Your final paper should take a position on the credibility of your chosen narrative and explore the various research

Your final paper should take a position on the credibility of your chosen narrative and explore the various research. Your final paper should take a position on the credibility of your chosen narrative and explore the various research.

Your final paper should take a position on the credibility of your chosen narrative and explore the various
research surrounding it, determining why you think it still maintains its relevance and how its proponents
use rhetoric to argue for its credibility, select and integrate sources, and develop an original persuasive
argument using MLA style and documentation.
Your research essay may take one of three forms (or you could explore some other concept in your
chosen texts as long as you include research to reinforce your claims):
1). A comparison of two primary texts and multiple variants (if necessary) (urban legend, rumor, fairy
tale, etc.) where you use sources to make an argument for how your texts comment on contemporary
society, accounting for Kairos, ethos, logos, and pathos. Thus, your thesis could resemble this one: “The
Vanishing Hitchhiker” is still effective in commenting on contemporary society because it focuses on
anxieties related to growing up in America, such as conformity, conservatism, and individualism.
2). An examination of two primary texts and multiple variants (urban legend, rumor, fairy tale, etc.)
where you use sources to make an argument for which text has evolved the most to account for societal
change. Thus, your thesis could resemble this one: “Little Red Riding Hood” and “The Dead Cat in the
Package” comment on American culture in various ways, exploring societal fears, expectations, and
norms; however, “Little Red Riding Hood” has been more fluid in how it provides possible solutions and
suggestions for societal problems.
3). A comparison of two stories (and their variants, if applicable) we have examined this semester in
which you discuss the similarities and differences between the two — possible similarities and differences
could include: moral, theme, lesson, character archetypes, etc., as well as how they incorporate ethos,
logos, and pathos. Thus, your thesis could resemble this one: On the surface, “The Kentucky Fried Rat”
and “The Bear From Arkansas” may appear different, but each is similar in how they include a morale
that cautions against certain behaviors, a theme that remains relevant, and an analysis of specific character
types that seem timeless.
Components
1. Outline (Optional)
1.1 This detailed formal outline will help organize the main points of your paper.
1.2 Include your personal thesis.
1.3 Consider the main points you will make. How would you arrange them to make a logical
argument?
1.4 What subpoints will you make within each point?
Your paper will consist of these parts:
2. Body of the paper (6-8 pages)
2.1 Expand upon your main points and subpoints.
2.2 Consider the various techniques of summary, evaluation, analysis, and synthesis.
2.3 You must use one direct quote per paragraph. You have to cite them in MLA using both
internal citation and signal phrases to get full credit.
2.4 If you are paraphrasing, you must also include internal citation. I need to know where you got
your information. Remember numbers are not common knowledge.
2.4 Include a final References page for the sources you cite in your paper.
2
3. References
4.1 MLA style
4.2 Please include only the specific sources you cite in your paper.
4.3 You will lose a significant number of points if you do not include a Works Cited Page on a
separate page.

Evaluation
300 points total:
 Rough Draft (11/19)
 Final 6-8 page research paper: (12/1 – Midnight)
Getting Started
Consider the following questions before/as you draft:
 What, exactly, is the issue or controversy/folk narrative you are researching?
 Which type of text are you going to examine?
 Are you going to examine two completely different texts or variants of one text?
 What background does your audience need to know to understand the complexity of the issue or
accept your viewpoint?
 How can you hook the audience?
 What is the specific argument (thesis) you make in response to the issue?
 How can you break down the issue/present your viewpoint in logical points?
 What other perspectives on the issue inform and influence your research?
 How do these other perspectives interact with one another? How can you turn their arguments into a
conversation in your research paper?
 What conclusion can you make or solution can you propose as a result of your argument?[supanova_question]

PSY7610 PSY7610 Tests by Type Test or Instrument Combined Review Allowed? Publisher

PSY7610

PSY7610

Tests by Type

Test or Instrument

Combined Review Allowed?

