Blog - Page 268 of 6058 - Platinum Essays

QR&A Week 8 Discussion 2

To prepare for this Discussion:

Review this week’s Learning Resources related to codes and coding.

Consider the similarities and differences in the data collected from your interview and from the transcripts of the Scholars of Change videos.
Consider the other data collection methods you studied (focus groups, reviews of documents and social media; and your own memos and notes).
Review your Major Assignment 1, paying attention to the alignment between your research question and considerations for data collection.

Post a response to the following:

From the data you collected and other data collection methods you studied, compare and contrast the strengths and weaknesses of at least two data collection methods. Include an explanation of your experience using these different data collection methods. Also, include an explanation of what you found difficult or challenging and why.
Explain how you as the researcher can ensure that your choices for data collection align with your research questions. Use your experience from Major Assignment 1 as an example.

Be sure to support your main post and response post with reference to the week’s Learning Resources and other scholarly evidence in APA style.

QR&A Week 8 Discussion 1

To prepare for this Discussion:

Review this week’s Learning Resources related to qualitative interviewing.
Consider the phone interview you conducted in Week 7.
- Listen to your recording 2–3 times.
- Review the notes you took during and after the interview.
- Consider how this experience is different or similar to a conventional conversation.

Post your reflection and analysis on what you learned about interviewing. Include in your reflection and analysis:

At least two things you would do differently and why
Something new and surprising that you learned
A reflection about the value of interviewing as a data collection tool

Be sure to support your main post and response post with reference to the week’s Learning Resources and other scholarly evidence in APA style.

Business Negotiation

Write a 2,300 – 2,700 word paper discussing the failed negotiation between Starbucks and Kraft. Using the following outline

1. Introduction

2. Background of the Starbucks and Kraft Dispute

3. Literature Review on Failed Negotiations

4. Analysis of the Failed Negotiation

● Origins and Nature of the Conflict

● Negotiation Strategies Employed

● Points of Contention

5. Consequences of the Failed Negotiation

● Impact on Starbucks

● Impact on Kraft

6. Alternative Strategies for Better Outcomes

7. Conclusion

Need at least 10 sources 7 of which are academic

Module 02 Content

The CEO of Pearl Incorporated has requested a meeting to address documentation and processes. You have been tasked to review all activity in your department before the meeting.
You are only in your second week on the job but discover that the documentation is severely outdated and lacking in content. Upon review, the following areas have no documentation on record:
- Configuration Management
- Change Management
- Asset management
- Service Request Fulfillment
- Operational Level Agreement
- Service Level Agreement
- Prepare a presentation for the CEO, explaining each bullet point and including best practices for each management level. Include consequences for not following best practices. Explain the importance of having properly documented OSAs and SLAs.
  Your presentation should be a minimum of 10 slides (Including a title slide and Reference slide).
  
  Submit your completed assignment to the drop box below. Please check the Course Calendar for specific due dates.
  
  Save your slides as a PowerPoint presentation. (Mac users, please remember to append the ".ppt" extension to the filename.)
  
  Save your assignment as a Microsoft Word document. (Mac users, please remember to append the ".docx" extension to the filename.) The name of the file should be your first initial and last name, followed by an underscore and the name of the

Module 02 Content

Research the COBIT and ITIL best practice frameworks. In at least four pages, write a paper that describes the base components required to create a master Service Level Agreement (SLA) for the items housed within a Configuration Management Database (CMDB).
Be sure to discuss any differences between how service levels for maintaining Software Configuration Items (CIs) differ from service levels for maintaining Hardware Configuration Items (CIs). Also, explain CMDB.

Submit your completed assignment by following the directions linked below. Please check the Course Calendar for specific due dates.

