Author: chris

Analysis of Personal Gender Performances: Write a paper in which you reflect on the process of performing one of your own gender stories in a particular situation. Address the following questions: (1) What factors and elements did you take into account and reflect on as you anticipated this particular gender performance? (2) What were the primary nonverbal elements that you enacted in this gender performance? (3) What were the primary verbal elements that you enacted in this gender performance? (4) How much agency do you believe you exercised in performing gender in this situation?
Sources From the book “Gender Stories” by Sonja K. Foss, Mary E. Domenico, Karen A. Foss

Annotated Bibliography Provide 20 additional references related to your Doctoral Study topic in annotated bibliography format and/or incorporated into the literature review.

• In what ways did you connect with the stories?
• How is your life disconnected from the stories?
• Identify common themes or patterns in the books and using quotations, discuss them.
• What sorts of injustice did you read about that you were already aware of?
• What features and experiences of injustice were new to you?
• Based on your current understanding of the forces that create the worlds described in the books, where do you see the most effective points of intervention within the different systems and their interrelations (Individual, family, peer group, school, community, social and culture). Say what the system or interrelated systems are, and why you think it or they presents the most potential to facilitate real chan

Part 2 Case – Selling to Wal-Mart (2014)
Because of your company’s success, the end-of-the-year accounting review is usually an upbeat occasion, and this December is no different. Your company manufactures an innovative kickstand that reduces injuries by keeping a child’s bike from falling all the way to the ground. After the device was written up in a parents’ magazine recently, sales to specialty bike shops – your primary customers – have started to climb. Despite the increased demand, you can still make kickstands to order.
At a meeting with your management team, you remark that although sales are increasing at a slow but steady rate, the company still has a large amount of excess capacity. A colleague agrees and then enthusiastically announces, “I know how to take care of that. Let’s sell to Wal-Mart!” A hush falls over the meeting. Becoming a Wal-Mart supplier would mean honing your current distribution process into a finely tuned, perfect delivery operation. The retailing behemoth gives suppliers a 30-second window to deliver their goods to Wal-Mart distribution centers; you currently ship product via UPS ground. Wal-Mart requires severe price concessions from all its suppliers, a practice that has forced many American manufacturers to outsource production overseas in order to get their production costs low enough to meet Wal-Mart’s pricing mandates. Master Lock, Carolina Mills, Levi’s, and, a bit closer to home, Huffy Bicycle are a few examples. Your company uses local suppliers for metal, paint, plastics, and packaging, and it pays its 25 workers above-market wages. Thankfully, now your company is the only manufacturer of the kickstand, so you have more freedom to set a competitive price on that item. If you begin selling through Wal-Mart, however, imitators will soon follow, and that would definitely affect your already modest margins. Not to mention that Wal-Mart uses historical price data about a company and its competitors to drive prices down across industries. Suppliers are rarely if ever granted a price increase; on the contrary, they are asked for regular price decreases!
In addition, if vendors want their products on Wal-Mart’s shelves, they have to implement Wal-Mart’s “customized business plans.” Each year, the big retailer hands its suppliers detailed “strategic business planning packets.” Wal-Mart grades its suppliers with weekly, quarterly, and annual report cards. In addition, when it comes to discussion of price, there is no real negotiation even for household brands. In addition, Wal-Mart often requires its suppliers to underwrite the costs of the retailer’s supply-chain productivity initiatives, like using radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags on their products for inventory tracking, a system that can cost between $13 million and $23 million to put in place. Trying to meet Wal-Mart’s requirements has pushed many small- and medium- sized businesses into bankruptcy. Businesses that stay afloat have generally done so by outsourcing to China
However, there are also benefits to selling to Wal-Mart. You have instant access to the world’s largest global retailing network. Doing things the “Wal-Mart way” inevitably leads to operations that are more efficient. You could sell exponentially more kickstands

