate limitations. Be flexible with routines so that your child has time and opportunity to be creative. Teach your child how to focus on something else if they are worried or upset. Discuss what it means to be a friend and help your child to make friends. Explain the importance of eating properly, resting, exercising and self care.Help your child to see that their individual accomplishments contribute to the well-being of the family as a whole. Why is important to teach them skills to keep them safe? Resilience is coping with change, and for many young children change can be stressful and scary. Helping a child to keep things in perspective and understand why change is an inevitable part of life, will help them to navigate and bounce back from tough times and move forward to better times. Wherever possible, ensure that children have unconditional support and stability from their family or caring network .

3 Uncommon Ways To Get Team Buy In Every Time

3 Uncommon Ways To Get Team Buy In Every Time You probably already know a few of the tips and tricks to getting team buy in to new ideas, processes, or change. When it comes to influencing your peers, though, it can be a delicate dance. Because you lack positional authority, you cant pull the, Well, thats the way were going to do it, card. (Not that you ever would 😉) But these three off-beat tactics Im sharing will work for you. Today. Well lay some groundwork first. But if you wanna jump ahead, be my guest. Each strategy will work for peer or team buy in. Table of Contents: The Problem: Why We Resist Change? The Solution: What Does Leading Change Look Like? Step 1: Take the Marketing Cholesterol Test Step 2: Start With the Problem Step 3: Script the Critical Actions Required3 Uncommon Ways To Get Team Buy In Every Time via @ Did Isaac Newton Already Figure Out Why We Resist Change? Neurologically, were hard wired to maintain things as they are via our ingrained habits. Were comfortable in the rut of status quo. And any threat to it is perceived as discomfort - which humans avoid tooth and nail. Said psychologist Ralph Ryback: Inertia, or a tendency to do nothing or to remain unchanged, is at the headwinds of any change that we make in our lives. Wildly enough, Isaac Newtons principle of inertia applies to our psychology as well as the world around us. One of the best places to validate this is in the world of software - in both simple and complex ways. Remember when Spotify changed its hue of green a few years ago? Millions of us were used to their funky green. It wasn’t beautiful, but it was normal. Then, they warmed up the color in favor of the vibrant lime green. Thousands of users whined at the ugly new color scheme. I’ll admit, I didn’t like it at first either. Oh yeah†¦ then there’s the Snapchat UI updates that just about broke the internet. People hated the updates so much, there were riots in the streets! Okay, not quite that bad. But, the backlash was so intense, 1,257,640 users signed a petition on Change.org to get the old UI back. On a societal scale, people are change averse. We often have negative initial reactions to both functional and visual changes. This means â€Å"different† is often perceived as â€Å"bad.† The perception that different = bad often blocks positive organizational change. Learn how toThis isn’t simply a mob-mentality issue, either. It’s a human phenomenon at scales both large and small. As Mark Twain famously quipped: Im in favor of progress; its change I dont like. What Does Leading Change Look Like For Marketers? In user experience design, this is known as change aversion: Change aversion is the negative short-term reaction to changes in a product or service. This happens in the non-digital world, as well. And is a force we marketers have to battle when leading change (especially within our own companies). Now, lets learn how to go out with the old and in with the new. One of the most important changes marketers should make is killing makeshift marketing. Makeshift marketing has become the normal way marketers do things today. Its the pain of using one tool for social media scheduling Another tool for analytics A spreadsheet for tracking Endless email threads for collaboration and communication A task management tool (or multiple ones if everyone on your team uses something different) We get caught in a mess of using tons of different productivity tools that end up strangling our output rather than boosting it. Another force at work is that complicated tool stacks are actually celebrated with awards. To bring it a little closer to home, lets ask a question. You’re executing marketing today How’s that going? Staying organized is really hard. You’re missing deadlines, your team is disgruntled, your boss is wondering what’s happening, and stakeholders like your sales reps are constantly asking where their projects they requested three months ago are at. You can’t blame them. If you worked with another team, you’d expect things to roll forward smoothly, too, right? The thing is†¦ if you don’t change anything, you’ll keep experiencing these same side effects of â€Å"good enough-ism.