PLAGIARISM FREE "A" WORK 18 HOURS or LESS

Respond to at least two of your classmates’ posts. Each of your responses to your classmates should be at least 150 words in length, and include an APA formatted scholarly resource. In your response post, please Challenge your peers on how they would have approached the case from a different planning perspective. Ask probing questions.

Discussion 1 (Rebecca) The beginning of the case study outlined a prospective approach by having a diver group of individuals that truly wanted to help children in Brazil that wanted to help educate children and teach them skills to survive the hardships they face. The educators used linear thinking in their education. Netting et al., (2008) suggested that producing a logical model can lay out a plan of action to move education and treatment forward. Part of the logical model is identifying the root cause of issues so that action plans can be created to solve the overall problem. The mayor skipped most steps in the process of trying to solve the root cause of the problem and chose to develop a so-called detention center to house the children prior to the research being complete. The actions of the mayor’s office were defiantly politically motivated. The researchers and educators while trying to use a prescriptive approach because of the lack of funding was motived by the small amount of money given by the mayor were able to educate children with self-defense and other common-sense education for being homeless. When the researchers were able to ask more questions and find out more information about the children and the number of children it was discovered that boys outnumber the girls, many had homes and were trying to help their families, some were abandoned because of the economy, and many could not find their families. The researchers were what Netting et al. 2008 calls planners that used a prescriptive approach bring faces to the statics and the problems.

If I were to have been placed in this situation. I would have asked the children about their greatest need, which is commonly food, shelter, safety, clothing, and love. I would have advocated for a space for housing for those that were homeless, or lost, given employment to all, and provided the necessities of life that all children need. But to do this I would also have to seek grants that would help provide monetary funding or even just a building to do this. Class would be taught on self-defense, and education and food and clothing would be provided. All participants would be evaluated based on their needs using a comprehensive assessment including medical, and treatment would be offered not forced.

Because of ethical considerations all would be welcomed, and no one would be turned away based on their religious, ethical, race or sexual orientation. Many contrived do not have child labor laws that prevent exploitation of children so I would implement that into the program and only have the children learn life skills such as cooking, cleaning, and

washing clothing their own clothing. No person would be hired out to others based on skills they have until they are of legal age of an adult.

With the changing political times it is important to remember that there are different standards by different parties. Most grants are politically motivated. However, the social welfare of children should never be used as a pawn for election.

This case study made me sick. I have read a lot of changes involving children that are in dire circumstances are used as a political talking point for many that are in politics which is why I never changed my major to political science and remained in the counseling field.

Reference

Netting, F. E., O’Conner, M. K., & Fauri, D. P. (2008). Comparative approaches to program planning. Wiley.

Respond to at least two of your classmates’ posts. Challenge your peers on how they would have approached the case from a different planning perspective. Ask probing questions.

Discussion 2 (Deziembre) Chapter 3 rational Planning and prescriptive approaches was very interesting to me especially after reading the scenario of the mayor and preparing for the program of saving street kids. Realizing it is very easy to choose a topic that has impacted the world needs. I do believe the political content is vital. While reading the scenario, there was a portion of the story where everyone continued to state how the mayor continuously challenged the team politically. (Netting2008) I believe thinking politically is very important due to the fact of when a person thinks politically it forces one to speak globally instead of locally. Also, having that political voice allows one to have a lesser chance of offending people or short-changing others.

I do not believe that political influence got in the way of effective problem-solving aspect of things. I also do not believe the political influence got in the way of the research from being professionally grounded. I believed the political influence caused the team to come from a politically correct direction. If research is not politically correct it would leave room for possible assumptions such as racism, classicism, or some form of discrimination assumptions.

The reverse order planning approach was the approach the team utilized, one of which I believed to be appropriate for the type of research being conducted. Basically, the team had to focus on the objective and the question and then conduct the appropriate research methods. (Brody 2000) (Netting2008).

When conducting research and planning it is important to stem from a political approach such as considering the data or how it is approached and kept at a professional level. Also, in this study, it was very appropriate to utilize a need-based approach in order to narrow the how much research is needed to not cause any information that could possibly be missed with the research to back things up as well as to organize the entire focus.

Reference

Netting, F. E., O’Conner, M. K., & Fauri, D. P. (2008). Comparative approaches to program planning. Wiley