through Wal-Mart than through the small specialty retailers to whom you currently sell. If doing business with Wal-Mart is so bad, why do Unilever, P&G, and Dial sell 6, 17, and 28 percent of their goods, respectively, to the giant retailer? A former president of Huffy Bicycle once said that Wal-Mart gives you “a chance to compete. If you can’t compete, that’s your problem.” You agree, to a point. Before you can voice any of the pros and cons, another manager expertly sums up the dilemma by saying, “The only thing worse than selling to Wal-Mart is not selling to Wal-Mart.”
Another key concern of yours is that Wal-Mart was sued for discrimination in 2001. In 2004 the lawsuit was approved for a class action case against Wal-Mart that could involve over 1 million employees. Wal-Mart is being accused of gender discrimination in pay and promotions.
Before you begin this management team decision, each team member will probably need to do some preliminary research on Wal-Mart’s business practices; go to the campus library to find articles on Wal-Mart’s business practices. A visit to the Wal-Mart stores can give you a wealth of information on how the company manages its suppliers. You may also wish to visit the PBS show Frontline’s web page “Is Wal-Mart Good for America?” http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/walmart/secrets). Review “Largest Discrimination Case in History: Wal-Mart’s Appeal Denied” at http://diversityinc.com/content/1757/article/1256/.
Questions
1. What is the problem? Identify and summarize the problem recognizing the embedded and implicit aspects.
2. What are the decision criteria that should be used in this situation, and how should they be weighted? How much consideration should be given to the discrimination woes of Wal-Mart?
3. Under what conditions do you think it is acceptable for 3M to settle for a “good enough” decision?
4. What is the conclusion or decision? Make sure to include consequences of the decision. Do you apply to become a Wal-Mart supplier, with all that entails? Do you choose a risk seeking or risk avoiding strategy? Why or why not? When answering this question, consider the strategy making process, grand strategies, and reference point theory.
Sources: C. Fishman, “The Wal-Mart You Don’t Know,” Fast Company, December 2003, 68-80; M. Boyle, “Wal-Mart Keeps the Change,” Fortune, 10 November 2003, 46; C. Y. Chen, “Wal-Mart Drives a New Tech Boom,” Fortune, May 2004; “Is Wal-Mart Good for America?,” Frontline, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/walmart, Largest Discrimination Case in History: Wal-Mart’s Appeal Denied, http://diversityinc.com/content/1757/article/1256/.

RESEARCH PAPER OUTLINE

FORMAT

TITLE:

1. INTRODUCTION

• General statements about the subject area
• Statement of problem
• Research question formulated as a statement
• Any methodological issues you might consider (how are you conducting your research? Are you using books, articles, newspapers? Why?)

2. BODY PARAGRAPHS

• Each body paragraph starts with a topic sentence
• Each body paragraph contains examples and supporting evidence that support the topic

3. CONCLUSION

• Restate your thesis
• Finish with your final thoughts, recommendations or opinions

RESEARCH PAPER OUTLINE SAMPLE

TITLE: How has India held together as a state?

1. INTRODUCTION
• History of India
— Pre-colonial rule
— Colonial rule
— Independence period
— Modern day
• Thesis statement: The purpose of this paper is to reveal how India has remained unified since its independence in 1947.
• Focus on academic articles, books and newspaper articles. Secondary sources are used to provide background information to the history of India.

2. BODY ONE – threats to India
• Partition (India and Pakistan)
• Kashmir
• Fundamentalism
• Religious differences and potential for conflict – Hinduism, Sikhism, Islam, Christianity

3. BODY TWO – dealing with threats
• Accommodating religious, ethnic and cultural differences
• Importance of citizenship rather than ethnicity
• Importance of religious holidays for all groups
• Ensuring different groups are part of the democratic political process and are represented within parliamentary and decision-making structures

4. BODY THREE – Future challenges for India’s unity
• Pakistan
• Nuclear power status
• Poverty/corruption
• Religious violence

5. CONCLUSION
• Restatement of the thesis: Despite a number of threats, India has managed to ensure its unification and non-fragmentation due to a number of far-reaching policies
• Recommendations
— Continuing to expand its economic status which will benefit the country as a whole
— Tackling corruption and poverty which threatens any gains made from economic progress
— China – need for India to improve its position in South East Asia (Nepal, Myanmar) to counter China’s growing influence
— Afghanistan – greater aid and negotiations required to ensure friendly partnership

Writing to Convince

Assignment: Decide on a controversial social issue and write a formal argumentative essay. (A controversial issue involves differing points of view and conflicting claims.) Select an issue you are curious about and will enjoy researching and writing. You will enter the debate with your own argument and articulate your claim/position about the controversy. Think of your argument as identifying a gap in the conversation or extending the debate in some way. Your goal is to argue your position persuasively, adding to the conversation.

Since arguer-audience connection is crucial in a persuasive essay, you need to identify a real audience to target your argument. “People who are against my position” is not a specific audience description, so you need to think about your audience in more detailed terms by considering, for example, their stance, reasons for taking that position, their moral and ethical values, political and religious beliefs, assumptions about society and culture, age, gender, social status, and possible objections to your argument. Imagine that you will present your argument in front of this audience.