Publisher

Intelligence / Cognitive Abilities

Comprehensive Test of Nonverbal Intelligence – Second Edition (CTONI-2)*

Yes, with CTONI

WPS

Differential Ability Scales – II (DAS-II)

NO

Pearson

Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children

– Second Edition (KABC-II)

NO

Pearson

Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales – Fifth Edition (SB5)

NO

PRO-ED

Test of Nonverbal Intelligence – Fourth Edition (TONI-4)

NO

PRO-ED

Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test – Second Edition (UNIT2)*

Yes, with UNIT

PROED

Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale – Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV)

NO

Pearson

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – Fifth Edition (WISC-V)

Yes, with WISC-IV

Pearson

Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence – Fourth Edition (WPPSI-IV)

NO

Pearson

Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities – Fourth Edition (WJIV:COG)*

Yes, with WJIII

Houghton Mifflin Harcourt

Achievement

/ Aptitude

Graduate Record Examinations (GRE)

NO

ETS

Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement

– Third Edition (KTEA-3)*

Yes, with KTEA-2

Pearson

Miller Analogies Test (MAT)

NO

Pearson

Wechsler Individual Achievement Test – Third Edition (WIAT-III)

NO

Pearson

Wide Range Achievement Test – Fourth Edition (WRAT4)

NO

Pearson

Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests – Third Edition (WRMT-III)

NO

Pearson

Test or Instrument

Combined Review Allowed?

Publisher

Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement

– Fourth Edition (WJIV:ACH)*

Yes, with WJIII

Houghton Mifflin Harcourt

Personality

16PF – Fifth Edition (16PF 5)

NO

IPAT

Millon Adolescent Personality Inventory (MAPI)

NO

Pearson

Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory – IV (MCMI-IV)*

Yes, MCMI-III

Pearson

Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory – 2 (MMPI-2)*

Yes, MMPI-2-RF

Pearson

Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory – Adolescent (MMPI-A)*

Yes, MMPI-A-RF

Pearson

NEO Personality Inventory – 4 (NEO-4)*

Yes, NEO-3

PAR

Personality Inventory for Children – Second Edition (PIC-2)

NO

WPS

Behavior

Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA) – any forms or age range

NO

ASEBA

Behavior Assessment System for Children

– 3 (BASC-3)*

Yes, BASC-2

Pearson

Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF)

– any forms or age range

NO

PAR

Conners 3

NO

Multi- Health Systems

Conners Comprehensive Behavior Rating Scales (CBRS)

NO

Multi- Health Systems

Adaptive Behavior

Adaptive Behavior Assessment System – 3 (ABAS-3)

Yes, ABAS-2

WPS

Scales of Independent Behavior – Revised (SIB-R)

NO

Houghton Mifflin Harcourt

Test or Instrument

Combined Review Allowed?

Publisher

Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales – 3 (VABS-3)*

Yes, VABS-II

Pearson

Neuropsych ological

Dean Woodcock Neuropsychological Battery (DWNB)

NO

Houghton Mifflin Harcourt

Halstead Reitan Neuropsychological Battery (HRNB)

NO

Neuropsy chology Center

Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery II (LNNB-2)*

Yes, LNNB

WPS

NEPSY – Second Edition (NEPSY-II)

NO

Pearson

Neuropsychological Assessment Battery (NAB)

NO

PAR

Careers/Busi ness/Organiz ations

Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB)

NO

USMEPC OM

California Psychological Inventory – (CPI)

NO

CPP

Campbell Interest and Skill Survey (CISS)

NO

Pearson

Fundamental Interpersonal Relations Orientation – Behavior (FIRO-B)

NO

Myers-Briggs Co.

Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI)

NO

Hogan Assessme nts

Strong Interest Inventory (SII)

NO

CPP

Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI)

NO

CPP

Wonderlic Personnel Test – Revised (WPT- R)

Yes, WPT

Wonderlic

Autism

Autism Spectrum Rating Scales (ASRS)

NO

Multi- Health Systems

Checklist for Autism Spectrum Disorder (CASD)

NO

Stoelting

Childhood Autism Rating Scale – Second Edition (CARS- 2)

NO

WPS

Test or Instrument

Combined Review Allowed?

