Unlock document.
This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
(1) While much has changed, the full acceptance and accommodation of gay,
lesbian, bisexual, and transgender employees remains a work in progress.
(2) Federal law does not protect employees against discrimination based on
sexual orientation, although 29 states and more than 160 municipalities do.
(3) Employers differ regarding their policies on this issue.
b. Gender identity
(1) Companies are increasingly putting in place policies to govern how their
organizations treat transgender employees.
2. Cultural Identity
a. People choose their cultural identity, and they also choose how closely they
observe the norms of that culture.
b. Cultural norms influence the workplace, sometimes resulting in clashes.
c. Thanks to global integration and changing labor markets, global companies do
well to understand and respect the cultural identities of their employees, both as
groups and as individuals.
d. A company seeking to be sensitive to the cultural identities of its employees
should look beyond accommodating its majority group and instead create as much
of an individualized approach to practices and norms as possible.
II. Ability
A. Ability is an individual’s current capacity to perform various tasks in a job.
B. Intellectual Abilities
1. Intellectual abilities are abilities needed to perform mental activities – thinking,
reasoning, and problem solving.
2. Most societies place a high value on intelligence, and for good reason.
a. Smart people generally earn more money and attain higher levels of education.
b. They are also more likely to emerge as leaders of groups.
c. Intelligence quotient (IQ) tests, for example, are designed to ascertain a person’s
general intellectual abilities.
d. So, too, are popular college admission tests, such as the SAT and ACT, and
graduate admission tests in business (GMAT), law (LSAT), and medicine
(MCAT).
e. Testing firms don’t claim their tests assess intelligence, but experts know they do.
3. The seven most frequently cited dimensions making up intellectual abilities are
number aptitude, verbal comprehension, perceptual speed, inductive reasoning,
deductive reasoning, spatial visualization, and memory. Exhibit 2-2 describes these
dimensions.
4. If you score high on verbal comprehension, you’re more likely to also score high on
spatial visualization.
a. The correlations aren’t perfect, meaning people do have specific abilities that
predict important work-related outcomes when considered individually.
b. However, they are high enough that researchers also recognize a general factor of
intelligence, general mental ability (GMA).
5. Evidence strongly supports the idea that the structures and measures of intellectual
abilities generalize across cultures.
6. Jobs differ in the demands they place on intellectual abilities.
a. The more complex a job is in terms of information-processing demands, the more
general intelligence and verbal abilities will be necessary to perform successfully.
b. Where employee behavior is highly routine and there are few or no opportunities
to exercise discretion, a high IQ is not as important as performing well.
c. However, that does not mean people with high IQs cannot have an impact on
traditionally less complex jobs.
7. Although intelligence is a big help in performing a job well, it doesn’t make people
happier or more satisfied with their jobs.
a. The correlation between intelligence and job satisfaction is about zero.
b. Research suggests that although intelligent people perform better and tend to have
more interesting jobs, they are also more critical when evaluating their job
conditions.
c. Thus, smart people have it better, but they also expect more.
C. Physical Abilities
1. Introduction
a. Though the changing nature of work suggests intellectual abilities are increasingly
important for many jobs, physical abilities have been and will remain valuable.
b. Nine basic abilities involved in the performance of physical tasks. (Exhibit 2-3)
III. Implementing Diversity Management Strategies
A. Introduction
1. Having discussed a variety of ways in which people differ, we now look at how a
manager can and should manage these differences.
2. Diversity management makes everyone more aware of and sensitive to the needs
and differences of others.
3. This definition highlights the fact that diversity programs include and are meant for
everyone.
4. Diversity is much more likely to be successful when we see it as everyone’s business
than if we believe it helps only certain groups of employees.
B. Attracting, Selecting, Developing, and Retaining Diverse Employees
1. One method of enhancing workforce diversity is to target recruiting messages to
specific demographic groups underrepresented in the workforce.
a. This means placing advertisements in publications geared toward specific
demographic groups.
b. Diversity advertisements that fail to show women and minorities in positions of
organizational leadership send a negative message about the diversity climate at
an organization.
2. The selection process is one of the most important places to apply diversity efforts.
a. Managers who hire need to value fairness and objectivity in selecting employees,
and focus on the productive potential of new recruits.
b. Where managers use a well-defined protocol for assessing applicant talent and the
organization clearly prioritizes nondiscrimination policies, qualifications become
far more important in determining who gets hired than demographic
characteristics.