Save your assignment as a Microsoft Word document. (Mac users, please remember to append the ".docx" extension to the filename.) The name of the file should be your first initial and last name, followed by an underscore and the name of the assignment, and an underscore and the date. An example is shown below:

Jstudent_exampleproblem_101504

Module 01 Content

Based on the scenario presented in the Course Project Introduction, create a PowerPoint presentation and address the following:
- Define IT service management (ITSM) and explain how you will use it to improve Retention rates of personnel.
- Explain how ITSM can improve customer satisfaction.
- List at least three benefits of utilizing ITSM.
- Explain SLAs.
- Explain OLAs.
- Create a 7-10 slide PowerPoint (not including the title slide) that address the questions above. This PowerPoint presentation should highlight your understanding of the project. Please cite any references.
  Please refer to the Rasmussen library for help creating a PowerPoint presentation.
  Submit your completed assignment to the drop box below. Please check the Course Calendar for specific due dates.
  
  Save your slides as a PowerPoint presentation. (Mac users, please remember to append the ".ppt" extension to the filename.)
  
  The name of the file should be your first initial and last name, followed by an underscore and the name of the assignment, and an underscore and the date. An example is shown below:

summer week 2

List two jobs you have held in the past.
- How were you recruited for each of these jobs?
Consider a job you hold now or have held recently. Discuss one of the following questions:
- How would you want this job to be redesigned to place more emphasis on efficiency, motivation, ergonomics, or mental processing?
- Why would you not want the job to be redesigned?

Explain deterrence theory as it applies to the Brutalizing Effect.

Explain deterrence theory as it applies to the Brutalizing Effect.

Discuss your opinion on the support or the abolition of the death penalty to deter violent crime and your recommendation for a punishment that not only prevents violent crime but deters it. The class text and in particular Chapter 7 and the PowerPoint lesson have pertinent and relevant information on the subject of the death penalty and deterrence. You must support your opinions and conclusions with credible references as mentioned in the syllabus. The following concepts will help you formulate the sections in your paper:

What about the brutalizing effect
Assumptions and problems of deterrence theory
Arguments and counterarguments

Students are expected to critically analyze and evaluate the death penalty topic listed above.

It is important to answer all of the questions, support your opinions and statements with at least two credible references. Cite the text in APA format and Include a Reference Page. Each question should be a section; an easy APA format to use to accurately answer each question. Of the total works cited, half should be from academic journals or books published by an academic press. Students must support their statements and opinions as they cite the text with at least two credible references. A conclusion section (APA) will solidify your statements and opinions. Works cited and the references should be in APA format at the end of each mini-paper.

The paper must be double-spaced, with 1.0-inch margins, using Times New Roman 12 point type and at least two

ccj4361Chapter7deathpenalty.pdf

CHAPTER 7

GENERAL DETERRENCE AND THE DEATH PENALTY

Deathquest: An Introduction to the Theory and Practice of Capital Punishment in the United States, 5th Edition

General Deterrence • The belief that people in general can be

prevented from engaging in crime by punishing specific individuals and making examples of them

• The broad deterrence question is whether executions prevent other people (other than the person executed) from committing capital crimes.

Importance of General Deterrence

• Until recently, reason cited most often by death penalty supporters

• Research shows that compelling evidence of no deterrent effect does not have much effect on death penalty support.

• No longer seems to be an important reason for support. In a recent poll, only 32% of respondents said that they thought the death penalty was a deterrent.

Reason for Believing in the Deterrent Effect of the Death Penalty

(Van den Haag) • Our penal system rests on the

proposition that more severe penalties are more deterrent than less severe penalties

• Thus, the most severe penalty, the death penalty, would have the greatest deterrent effect

Counter to Van den Haag’s Argument

• The highly influential 18th Century philosopher, Cesare Beccaria believed that life imprisonment, or what called “perpetual servitude” was a greater deterrent than the death penalty.

• He describe the practice as a “useless prodigality of torments” and that it gave an “example of barbarity to men.”

Counter to Van den Haag’s Argument (cont.)

• Although more severe penalties are generally more deterrent than less severe penalties, beyond a point, added severity may reduce deterrence (e.g. through jury nullification).

• Is the death penalty the most severe penalty? (More severe than life imprisonment?)

Important Question for Death Penalty Proponents

• Not whether capital punishment is the severest punishment

• But rather what punishment should be the severest allowed by law?

What Does the Evidence Show? • There is no evidence showing that

capital punishment deters more than an alternative non-capital punishment, such as life imprisonment without opportunity of parole (LWOP).

