For this project you need to plan ahead. You will need to attend a Symphony Orchestra Concert in order to complete it. As long as it is a symphony orchestra concert, any event is OK. Solo recitals, musicals, chamber music concerts, jazz concerts, operas, or other non-orchestra concerts will not be acceptable.

Your Assignment

You are to write a 3-page term paper giving a review of the concert you attended. Your report should be in essay form, 12-font, single-spaced. Please be sure to cover every piece on the program. Your review must include the following:

• What kind of listener were you at the concert? Why?
• What pieces were performed?
• What was the style of each of the pieces performed?
• What was the instrumentation of the orchestra?
• Draw out the seating arrangement of the instruments in the orchestra.

Analyze each piece played in the concert with following criteria from the course:

• Unity and Variety
• Structure of the Music
• Purpose of the Music
• Tempo
• Volume
• Rhythm
• Melody
• Harmony
• Form
• Historical Period

Did you enjoy the concert? Why or why not?

Please submit your report online, by clicking Submit. You must also submit a printed copy of your report, along with the concert program and your ticket stub, and your drawing of the seating arrangement of the orchestra to my office on or before the due date to receive full credit. You may mail your Concert Report materials to the campus address shown on the Important Information page for this website or come to the Music Office at the Madison Campus between 8:30 a.m. and 2 p.m. on week days to leave these materials in an envelope in my department mail box. The Madison Music Academy is located on Santa Monica Blvd. between 10th and 11th Streets and there is plenty of free parking.

No late reports will be accepted. Evaluation of your work will depend on how complete, coherent, and valid your comments and arguments are.

Submission Instructions

1. Click “Add Submission”
2. Use the text entry box and/or upload a file to add your assignment.
3. Click “Save Changes.” You will have the option to “Edit Submission” after you have saved your changes to continue working on your assignment.
4. Click “Submit Assignment” when you are ready to submit your assignment to your instructor.
5. Click “Continue” at the prompt “Are you sure you want to submit your work for grading? You will not be able to make any more changes.”

Read the following article:

Lytle, T. (2015). Confronting conflict. HR Magazine, 60(6), 26-31. Retrieved from

https://libraryresources.columbiasouthern.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=103708484&site=ehost-live&scope=site

After reading the article, analyze the scenarios provided below, and choose one to discuss in the case study paper. In the case study, be sure to address the following items:

Include a brief statement that identifies your style of conflict management.

Use the information provided in this unit to develop a process to resolve the conflict.

Describe how you would handle the workplace investigation for the chosen scenario.

As a result of a merger, the organization decided to decentralize its human resource management (HRM) functions and create area human resource (HR) generalists across the United States. One of their responsibilities is to handle all employee relations issues. You report directly to the senior vice president of HRM in the corporate headquarters in New York, and there is a dotted line reporting relationship to the vice president of field operations in your area, which is located in the Midwest. You just arrived at your new location for this position about six days ago.

Armed with the information you have learned in Units I and II and aided by your own experience and ability to research, please read the scenarios below, and select one for this assignment. Please answer the questions, and follow the guidelines presented.

Scenario:

Your senior vice president (SVP) of HRM has received a complaint from two branch managers in your geographic area. They are separate but similar complaints concerning Robert, the SVP of Area Operations. Both managers say Robert touches them and other women in the office inappropriately by rubbing their shoulders; the managers also report that Robert makes remarks about their alluring attire and comments that he is in love with them for the great job they are doing. Knowing you are housed in the same area office with this SVP, your boss asks you if you can objectively investigate this complaint. You talk it over with your boss and know he will support your efforts, and you agree to do the investigation. Almost as soon as you give your answer to your boss, you receive a phone call from the area SVP’s wife, who somehow already knows you will be interviewing her husband for a harassment complaint. She is irate and states that the charges are ridiculous. She becomes belligerent and begins to degrade the female managers.

Based on your knowledge of employment law, conflict management, and investigation procedures, what would be the best way to handle this situation? For example, what laws are involved? Where do you start? Who do you notify? When do you start? What do you tell the area SVP’s wife?

In this situation, you are the employee relations representative for the organization. What is your role in the investigative process? Describe the steps you take to investigate this employee complaint.

In your response to the scenario you have chosen, follow the guidelines below:

Be sure to include academic sources to support your positions/conclusions. You are required to use at least two outside sources.