3. Similarity in personality appears to affect career advancement.
a. Those whose personality traits are similar to those of their coworkers are more
likely to be promoted than those whose personalities are different.
C. Diversity in Groups
1. Groups are an essential part of organizational settings.
a. If employees feel no cohesion or sense of membership, group attributes are likely
to be less.
b. Does diversity help or hurt group performance?
(1) Whether diverse or homogeneous teams are more effective depends on the
characteristic of interest.
(2) Demographic diversity (in gender, race, and ethnicity) does not appear to
either help or hurt team performance in general.
(3) On the other hand, teams of individuals who are highly intelligent,
conscientious, and interested in working in team settings are more effective.
(4) Thus, diversity on these variables is likely to be a bad thing – it makes little
sense to try to form teams that mix in members who are lower in intelligence,
conscientiousness, and uninterested in teamwork.
c. In other cases, differences can be a strength.
(1) Groups of individuals with different types of expertise and education are more
effective than homogeneous groups.
(2) Similarly, a group made up entirely of assertive people who want to be in
charge, or a group whose members all prefer to follow the lead of others, will
be less effective than a group that mixes leaders and followers.
(3) Regardless of the composition of the group, differences can be leveraged to
achieve superior performance.
(4) Groups of diverse individuals will be much more effective if leaders can show
how members have a common interest in the group’s success.
2. Evidence also shows transformational leaders (who emphasize higher-order goals and
values in their leadership style) are more effective in managing diverse teams.
D. Effective Diversity Programs
1. Effective diversity programs have three components:
a. They teach managers about the legal framework for equal employment
opportunity and encourage fair treatment of all people regardless of their
demographic characteristics.
b. They teach managers how a diverse workforce will be better able to serve a
diverse market of customers and clients.
c. They foster personal development practices that bring out the skills and abilities
of all workers, acknowledging how differences in perspective can be a valuable
way to improve performance for everyone.
2. Much concern about diversity has to do with fair treatment.
a. Most negative reactions to employment discrimination are based on the idea that
discriminatory treatment is unfair.
b. Regardless of race or gender, people are generally in favor of diversity-oriented
programs, including affirmative action, if they believe the policies ensure
everyone a fair opportunity to show their skills and abilities.
3. Organizational leaders should examine their workforce to determine whether target
groups have been underutilized.
4. If groups of employees are not proportionally represented in top management,
managers should look for any hidden barriers to advancement.
5. Communications should focus as much as possible on qualifications and job
performance; emphasizing certain groups as needing more assistance could well
backfire.
6. Finally, research indicates a tailored approach will be needed for international
organizations.
IV. Summary and Implications for Managers
A. This chapter looks at diversity from many perspectives paying particular attention to
three variables – biographical characteristics, ability, and diversity programs.
B. Diversity management must be an ongoing commitment that crosses all levels of the
organization.
1. Policies to improve the climate for diversity can be effective, so long as they are
designed to acknowledge all employees’ perspectives.
C. Implications for managers:
1. Understand your organization's anti-discrimination policies thoroughly and share
them with your employees.
2. Assess and challenge your stereotype beliefs to increase your objectivity.
3. Look beyond readily observable biographical characteristics and consider the
individual’s capabilities before making management decisions.
4. Fully evaluate what accommodations a person with disabilities will need and then
fine-tune a job to that person’s abilities.
5. Seek to understand and respect the unique biographical characteristics of your
employees; a fair but individualistic approach yields the best performance.
An Ethical Choice
Affirmative Action for Unemployed Veterans
This exercise contributes to:
Learning Objectives: Describe how organizations manage diversity effectively; Demonstrate how workplace
discrimination undermines organizational effectiveness
Learning Outcomes: Describe the factors that influence the formation of individual attitudes and values; Apply the
study of perception and attribution to the workplace; Define diversity and describe the effects of diversity in the
workforce
AACSB: Diverse and multicultural work environments
Unemployed veterans, take heart: Walmart wants YOU. In a historic move, the retailing giant
vows to hire any returning U.S. veteran who applies. Projections are that Walmart will extend job
offers to 100,000 veterans from 2013 to 2018. Other businesses are launching similar initiatives,
such as JPMorgan Chase’s 100,000 Jobs Mission, which aims to hire that many veterans by
2020. Is this an ethical choice all businesses should be emulating, or a form of reverse
discrimination?
