Child Development And Vygotsky s Theory Essay - 2098 Words

One of the most important cognitive skills is the ability to solve problems. It is manifested through the capability to find solutions to complex issues. By comparing two theories of child development, namely, the Piaget s approach to cognitive development and Vygotsky s social constructivist perspective, it will become clear that the nature of epistemological beliefs held by teachers might influence the development of children. This in turn suggests that problem-solving abilities in children can be influenced and improved by contextual factors. The similar pattern of influence has been observed in research on creativity in adults which have demonstrated that the context in which the individual is placed in improves one s creative processes. If we assume that the problem-solving ability depends, at least partially, on finding novel solutions to complex issues, creativity would play a key role in finding such solutions and thus, can be improved by the contextual factors. On another ha nd, there are certain factors such as individual differences and cultural background which play an important role in creative processes. Personality type is usually quite stable throughout the lifetime and thus, difficult to change by changing the context. Traits such as openness or schizotypy has been found to correlate with creativity thus acting against the idea that creativity can be improved by mere contextual changes. By describing the evidence for and against the notion thatShow MoreRelatedOutline the main similarities and differences between Piaget‚Äà ´s and Vygotsky‚Äà ´s explanations for cognitive development in children1702 Words   |  7 Pagesfor cognitive development in children. Piaget and Vygotsky were both, looking into the same period of cognitive development in infants and children and sharing the same basic concerns. Piaget (1896-1980) developing his theory slightly earlier than Vygotsky (1896-1934) who worked to show that there were certain flaws in Piaget s theory of genetic epistemology. Vogotsky and his social-cultural theory of cognitive development might be seen as the Soviet counterpart to Piaget s western individualistRead MoreVygotsky s Theory Of Internalisation1709 Words   |  7 Pages Vygotsky also introduced his theory of internalisation, one of the main concepts that differentiated from that of Jean Piaget (Duchesne, S., McMaugh, A. 2016. P.103). The theory of internalisation put forward by Vygotsky is an idea that suggests an individual is able to observe and internalise the ideas and processes of their surroundings as they partake in social interaction defined as, â€Å"new ways of thinking† (Duchesne, S., McMaugh, A.,2016p.103). During social interaction the individualsRead MoreVygotsky And Vygotsky Theories Of Learning1257 Words   |  6 PagesTheories of learning In this essay, I will compare and contrast jean Piaget and lev Vygotsky theories of learning. First, I will discuss Piaget followed by Vygotsky then I will compare and contrast both theorists. Jean Piaget was a Swiss developmental psychologist and philosopher, he is known for his contribution to a theory of cognitive development. Piaget became interested in the reasons why children gave the wrong answers to questions that required logical thinking. He believed that these incorrectRead MoreVygotsky And Vygotsky s Theory Of Development791 Words   |  4 PagesPiaget and Lev Vygotsky are prominent influential figures in the field of developmental psychology. The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast their theories of development, as well as identified what can be gained through a better understanding of the theories. A Brief Summary of the Theories of Piaget and Vygotsky Piaget’s theory of development is based on four stages: sensorimotor, preoperational, concrete operational, and formal operational stage. Piaget believed development was autonomousRead MoreDevelopment Of A Child s Social And Emotional Development1377 Words   |  6 Pagesof child development there have been many scientific studies which have formed our understanding of children’s social and emotional development, within this essay I am going to look at some of the theses developmental theories and how they have impacted modern day society in understanding the development of a child’s social and emotional development. Development is the pattern of change that begins at conception and continues through the lifespan (Santrock, 2008, p.5) Emotional development is theRead MoreJean Piaget And Vygotsky s Theory On Children s Cognitive Development1507 Words   |  7 PagesJean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky, have shared their knowledge on children’s cognitive developm ent. Both psychologists had their own vision of what stimulates and helps a child grow. Jean Piaget s theory was shaped through the thinking and understanding of how knowledge is built through a series of four stages; preoperational, sensorimotor, formal operational and concrete operational. He believed that the development was with the child themselves. On the contrary, Lev Vygotsky s theory is shaped throughRead MoreEducational Methods Influenced By Jean Piaget And Lev Vygotsky800 Words   |  4 Pagesand Lev Vygotsky. Both of these men provided influential theories, which had a significant impact on evaluating children’s learning styles and abilities. After years of research and observation, Piaget determined that intellectual development is the result of the interaction of