Part I: Requirements for the Essay
•You must use at least 5 academic and credible sources in this paper. At least 3 of these sources should be from ASU library databases. (Please watch the videos in the “Research Help” module for reference.) All sources should be incorporated into the essay effectively by using signal phrases and cited correctly according to APA style. (Please watch the videos in the “Documenting Sources” module for help.) Prior to writing the rough draft, you will research your topic using ASU library databases and the Internet and map out your ideas for the essay by completing a relevant discussion board and an eBook assignment.
•Your argument should be targeted for a specific audience and developed using 2-3 audience-based reasons. These are reasons that are rooted in your audience’s values and beliefs, reasons that will sound the most convincing for them.
•You should also identify 2-3 counter-arguments that your audience may raise to challenge you and respond to them by either refuting or conceding to them. You will complete a relevant discussion assignment to help you with this audience requirement.
•You should use the rhetorical appeals (logos, pathos, and ethos) effectively with your target audience and purpose in mind. Your tone and diction should also be appropriate for this audience. Ask yourself how you will appeal to your audience’s intellect and make a logical argument, engage them emotionally and appeal to their values/beliefs, and how you will come across as a credible, trustworthy writer.

Overused Topics: Unless you have a personal connection to the topic and have obtained permission from your instructor, don’t focus your project on any of following issues, as they either a) are too generic or common, b) don’t promote creative idea generation, or c) lack sufficient depth. Instead, challenge yourself to research and learn about a topic that you don’t know much about.

Abortion, death penalty, decriminilization of marijuana, euthanasia, eating disorders or body image, global warming, negative effects of the media, religion or God, stem cells or cloning, steroids, recycling, homelessness, gun control, sex education, animal testing, gay marriage.

Length and Format: 1500-2000 words of typed text (excluding the References list) double-spaced and in APA style

Part II: Requirements for Visual Representation and Analysis

1. Using the information you gathered for your essay, you must articulate your position/argument in one or more photographs (for example in the form of a collage). You can use a digital camera, a smartphone, Instagram, or any other photography app to capture the image(s)—either one you find already existing in your environment or one you stage using objects or people. Your images/photographs must be school-appropriate. Nudity and/or offensive or pornographic images will not be tolerated.

2. You should place the photograph(s) in a word document, crafting an appropriate title that hints at the purpose of the image(s).

3. Under the photograph(s), you will craft a minimum 500-word visual analysis, where you discuss the following:

· Rationale behind the image(s) as it (they) relate to your position

o What elements or objects did you include and why?

· The framing of the image

o What is significant about what you included in the boundaries of the frame and what you left out?

· Rhetorical considerations

o How do the images, the placement of the images, and your/the photographer’s vantage point appeal to ethos, pathos, and logos? How do you convince your audience of your position through the staging of the images?

Discuss the argument in support of the position.
Discuss the counter argument to the position.
Evaluate the merits of the argument and explain why it is valid.
Conclude and summarize the main findings.

Topic : Use of Animals for Medical testing

Introduction
The purpose is to convince my audience that an animal for medical testing is unnecessary.

Body 1
Reasons
Animals go through horrible experiences. It is against animal rights.

Body 2
Reasons
Adopting nonviolent methods of scientific investigation.

Body 3
Reasons
The technology is more advanced that the testing can be done in labs.
It can save animal lives by doing experiment on them.

Body 4
Although (concession- the other side)
Counter argue
Animals are biologically similar to humans. An animal for medical testing is needed to improve the quality life of the humans and the community.

How will I overturn these concession arguments?
How animals should not be used for making humans life better. Make animals suffer

Support needed to convince my audience of my topic?
How animals should not be used for improving the medical testing.

Conclusion
It can save animals life if the testing is not done on animals.

1102 Research/Argumentative Essay (Essay Five)

Write a research/argumentative essay of at least 1000 words. Keep in mind that you will likely have to narrow from a very broad topic to more concrete ideas. Consider the ideas we have discussed thus far in class with our readings/films (knowledge and individual power, community, individualism, personal and social conflicts, technology, etc.).

Internal sources, sources used within the paper, will need in-text parenthetical references following the MLA guidelines in The Little, Brown Essential Handbook (in-text citation directory page 152) and external citations, citations on a works cited page, following the MLA guidelines also in LBEH (works cited entries directory on page 158).

To earn an A on this paper, you must go beyond the obvious, do serious research beyond the minimum requirements, and demonstrate real insight into your topic.

