Drastic Changes in the Last Few Decades

¶ … drastic changes in the last few decades is the availability of information from electronic sources. This information tends to be global, and is so pervasive that it is often difficult to manage and analyze sources and material. Media, by its very nature, is biased. Regardless of the intent, what is shown, told, or pictured is important; but what is also important is what is not shown, not told, or not pictured.

In the context of organizational behavior, it is important to remember that one must be an informed consumer of information when reading or viewing sources.

Evaluating sources should become second nature if only a few sets of cognitive tools are used: who is the author? What are their credentials and what is their bias and point-of-view (even academics have bias)? What is being said or pictured? How does it relate to past knowledge? Where may I go to verify it? Simply being a bit skeptical about the information given does not make one cynical, but instead helps to maintain principles of a discipline, in this case, organizational behavior, and to ascertain alternative viewpoints.

This, in fact, makes one's own view stronger and more easily defendable (Scott, 2007). This is particularly true when evaluating the difference between scholarly work and the popular press. Since we recognize bias occurs in all works, it is not enough to simply say that popular works are propaganda and scholarly works fact, for that is too great a generaialization. Instead, we simply need to be careful and realize that the absence of sources or the choice of sources also skews the outcome of the work.

In School Uniform Costs 'Break the Bank' for Poorer Families, the overall theme is critical of British school's requirements of uniforms and their cost for pooer families. Of course, the argument for uniforms says that it makes the school environment more egalitarian because they reduce the relevance of class difference, take the focus away from designer clothing, and allow schools to emphasize learning instead of fashion.

The article cites anecdotal sources that really do not form a cogent opinion of the efficacy of uniforms in general, just that parents of pooer children are complaining about the expense. Some parents complain that up to 40 per cent of their monthly income went to back to school costs, but fail to deliniate how much of that was for clothing (Helm and Busby, 2011). However, one of the major points the article fails to address is the actual cost of uniforms vs. non-uniforms.

If there is a set cost of a uniform, even if relatively expensive, it stands to reason that this cost would be less than several outfits, which is one of the points of requiring uniforms -- reduction of expense and leveling out of available clothing to prevent excessive competition.

We do know that, in general, The Guardian, is a more liberal leaning publication, however, what is not apparent without a careful reading of the text is that two major points are completely missing from the prose: 1) the actual cost of uniforms per annum (on average) and 2) the make-up of the supposed 40 per cent of a monthly salary in school supplies (how many parents spent that much?). Further research is clearly necessary to determine these actual costs. There is some debate on whether districts should subsidize required uniforms.

However, considering contemporary educational budgets, lack of money for books, supplies, lab materials, extra-curriculuar activities, art and music, it seems unlikely that money can be diverted to pay for clothing. Even if there are 2 tops (shirts or blouses) and 2 bottoms (skirts or trousers), this is still far less an expenditure that what might be bare necessities for a non-uniform school. Designer shoes and jeans alone could poetntially cost more than the entire uniform, and be outgrown even quicker. One of the.