† And that means†¦ You’ll continue to be frustrated†¦ You’ll continue making your peer managers frustrated†¦ You’ll burn yourself out with the trivial minutia of consistently missing deadlines Overcoming Change Aversion In Your Team However, everyone is used to the way things are. So, if youre going to overcome the forces allied against you as a leader, youve gotta be armed with the right strategies. So lets tackle three off-beat ways to overcome change aversion. Obliterate the status quo. And become a more influential leader while youre at it. #1. Take The Marketing Cholesterol Test To Get Team Buy In To start, you might need to prove that change is actually required right now. When you create urgency, at least people can agree that, We need to do something. One ingenious assessment for your organizations need to change appeared in the Harvard Business Review, and is called the Corporate Cholesterol Test. You can check out the original test in the article Change For Changes Sake. But heres an adaptation for us marketers to use. The tests purpose is to assess how well your teams (or team members) are working together. Thus Measuring how high your collaborative cholesterol is 😠· How high is your marketing cholesterol? Find out what that means and learn the answer viaTo do this, you can use Google Forms  to create a survey. Each of your peer managers should get the questionnaire to fill out. The test starts the buy-in process by helping your peer managers see for themselves if change is needed. Youll create three sections. Each with three yes or no answers. How well do we communicate? How well do we work together? How are our collective results? Pro Tip: To get honest answers, you can nix requiring first and last name. And simply make answers anonymous! Section One: How well do we communicate? In section one, youll ask these three yes or no questions: Do our teams interact only with people in their own group? This questions identifies the presence of silos.A silo mentality occurs when several departments or groups within an organization do not want to share information or knowledge with other individuals in the same organization.Basically its a problem of key info staying stuck in one group rather than shared with others it could help. Are there breakdowns in communication caused by silos? If there are silos, this will be a big fat yes 😕This is a great opportunity to understand it as a source of frustration. And you can position your change as a cure. Has fluid collaboration between our teams decreased over the past 6 months? This is an easy way to gauge how well your teams have worked together. If this is a Yes, its another sign that the winds of change should be blowing! How can marketers know theyre influencing positive organizational change? Find out via @Section Two: How well do we work together? In section two, youll ask these three yes or no questions: Are any people on your team uncomfortable with change? Now, admittedly, this question is a double-edged sword âš”ï ¸ After all, change is uncomfortable for pretty much everyone. But, as Sujan Patel writes, this is crucial to success.The crux of this question is to bring to mind the proverbial roadblocks to changeThe people on their team whose automatic answer is, No. Do we have processes, workflows, and tools that align with one another? I know this is buried in the middle of the survey But its my favorite question.This digs into the heart of a central problem for marketers today. We call it makeshift marketingand think of it as the temporary, sub-optimal solution for getting your marketing sh*t together. This is not #fakenews.I cant tell you how many marketers Ive met whose solution for â€Å"keeping their sanity† involves spreadsheets organizing spreadsheets.Who’ve decided endless meetings to â€Å"get on the same page† is par for the course.Who’ve succumbed to â€Å"on the fly† project management because that’s just the nature of the job?!And who’ve settled for a cobbled mess of one-trick tools becausewell†¦?Thats just how marketing works 😠¢In fact, this is one of the biggest problems solves (you can snag a free 1-on-1 demo to learn how it can help you do this!).Teams pay a HUGE productivity tax for misaligned processes, workflows, and tools.If this is a yes, its a red flag 🚠© Do your teams resist collaborative projects with other teams? Heres a newsflashIf people on your peer managers team resist collaboration, its prolly not because theyre bad people. Or employees.Did you know that 85% of most workers time is spent in email, meetings, and being on the phone?So maybe they resist working with other teams because they have so freaking much to do and not enough time!