Hello, I am looking for someone to write an article on Employment Story: Why You Should Quit That Bad Job. It needs to be at least 1000 words. iv. I am not a quitter: Some workers do not exactly relish the idea of being labeled as a quitter, as that amounts to being submissive to the excesses of the employer. Instead, the worker is on the lookout for a suitable opportunity when s/he can make the employer realize his/ her worth.iv. I am not a quitter: Some workers do not exactly relish the idea of being labeled as a quitter, as that amounts to being submissive to the excesses of the employer. Instead, the worker is on the lookout for a suitable opportunity when s/he can make the employer realize his/ her worth.v. I’ll never get another job: This is the kind of situation where the employer tries to exploit the sense of insecurity amongst the workers. A worker does not feel like quitting because s/he doesn’t find enough confidence in her/his abilities, which can get them a decent job.vi. If I quit I’ll lose my salary, status, company car, the recognition of my peers, etc.: This is, in fact, a classic case of an employer recognizing the needs of the individual and offering him/ her an environment which helps the individual in coming out with optimum performance. Such an arrangement often happens to provide a practical working environment, if not an ideal one.vii. Everywhere else is just as bad: This scenario comes up, when either the worker has already seen a couple of job shuffles or the worker gathers from people around him/her working in some other company/ industry that the worker’s are not exactly relishing the working environment and they too are being put to difficult circumstances by the management. This prevents the worker from quitting the work.viii. I’ve invested so much in this job already: This situation often arises out of the bonding that one finds himself in the company. Workers do realize that the company is in a difficult situation and the management is not taking fullest care of the workers, but even then they feel like sticking to the job because the investment that has been done by the individual in terms of quality time, efforts, money etc. holds him/ her from leaving the job, in the hope that the situation might turn good enough in near future. Kjerulf advises that under such situations quitting is the only intelligent decision as staying amounts to ‘throwing good time after bad’.

READING FOR THE WEEK 

1) Read and annotate: Mike Rose’s “The Politics of Remediation” Chapter 14 in the book and/or using this digital copy to insert comments into isn’t quite the same section as the one in the book):  The Politics of Remediation  (This is a shortened version of what is in Chapter 14).

Read more about Mike Rose’s philosophy, check out his blog or Chapter 15 in the book. I saw in Discussion Forum 1 that  you were reading about the authors that you are using—keep that up! Also, explain a bit about them in your papers (I did not see much of this in the Mini-synthesis rough drafts). It is good to get to know the authors’ worldview and the context of their writings and you might find other issues/articles that you could use later on.

As you read: Notice how Rose writes about individual student problems in the opening pages, then later how he writes about five overlapping problems that he set up with the student stories. Look for and try to determine the five overlapping problems. Also, think about what Rose might have left out—looking for a gap or something the authors left out is a way to “move… toward some standard of critical analysis” which Barry Alford, who you will hear from later, values (Alford 116). This is also your way of joining the conversation.

In your annotations: look for learning problems that hinder the students he talks about. Try to focus on learning and the issues of the students, not just on the educational system or what is wrong with it, ok? Some of the problems are because of it, but in later writing we are studying people, not the system, which will be fun for those of you in psychology (we have a lot this semester) and could also be a way to analyze your own thinking issues.

As you read, try to make connections to your own experience, interact with Rose’s ideas, ask questions, learn something new, look things up etc.

This article is an excerpt out of a book, so once in a while Rose will bring up a character that you might not remember. Keep that in mind. This article is quite long, so try to get through it a little at a time. Remember, you do not have to remember everything you read!

Students put such pressures on themselves and do not forgive themselves for not meeting expectations. Authors Bartholomae and Petrosky remind us that “The desire to remember everything is not only obsessive, if achieved it would be madness” (17). I love this line!

From: Bartholomae, D. & Petrosky, A. Selections from Facts, Artifacts, and Counterfacts.

Portsmouth: Boynton/Cook, 1986.

Annotate the whole article (sometimes students do a lot of annotation in the early pages then fizzle out). Hint, his ending is important!

DF Midterm Instructions

Submit at least 4 pages of your annotations:

You will annotate either using Word or some other option of your choice and turn in at least four pages of your annotations. You can certainly turn the whole thing in, since I love to see/hear your thoughts and comments. Hint, submitting the last page is a good idea since I will see that you got to it!

Discussion Forum 

Part 1

1. Explain what you think Mike Rose determines as five overlapping problems with learning that students have. Support why you think these are the five.

Explain these problems

Include quotes /paraphrases from Rose to support your ideas.

Cite quotes and paraphrases using MLA in-text citations. See: The Purdue Online Writing Lab (OWL). Or the MMC Writing Center

1. Post your annotations on the Rose article this week. See above for how to do this.

When replying to others—two (or more) replies as usual—notice how there are differences in what people determined the problems to be and try to figure out why there are differences. Comment on the differences.

Part 2: add a short paragraph on another overlapping problem with learning that you think Rose does not talk about which affects many students (not specific brain based problems like learning disabilities or ADD etc.). Or, critique a point he makes. Pointing out something that an author left out is a way to show critical reading.

Part 3: comment on one rhetorical appeal Rose used. Include examples (cite them!). Review Week 2 if needed.

Reply to others (comment on content, MLA citations, ask questions etc.)

After completing the reading this week, please review table 1.2 in the text and review the distinction between leadership and management.  Then think about this in regard to how senior leaders versus senior managers lead change in an organization (especially when it comes to technical change in an organization).

This week please reflect on these concepts and answer the following questions:

1. When implementing change in an organization, there are always cultural issues that are faced, such as not accepting change, determine how differently this would be handled thinking about the management versus leadership constructs?
2. When dealing with performing work, how is this implemented differently within the management versus leadership constructs?

Please be sure to answer all of the questions above in the initial post.

Please ensure the initial post and two response posts are substantive.  Substantive posts will do at least TWO of the following:

• Ask an interesting, thoughtful question pertaining to the topic
• Expand on the topic, by adding additional thoughtful information
• Answer a question posted by another student in detail
• Share an applicable personal experience
• Provide an outside source
• Make an argument

At least one scholarly (peer-reviewed) resource should be used in the initial discussion thread.  Please ensure to use information from your readings and other sources from the UC Library.  Use APA references and in-text citations.