Few people would disagree there is a need to address the plight of returning soldiers in America.
As a rule, veterans say employers don’t want them. “There are a lot of companies that say they
want veterans, but that conflicts with the unemployment numbers,” said Hakan Jackson, a former
technician in the Air Force. He’s right: unemployment rates remain higher for veterans. The
suicide rate for veterans is also sharply higher than for active-duty soldiers, and the
“hopelessness of unemployment almost certainly plays a role,” reports Georgette Mosbacher,
CEO of the Borghese Cosmetics Company and board member of the Intrepid Fallen Heroes
Fund. Veterans need jobs. But is affirmative action justified, or are these former soldiers not
competing well in the job market?
According to some veterans, the returning solders are not competitive in the marketplace. Erik
Sewell, an Iraq war veteran, suggested the reason the veteran unemployment rate is poor is partly
because vets often don’t market their strengths well or showcase their transferable skills to
potential employers. Bryson DeTrent, a 12-year veteran of the National Guard, observed that one
of the key reasons vets haven’t found jobs is that they aren’t working hard at it, preferring to
collect unemployment instead. However, he also found that companies are reluctant to hire
veterans, especially National Guard members, fearing these employees may later be recalled to
duty. Employers also worry that veterans may suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD),
though some managers report that veterans’ work ethic, team outlook, and receptivity to training
are greater than among the general populace.
Sometimes, affirmative action is needed to give an unfairly disadvantaged workforce segment an
opportunity to succeed, whether it is done through percentage quotas, number quotas, or hiring
all prospective employees from the desired groups. But any affirmative action program risks
including under-qualified individuals from the target group while excluding qualified individuals
from other workforce segments, creating reverse discrimination. Resources are always scarce,
and there are only so many jobs to go around. If a manager must choose between a qualified
civilian candidate and a qualified veteran, the manager might favor the veteran without
discrimination. But if a manager must choose an under-qualified veteran candidate over a
qualified civilian candidate due to an affirmative action policy, the manager is forced to
discriminate against the qualified candidate. Managers must balance the ethics of affirmative
action against the responsibility of strengthening their workforces for the good of their
organizations.
Sources: D. C. Baldridge and M. L. Swift, “Withholding Requests for Disability Accommodation: The Role of Individual Differences and
Disability Attributes,” Journal of Management (March 2013), pp. 743–762; G. Mosbacher, “Wal-Mart Wants You!” The Wall Street Journal
(February 1, 2013), p. A11; B. Yerbak and C. V. Jackson, “Battling to Get More Vets in the Work Force,” Chicago Tribune (October 28, 2012),
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-10-28/business/ct-biz-1028-vets--20121028_1_train-veteransunemployment-rate-war-zone; and
“Veterans Unemployment Drops But Remains High,” HR Magazine (February 2013), p. 16.
Class Exercise
1. Have the students divide into groups of four to five students.
2. Ask students to consider a situation in which their boss has asked for help in fulfilling a
new company policy to hire a large number of returning war veterans.
3. After interviewing numerous veterans, and not finding a promising candidate, a candidate
who had been on the short list prior to the company’s new policy toward war veterans
remains on the top of the list.
4. Have students prepare a letter to their boss outlining why the most promising candidate
should be overlooked in favor of a less qualified veteran, and a letter outlining why the
promising candidate should be hired even if it goes against company policy.
5. Ask students to vote on which individual is offered the new job. Discuss what this means
for their prospects in the job market.
Teaching Notes
This exercise is applicable to face-to-face classes or synchronous online classes such as
BlackBoard 9.1, WIMBA, and Second Life Virtual Classrooms. See
http://www.baclass.panam.edu/imob/SecondLife for more information.
Personal Inventory Assessments
Intercultural Sensitivity Scale
Are you aware of intercultural dynamics? Take this PIA to assess your intercultural sensitivity.
Myth or Science?