Specific Research Paper Guidelines

• 1000-1250 final word count (not including Works Cited page or separated quotes)
• 5 sources:
o 1 source must be a scholarly source from our library database
o 4 additional sources must be either academic or professional (can be online, book, magazine, etc.)
• Wikipedia is NOT an acceptable source!
• ALL Body Paragraphs must include in-text citations, cited correctly according to MLA guidelines
• All cited sources printed or photocopied, highlighted and turned in with your final packet

**Note that your essay cannot receive a passing grade without having met the above minimum requirements!

Additional Requirements:
1. Essay must contain a proper introduction that includes a claim centered on your topic and stance (although it is up to you to decide how you will narrow this topic into something arguable).

2. Sources will be entered on the Works Cited page (in alphabetical order) and cited accurately according to what kind of source they are (determined by you and me in consultation if you are unsure).

3. Only third person point of view is acceptable for this essay..

How does effective communication incorporate the basic elements of communication?
How do the basic elements of effective communication differ from the basic rules of health care communication?
How might a provider encourage a reluctant consumer to communicate candidly?
Howmight cultural differences influence communication?

Use this book as one of the sources if possible
“Communicating About Health: Current Issues and Perspectives, 2e. ISBN-10:0072862947”

Fracking and the Precautionary Principle
Hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking”, is an industrial process used to extract natural gas from layers of shale (Weinhold). In the United States, fracking has been used in areas such as Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming, and Texas. Far from being a new process, fracking has been used in the United States since 1949; it is only recently that attention has been drawn to the process (Process Industry Forum). Shale layers are generally located thousands of feet below the surface of the planter, far beneath water tables used for human consumption. Most of the gas is trapped within the shale, so in order to release it the rock is blasted with water pressurized to extreme levels. The water contains chemicals designed to decrease friction between the rock and the water. While some of the chemicals are toxic, they are present in very small amounts. But chemicals are not the main problem with the wastewater from fracking: it’s salt (Westenhaus).
However, there is not enough research available to determine if fracking is dangerous to the environment and, therefore, to the human population. Environmentalists feel fracking operations should be halted until research shows the practice is safe in terms of polluting by-products.
The dominant fear associated with fracking is contamination of water supplies. The human health conditions that could be affected by drinking water polluted by fracking include immediate death, cancer, birth defects, or other serious illnesses (McKenzie et al.).There are a number of routes chemicals can enter water from the pockets of natural gas. However, an representative of the natural-gas industry, The Independent Petroleum Association of America, issued a press release stating there are “ … no proven cases of hydraulic fracturing impacting groundwater “ (Fuller). Researcher like James Saiers, professor of hydrology at F&ES believe it is not likely that fracking would open a pathway to water sources used for drinking; water is only a few hundred feet below the surface, while fracking takes place a mile or more down (Schrope).
In addition to concerns over water pollution, fracking requires huge amounts of water for the process and areas with scare resources have farmers and cities competing for the supply (EPA). Through using electrodialysis to desalinate the wastewater from fracking, it can be reused in further drilling processes. Although it does not make the wastewater clean enough to drink, it would decrease the amount of potable water needed for drilling (Westenhaus). The technology for desalination of the wastewater requires upgrading to make the process practical. To determine the amount of water used by the fracking wells in the United States, the approximately 27,000 wells use about five million gallons per fracking job (Jenkins). The math comes out to about 135 billion gallons of water per year or around 0.3 percent of the freshwater withdrawals. In comparison, agriculture uses 243 times more water annually and gold courses use 0.5 percent of the freshwater consumption.
Some scientists believe fracking causes earthquakes. Oklahoma has been using the process for years, and in 2009 it was reported the state experienced over 1000 earthquakes per year compared to the 50 per year reported in the years prior to allowing the fracking process for drilling (Process Industry Forum). The United States Geological Service recorded an earthquake near Prague, Oklahoma in 2011 that was a reported magnitude of 5.0 and it may have caused the large M5.7 quake less than 24 hours later USGS.gov). This is probably the largest earthquake cause by the injection of wastewater into the earth. Ohio and Pennsylvania have also reported earthquakes contributed to fracking.
However, the oil and natural gas industry states fracking is not a threat to the environment, although they are taking steps to comply with the EPA impositions for environmental protection. In a press release in June 2012, the American Petroleum Insti¬tute and Ameri¬ca’s Natural Gas Alliance states the most recent estimates of emission of industry methane are about 50 percent of those of the EPA (Bush). It is difficult to measure the escaping methane from inefficient pneumatic systems, loose pipe flanges, pipes that are corroded, stuck condenser valves, compressor that are outdated, and leaking storage containers (Druoin). Although the cattle industry produces more methane that fracking, about nine percent of the greenhouse gas emissions come from methane leaking in drilling. While methane does not linger as long as carbon dioxide, it is far more potent in contributing to global warming. With the industry expected to increase 56 percent over the next 25 years, efforts to reduce methane leakage is crucial.