Be sure that your analysis is highly relevant, thorough, and remains on topic.

Accuracy should be strong, with close attention to detail in all parts of the assignment.

Writing should be clear and concise with solid sentence structure and should be free of grammar, punctuation, and spelling errors.

The paper should be at least three pages in length.

All sources used must be referenced; paraphrased and quoted material must have accompanying citations in APA format.

Critical Thinking Case Study: Free Speech

The following worksheet will take you through the process of using Bloom’s taxonomy (the original) to make a decision about the issue (debate): Is Free Speech Under Attack on University Campuses? Yes or No.

NOTE: This is a learning exercise about making sense of complex issues. The information presented throughout is from various perspectives, and does not necessarily reflect the views of the course instructor or the university of Winnipeg. Your task is to use the additional information to help you make your decision at the end of this assignment.

Instructions:

·         Watch the YouTube Video by following the link in the PPT or by clicking on: https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/920855619628

·         PPT – click on the links to find additional information from various perspectives

·         Please type directly on this worksheet, or copy it onto another doc format, and upload it to Nexus when it is complete

Level 1 – Knowledge:

What is the issue?

Where is this happening?

When did this take place? Is it still an issue?

Why is this an issue?

Who is involved?

Level 2 – Comprehension:

Complete the chart by looking at a few stakeholders (people/groups) who were interviewed by the reporter.

Stakeholder (Who is involved?)

Do they think free speech is under attack?

Who are they? What is their position?

Example: Prof. Jordan Peterson

Yes or No

He is a Professor from the University of Toronto. He is against the Bill C-16 because he believes it will infringe his right to free speech, because he feels it will force him to use the preferred gender pronouns.

1.

Yes or No

2.

Yes or No

3.

Yes or No

4.

Yes or No

5.

Yes or No

Level 3 – Application:

If you could have a conversation with one of the stakeholders, who would you talk to, and what questions would you ask to help you understand their perspective better?

Example: I would ask Prof. Jordan Peterson why he wouldn’t want to call someone their preferred pronoun.

Level 4 – Analysis:

Everything you read or see has a particular lens, or a way of seeing an issue. Some people refer to that as having a “bias,” but it is more accurate to call it a perspective, because it is directly related to the interests, goals, motivations, beliefs, and values of a person or a group.

Choose one group/individual from each side of the debate

Describe their values and beliefs

Describe their mission and vision for the world

A – Free Speech is under attack

B – Free Speech is NOT under attack

The question in the documentary is: Is Free Speech under attack on University Campuses? Yes or No? Which perspective (YES or NO) is being presented by the documentary as the right one? How do you know? Explain.

Instructions:

ü  For the following questions, you need to read at least one additional article. You can find links to additional articles on the last two slides of the Week 2 PPT and below.

ü  There are many more articles about this issue online, so you may choose to find additional information on your own by doing a google search.

Additional readings for both sides of the debate:

Free Speech is NOT under attack

Free Speech IS under attack

•       ://nationalpost.com/news/students-have-charter-protected-free-expression-rights-on-campus-alberta-appeal-court-rules

•       https://campusfreedomindex.ca/

•       https://theconversation.com/freedom-of-expression-is-under-attack-at-our-universities-91219

•       https://academicmatters.ca/the-alt-right-and-the-weaponization-of-free-speech-on-campus/

•       https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/how-the-alt-right-weaponized-free-speech/

•       https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/sep/03/the-myth-of-the-free-speech-crisis?CMP=share_btn_fb&fbclid=IwAR03T-LgdDCK6vGbf2ks2VgGu7e78bisZ_QVmG3Dw0k7z0tp1QNrz2gZwtw

Referencing: Since we are using non-scholarly research, I will not be overly picky about referencing for this assignment. Please refer to the author of the article in your writing by name, or the organization by title, and include the website at the end of the paragraph/page. We will discuss proper APA and MLA for the next assignment.

Level 5 – Synthesis:

Using the additional readings to help you, write 1 paragraph (1/2 page) that refutes the argument of the stakeholder you disagree with most.

Consider the following questions to help you as well as the active reading questions from the textbook:

·         Why do you disagree with them?

·         What did they get wrong, or leave out?

·         What evidence (examples, claims, facts) do you have to prove that they are wrong?