“Bald is Better”
This exercise contributes to:
Learning Objectives: Describe how the key biographical characteristics are relevant to OB
Learning Outcomes: Describe the factors that influence the formation of individual attitudes and values; Apply the
study of perception and attribution to the workplace; Define diversity and describe the effects of diversity in the
workforce
AACSB: Diverse and multicultural work environments
This is true, at least for men: What you wear (or don’t wear) on your head matters. A recent study
showed that observers believe a male’s shaved head indicates greater masculinity, dominance,
and leadership potential than longer or thinning hair. Thinning hair was perceived as the least
powerful look, and other studies have agreed that male-pattern baldness (where some hair
remains) is not considered advantageous. But why is this?
In some respects, the reported youthful advantage of a shaved head is counterintuitive. Because
we have more hair when we are young, and our culture considers youthfulness a sign of
capability (if you doubt this, see the sections on aging in this chapter), it would make more sense
for a hairless head to be a distinct disadvantage. Yet culture has influenced this perception,
loading the media with images of powerful men who are intentionally bald with shaved heads –
military heroes, winning athletes, action heroes. No wonder the study participants declared the
men with shaved heads were an inch taller and 13 percent stronger than the same men with hair.
A shaved head has become the hallmark of some important CEOs, notably Jeff Bezos of
Amazon, Dan Akerson of General Motors, and Steve Ballmer of Microsoft. Men who have
shaved their heads report it can give them a business advantage, whether or not it makes them
look older (which is debatable). According to psychologist Caroline Keating, just as older
silver-back gorillas are “typically the powerful actors in their social groups,” so it is in the office,
where baldness may “signal who is in charge and potentially dangerous.” Research professor
Michael Cunningham agrees, adding that baldness “is nature’s way of telling the rest of the
world you are a survivor.” Men with shaved heads convey aggressiveness, competitiveness, and
independence, he adds. Will you join the 13 percent of men who shave their heads? Time will
tell.
Sources: J. Misener, “Men With Shaved Heads Appear More Dominant, Study Finds,” The Huffington Post (October 1, 2012),
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/01/bald-men-dominant-shaved-heads-study_n_1930489.html; A. E. Mannes, “Shorn Scalps and
Perceptions of Male Dominance,” Social Psychological and Personality Science, doi: 10.1177/1948550612449490; and R. E. Silverman, “Bald Is
Powerful,” The Wall Street Journal (October 3, 2012), pp. B1, B6.
Class Exercise
1.Ask students to discuss in class attitudes toward shaved heads versus balding. What does
each student believe in agreement or disagreement with points made about balding?
2.Have students relate their own experiences or those of close friends to determine if any of
them can remember situations in which they were judged either positively or negatively
because of their hair.
3.What do these experiences tell students about surface-level characteristics and
discrimination in the workplace?
4.Finally, as a class, ask students to look at images of men with shaved heads and men with
full heads of hair. Ask students to write down the first thought that comes to mind.
Tabulate the results and discuss what they mean for men looking for a job or a promotion.
Teaching Notes
This exercise is applicable to face-to-face classes or synchronous online classes such as
BlackBoard 9.1, WIMBA, and Second Life Virtual Classrooms. See
http://www.baclass.panam.edu/imob/SecondLife for more information.
Career OBjectives
Is it okay to be gay at work?
This exercise contributes to:
Learning Objectives: Describe how the key biological characteristics are relevant to OB; Describe how
organizations manage diversity effectively
Learning Outcomes: Describe the factors that influence the formation of individual attitudes and values; Apply the
study of perception and attribution to the workplace; Define diversity and describe the effects of diversity in the
workforce
AACSB: Diverse and multicultural work environments
I’m gay, but no one at my workplace knows it. How much should I be willing to tell? I want to
be sure to have a shot at the big positions in the firm. — Ryan
Dear Ryan:
Unfortunately, you are right to be concerned. Here are some suggestions:
• Look for an inclusive company culture. Apple CEO Tim Cook said, “I’ve had the good fortune
to work at a company that loves creativity and innovation and knows it can only flourish when
you embrace people’s differences. Not everyone is so lucky.” Recent research has focused on
discovering new methods to counteract a discrimination culture in the United States, the United
Kingdom, and Australia.
• Choose your moral ground. Do you feel you have a responsibility to “come out” to help effect
social change? Do you have a right to keep your private life private? The balance is a private
decision. A recent study by the U.S. Human Rights Campaign indicated that only half of LGBT
employees nationwide disclose their status.