individual and environmental factors. He felt that as a child develops and always interacts with the world around him, knowledge was established. Through his observations of his children, Piaget develo ped a stage theory of intellectualRead MoreCompare And Contrastusing Apa Style. Nori Mosqueda Rivera.1010 Words   |  5 PagesThis paper will talk about theories of Piaget and Vygotsky in which similarities and differences in their theories will be discussed. At the end of this paper, you will be able to understand the differences and the and similarities between both famous educators. If we take a brief look and compare Piaget s Theory with Vygotsky Theory we will see that Piaget Theory was a Constructivist Theory, while Vygotsky Theory was a Sociocultural Theory/Social Development Theory. In this paper you will getRead MorePiaget vs. Vygotsky1120 Words   |  5 PagesThe theory of cognitive development is defined as the development of the ability to think and reason. There are many theorists who have studied cognitive theories and the most famous is Jean Piaget. Cognitive development covers the physical and emotional stages of a child. The basic premise for cognitive development is to show the different stages of the development of a child so you can understand where the child might be in their development. Understanding cognitive development will betterRead MoreSociocultural Theory And Social Rules1726 Words   |  7 Pagesassociated with these models, Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory, which is based in his study of psychology, does not attempt to use culture to explain how language is acquired. Instead, Vygotsky identifies the relationship between language and culture as a dynamic, reciprocal and constantly evolving experience whereby language and culture are constituted in and of each other. Lev Semenovich Vygotsky developed what is now called The Sociocultural Theory in Russia during the 1920s and 1930s. The core

Taking A Class On Religion - 1232 Words

I have always been interested in taking a class on Religion. So many ideas ran through my head on what I thought this class would ultimately be like. I wanted to take this class on campus but my schedule did not allow it. I imagined being in a class with students of different religious backgrounds would be full of different views, discussions, and maybe even some good arguments in which I felt would be healthy for people to understand someone else’s culture. When I first started this class, I had no idea that I would learn about so many different religions and I honestly thought it would be more on Christianity. Although it was not it opened my eyes to many new things I had not known. When I saw someone posed the question â€Å"Why are you a†¦show more content†¦Before taking this class, I always found Buddhism to be the most interesting that is after attaining more knowledge other than people worshiping a bald guy. Once I learned more about this religion it was really heart warming that it was so different from what I was brought up in, yet I felt like I could still practice these things without putting aside my Christianity. Buddhism is not ultimately seen as a religion but as a philosophy or â€Å"way of life† where people are taught to â€Å"lead a moral life, be mindful and aware of thoughts and actions, and develop wisdom and understanding†. All of which I feel like everyone should practice in they’re day to day life. What I also like about the Buddha was that he did not claim to be a God. He was just a man who taught a path to enlightenment from his own experiences. â€Å"Buddha, also known as Siddhartha Gotama, was born into a royal family. He realized that wealth and luxury did not guarantee happiness, so he explored teachings, religions and philosophies of the day to find the key to human happiness. After spending six years studying and meditating, he found â€Å"the middle path† and spent the rest of his life teaching the principles of Buddhism until his death. Buddhism mostly agrees with the moral teachings of other religions but it goes farther by giving long-term purpose to our existence†. Buddhism was by far my favorite religion to learn more about. I

12 Angry Men Free Essays

Twelve Angry Men 1. How do you think you might have acted as a juror in this case ? How would you had interacted ? I think i would have started off with being calm but stressed i mean I would probably feel very burdened, because just by choosing one option you can change someones life. And as fas as interacting goes i would be casual but if something unexpected happens and i do have an outburst then it happens every one loses it at some point. We will write a custom essay sample on 12 Angry Men or any similar topic only for you Order Now 2. At the beginning of this movie the jurors vote 11 to 1 to convict the defendant and send him to death for murder; yet by the end of the movie they vote to acquit him, to set him free. What are the events that led the jurors to change their minds so radically and set the defendant free ? Describe the process. 1)The knife could be bought or have been found by anyone 2)The murderer knew how to use a pocket knife and the count have known. 3)When they re-enact the old man walking/limping from his bed to the door outside it takes them more then 15 seconds to get to the outside door. And the old man swore it had taken him 15 seconds. 