Publisher

Gilliam Autism Rating Scale – Third Edition (GARS-3)

Yes, GARS-2

PROED

Depression

Beck Depression Inventory – II (BDI-II)

NO

Pearson

Beck Hopelessness Scale – Revised (BHS- R)*

Yes, BHS

Pearson

Children’s Depression Inventory – 2 (CDI2)

NO

Multi- Health Systems

Preschool

Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development – III (Bayley-III)

NO

Pearson

Brigance Inventory of Early Development – III (BRIGANCE IED-III)*

Yes, BRIGANCE IED-2

Curriculum Associates

Behavior Analytic Assessments

Verbal Behavior Milestone Assessment and placement Program (VBMAPP)

Assessment of Basic Language and Learning Skills, Revised (ABLLS-R)

Assessment of Functional Living Skills

Questions About Behavior Function (QABF)

Motivation Assessment Scale (MAS)

Performance Diagnostic Checklist

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

AVB Press

Different Roads to Learning

Behavior Analysts, Inc.

Matson & Vollmer, 1995

Monaco & Associates, Inc.

Austin, 2000

* Tests may be frequently revised. In those cases, and depending on when you are researching a particular test, it may be difficult to locate sufficient articles on the latest version of your test. If needed, you may complete your review of the test by combining research on the current version with the previous one. See the second column for those tests and their allowed previous version for your research.

1

1[supanova_question]

Can Leadership Be Taught? Robert P. Vecchio Remarks delivered at Meeting of

Your final paper should take a position on the credibility of your chosen narrative and explore the various research Can Leadership Be Taught?

Robert P. Vecchio

Remarks delivered at Meeting of Southern Management Association, San Antonio, Texas, November 5, 2004

The question under consideration by this symposium is an important one. It rests, arguably, at the heart of management education. A broader restatement of the question might be: Do we teach much that is of real value in schools of business? To be sure, there is a widespread perception that what we offer in business school curricula is of some value (just look at our enrollment numbers!). Although one sometimes hears people praise the merits of graduating from the “school of hard knocks,” I vividly recall a conference that brought together highly successful entrepreneurs from across the nation, many of whom had very limited formal education, even a limited initial ability to speak English. I asked each entrepreneur if he or she would ultimately desire to someday complete an MBA degree at a university. They all said “yes,” indicating that there was still much that they felt they could learn through exposure to formal business education. So even successful graduates of the “real-world” acknowledge that if the opportunity were available, they would pursue further knowledge of the type that we offer in our degree-granting programs. My sense is that their various contacts with more “knowledgeable” (more formally trained) managers created a sense of personal deficiency that they would like to have corrected.

As for the narrower question of whether we can actually teach leadership, I must mention that I often begin my leadership classes each semester by raising this very question. I point out that I (like other instructors) offer no warranties (written or implied) and that they will surely be “exposed” to educational content, but whether the course experience affects their subsequent behavior and success will be heavily influenced by other factors. If they become great leaders, it may not be because of what the course provides, as much as it is in spite of what the course provides to them (i.e., it is conceivable they may gain insights and understandings of other perspectives that lead them to be even less certain when adopting a course of action , and thereby less effective as a consequences of “over-analysis” of situations) Certainly, they should have, at minimum, deeper insights on social dynamics at work and greater self-awareness after exposure to a leadership course.

The question of whether one can be taught to be a great or effective leader is a deceptive one. It seems that a simple dichotomous, yes/no, type of answer should exist. However, consider that we could also ask whether one can be taught to be a great swimmer or a great football wide-receiver. On deeper reflection, we would have to admit that it is really a matter of degree; that greatness/effectiveness is not definable in simple yes/no terms, but only in terms of gradations. Moreover, on still deeper reflection, we realize that there are separate performance dimensions that underlie greatness/effectiveness. So, a prospective wide-receiver may be very capable in terms of flat-out speed but lack needed strength for overcoming one-on-one blocking contact or lack needed coordination and dexterity to catch a pass while running at full speed. So too, a leader may have strong communication skills but lack detailed knowledge of the work at hand (and thereby lose credibility with followers who may know substantially more about the tasks they perform) or lack the ability to envision the future (and thereby fail to identify emerging threats and opportunities). Therefore, a person who aspires to be a leader must recognize the multidimensional nature of the role and the need for appraisal on each dimension. Furthermore, some dimensions are more critical than others, depending heavily on the context (unique character of circumstances). Exogenous factors can also undermine leaders. For example, consider one of my favorite quotes, “A person can do everything right, and do absolutely nothing wrong, and still fail!”