• Consider your future in top management. Corporate-level leaders are urged to be open with
peers and employees. As Ernst & Young global vice chairperson Beth Brooke said about her
decades of staying closeted, the pressure to be “authentic” adds stress if you are keeping your
gay status a secret.
• Weigh your options. The word from people at the top who are gay (some who have come out
and others who have not) is mixed. Brooke said, “Life really did get better” after she announced
her status in a company sponsored video. Mark Stephanz, a vice chairman at Bank of America
Merrill Lynch, agreed, remarking that “most people still deal with you the same way they always
do.” Yet Deena Fidas, deputy director for the largest LGBT civil rights group in the United
States, reported that being gay in the workplace is still “far from being a ‘nonissue’.”
• Be aware of international and national laws. Sadly, some nations and states are intolerant. You
will need to study the laws to be sure you will be safe from repercussions when you reveal your
status. So, think about your decision from both an ethical and a self-interested point of view.
Your timing depends not only on what you think are your ethical responsibilities, but also on
your context – where you work, the culture of your organization, and the support of the people
within it. Thankfully, globalization is ensuring that the world becomes increasingly accepting
and fair.
Good luck in your career!
Sources: M. D. Birtel, “’Treating’ Prejudice: An Exposure-Therapy Approach to Reducing
Negative Reactions Toward Stigmatized Groups,” Psychological Science (November 2012): 1379–86; L. Cooper
and J. Raspanti, “The Cost of the Closet and the Rewards of Inclusion,” Human Rights Campaign report (May
2014), http://hrc-assets.s3-websiteus-east-1.amazonaws.com//files/assets/resources/Cost_of_the_Closet_May2014.
pdf; N. Rumens and J. Broomfield, “Gay Men in the Police: Identity Disclosure and Management Issues,” Human
Resource Management Journal (July 2012): 283–98; and A. M Ryan and J. L. Wessel, “Sexual Orientation
Harassment in the Workplace: When Do Observers Intervene?” Journal of Organizational Behavior (May 2012):
488–509. The opinions provided here are of the managers and authors only and do not necessarily reflect those of
their organizations. The authors or managers are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for the results
obtained from the use of this information. In no event will the authors or managers, or their related partnerships or
corporations thereof, be liable to you or anyone else for any decision made or action taken in reliance on the
opinions provided here.
Point/Counterpoint
Affirmative Action Programs Have Outlived Their Usefulness
This exercise contributes to:
Learning Objectives: Describe the two major forms of workplace diversity; Describe how organizations manage
diversity effectively
Learning Outcomes: Describe the factors that influence the formation of individual attitudes and values; Apply the
study of perception and attribution to the workplace; Define diversity and describe the effects of diversity in the
workforce
AACSB: Diverse and multicultural work environments
Point
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor is arguably the court’s strongest supporter of
affirmative action . . . in theory. In a recent case upholding the Michigan ban on affirmative
action for underrepresented races in state university admission practices, Justice Sotomayor
refused to use the term. “Affirmative action,” she said, has the connotation of “intentional
preferential treatment based on race alone.” Yes, it does. Isn’t that the point?
Now, we aren’t saying that affirmative action was a bad idea, initially. The intentions were good
when President John F. Kennedy first directed government contractors to “take affirmative action
to ensure that . . . employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, creed,
color, or national origin” (1961). Few would also argue with the later interpretation that included
“actions, both in government and private industry, aimed at equalizing job opportunity.”
Affirmative action programs (AAP) were needed to get the process of workplace diversity
started, but that was all a long time ago. The practice, now outlawed in Arizona, California,
Florida, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, and Washington, raises the percentage
of minority individuals but does not create a positive diversity climate. Here’s why:
Affirmative action lowers the standards for everyone by shifting the criteria for admission
from performance standards to quotas based on race or other non-performance attributes.
Performance standards for the organization are then effectively lowered. Groups not helped
by the initiative will be resentful, and qualified members of the protected minority may be as
well.
Research indicates that minority students are not helped by school admission initiatives. In
fact, a large-scale study showed that minority law students who attended schools best
matched to their LSAT scores performed better than those who went to higher-ranked schools
than their scores would warrant without affirmative action. Similarly, employees who are
mismatched to their positions—who have poor person-organization fit—underperform and
are generally less satisfied in their jobs.