4)The old man and the lady say that they heard the boy screaming at his father saying â€Å"I’ll kill you† but that doesn’t really mean he actually killed him since people say that phrase all the time but don’t really mean it and that was proved when juror number three has and outburst and say’s â€Å"I’ll kill you† to juror number eight. 5)How could the old man and the lady have heard the boy screaming when you can’t even hear yourself thinking over the el train. )The jurors start doubting the lady’s eyesight since she did not have her glasses on and maybe just assumed that it was the boy staying his father. 3. Why is juror number nine (old Man) a real hero ? Explain this using examples. 1)Because he is the first to agree with juror number eight , deciding that there is not enough evidence to sentence the young boy to death. 2)He openly describes juror number ten’ s racist attitude. 3)When he agrees that the old man could have maybe justified to what he heard and saw the night of the murder so he’s name could be recognized. 4. Explain number three’s anger against the accused. He’s anger towards the accused is because he’s relationship whit his son was very similar to the accused and the defendant. So based on the fact that he hasn’t seen his son in the past two years and the negative relationship he’s had with him he decides to declare the accused guilty because he thinks that the boy dose not deserve to live because he killed his own father. 5. Explain the impact of the closing scene in the jury room between number eight and three. Juror number three breaks down after his outburst while every one is leaving juror number eight stays back and tries to console him without communication. . Explain the following (refers to the play). a) â€Å"Innocent until proven guilty† Until you have no strong evidence against the accused, the accused is declared guilty. b) â€Å"Reasonable doubt† Something that could possibly prove the accused guilty. c) â€Å"Burden of proof† The biggest/important proof to prove the accuse d guilty or not guilty. 7. Explain the title. The title explained how these twelve men are frustrated and stressed and have this burden of declaring the accused guilty or not guilty. How to cite 12 Angry Men, Essay examples 12 Angry Men Free Essays The movie twelve angry men was a movie about different people from backgrounds, races, and religions. They were all different and being in a group dynamics class we learned about how personality affects people and other things that people tend to do. The judge in the beginning of the movie showed some non verbal behavior, which is sending a message without using words but things like facial expressions and body movements. We will write a custom essay sample on 12 Angry Men or any similar topic only for you Order Now The judge in the beginning was hunched over meaning he was not very alert and seemed to be a passive man.The foreman is supposed to be the leader of the jury’s and according to his behaviors he is. He communicates well which is a key role to being a leader. The foreman functions as a leader because he listens well and also tries to give out ideas to the rest of the jurors. He has the ability to look at the situation in other perspectives. In making these hard decisions the jurors need to have perception checks, to make sure they are not jumping to any conclusions. This is the life of a kid and their decision depends on his life. The conflicts that arise in the jurors room where productive to the situation at hand. The conflicts were solved in a good manner and beneficial to the case and getting everyone to feel confident about whether the kid was guilty or not. The jurors had assumptions about â€Å"those people† and â€Å"slums† which influenced the way they felt about the case. Their assumptions about those things influenced the way they thought about the case initially, the perception of the facts was altered because of having some type of bias.The juror’s assumptions had to do with the cultural and social diversity of the jury. The jurors based on how they lived their life, thought differently from the ones who were different from them based on the way they lived their lives. There were a lot of details to the case, and some jurors did not quite remember what others did. Some jurors remembered things that others did not due to selective listening. Most of the jurors listened to things that held more meaning to them than others.During the whole case the jurors did not know each other’s names and there is an importance to this, the importance is that being in the case it is supposed to be a strictly business environment. They are there to do one job and that is to make a decision. The twelve angry men is a reflection of how people act together and how their behavior can affect others. The movie is a good example of things we have learned in class. How to cite 12 Angry Men, Papers 12 Angry Men Free Essays MODULE TITLE: – STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT DATE ASSESSMENT SET AND LOADED ON TO STUDENT PORTAL:- 13th February 2013 DATE ASSESSMENT TO BE COMPLETED AND SUBMITTTED:- SUBMISSION METHOD/MODE:- Online via turnitin, in person Group Oral presentation —————————————————————————————————————- Assessment Type: An Individual Assignment and a Group presentation Individual Assignment Word limit -3000 words Assignment One is based on the Harvard Business Review Case Study on Facebook. Study the case carefully and the recommended sources in the reading list. Attempt the following tasks Task A Using relevant analytical frameworks critically analyse the strategic capability of Facebook (1500 words, 12. We will write a custom essay sample on 12 Angry Men or any similar topic only for you Order Now 5%) Task B To what extent could prescriptive models of strategy be used to explain the strategic success of Facebook? (1500 words, 12. 