^^^ Sound familiar to you?If this is the case, its time to get efficient and make better use of peoples time.After all, who would resist: Here, would you like less stress while getting your time back and feeling more valued?If youre leading the right change, this can be exactly what youre giving them.What if collaboration could be a source of excitement and growth rather than a drain? Section Three: How are our collective results? In section three, youll ask these three yes or no questions: Has your team hit 80% or more of its KPI goals in the past 3 months? Simply put, if teams arent hitting their goals for more than 3 months in a row - somethings gotta change.This is a chance to highlight how your suggested change can help everyones tide rise. Have your teams collaborative projects proven positive ROI? This is an interesting one. Because some of your peer managers might say, What collaborative projects?Again, this could stem from silo issues Or signal a breakdown in teams working together.For instance, nearly every modern marketing teams should be working with developers (who are often outside their team) regularly.Next, if they have worked with other teamsWell, has it worked?Are there more dollars, email signups, or whatever else they were looking for because of the joint venture? Does anyone on your team (including you!) experience significant stress or anxiety when executing a new project? I absolutely love this question.While there is always *some* amount of stress kicking off a new project - it shouldnt be consistently significant.Scientifically, we know significant stress reduces productivity. It also promotes negative behaviors like procrastination. So if new projects give your team a panic attack, something major is broken.Now is the time to fix it. How To Score Your Marketing Cholesterol Test (In GIFs) Alright, heres the final reveal Score your test responses as follows: 0–2 yes answers Youre good and probably rock at getting your peers to buy in. 3–7 yes answers Right now is the perfect time for change! Saddle up and get it done. 8–9 yes answers Panic. It was time to change yesterday but today is good too. You got this  Ã°Å¸ ¤Ëœ #2. Start With The Problem To Get Team Buy In Next,  to overcome change aversion with your peer managers, start with the problem you’re trying to solve and the benefits your solution offers to them. Yes I’m encouraging you to market change to marketers. #inception Software has more to teach us, here. Intercom recently revamped the design of their products inbox - a place their customers spend a lot of time in. The new interface looks like Evernote and Intercom had a baby And its one cute baby. They got ahead of change aversion by focusing on problem their change was geared at solving. Often, change is resisted with statements like this: We dont need to change for changes sake! If you begin with the problem, though, you sidestep this as an issue altogether. When theres a genuine problem to be solved, you arent changing for changes sake. Your changing for growths sake. Huge difference. Trying to influence positive change within your marketing department? Start with the problem first. Start With The Problem First, specifically outline the problem you want to solve and the harm its causing. Outline the problem as specifically as you can: Right now, were using six different tools to manage our marketing. Because of the constant shuffle, details are getting lost, were dropping balls, and not hitting deadlines. Outline Your Solution Propose your solution, address the cost of switching, and focus on the benefits: If we consolidate our tools, these problems will evaporate. We each lead talented, competent teams. So its a simple thing to give them a better way to do their jobs. Yes, this will mean adapting our workflows to a fresh way of doing things. And it will mean a new way of collaboration among our teams. But the gain in productivity and organization will pay dividends in results, reduce stress, and improve communication. When you focus on the problem, your proposed change isnt the focal point. Admittedly, Im assuming the change you want to lead is truly an issue. If it is, you can position any resistance to be against the benefits your solution offers. This keeps the conversation focused on, How do we solve this  real problem. #3. Script The New Actions The Change Requires To Get Team Buy In A third way to  get your peer managers to buy in comes from Chip and Dan Heaths fantastic book,  Switch: How To Change Things When Change Is Hard. Its a way to get ultra-specific about what needs to happen next. The catchphrase analysis paralysis turns out to be a real thing. It even happens to LeBron James. When people are presented with too many options, we get stuck. When people are presented with too many options, we get stuck.Analysis Paralysis Is A Real Thing In the book  Switch, the authors share how this same phenomenon happens to doctors. A medical doctor and a psychologist devised a test to see how well the average doc make choices. The test involved two similar groups asked to make a decision on the same case. The only difference was that Group A made a choice between two options. While Group B had three. Check out the scenario The patient in the test was an older gentleman with hip trouble. Group A had to decide between a hip-replacement surgery and a simple medication that hadnt yet been tried. Almost 50% of the doctors from Group A chose the non-surgical path. Group B had a similar choice. Only instead of one non-surgical option, there were two. Thats it. That was the only variable. These doctors had to decide on surgery, medication 1, or medication 2 Logically, two non-surgical options seem even better than one, right? Well, only 28% of Group B docs opted for the non-surgical option. ^^^ This is analysis paralysis at work.