Subordinates, as part of the context, can also limit the effectiveness of a would-be leader in that they can withhold their support. Mutual dependency operates in leadership settings such that a person who appears to “have it all” on the dimensions that are seemingly critical for effectiveness in a given setting, may be undermined by subordinates who withhold their acceptance of that person. Moreover, followers are not uniform in their views, and followers are likely to vary in how accepting or supportive they are of a leader. With a sufficient cadre of loyal supporters, a leader may yet be effective. But without some minimal subgroup of key supporters, a leader cannot be effective.

While leadership can be viewed very broadly, we are most interested in the topic of managerial leadership (as distinct from political leadership, military leadership, sports leadership, etc.). Typically, we try to teach the major management functions, among which leadership is often listed and actually covered last (after planning, organizing, controlling, and staffing).

Perhaps it is often treated last because it is the murkiest of the management functions and does not lend itself to a summary list of “dos and don’ts.” Fundamentally, education is essentially about “knowledge acquisition.” For the topic of leadership, there is a “body of knowledge” that can be taught (consider the Handbook of Leadership as a useful compendium and starting point). There is also a “growing archive of research” (generated as a result of the scientific enterprise) that we can teach in terms of “how to contribute to it” by teaching research techniques and critical thinking skills. But it is the application of knowledge that is surely the tricky part. (Interestingly, we do not often ask instructors in, e.g., statistics or economics courses to demonstrate that their students will successfully apply what they have learned in class at a later point in a managerial career.) Unfortunately, we are still some distance away from developing a “science of leader development” (Day & Zaccaro, 2004).

In a review of the empirical evidence, Bass (1990, p. 856) concluded that available evaluative studies have provided evidence that leadership and management training, education, and development are usually effective.” One might more cautiously state that such experiences generally appear to add value.” However, a close examination of the relevant evidence shows that many studies rely on subjective criteria (such as participant satisfaction) to appraise the impact of developmental/training exercises. Also, a number of studies focus on demonstrating that participants gain in knowledge and its application relative to fairly narrow notions of leadership that are specified by certain models (e.g., Fiedler’s Leader Match, the Vroom-Yetton Model, Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Theory, McCelland’s achievement-motive imagery, etc.). On closer inspection, these criteria are not what we often envision when asking whether leadership can be taught. Furthermore, the training that is provided in undergraduate and MBA curricula may be very much in demand, by all economic indicators. Yet, my sense is that business schools do a far better job of teaching decision making, rather than decision implementation (i.e., we instruct, quite well, on how to calculate the Net Present Value of various courses of action and the selection of an appropriate statistical test; but we instruct less well, I believe, in how to build consensus, create and share a vision, or motivate others to pursue a course of action). Experience in the role of leader, or observing others in that role, is particularly valuable for understanding how to be successful in decision implementation.

In the realm of leadership education, I am impressed by three perspectives. These three perspectives relate to that portion of unexplained variance in leader effectiveness that remains after controlling for individual innate/trait propensities to be flexible, socially engaged, confident, etc. The first perspective is the cyclical notion of individualized assessment and learning. This involves the three steps of initially identifying individual strengths/weaknesses relative to a particular leadership role; then, designing developmental experiences that target deficiencies and maintain strengths (e.g., public speaking coupled with feedback, role-playing, and job-relevant training on the specifics of a task); and finally, re-appraisal and feedback. Unfortunately, this type of individualized assessment and learning, which identifies and targets relevant “gaps,” is very labor-intensive (and especially not amenable to classes of 40-70 students, as are often found in university leadership courses). Moreover, this type of developmental exercise cannot be conducted even in small classes if we do not have a specific job in mind that we are targeting for individual appraisal. However, it worth noting that the practice of “executive coaching” does, in fact, frequently follow this three-step process. Also, one can argue that “mentoring” implicitly incorporates this three-step process as well.

