Quantitative Statistical Analysis for Problem Solving And Decision Making Project

A quantitative statistical analysis written as a Masters Thesis in Problem Solving for the Johnson and Wales University MBA Program. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) contends that increased regulation is required to save dwindling American Lobster stocks (Homarus Americanus) in the North Atlantic Region. Members of various trade organizations contend that the stocks are at the very least stable and probably growing. That cyclical rises and falls in the total biomass is a natural function and is altered more by pollution and habitat degradation than commercial fishing. This paper gives an alternate theory through the use of research and statistical analysis as regards to harvest within the Rhode Island waters. These waters being defined as those within the Northeast and Southwest boundaries of NMFS Management Areas 2 and 3 that are covered by both state and federal jurisdiction

‘Slavery’ and the Jena 6: A Tragedy in Three Acts

It is the modest goal of this Article to consider the twenty-first century American incident not against the panoply of African-American/American history, but rather against but one piece of it: \u27Jena 6\u27 and American slavery. Specifically, I would like to explore the broad stresses of that particular history on this event, considering the way in which the energy of the one may have influenced the shape of the other, though I will approach this task from a very particular direction. While it is intellectually legitimate to consider the details of any imagined connection between the contemporary \u27Jena 6\u27 controversy and America\u27s slavery history, it is my desire here instead to explore that relationship in its negative rather than its positive. Clearly the very influences of our discrete slavery past are not difficult to imagine or see reflected in the present details of the \u27Jena 6\u27 controversy. But how might Jena have looked against a parallel historical backdrop, a backdrop of un-slavery, if you will

Communication and Trust in Virtual and Face-to-Face Teams

Virtual teams (VTs) accomplish shared goals by relying on technology-mediated communication to counteract geographic disparities. Rapid advances in technology have led to the near-ubiquity of VTs within modern organizations, but gaps in existing research designs afflict extant empirical VT research. This experiment evaluates the constructs of trust, communication, and effectiveness in VTs. Two-hundred six participants (103 teams) completed an interdependent task either face-to-face, mediated by a videoconferencing telepresence robot, or mediated by a voice call. I collected measures of cognitive trust, trust propensity, communication quality, and team effectiveness, and conducted in-depth communication analyses. Results suggest that while virtual teamwork does not result in effectiveness decrements, it does result in team trust decrements, but video teams demonstrated smaller trust decrements than voice-only teams. The expansive communication analyses utilized in the study produced inconclusive findings. Given the large sample size used and the breadth of constructs assessed, this experiment sets a milestone in empirical virtual teamwork research for future work to build upon

So Extraordinary, So Unprecedented an Authority : A Conceptual Reconsideration of the Singular Doctrine of Judicial Review

Because the Constitution is the foundation of American government, the political body that interprets and applies that venerable document possesses an extremely potent tool for shaping the American landscape. This tool, known as judicial review, allows the United States Supreme Court to pass judgment not only upon the actions of individual citizens but also upon the actions of the other branches of federal and state government. This authority inevitably leads to criticism of the way the Court implements this power. The author, after delivering a trenchant analysis of the way in which a judicial reviewing power was viewed in America both before and shortly after the framing of the Constitution, provides a new method for reviewing incidents of judicial review. In addition, the author demonstrates the utility of this new method by applying it to two of the most controversial cases in American legal history - Dred Scott v. John F.A. Sandford and Roe v. Wade

Causing the Blood to Flow Where I Touched Him - Liberalism, Constitutionalism, Christianity, and the War at Covey Farm

I will begin my critique by going directly to the source here, the famous Philadelphia Constitutional Convention of 1787, and ask us to look somewhat carefully at the work of the founders there, in considering the ultimate integrity of the product they fashioned and the world they created. That they gave us a classical liberal wonder, with tenets of that philosophy writ large in government for the very first time, is undeniable, though it will be submitted that they gave us something else as well. It is right for us then to explore that something else, not abstractly, through ideas, but concretely - starkly and bloodily so - through the world captured so powerfully by self-educated, selfactualized and self-emancipated Frederick in his 1845 published memoirs, recalling experiences of his youth in that rights-reifying land remembered a decade or more thereafter. In this we will focus on one incident where two worlds collided violently on a non-descript Maryland farm - those of legally generated and maintained master and slave - and we will seek to test the weight of our conference\u27s thesis in the struggle of these two men and these two worlds. We will be free to make appropriate following comments in conclusion

Beyond the Call of Duty: Supererogation Towards an Apologetic Approach in the US Navy

Members of the US Navy subscribe to common values outlined in the Sailor’s Creed, a shared dictum of foundational ideals that burdens all persons within the organization to follow. Honor, courage, commitment, excellence, and fairness are explicit organizational values written therein that codify the standard values expected of all Sailors regardless of rank or other designators. For Christians serving in the US Navy, how can they present the tenets of the Gospel in a manner appropriate, and legal, for a professional, secular work environment such as the military but are consistent with the biblical imperative to give a defense of Christianity to all who ask (1 Peter 3:15)? The answer lies in what John Rawls calls supererogatory acts, those actions in which there is no moral obligation to perform, and are above and beyond the standard ethical behavior the Navy expects; these are not only extraordinary acts of heroism but simple and small occurrences of humility and hospitality. Common moral intuition may lead any Sailor, Christian or not, to perform supererogatory acts but a follower of Christ can intentionally use these actions as part of a greater apologetic approach. In the language of public theology, the paper explores the Heart Before Head method, a combination of Blaise Pascal’s psychological apologetics and evidential apologetics, a two-step method that first appeals to an individual’s heart, the seat and center of human emotion, volition, and will, before moving to historical evidences for the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