Controversial Supreme Court Case Roper V. Simmons Essay Example

Controversial Supreme Court Case Roper V. Simmons Essay Example Controversial Supreme Court Case Roper V. Simmons Paper Controversial Supreme Court Case Roper V. Simmons Paper Essay Topic: Controversial The Death Penalty is a controversial topic on its own. However, if you add the possibility of a minor receiving the death penalty it gets even more interesting. The Supreme Court case of Roper v. Simmons was a perfect example of that. Roper v. Simmons presented the Supreme Court with two questions: 1) whether or not the execution of those who were sixteen or seventeen at the time of a crime is cruel and unusual punished and 2) does is violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment. The main audience for this particular case is the general American population, and specifically affects the juvenile population. Christopher Simmons, seven months shy of his 18th birthday, planned and implemented the murder of an innocent woman. Descriptions of the murder are thoroughly chilling. Reports exposed that Simmons and an accomplice bound the woman in tape and dropped her off a bridge, drowning her in the waters below. Simmons later confessed to the crime and even participated in a videotaped reenactment of it. If he had been an adult at the time of the murder, Simmons’ case would not raise any constitutional questions. But due to his age, the issue before the court was whether the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments allowed the United States to â€Å"execute a juvenile offender who was older then 15 but younger than 18 when he committed a capital crime. † Justice Kennedy affirmed the previous ruling in the Missouri Supreme Court. As a result, Simmons could not be considered for the death penalty due to his age, and his sentence remained at life in prison without parole. Justice Kennedy went on to say, â€Å"it is the court’s reasoning that makes this case controversial, due to evolving standards of decency† (ROPER v. SIMMONS, (03-633) 543 U. S. 551 2005) since the ruling in Stanford v. Kentucky (1989), the Court has grounds to rule against the juvenile death penalty. In the Stanford ruling, the Court held that juveniles under the age of 15 could not be executed, â€Å"due to views that have been expressed by respected professional organizations, and leading members of the Western European community. † (STANFORD v. KENTUCKY, 492 U. S. 361 1989) The Court later ruled in Atkins v. Virginia (2002) that, â€Å"mentally retarded persons were exempt from the death penalty as well, a further sign of society’s changing standards. † (ATKINS v. VIRGINIA, 536 U. S. 320 2002) The decision in Atkins explained that due to their impairments, â€Å"it is highly unlikely that such offenders could ever deserve capital punishment. † (ATKINS v. VIRGINIA, 536 U. S. 320 2002) The reasoning in Atkins is applied to the Simmons decision. Kennedy argues that because individuals under 18 are categorically less culpable than the average criminal, they should not deserve the death penalty. Kennedy adds that there are three differences between juveniles under 18 and adult offenders. First, â€Å"juveniles often lack the maturity found in adults, a trait that is understandable among the young and adolescents are overrepresented statistically in virtually every category of reckless behavior. † (ROPER v. SIMMONS, (03-633) 543 U. S. 551 2005) The second difference is, â€Å"that they are more vulnerable to negative influences or outside pressures and this could lead to deviant behavior. † (ROPER v. SIMMONS, (03-633) 543 U. S. 51 2005) Lastly, Kennedy asserts that â€Å"the character of a juvenile is not as well formed as an adult and that personality traits in adolescents are transitory. † (ROPER v. SIMMONS, (03-633) 543 U. S. 551 2005) Moreover, because of the comparative immaturity and irresponsibility of such people, Kennedy logically notes that nearly every state bars people under 18 from voting, serving on juries or marrying without parental consen t. If this is the case, they should also be exempt from the death penalty, since juveniles have a greater claim than adults to be forgiven of circumstances that can lead to crime and deviant behavior. In addition, the defense introduced psychological and neurological evidence showing that adolescents, including sixteen- and seventeen-year-olds, lack sufficient brain and behavioral development to possess the requisite culpability. Though the Court recognized that juveniles are