Level 6- Evaluation:

Time to make a decision: Is free speech really under attack on University campuses? Yes or No. To evaluate an issue, you have to make connections to the world around you. So you should make a judgement by assessing the issue using criteria related to your vision of a well-ordered and humane society (from PPT), and defend your position using your own ideas and those you found in the additional articles you read. This should be about ½ page to 1 page.

Consider the following questions to help you:

·         Is free speech under attack on University campuses? Yes or No? Explain.

·         How does your perspective uphold your vision of a well-ordered and humane society?

·         What is the cultural and political context?

·         What are the moral and ethical implications?

·         Why is this issue important?

What is the relationship between individual rights and rights of the larger society?

Mickey Mantle received a liver transplant in 1995. He was a Baseball Hall of Fame center fielder for the New York Yankees whose liver was failing because of cirrhosis and hepatitis. Although the waiting period for a liver transplant in the United States is about 130 days, it took only two days for the Baylor Medical Center’s transplant team to find an organ donor for the 63-year-old former baseball hero.

According to the director of the Southwest Organ Bank, Mantle was moved ahead of others on the list because of his deteriorating medical condition; however, there were mixed feelings about speeding up the process for a celebrity. Mantle was known for overcoming immense obstacles, and many argued that the medical system should provide exceptions for heroes. He was also a recovering alcoholic, which further complicated the ethical implications of the case. Because of Mantle’s medical problems, doctors estimated that he had only a 60 percent chance for a three-year survival; whereas, liver transplant patients typically have about a 78 percent chance for a three-year survival rate.

As in the case of the liver transplant for Mickey Mantle, should the system make exceptions for anyone? Why or why not?

Write a 1,050- to 1,400-word paper in which you analyze the Mickey Mantle case using the Seven-Step Decision Model.

Format your assignment according to APA guidelines.

Click the Assignment Files tab to submit your assignment

MAIN POSTFor your Week 2 Assignment, the formal proposal, you will be going to the Keiser e-Library to gather research for your argumentative research paper. When you find articles, what will you do with them? You will take these and begin crafting a formal proposal as well, where you demonstrate you have done research on the topic you picked. This week’s readings and discussion will help you think about how to keep your focus and engage those readings critically. For this discussion, choose one of the following two readings:

• Option 1 – Adler, M. J. (2014). How to mark a book. In G.H. Muller (Ed.), The McGraw-Hill reader: Issues across the disciplines pp. 16-21. McGraw-Hill.
  • p. 21, “Writing,” Question 3: Writing an Argument: Argue for or against the proposition that this essay has lost its relevance owing to the introduction of new forms of educational media.
  • Be sure to quote and cite Adler when writing your response.
• Option 2 – Carr, N. (2014). Does the internet make you smarter or dumber? In G.H. Muller (Ed.), The McGraw-Hill reader: Issues across the disciplines pp. 21-25.  McGraw-Hill.
  • p. 25, “Writing,” Question 3; Writing an Argument: Agree or disagree with Carr’s claim that people “who read texts studded with links … comprehend less than those who read traditional linear texts.”
  • Be sure to quote and cite Carr when writing your response.

First, read the article carefully. Answer the question associated with the reading. (100+ words) Second, think about what the author is suggesting you do in your research. How will you apply these ideas when you critically read the research you gather, including the assigned essay, academic research from the database, and general research from the internet? How would this author define “critical reading”? (100+ words) Third and f inally, what topic are you considering writing your final paper on? Review the feedback you received on your Week 1 Assignment. What ideas did you have? What did your instructor suggest? What direction might your paper take? How will you make your paper argumentative?

TIP: Be sure to respond to all three questions in individual paragraphs.

PEER REPLIES

• In 100-150 words, respond to two peers’ main posts. Examine whether each post clearly supports the peer’s ideas about the merits of each proposal and the choice of proposal format for the intended major writing assignment. Offer suggestions for where your peers might take their final paper for this class.
• Take a moment to check replies you receive to your own main post. Respond to your peers and your instructor.

REQUIREMENTS

• Main post is due by Wednesday at 11:59 PM Eastern. No credit will be awarded for late posts without instructor approval.
• Peer posts should be posted on two different days from the main post and no later than Sunday at 11:59 PM Eastern. In other words, post on at least three different days.
• Use objective point of view only rather than subjective. (See page G-8 for an explanation)