Installation of equipment to catch and separate the gases and liquids flowing from the fracking wells are part of the “greening” activities the natural gas industry is taking in an attempt to satisfy environmentalists concerning pollution (Weinhold). Green completions became mandatory in January 2015 with larger companies complying more quickly. The EPA estimates the use of green techniques will reduce approximately 95 percent of the volatile organic compounds emitted annually from fracking wells (Overview Of Final Amendments To Air Regulations For The Oil And Natural Gas Industry). Another positive aspect of natural gas is the fact that it burns fairly clean, creating much lower greenhouse gas emission than fossil fuels (Schrope).
Aside of the safety proposed by the natural gas industry, there are economic advantages to using natural gas. Fracking has the potential to chop the cost of energy to Americans, saving $1200 annually for the average American household (Cutler). In addition, the economic boost to drilling areas in terms of jobs and leasing rights leaves many people supportive of the process in the face of possible environmental hazards. For instance, in Colorado the oil and natural gas industry provides 110,000 jobs with an average of $74,000 annually; constituting 11 percent of the economy in the state, it is a $30 billion yearly business (Staff).
Even after considering the current information, the debates in the media and literature concerning fracking seem limitless. Environmental groups weigh in against economists and corporations, and studies are not providing conclusive evidence in any direction. The precautionary principle advocates placing a burden of proof on the fracking industry to establish safety prior to use. The question remains of whether fracking should be considered safety until it is show not to be so, or should it be assumed it is unsafe until shown that it is: in other words, should fracking be “innocent until proven guilty” or “guilty until proven innocent”?
There is no question that the United States has an ever-increasing need for energy. While strides are being made in the direction of solar-powered technology, significant changes in the lifestyles of American are far in the future. In an effort to decrease the nation’s dependency on foreign oil, the creation and expansion of drilling for natural gas in the form of fracking offers an alternative to the purchase of fossil fuels. However, concerns about the impact on human and environmental health from polluting by-products of the industry generate serious debate on the wisdom of using fracking. The precautionary principle states that the energy companies must demonstrate that compliance with federal standards will generate the results to guarantee safe quantities of pollutants. The drilling companies believe results show they are already within those guidelines.
The underlying problem is that there does not appear to be significant scientific evidence to support one viewpoint over the other. States are allowing drilling until environmentalists can prove dangerous damage. Companies are taking steps to avoid contamination of water sources and other pollution, but it cannot be determined if they are sufficient. A comparison can be made between the development of human vaccines and fracking.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) originated at the Division of Chemistry in 1901 and used healthy human volunteers to determine the effects of food additives (FDA.gov). However, the FDA didn’t achieve any real power until 1938 after a public outcry following the deaths of over 100 people (many of them children) after taking Elixir Sulfanilamide, a toxin similar to antifreeze. The agency set the standards for experimentation and other forms of proof of safety prior to human administration.
A polio epidemic in 1916 in the United States left 6000 people dead and 27,000 paralyzed. A vaccine for polio was developed in 1935 and was tested on 3000 children in California. This was prior to the power of the FDA to regulate testing and human administration. In regards to medicine, the FDA regulates the creation of drugs and their administration. In the natural oil industry, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) serves the same purpose. Just as a vaccine for polio was testing without government approval in 1916, fracking has come into operation with the EPA looking on for possible problems.
A comparison between the development of vaccines and fracking may be farfetched, but the roles of governmental agencies remain the same. Drugs are required to undergo extensive testing for years in an effort to determine safety for patients receiving them. In the event there are significant cases of adverse reactions, the drug is pulled from the market and the drug companies liable for damages. However, the use of fracking has not undergone the same testing needed for a drug that has the potential to adversely affect thousands of human lives. In the few instances lawsuits have been filed against drilling companies, payments have been made with admission of guilt.
The United States rushed into fracking as a means of gaining independence from the foreign producers of oil. The prices set by those nations affected almost every American in terms of gasoline for automobiles, manufacture of products, and fuel for heating. There are numerous problems associated with the industry, and there has not been sufficient research conducted to address the concerns of the public about pollution. This author feels the statement, “Fracking should be guilty until proven innocent” is a realistic attitude given the possibility of the pollution of vast amount of land. The EPA should impose on fracking the same types of guidelines as the FDA imposes on drugs and humans should not be subjected to exposure until it has been deemed safe.