Assessment Information
Subject Code: MBA506
Subject Name: Thinking Styles, Negotiation and Conflict Management
Assessment Title: Conflict Management Analysis & Evaluation
Weighting: 40%
Total Marks: 40
Due Date: Monday of Week 11, 11.55 pm AEST
.
Assessment Description
. ..
You are required to watch the CNN interview between presenters Don Lemon and Alisyn Camerota and their guest Reza Aslan available here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-W-7ozJXLw
Transcript analysis
You are required to annotate the written transcript of the interview (provided below) with notes identifying:
1. The purpose of each participant at the beginning of the interview and comment on whether or not their purposes were more likely to cause conflict or manage conflict
2. The stories the participants are telling themselves and any specific acts of vilification
3. Any instances in the interview where any of the participants became threatened and explain why
4. Any instances where the participants were relying on opinions rather than facts
Conflict management evaluation
You are required to write a report (3 pages) explaining how you believe each participant could have managed themselves and the interview more effectively.
Transcript of CNN Tonight interview with Reza Aslan
Aired 29 September 2014
CAMEROTA: Defenders of Islam insist it is a peaceful religion. Others disagree and point to the primitive treatment in Muslim countries of women and other minorities.
LEMON: So let's discuss this now.
We're joined now by Reza Aslan, a scholar of religions, a professor at University of California, Riverside, and the author of -Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth.-
Let's talk about this because it's a very interesting conversation every time we have it. Before we get into this discussion, I want to play with you this clip from Bill Maher's show just this Friday night. Here it is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MAHER: President Obama keeps insisting that ISIS is not Islamic. Well, maybe they don't practice the Muslim faith the same way he does.
(LAUGHTER)
MAHER: But if vast numbers of Muslims across the world believe, and they do, that humans deserve to die for merely holding a different idea or drawing a cartoon or writing a book or eloping with the wrong person, not only does the Muslim world have something in common with ISIS; it has too much in common with ISIS. There's so much talk -- you can applaud. Sure.
(APPLAUSE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LEMON: He went on for a good five or six minutes about that, talking about how women are -- circumcision for women, not respecting the rights of women, not respecting the rights of gay people. And what's your reaction? And then we will talk.
REZA ASLAN, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, RIVERSIDE: Well, I like Bill Maher. I have been on his show a bunch of times. He's a comedian.
But, you know, frankly, when it comes to the topic of religion, he's not very sophisticated in the way that he thinks. I mean, the argument about the female genital mutilation being an Islamic problem is a perfect example of that. It's not an Islamic problem. It's an African problem.
(CROSSTALK)
CAMEROTA: Well, wait, wait, wait.
(CROSSTALK)
CAMEROTA: Hold on. Hold on a second Reza, because he says it's a Muslim country problem. He says that, in Somalia...
ASLAN: Yes, but that's -- yes. And that's actually empirically factually incorrect.
It's a Central African problem. Eritrea has almost 90 percent female genital mutilation. It's a Christian country. Ethiopia has 75 percent female genital mutilation. It's a Christian country. Nowhere else in the Muslim, Muslim-majority states is female genital mutilation an issue.
But, again, this is the problem, is that you make these facile arguments that women are somehow mistreated in the Muslim world -- well, that's certainly true in many Muslim-majority countries like Iran and Saudi Arabia. Do you know that Muslims have elected seven women as their heads of state in those Muslim-majority countries?
How many women do we have as states in the United States?
(CROSSTALK)
LEMON: Reza, be honest, though. For the most part, it is not a free and open society for women in those states.
ASLAN: Well, it's not in Iran. It's not in Saudi Arabia.
It certainly is in Indonesia and Malaysia. It certainly is in Bangladesh. It certainly is in Turkey. I mean, again, this is the problem is that you're talking about a religion of 1.5 billion people and certainly it becomes very easy to just simply paint them all with a single brush by saying, well, in Saudi Arabia, they can't drive and so therefore that is somehow representative of Islam.
It's representative of Saudi Arabia.
(CROSSTALK)
CAMEROTA: But hold on. I think that Bill Maher's point is that these aren't extremists. We often talk about extremists and that we should crack down on extremists and why aren't Muslims speaking out about extremists?