5 %) Total weighting for Assignment 1: 25% Individual Assignment: Marking Guidelines 100 marks = 25% weighting †¢ Critical discussion and application of relevant models and concepts on strategic capabilities to understand the competitive advantage of Facebook (25 marks) †¢ Critical examination of conventional strategic management models to explain the success Facebook (25 marks) Discussion of contemporary models/ studies such as complexity theory, chaos and positive returns economics that may give an insight into Facebook’s explosive growth (25marks) †¢ Academic protocol – quality of academic references, the presentation of these and the overall structuring and format of the business report (25 marks) (Total 100 marks=25%) ————————————â₠¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€œ Group Assignment Assignment Brief Task A Using relevant strategic management concepts, conduct an analysis of the film: â€Å"12 Angry Men† ( Dir. Sidney Lumet. Orion-Nova, 1957. Film) and discuss the implications of your findings for decision making in a business organisation. (Max: 1000 words or 5 slides) Task B The Board of Directors of a medium-sized company of your own choosing have recently attended a conference on contemporary developments in strategic thinking. They were particularly impressed by the Blue ocean concept. As consultants, critically discuss the ways in which the Board could shift its current strategy in oder to open up new market possibilities and to create sustainable value for its current and new stakeholders. 2000 words or 10 Slides) . Group presentation guidelines †¢ Students are required to fully participate in and contribute to the development of the Group Presentation. Non-participation and/or non-attendance will result in restriction of marks for this aspect of assessment †¢ The group size will be determined by the module leader and module teaching team and will normally be in the range o f 6-8 group members (normal maximum). In specific circumstances this may be varied. †¢ The formal Group Presentation will be delivered by a maximum of three members of the group. The other group members will be required to answer questions put them by assessors at the end of the presentation. †¢ The absolute maximum presentation period is 20 minutes. This will be timed and there will be NO extensions to this time period. Student Groups are strongly advised to rehearse their presentation to ensure that the time period is strictly adhered to. †¢ Presentations will be stopped by the lecturer/assessment team at the end of 20 minutes †¢ Presentations are followed by Questions which are required to be fielded by/responded to by all the members of the group. The absolute timed period for questions is 10 minutes. †¢ Both times are required to be strictly adhered to. †¢ There is a stipulated Maximum of 15 power point slides in the 20 minute presentation. †¢ Students are required to be aware and are formally advised of all maximum times which will be cut off times with no exceptions. †¢ Power Point printouts with the individual texts provided for the presentation by each student are required to be handed in to the assessment team/lecturer at the time of the presentation immediately before the commencement of the presentation and will be retained by the lecturer/assessment team. The contribution to the Group Presentation is deemed to be equivalent to 3000 words from each student. †¢ The Assessment Weighting for this aspect of the group assessment is 25% (all students in the particular group are awarded the same percentage) Group Presentation Evaluation Criteria 100 marks= 25% weighting Organisation †¢ Topic clea rly stated †¢ Structure and scope of presentation clearly stated †¢ Topic developed in order stated †¢ Speakers summed up main points in conclusion 10 marks Content Knowledge of subject (background of company and storyline of film and their relevance to module) †¢ Application and discussion of relevant conceptual models †¢ Clarity of business concept for Blue Ocean †¢ Implications of analysis for strategic decision-making and company selected †¢ Speakers in control of subject matter 30 marks Confidence †¢ Speakers look relaxed and confident †¢ Professionally dressed †¢ Maintain eye contact †¢ Engage with audience and display awareness of audience response 10 marks Speech †¢ Varied paced †¢ Use of conversational style avoiding jargon and long-winded â€Å"bookish† xplanation of relevant concepts †¢ Appropriate volume †¢ Clear pronunciation and articulation †¢ Accurate grammar 10 marks Visual Aids à ¢â‚¬ ¢ Clear and legible †¢ Introduced at right time †¢ User-friendly, easy to follow and not too much information †¢ Impact on audience †¢ Creativity and novelty 10 marks Timing †¢ Well-timed presentation †¢ Time divided appropriately between tasks 10 marks Discussion management and handling of questions †¢ Respond confidently to questions †¢ Deflect difficult or irrelevant questions 20 marks (Total 100 marks= 25%) Students are required to fully participate in and contribute to the development of the Group Presentation. Marks will be restricted for non-participation and/or non-attendance. Module Learning Outcomes to be Assessed:- Upon successful completion of the assessment, students will be able to: Assignment 1 (Individual): †¢ analyse the aims, concept and role of strategic management Assignment 2 (Group Assignment) †¢ critically analyse how the different perspectives of social science disciplines inform strategic management †¢ evaluate the debates surrounding contemporary strategic issues How to cite 12 Angry Men, Essay examples 12 angry men Free Essays string(346) " about many aspects of this boy’s life; his childhood and especially the system that would allow such a boy to fall through the cracks and almost invite this type of behavior \(had be been guilty\) and feels that an intense and methodical discussion is warranted before he is to vote for the guilt and subsequent death of a fellow human being\." 