Understanding School Violence
School is a place of growth before a person steps into the uncertainties of adulthood. However, for a few individuals school is a stressful, negative environment, which may result in them becoming violent.
In terms of student victimization, the United States does not have the highest rate of violence compared with other nations. Although US schools are occasionally sites of horrific attacks, on a day-to-day basis, US public schools appear about as safe (or unsafe) as those in other nations.
The impact of widespread coverage of these violent incidents is difficult to measure, but surveys of student and teacher concerns show a pervasive pattern of fear of violence. School violence has been a topic of national concern throughout the past decade as the public has repeatedly witnessed horrifying shooting incidents in US public schools.
When studying violence in schools, it is important to consider both offenders and victims. Many studies have found a positive relationship between physical abuse and suicide.
In light of these factors, it is important for you to understand the impact of violence in schools on victims, their families, and the public.
Task:
Use the textbook readings, the internet, and any other outside sources to research school shootings and select a school-shooting incident.
Submission Details:
In a minimum of 250 words, post to the Discussion Area your responses to the following:
• Provide a summary of the school-shooting incident you selected.
• Describe any risk factors and warning signs that were present in the case prior to the violent act.
• Identify the security measures that, had they been implemented prior to the tragedy, might have either prevented or lessened the
casualties. Give your reasoning.DISCUSSION A 100 words 1 reference
Class, might the same method be used effectively to create a policy decision for the public-sector as in the private-sector?
DISCUSSION B 100 words 1 reference
Policy analysts are often faced with multiple advocacy choices when developing a policy recommendation. These choices are known as advocative claims. What are the characteristics of an advocative claim?
Advocative claims have four different main characteristics that are actionable, prospective, value laden, and ethically complex (Dunn, 2008). The claims below are described by Dunn as:
• Actionable.Advocative claims focus on actions that may be taken to resolve a policy problem. Although advocative claims require prior information about what will occur and what is valuable, they go beyond questions of "fact" and "value" and include arguments about what should be done to solve a problem (Dunn, 2008).
• Prospective.Advocative claims are prospective, because they occur prior to the time that actions are taken (ex ante). While policy-analytic procedures of monitoring and evaluation are retrospective, because they are applied after actions are taken (ex post), forecasting and recommendation are both applied prospectively (ex ante) (Dunn, 2008).
• Value laden.Advocative claims depend as much on "facts" as they do on "values." To claim that a particular policy alternative should be adopted requires not only that the action being recommended will have the predicted consequences; it also requires that the predicted consequences are valued by individuals, groups, or society as a whole (Dunn, 2008).
• Ethically complex.The values underlying advocative claims are ethically complex. A given value (e.g., health) may be regarded as both intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic values are those that are valued as ends in themselves; extrinsic values are those that are valued because they will produce some other value. Health may be regarded as an end in itself and as a condition necessary for the attainment of other values, including security, freedom, and self-actualization. Similarly, democratic participation may be valued as an end in itself (intrinsic value) and a means to political stability (extrinsic value) (Dunn, 2008).
Each claim focuses on some sort of action or value that is perceived or occurred. The claims further describe the different choices that may occur when further developing policy recommendation.
What methods of advocative claims affect a public policy recommendation?
Public choice and the multiple legitimate stakeholders is one of the methods that affect public policy recommendations that I see more than others. With the numerous people that feel that their stake in the policy is the most important can cause the policy to be skewed towards whom benefits the most from the policy (Dunn, 2008). This can be problematic when it pertains to safety and people's freedoms.
Which type of claim is more common in your organization or local government? Explain your answer using examples.
The type of claim that my organization deals with the most is the value laden as well as the ethically complex. We deal with facts and behaviors that have can multiple actions as far as enforcement. So much of what I deal with can be seen as ethically based due to the intrinsic and extrinsic values. Law enforcement focuses so much on security and freedom that these claims can often be questioned often and are more common that the value laden and other claims. Our behaviors in and out of work often get called into question by superiors or the public and therefore play into our values and ethical choices.
Reference
Dunn, W. (2008). Chapter 5: Recommending Preferred Policies. In Public policy analysis: An introduction (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Discussion C 100 words 1 reference
Is rational choice possible?
Rationality is based on several different agents. An agent of rationality is also the decision-makers beliefs and ability to incorporate facts and reason in making choices. Rationality is possible but varies based on priorities, ethical and cultural backgrounds, information availability and the facts presented. For instance, when I am watching the news I notice that there is a clear interpretation's difference between Fox news and their pitch in contrast to Rachel Maddox and her pitch. Rationality implies a census of personal thoughts and interpretation of the facts and relevant information to make a solid decision that will severe the most amount of people in the most cost effective. It may appear that the process of making policy recommendations is not and cannot be "rational." Tempting as this conclusion might be, our inability to satisfy the conditions of the simple model of choice does not mean that the process of recommendation is not and cannot be rational (Dunn,2009).
Rationality is an objective thought steam, everyone rationalizes differently. There are five types of rationality Technical rationality deciding between two options and their ability to be effective, Economic rationality which calls for rationality and fiscal responsibility, legal rationality the comparison of alternatives based on their legal conformity, social rationality reasoned choices used to maintain or approve social institutions, and finally substantive reasonable choices that involve multiple forms of rationality.(Dunn,2009)