In Saudi Arabia, when women can't vote and they can't drive and they need permission from their husband, that's not extremists. Why aren't we talking more about what...
ASLAN: Why? CAMEROTA: That's not extremist. That's commonplace. Why don't we talk more about the commonplace wrongs that are happening in some of these countries?
(CROSSTALK)
ASLAN: It's extremist when compared to the rights and responsibilities of women, Muslim women around the world. It's an extremist way of dealing with it.
(CROSSTALK)
LEMON: But it's not extremist in that country, in Saudi Arabia. That's the norm.
(CROSSTALK)
LEMON: That's what she is saying.
ASLAN: Oh, no, it's not.
I mean, look, Saudi Arabia is one of the most, if not the most, extremist Muslim country in the world. In the month that we have been talking about ISIS and their terrible actions in Iraq and Syria, Saudi Arabia, our closest ally, has beheaded 19 people. Nobody seems to care about that because Saudi Arabia sort of preserves our national interests.
LEMON: OK.
ASLAN: You know, but this is the problem, is that these kinds of conversations that we're having aren't really being had in any kind of legitimate way. We're not talking about women in the Muslim world. We're using two or three examples to justify a generalization. That's actually the definition of bigotry.
LEMON: All right, fair enough.
Let's listen to Benjamin Netanyahu at the United Nations today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: So when it comes to their ultimate goals, Hamas is ISIS, and ISIS is Hamas. And what they share in common, all militant Islamists share in common.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LEMON: So, Reza, the question at the bottom of the screen that everyone is looking at, does Islam promote violence?
ASLAN: Islam doesn't promote violence or peace. Islam is just a religion, and like every religion in the world, it depends on what you bring to it. If you're a violent person, your Islam, your Judaism, your Christianity, your Hinduism is going to be violent. There are Buddhist -- marauding Buddhist monks in Myanmar slaughtering
women and children. Does Buddhism promote violence? Of course not. People are violent or peaceful. And that depends on their politics, their social world, the way that they see their communities, the way they see themselves.
CAMEROTA: So, Reza, you don't think that there's anything more -- there's -- the justice system in Muslim countries you don't think is somehow more primitive or subjugates women more than in other countries?
ASLAN: Did you hear what you just said? You said in Muslim countries.
I just told you that, Indonesia, women are absolutely 100 percent equal to men. In Turkey, they have had more female representatives, more female heads of state in Turkey than we have in the United States.
LEMON: Yes, but in Pakistan...
(CROSSTALK)
ASLAN: Stop saying things like -Muslim countries.-
LEMON: In Pakistan, women are still being stoned to death.
ASLAN: And that's a problem for Pakistan. You're right. So, let's criticize Pakistan.
(CROSSTALK)
LEMON: I just want to be clear on what your point is, because I thought you and Bill Maher were saying the same thing. Your point is that Muslim countries are not to blame.
There is nothing particular, there's no common thread in Muslim countries, you can't paint with a broad brush that somehow their justice system or Sharia law or what they're doing in terms of stoning and female mutilation is different than in other countries like Western countries?
ASLAN: Stoning and mutilation and those barbaric practices should be condemned and criticized by everyone. The actions of individuals and societies and countries like Iran, like Pakistan, like Saudi Arabia must be condemned, because they don't belong in the 21st century.
But to say Muslim countries, as though Pakistan and Turkey are the same, as though Indonesia and Saudi Arabia are the same, as though somehow what is happening in the most extreme forms of these repressive countries, these autocratic countries, is representative of what's happening in every other Muslim country, is, frankly -- and I use this word seriously -- stupid. So let's stop doing that.
LEMON: OK, Reza. Let's -- I want you to listen to Benjamin Netanyahu again. This is actually the one I wanted you to hear. ASLAN: Yes, the ISIS.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NETANYAHU: But our hopes and the world's hopes for peace are in danger, because everywhere we look, militant Islam is on the march. It's not militants. It's not Islam. It's militant Islam. And, typically, its first victims are other Muslims, but it spares no one.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LEMON: He's making a clear distinction there. He says it's not militants, it's not Islam; it's militant Islam. Do you understand his distinction there? Is he correct?
ASLAN: Well, he's correct in talking about militant Islam being a problem.