12 Angry Men, originally a play in 1954, then made into a movie in 1957, has easily stood the test of time.   In an era when the studios and the public were more inclined towards major Technicolor productions with multimillion dollar budgets, over 90% of the movie takes place in a single a setting; the jury deliberation room where, in real time, the viewer is given a no nonsense approach to the many aspects of group decision making, standing up alone for one’s beliefs and overriding the ideology of the day concerning minorities and the poor in order to see the truth; the truth the majority of the twelve jurors did not wish to see. Also, how group process comes into play within the diverse make up of the jurors: How each juror acts differently in the group than how we are led to believe they would act alone. We will write a custom essay sample on 12 angry men or any similar topic only for you Order Now 12 Angry Men tells the story of twelve jurors thrust together in a hot and humid room on a New York summer evening to deliberate on the guilt or innocence of an eighteen year old Hispanic boy with a troubled past.   He is accused of stabbing his father; a man with whom he has had a contentious relationship for years.   The accused is fighting an uphill battle towards an acquittal: the eye witness account of his neighbors, a court appointed public defender whose apathy towards this case is mirrored by more than one of the jurors and his race which seems to be a major strike against him in the mind of some of the jurors, specifically juror #10. From the onset, it seems like an open and shut case with the accused being sentenced to death for the murder of his father. But if that were the case, 12 Angry Men, with its study of human contrasts, inconsistencies and prejudices, would have been long forgotten. Instead, 12 Angry Men is a testament to the notion that standing up for ones beliefs that have come from an unbiased and methodical overview of the facts, even if those beliefs are contrary to the vocal majority, is honorable and that such prejudices which cloud those facts are an impediment to every citizen in a democratic society. Being forced to listen to six days of testimony while at the same time being paid only three dollars a day for their services, it is easy to see how some or most of the jurors at the beginning of deliberations, seemed apathetic towards the great responsibility they have to give the accused their undivided attention while deciding his guilt or innocence. This is the case for a number of jurors; specifically juror #7 who is preoccupied with making the Yankee/Indians game later that day. He feels rushed by the proceedings and desires quick deliberations followed by a unanimous guilty vote. He feels that the accused is guilty but most likely would have voted the way of the majority if that meant that he could have gone to the game, gone home or just been anywhere other than in the courtroom for any additional length of time.   He does not see and cannot be affectively reminded about the awesome power he has to either put a man to death or to set him free. The issue of the guilt or innocence of the accused should be paramount in his mind but sadly, it is not. Juror #5 is not the only one who shrinks from his responsibility. Juror #12, the well dressed and jovial salesman feels that the accused is guilty but when pressed to explain his reasoning, cannot and quickly changes his mind when pressured to do so. Juror #12 is preoccupied with his job and maintaining a light atmosphere in the jury room; almost oblivious to the matter at hand.   Juror #2 is in many ways, the same as juror #12 except for the fact that his personality is not nearly as outgoing but in the same way, lacks convictions and is content to go with the crowd. He does not take his civic duty seriously and is afraid to stand up against the crowd unlike juror #8; the lone dissenter at the beginning of the film. Also, juror #2 does not seem to be able to explain why he feels that the accused is either innocent or guilty. This is contrary to jurors #3,#4 and #10 who at the start of the movie, have no qualms about putting the accused to death and detailing exactly whey they feel that the boy should be worthy of such a fate. The remaining three holdouts all have different reasons why they think the boy is guilty; some are legitimate concerns while others are rooted in prejudice against the poor and minorities. Although misguided, the above mentioned jurors had the conviction to state specifically why they thought what they did and to be perfectly willing for a time and to stand up to what is becoming a numerous and vocal majority as the movie progresses. Jurors #2, and #10 are either too preoccupied to be bothered by the tremendous power they have over the accused, or are too timid and will go with the majority. For that reason, he is among the jurors that did not take their civic responsibility as seriously as they needed to. Jurors #5, #9 and of course #8 are polar opposites of the above mentioned jurors.   