less experienced, educated, and intelligent than adults in Thompson, the Roper Court is, â€Å"unlikely to find the deficiencies of juveniles as great as those of the mentally retarded. † (THOMPSON v. OKLAHOMA, 487 U. S. 15 1988) Furthermore, Stanford’s explicit disapproval of scientific proof suggesting that juveniles are less culpable indicates that the Court is likely to find retribution can be sufficiently served. Finally, â€Å"juveniles will likely be found to be suitably deterred by the threat of the death penalty, especially since the same cognitive and behavioral abilities at issue in Stanford are under consideration in Roper. † (ATKINS v. VIRGINIA, 536 U. S. at 320. Pp. 5-17) Ju stice Stevens agreed with the majority pinion, but felt compelled to note that because our understanding of the Constitution does change from time to time, the Court could rightly examine the change in standards to interpret the Eighth Amendment. Yet Justices O’Connor and Scalia felt that there were obvious problems with the Court’s blanket ruling. They were especially concerned that the Court felt a â€Å"national consensus† against the juvenile death penalty existed. A large number of the American population are anti death penalty and even more passionate against it when it comes to juveniles facing this sentence. According to Justice Kennedy, 30 states now prohibit the juvenile death penalty – 12 that have eliminated capital punishment altogether and 18 that exclude juveniles from its reach. Yet Justice Scalia blasts this argument noting, â€Å"that none of the Court’s previous cases that dealt with alleged constitutional limitation upon the death penalty has counted states that have eliminated the death penalty entirely. † (ROPER v. SIMMONS, (03-633) 543 U. S. 51 2005) Justice O’Connor adds that the â€Å"halting pace of change† in this situation is far different from the â€Å"extraordinary wave of legislative action† that preceded the court’s ruling in Atkins. This gives the dissenters â€Å"reason to pause,† because the national sentiment does not seem as concrete as Justice Kennedy asserts. However, the 5-4 Supreme Court decision in Roper v. Simmons now prevents anyone under the age of 18 from being executed. The dissenting opinions also focused on the Court’s reasoning that juveniles are â€Å"categorically less culpable than the average criminal. Both Justices disagree with this reasoning, and Justice O’Connor points out that though a 17 year old murderer is normally less responsible than an adult, does not mean he could be sufficiently culpable to merit the death penalty. O’Connor points out that Simmons bragged he could â€Å"get away with murder† because of his age. Showing a sign that he was not deterred by the idea of capital punishment. The fact that every detail was planned in advance explains how Simmons possesses a consciousness materially more depraved than that of the average murderer. Justice Scalia cites an amicus brief by the American Psychological Association, which argued, â€Å"Adolescents possessed effective skills in reasoning about moral dilemmas and understanding social rules and laws†¦ and could make decisions like having an abortion without parental approval. † (APA 2004) Surely, if juveniles are mature enough to decide on an abortion, they can be mature enough to commit murder. Furthermore, Scalia discussed the amici briefs describe, â€Å"Additional examples of murders committed by individuals under 18 that involve truly monstrous acts. (APA 2004) While juvenile executions are rare, Justices O’Connor and Scalia believe that it was a mistake to ban them completely. In their mind, not only are some adolescents capable of heinous acts, they should be punished accordingly. References American Psychological Association. Roper. D. P. v. Simmons, C. (2004). Brief from the Psychological Association, Missouri Psychological Association. as Amici Curiae supporting respondent July 2004. Retrieved May 20, 2011 from apa. org/about/offices/ogc/amicus/roper. pdf ATKINS v. VIRGINIA, 536 U. S. 320 (2002) Retrieved May 20, 2011 from FindLaw: http://caselaw. findlaw. com/va-supreme-court/1427407. html ROPER v. SIMMONS, (03-633) 543 U. S. 551 (2005) 112 S. W. 3d 397, affirmed Retrieved May 20, 2011 from law. cornell. edu/supct/html/03-633. ZD1. html STANFORD v. KENTUCKY, 492 U. S. 361 (1989) Retrieved May 20, 2011 from FindLaw: http://laws. findlaw. com/us/492/361. html THOMPSON v. OKLAHOMA, 487 U. S. 815 (1988) Retrieved May 20, 2011 from FindLaw: http://laws. findlaw. com/us/487/815. html