He is absolutely incorrect in talking about ISIS equaling Hamas. That's just ridiculous. No one takes him seriously when he says things like that. And, frankly, it's precisely why, under his leadership, Israel has become so incredibly isolated from the rest of the global community.
Those kinds of statements are illogical, they're irrational, they're so obviously propagandistic. In fact, he went so far as to then bring up the Nazis, which has become kind of a verbal tick for him whenever he brings up either Hamas or ISIS.
Again, these kinds of oversimplifications I think only cause more danger. There is a very real problem. ISIS is a problem. Al Qaeda is a problem. These militant Islamic groups like Hamas, like Hezbollah, like the Taliban have to be dealt with. But it doesn't actually help us to deal with them when, instead of talking about rational conflicts, rational criticisms of a particular religion, we instead so easily slip into bigotry by simply painting everyone with a single brush, as we have been doing in this conversation, mind you.
LEMON: Well, we're just asking the questions, Reza. And you're answering. And I think you answered very fairly, and we appreciate it.
Thank you, Reza Aslan.
CAMEROTA: We appreciate your perspective...
ASLAN: My pleasure.
CAMEROTA: ... and helping everyone understand your perspective.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Criteria F (Fail)
0%-49% P (Pass) 50%-64% CR (Credit) 65%-74% D (Distinction)
75% - 84%
HD (High Distinction)
85%-100%
Mark
Assessment Content (Subject Specific) OUT OF 80 MARKS
Transcript analysis
Purpose identification Failure to accurately identify the purpose of each participant at the beginning
of the interview with little to
no commentary on whether or not their purposes were more likely to cause conflict or manage conflict. Reasonable effort made to identify the purpose of each participant at the beginning of the interview with appropriate commentary on whether or not their purposes were more likely to cause conflict or manage conflict. Close to accurate identification of the purpose of each participant at the beginning of the interview and relevant commentary on whether or not their purposes were more likely to cause conflict or manage conflict with explanation in support. Accurate identification of the purpose of each participant at the beginning of the interview and good commentary on whether or not their purposes were more likely to cause conflict or manage conflict supported by logical explanation. Precise identification of the purpose of each participant at the beginning of the interview and insightful commentary on whether or not their purposes were more likely to cause conflict or manage conflict supported by detailed explanation. /15
Transcript analysis Storytelling Demonstrated misunderstanding of or failure to appropriately consider and apply storytelling and vilification concepts to participant behavior. Exploration of possible storytelling scenarios adopted by each
participant together with somewhat accurate identification and analysis of specific acts of vilification. Relevant consideration of plausible storytelling scenarios adopted by each participant together with reasonably accurate identification and analysis of specific acts of vilification. Accurate discussion of probable storytelling scenarios adopted by each participant together with sound identification and analysis of specific acts of vilification. Detailed discussion of highly probable storytelling scenarios adopted by each participant together with precise identification and analysis of specific acts of vilification. /15
Transcript analysis Under threat Failure to accurately identify instances in the interview where the participants became threatened with little or no explanation in support. Fair attempt made to identify instances in the interview where the participants became threatened with appropriate explanation provided. Close to accurate identification of instances in the interview where the participants became threatened with relevant explanation offered. Accurate identification of instances in the interview where the participants became threatened logically discussed and explained. Precise identification of instances in the interview where the participants became threatened supported by insightful and detailed explanation. /15
Transcript analysis
Opinions versus facts Demonstrated inability to identify instances where the participants were relying on opinions rather than facts. Reasonable effort made to identify instances where the participants were relying on opinions rather than facts. Relevant consideration of instances where the participants were relying on opinions rather than facts. Accurate identification of several instances where the participants were relying on opinions rather than facts. Precise identification of multiple instances where the participants were relying on opinions rather than facts. /15
Conflict management evaluation Report indicates a lack of understanding of conflict management principles and their practical application. Reasonably well drafted report demonstrating appropriate level of understanding of conflict management principles and their practical application. Competent report demonstrating understanding of conflict management principles and their practical application. Well drafted report demonstrating clear understanding of conflict management principles and their practical application. Clear and concise report demonstrating advanced level understanding of conflict management principles and their practical application. /20
Structure Format and Presentation (Consistent across all courses) OUT OF 20 MARKS
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Copyright Regulations 1969
This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of Kaplan Business School pursuant to Part VB of the Copyright Act 1968 (‘Act’). The material in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act. Kaplan Business School is a part of Kaplan Inc., a leading global provider of educational services. Kaplan Business School Pty Ltd ABN 86 098 181 947 is a registered higher education provider CRICOS Provider Code 02426B.