At the beginning of the film, only juror #8 votes for the innocence of the accused.   Or rather there is reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the accused in his mind. But juror #8, by his own admission, reluctantly stands alone in defiance to the other eleven jurors. He does not do this while void of fear. It is seen on his face, in his mannerisms and even when he is willing to vote with the majority if after a short deliberation and a second vote, he is still the lone dissenter. Juror #8 is skeptical about many aspects of this boy’s life; his childhood and especially the system that would allow such a boy to fall through the cracks and almost invite this type of behavior (had be been guilty) and feels that an intense and methodical discussion is warranted before he is to vote for the guilt and subsequent death of a fellow human being. You read "12 angry men" in category "Essay examples" This type of moral fortitude, courage and attention to duty goes rewarded by juror #9; the oldest juror who once he has a companion, has no trouble standing up to the intense verbal ridicule of the majority, specifically juror #3,#7,#10. By this act, the group process’s momentum slowly starts to shift away from rendering a guilty verdict to instead empowering those timid jurors who have doubt as to the guilt of the accused but were too afraid to speak as they knew that they could not handle the onslaught levied against them by jurors #3 and #10. The jury room consists of polar opposites when it comes to their fulfillment of their duty in this matter. It is not the specific vote that they cast that makes them the most different, but in the way that they came to that decision. Each juror possessed a different decision making process concerning how they voted, how quickly they changed their vote and how resistant others were to let â€Å"one of them† go free. It is very rare for twelve different people to be completely impartial and void of any prejudices. This was the case especially for juror #3. He is the last of the jurors to change his vote to not guilty and in order for him to do so, a great deal of internal and personal problems and frustrations must be overcome for him to change his vote. Juror #3 is a traditional, hard nosed individual who taught himself to be tough as well as his son, remarking that when his only son was nine and walked away from a fight, it make him sick and he resolved to make a man out of his son. At the time of the trial, his son is twenty two and it is safe to say that they have a contentious relationship for the past few years. The son, most likely, resisted the intense tactics of his father and they have not spoken in years.   This has caused the father a great deal of pain and this pain served as the main source of the father’s hatred for the accused.   Juror #3 sees a correlation between the accused and his son and exerts little effort to disguise that bias. The accused had a troubled relationship with has father as well. Juror #3 sees both the accused and his son as being ungrateful to their fathers and feels that there should be consequences for this disrespect. He seems to have no power over his son for if he did, they would be reconciled or at least there would be visits between them. But he does have power over the accused to put him to death for what his hatred tells him that the boy must obviously be guilty.   The accused stands for everything that juror #3 hates and coupled with his tough exterior, is the last to submit to letting the accused go free. On the opposite end of the spectrum are jurors #11, 5 and 8. Juror #11 is a watch maker from Eastern Europe. Even though he is Caucasian, he is conscious of his ethnicity and the prejudices that come with being from a different country. He sympathizes with the accused and how his ethnic background puts him at a disadvantage in almost every aspect of daily life in 1950’s America. At the beginning of the movie, he agrees with the majority regarding the guilt of the accused but the racist generalizations made by jurors #7 and 10 are very effective in showing   juror #11 that there are certain prejudices in play that need to be examined. Along with the methodical explanation by juror #8, the watchmaker changes his vote to not guilty and does not waver for the rest of the movie despite intense pressure from juror #7 and #10 to convince him of the contrary and to play on the fears the watchmaker has of being different. Also motivated by the obvious shift in the group process away from the ideology that encourages a guilty verdict, the above mentioned jurors do all that they can to slow the momentum.   The way in which the watchmaker comes to his decisions in a non biased, sympathetic and dutiful process and is willing to absorb ridicule against the prejudices of jurors # 3 and 10; some of the same prejudices which force them to be the last to change their vote, is honorable and worthy of mention; second only to that of juror #8, the lone dissenter. The movie wastes no time in pointing out who will emerge the leaders in the jury room. One would think that naturally, the foreman would be selected as the leader and that the proceeding would be run under his watchful eye.   