U.S. businesses and laws do support diversity, and indicators show that U.S. workers
generally consider it important. But they value fairness more. In fact, though recently aimed
at creating diversity, affirmative action was enacted to ensure fairness to the disadvantaged.
Now that experience and research have proven a culture of inclusivity is more important for
diversity than headcount, organizations should focus on the fairness of objective standards.
Affirmative action is even unfair to its highest-performing beneficiaries, who suffer from the
misperception that their success is due only to its advantages.
Affirmative action has run its course to increase diversity, and it’s time to create true equality by
focusing on merit-based achievements.
Counterpoint
Affirmative action was enacted to ensure equality, and it’s still needed today. When the United
States was considering the issue for black minorities back in 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson
said, “You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him,
bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say, ‘You are free to compete with all the
others,’ and still justly believe that you have been completely fair.” Dr. Martin Luther agreed
that, in order to create equal opportunity, proactive measures are needed as long as some people
remain at a disadvantage. Therefore, what we should be asking is: are minority groups faring as
well as majority groups in the United States? No, not by any indicator. Minority groups test
lower in academics, are under-represented in management and leadership roles, and have a
smaller presence in the professional ranks.
Affirmative action continues to benefit the community. Consider the following:
Affirmative action programs have given all workers access to training and promotion
opportunities through the establishment of merit-based norms.
Affirmative action policies work around the world. The percentages of minorities in
universities, management, and professions have increased in the years since it was adopted.
Diversity has contributed to the college and workplace experience. As research shows,
understanding and tolerance are increased when members of different people groups work
together. Classrooms with a diverse student body help raise future leaders from minority, and
sometimes economically disadvantaged groups, which helps them become integrated into
U.S. society.
To be certain, fairness is in the eye of the beholder. Affirmative action provides opportunity, but
then it is up to the individual to meet the expectations of schools or employers. As blogger
Berneta Haynes wrote, “I’m not ashamed to admit that without affirmative action, I’m not certain
I would be on the precipice of the law career that I’m at right now. As an African-American
woman from a poor family, I have little doubt that affirmative action helped me get into college,
earn a degree, and enroll in law school.” Her underprivileged status earned her an opportunity to
succeed, but is that different from anyone else using his or her social status to get a foot in the
door?
If anything about affirmative action is changed through Supreme Court rulings, it should be only
to expand the program until the statistics of minority-group achievements fully match those of
the long over-privileged majority.
Sources: D. Desilver, “Supreme Court Says States Can Ban Affirmative Action: 8 Already Have,” Pew Research
Center Thinktank (April 22, 2014),
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/04/22/supreme-court-says-states-can-ban-affirmative-action-8-already-h
ave/; B. Haynes, “Affirmative Action Helped Me,” Inside Higher Ed (March 12, 2013),
www.insidehighered.com/views/2013/03/12/affirmative-action-helped-me-and-benefits-society-essay; D. Leonhardt,
“Rethinking Affirmative Action,” The New York Times (October 13, 2012),
www.nytimes.com/2012/10/14/sunday-review/rethinking-affirmativeaction. html?pagewanted=all; L. M. Leslie, D.
M. Mayer, and D. A. Kravitz, “The Stigma of Affirmative Action: A Stereotyping-Based Theory and Meta-Analytic
Test of the Consequences for Performance,” Academy of Management Journal 57, no. 4 (2014): 964–89; and B.
Zimmer, “Affirmative Action’s Hazy Definitions,” The Wall Street Journal (April 26–27, 2014), C4. With help from
Wikipedia.
Class Exercise
1. Assign teams of students comprising of three students each.
2. Assign Point or Counterpoint to each group.
3. Assign groups to focus on the issues in the Point/Counterpoint and to do some Internet or
library fact-finding supporting their assigned positions.
4. In class, draw lots from groups assigned to a position.
5. Have the group members present their positions in persuasive presentation with the goal
to address factors brought up by the opposing position.
6. Repeat for other groups.
or
Assign students to write a position paper on the Point or Counterpoint that contrasts the positions
and draws conclusions based on facts.
Teaching Notes
This exercise is applicable to face-to-face classes or synchronous online classes such as
BlackBoard 9.1, WIMBA, and Second Life Virtual Classrooms. See
http://www.baclass.panam.edu/imob/SecondLife for more information.