The second perspective that I find impressive is that of observational learning. Some might call it role-taking or mimicry. Yet, many people engage in this activity (often unconsciously) in that they have role models or exemplars whose style they, in fact, imitate. Because one’s experiences are, often limited to a certain range of people and settings, educators can try to broaden students’ exposure to the range of styles that exist, thereby creating in students the useful sense that “I can do that,” or “I can conduct myself like that.” Beyond videos, structured simulation is another powerful tool for providing opportunities for active rehearsal and confidence-building.

The third perspective might be termed self-education. We can foster self-education (which includes experiences beyond the classroom) by emphasizing the continuing character of life-long education. Two pillars of self-education are self-managed ability and motivation. These constructs are compensatory, to a degree. However, the absence of either is fatal, while the presence of both in ample amounts can greatly enhance the likelihood of a leader’s effectiveness.

But what should a person have as goals in terms of developing cross-situational abilities and motivation? Although it may seem overly broad in light of my earlier remarks, three often-cited critical dimensions of effectiveness that can be manifested by virtually anyone in a leader role are: knowing what one is talking about, being honest in dealings with others, and caring about the welfare of others (see Holtz & Mackay, 1999). “Knowing what one is talking about” is basic for possessing credibility with respect to followers and is a learnable skill. It requires (as Rudy Giuliani terms it in his 2003 book, Leadership) “relentless preparation”-a devotion to understanding as much as, if not more than, others know about the task at hand. Oddly, nearly all of our models of leadership omit this notion (perhaps because it is assumed to be self-evidently valid). “Honesty” is also an essential element of effectiveness, and the failure to maintain this standard can easily undermine any leader. And finally, “caring” is critical in that anything less than genuine concern for others will likely lead to a cynical interpretation of a leader’s motives and actions. This cynicism, in turn, will have adverse consequences for follower loyalty and trust. Caring/concern for others, however, can often emerge as a result of circumstances that involve “mutual shared fate” (i.e., “we are all in this together”). Those leaders who do not foster this sense of mutual dependency or sense of shared fate in themselves as well as their followers, risk failure on this critical dimension.

So, bottom line: Can we teach leadership? The answer, like many answers in the realm of social relations, is both “yes,” for certain aspects of leadership (such as an appreciation of obstacles to effectiveness, an awareness of different role models, greater self-awareness, and knowledge of frameworks for understanding/interpreting social influence processes); and “no,” for certain aspects of leadership that are more situation-specific (such as whether to undertake a personal “makeover,” to challenge one’s own supervisors, or to join Toast-Masters). Traditionally, leadership has been analyzed in more general terms, such as personal style or demeanor of nominal head, while the specifics of how a leader can influence others to achieve desired goals have not been treated in sufficient detail. The development of leader competencies (in the areas of cognitive and social skills), as well as the awareness of political/power realities, can provide a useful approach for more directly addressing these specifics.

References

Bass, B.M.(1990). Bass and Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership. New York: Free Press.

Day, D.V. and Zaccaro, S. J, (2004). Toward a science of leader development. In D. V. Day, S.J. Zaccaro, and

S. M. Halpin (eds.). Leader Development for Transforming Organizations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Giuliani, R. W. (2003). Leadership. New York: Miramax .

Holtz, L. and Mackay, H. (1999). Winning Every Day: The Game Plan for Success. New York . Harper Business.[supanova_question]

Name:______________________ Listening Log #6 Music in America Title Composer Type of Piece

Name:______________________

Listening Log #6

Music in America

Title

Composer

Type of Piece

Instruments

Characteristics

Comments

Oh, Susanna!

Stephen Foster

Maple Leaf Rag

Scott Joplin

If You Ever Been Down Blues

Sippie Wallace

Hoochie Coochie Man

Muddy Waters

Atomic Boogie

Pete Johnson

Conga Brava

Duke Ellington

Rhapsody in Blue

George Gershwin

Out of Nowhere

Charlie Parker and Miles Davis

Bitches Brew

Miles Davis

West Side Story

Leonard Bernstein[supanova_question]

Your final paper should take a position on the credibility of your chosen narrative and explore the various research

Your final paper should take a position on the credibility of your chosen narrative and explore the various research