• Available evidence indicates that capital punishment makes no discernible difference on homicide rates.

Evidence: Pre-1975 Research • Comparison of murder rates, police

killings, and prison murders of contiguous states with and without death penalty

• Comparison of murder rates before and after abolition or reinstatement of death penalty

• Comparison of short-term murder trends before and after highly publicized executions of convicted murderers

1975: Ehrlich Finds A General Deterrent Effect

• Examined the simultaneous effect of several variables on homicide rates, 1933—1969

• Concluded: An additional execution per year over the period may have resulted, on average, in 7 or 8 fewer murders

• Research highly criticized

Post-1975 Deterrence Research

• A few methodologically inferior studies have found a general deterrent effect (also new econometric studies).

• Numerous studies (of varying quality) have failed to find a general deterrent effect.

• A few studies have found a counterdeterrent or brutalizing effect.

Post-1975 Deterrence Research (cont.)

• Study of homicides in Texas from January 1994–December 2005 found – that for executions to have a deterrent

effect, a large number of executions must be conducted

– Most of any deterrent effect of executions on homicides occurs soon after execution is announced

Post-1975 Deterrence Research (cont.)

• In 2008, Yang and Lester carried out a meta- analysis of 104 capital punishment deterrence studies. They found – Only 95 had adequate data to report an effect size – 60 found a deterrent effect – 35 found a brutalization effect – Many of the time-series and panel studies showed

a deterrent effect; whereas cross sectional studies did not show such an effect.

Post-1975 Deterrence Research (cont.) • Many of the newer studies have methodological

problems: – They do not differentiate between the types of

homicide – Some include non-negligent manslaughter – None of the studies controlled for auto-regression – Few of the studies controlled for law enforcement’s

ability to clear capital cases – The studies ignore large amounts of missing data – All the studies are indirect tests of the hypotheses – None of the studies determine the marginal effects of

capital punishment as opposed to life imprisonment

Post-1975 Deterrence Research (cont.)

• In their review of the newer econometric studies Donohue and Wolfers stated: – “Execution policy drives little of the year-

to-year variation in homicide rates.”

Counterarguments to Studies That Show No General Deterrent Effect

• Statistical evidence used was unreliable.

• Most law enforcement officials continue to favor capital punishment.

• There is inherent logic in the deterrent power of the threat of death.

• The number of homicides increased when number of executions decreased (mid-1960s through the 1970s).

Counterarguments to Studies That Show No General Deterrent Effect

(cont.) • Deterrent effect has been reduced

to nothing in recent years (and thus does not show up in the research) because it has not been imposed often or quickly enough to get desired response

Assumptions and Problems with Deterrence Theory

• Most murderers probably do not rationally calculate the consequences of their actions before they act.

• They doubt that they will be caught. • They may not know what constitutes

capital murder. • If they have killed before, they may not

care.

Counterdeterrence or Brutalization

• A few studies have found a counterdeterrent or brutalizing effect.

• The death penalty may cause murders rather than deter them.

Counterdeterrence or Brutalization: How?

• The suicide-murder syndrome • The executioner syndrome • The pathological desire to die

by execution • To gain attention and notoriety • Diversion of resources from more

effective violence prevention

Slide Number 1
General Deterrence
Importance of General Deterrence
Reason for Believing in the Deterrent Effect of the Death Penalty (Van den Haag)
Counter to Van den Haag’s Argument
Counter to Van den Haag’s Argument (cont.)
Important Question for Death Penalty Proponents
What Does the Evidence Show?
Evidence: Pre-1975 Research
1975: Ehrlich Finds A General Deterrent Effect
Post-1975 Deterrence Research
Post-1975 Deterrence Research (cont.)
Post-1975 Deterrence Research (cont.)
Post-1975 Deterrence Research (cont.)
Post-1975 Deterrence Research (cont.)
Counterarguments to Studies That Show No General Deterrent Effect
Counterarguments to Studies That Show No General Deterrent Effect (cont.)
Assumptions and Problems �with Deterrence Theory
Counterdeterrence �or Brutalization
Counterdeterrence or Brutalization: How?