Answer clearly and logically presented Serious lack of organization. Body paragraphs do not refer back to or relate to main arguments. Writing is formulaic, i.e. “in conclusion,” “another example is….” Writing style could be more effective. Organization is hard to follow; there is little progression of ideas. Little or no transitions between paragraphs. Need to more effectively weave main arguments throughout and relate body paragraphs. Paragraphs are generally well organized. Better transitions needed. The progression of ideas could be more thoughtful. Paragraphs relate back to main arguments to prove argument. Ideas & arguments are well structured. Thoughtful progression of ideas and details. Sound transitions between paragraphs. Major arguments are effectively made. Ideas & arguments are effectively structured. Thoughtful progression of ideas and details. Excellent transitions between paragraphs. Concluding comments leave the reader thinking. Major arguments are effectively woven throughout every body paragraph, with ideas always related back to main arguments. /4
Appropriate theory and research used to answer question posed The critique does not have appropriate structure and lacks
direction. No significant observations made from appropriate theory and research. Poor writing and expression of arguments. Reasonable critique which examines the relevant issues and makes reasonable observations made from appropriate theory and research. Reasonable writing and expression of arguments. Good critique examines the relevant issues and makes good observations from appropriate theory and research. Good writing and expression of arguments. A very good critique considered all the relevant issues and made important observations made from appropriate theory and research. Very good writing and expression of arguments. Fully considered all the relevant issues and made significant observations made from appropriate theory and research. Excellent writing and expression of arguments. /4
Correct academic writing style used, including correct spelling, grammar and punctuation Needs more sentence variety. Little or no thought given to diction. Tone or language is conversational. Contains much informal language. Uses “I” or
“you.” Contains many examples of unclear or awkward phrasing. Needs more sentence variety. Attention needed with diction. Contains informal language or conversational tone, or uses “I” or “you.” Unclear or awkward sentence phrasing. Sentence variety is adequate. Tone is appropriate. Diction is clear, but could be more effective. Language is academic, and writing is clear and effective. Very little or no unclear or awkward phrasing. Sentence variety is effective and good. Tone is appropriate and consistent. Diction/ vocabulary is appropriate and effective. Language is academic. Writing is clear, and concise. Sentence variety is effective and sophisticated. Tone is appropriate and consistent. Diction/ vocabulary is sophisticated and effective. Language is academic. Writing is clear, concise, and strong. /4
Format of answer consistent with question requirements and
KBS guidelines No efforts made to follow submission and editing, spacing, etc requirements. Meets most editing, spacing,
fonts, and other editing requirements. Some requirements not met. Meets editing, spacing, fonts, and other editing requirements. Meets almost all editing, spacing, fonts, and other editing requirements. Meets all editing, spacing, fonts, and other editing requirements. /3
In-text referencing and reference list follows Harvard style and consistent with KBS guidelines Inappropriate referencing. Not in-line with requirements of Harvard style and consistent with KBS guidelines. Reasonably appropriate referencing, generally in-line with requirements of Harvard style and consistent with KBS guidelines. Good referencing, largely inline with requirements of Harvard style and consistent with KBS guidelines. Very good referencing, 100% in-line with requirements of Harvard style and consistent with KBS guidelines. Excellent/appropriate referencing, 100% in-line with requirements of Harvard style and consistent with KBS guidelines. /3
Word count is within + / - 10% of requirement Word count is within + / - more than 15% of requirement Word count is within + / - 15% of requirement Word count is within + / - 10% of requirement Word count is within + / - 5% of requirement Word count is within
+ / - 0% of requirement /2
Comments:
/80
/20
/100
Assessment Marking Rubric
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Copyright Regulations 1969
This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of Kaplan Business School pursuant to Part VB of the Copyright Act 1968 (‘Act’). The material in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act. Kaplan Business School is a part of Kaplan Inc., a leading global provider of educational services. Kaplan Business School Pty Ltd ABN 86 098 181 947 is a registered higher education provider CRICOS Provider Code 02426B.