audskim

The following is a memorandum from the business manager of WLSS television station. "Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increasingly more time to covering national news and less time to covering weather and local news. During the same time period, most of the complaints we received from viewers were concerned with the station's coverage of weather and local news. In addition, several local businesses that used to run advertisements during our late-night news program have just cancelled their advertising contracts with us. Therefore, in order to attract more viewers to our news programs and to avoid losing any further advertising revenues, we should expand the coverage of weather and local news on all our news programs." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Recently, a late-night news program devoted more time to national news and less time to weather. The business manager believes that this resulted in increased complaints from viewers who are concerned about the station's coverage of weather and local news, in addition to local business cancelling their advertising contracts with the television station. The manager concluded that in order to attract more viewers to the program and avoid losing any more advertising revenues, they should restore time devoted to weather and local news to its former level. However, his argument is based on unaddressed assumptions and weak evidence. Therefore, his argument is unsubstantiated. First of all, the manager claims that viewers' complaints about coverage of weather and local news have increased during this time period. However, he fails to address what their issues were regarding. Perhaps it was that even with the decrease of time for weather and local news, this time was still too much. If time devoted to weather and local news time was three hours long before and has been reduced to two hours and forty-five minutes, viewers may be complaining that this segment is still too long. It is also possible that viewers are complaining about misrepresented information regarding the weather. Perhaps the weather station repeatedly misinformed the public about a thunderstorm each week that never happened. We simply to do not know and the manager provides no further clarification on the topic. Secondly, the manager states that local businesses have canceled their advertising contracts with us. However, it is not clearly stated whether this is a direct result of cutting the time of the weather and local news segment. It may be that the economy has not been good and businesses just cannot afford to spend as much on advertising as they had before. Perhaps, advertising on a television news station has not made much improvement on their sales. Again, there is insubstantial evidence to conclude that their cancelled contracts are a result of a smaller segment devoted to local news and weather. Therefore, restoring these segments' time to its former level may do little to improve advertising contracts. Lastly, to build on my first point, the manager does not mention the specifics in regards to the program changes. If the time for local news and weather segments had decreased from 3 hours to 2 hours and fifty minutes, it is unlikely to make a significant impact. Perhaps, these segments had to be shortened in order to make time for another segment in late-night entertainment. Perhaps there were significant global events happening that necessitated an increased time segment for national news--again, we do not know as we are not provided any evidence. It is possible that some other programs that have been added to the station (but unmentioned in the manager's memorandum) did not agree with some local business' tastes, which is why they canceled their advertising contracts. We also cannot exclude the possibility of the costs of such a contract being raised, which is why businesses pulled out. In this case, the television station would do better to reduce costs of their contract than to restore the weather and local news segment, which may ultimately be irrelevant. While the business manager raises some important concerns, he needs to address several questions before proposing that the station restore the same amount of time to weather and local news. Among them are: What exactly are the viewers complaining about? For what reasons in particular are businesses canceling their advertising contract? In addition to asking these crucial questions, the manager should closely examine other factors perhaps unrelated to local news and weather that may contribute to the problem--the addition of any new programs that have received mixed reviews, the increase in cost of advertising contracts with the television station. By addressing these questions, observing other potential factors with close scrutiny, and taking them into consideration, the business manager may do better in corroborating his conclusion with solid evidence and not simply baseless assumptions.

A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position. This topic raises the question of whether a nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. Indisputably, this would help regulate that all students enter university having studied the same topics. However, it is unreasonable for a single curriculum to be mandated unto all students, regardless of their individual needs. Therefore, I disagree with the statement--having the same national curriculum may be more harmful than helpful in regards to the needs of each student. First of all, the argument does not address what subjects will be included in the national curriculum. Will it include the basic skills such as math and science--and if so, to what extent? It is dubious whether all students will need to know the principles of organic chemistry or astrophysics, and those students who want to pursue such specific fields may not have access to those courses because of the restrictions that accompany such a strict curriculum. Similarly, a national curriculum raises questions relating to language classes--what language of instruction will be chosen to teach? Will there be a foreign language and who will be the one to make that decision? While most classes in the U.S. are taught in English, should English be the national language for instruction for other countries? While English is one of the more global languages and many countries are adopting it as a useful skill for its citizens to learn, there are many other countries who prefer to speak their own language for reasons cultural and social, among others. Moreover, it is likely that some of these smaller countries may lack teachers and faculty available to instruct in a language like English that is not often used for their daily purposes. Moreover, while many people will agree that history is fundamental to the future success of our nations, the topic of whose history will be taught is likely to be a more sensitive topic. American history books have been known to paint its own history in a way that looks favorably upon itself; however, many other nations do not see America in quite the same light. Reflecting briefly upon the tragedies of Pearl Harbor and the consequent Japanese internment camps that arose out of fear and xenophobia, specifically towards those of Japanese heritage, it is safe to say that promoting the U.S. as a great, faultless country is not an idea that Japanese education boards would hope to inculcate in its students. Undoubtedly, the discussion of whose history (and subsequently, those minority groups that are repeatedly overlooked in it) is likely to be a dissonant one that may result in impasse--it is too sore a subject. Lastly, schools should not overlook the needs of their individual students. For instance, is it imperative that students with special needs or disabilities learn under the same curriculum as their peers? Today, many of these students use a specialized curriculum so that individuals can learn at their own pace. To impose a standard national curriculum would be to ignore the needs of this group of students, and would likely garner disapproval from these individuals, their parents, and their current teachers who support this current approach to teaching. Overall, while a united curriculum may be helpful to a specific group of students limited to a specific region, imposing such a curriculum on the entire nation would be far-reaching, and even ignorant to the needs of the smaller minority groups of students. Therefore, nations should consider the needs of each and every student before proposing that a national curriculum is what is best for them.