But that is not the case. The foreman has no such ambition and is quick to offer his seat to anyone who thinks that they might be able to do a better job once an argument arises on how the deliberations would be conducted. By the simple yet courageous action of juror #8 to vote not guilty by a show of hands, while knowing that such an action would be the source of ridicule, quickly makes him as one of the leaders in the jury room. Juror #8 becomes the leader by not only being the sole dissenter in the face of ridicule but in the way that he reacts to that ridicule; through a quiet, confident and respectful resolve which earns him not only respect from people who are not used to such treatment, but also converts to his call for a complete examination of the facts. It is this unbiased and caring demeanor that helps his argument to have legitimacy unlike the boisterous juror #3 and #10 whose demeanor steadily helps them to lose converts until they are the only ones left. On the other end of the spectrum are jurors #3 and #10. It is obvious that they have ulterior motives in seeing the accused gets the electric chair.   They are tough on crime, short on compassion and frequent on racist generalizations which cloud their mind and sour their soul with such hatful rhetoric. These prejudices come busting out towards the end of the movie when jurors #3 and #10 are the most desperate as they are now left alone with the intense eyes of jurors who at the beginning of their deliberations, supported their discriminatory ideology by voting for the guilt of the accused. Once the support has been eroded, their actions, like the actions of juror#3, set them apart as they infamously emerge as the other leaders in the jury room. The fact that juror #3 allows his frustrations with his son to come into play with his judgment towards the guilt of the accused and that he his mannerisms are so over the top, helps him emerge as the other main leader in the jury room. His prejudice lies in the age of the accused being close to that of his own son with whom he has had a troubled relationship and a troubled past. Juror #3 may or may not hate his son but he is very discouraged and displeased with the way that things have gone in their relationship and vents his frustration towards the accused. The prejudice of juror #10 lies not in the age of the accused by rather in his race. The accused is a Latino who grew up in the poor tenements of New York where crime runs rampant and juror #10 feels that the accused is guilty by association since he came from such squalor and with a troubled past. However, juror #10 is not nearly as vocal in his suspicion of juror #5 who grew up in a similar atmosphere simply because the juror is white. It is more the race of the accused than where he grew up that seems to motivate juror #10 into the assumption that the boy is guilty. At first, it is the outspoken demeanor of juror #10 that helps to set him apart from the other jurors in a leadership role. But his leadership emerges in more infamous ways as he vocalizes his racist assumptions of the accused in one final and desperate outburst as he desperately tried to win back converts to his cause. He uses such words as â€Å"those people† and â€Å"you know how they are† and finally, the accused is â€Å"one of them.† The phrases are used at the beginning of the movie and assumed as fact in the mind of juror #10 mostly due to the fact that his only opposition is from juror #8 who is not being taken seriously and is no threat to him. However, when the group process shows that juror #10 is in a shrinking majority and will soon be a lone standout, along with juror #3, the same phrases are used desperately but to no avail. The main source for the drama in the jury room is the requirement that their decision must be unanimous. If for the simple fact that everyone must be in agreement in either sending the accused to his death or setting him free, there would have been no screenplay to begin with. The jurors might have argued the merits of the case but with there being no need for a unanimous decision, juror #8 would have known that unless he could win six more converts in what would have to be a short amount of time, the deliberations would soon be over. The ulterior motives of jurors #3 and #10 would never have seen the light of day. The lack of conviction displayed by jurors #1 #2 and #12 would never had been recognized and the heroic actions of juror #8 and to a lesser extent juror #9, would never had sparked such heated yet important and necessary debate within the jury room. Every man left the jury room a little different than when they first came. Jurors #2, #5, #11 and #12 may have been emboldened in their private lives and to let future injustices not slide as easily as they may have had in the past. Jurors #3, #10 and to a lesser extent #7, recognized their prejudices and may have exerted some effort to confront these problems. The phrase â€Å"group process† refers to the behavior of people in groups, such as task groups that are trying to solve a problem or make a decision. 12 Angry Men has numerous and obvious examples of group process. It is the fact that twelve men must come to a unanimous decision that such examples can be shown. If there were only one or two jurors and/or a unanimous decision did not have to be achieved, any aspect of group process would have been absent. The jurors can be grouped into three main groups: those who are strongly in favor of giving the accused the electric chair, those who are willing to go along with the majority and those who are strongly in favor of being oblivious from the glaring prejudices and racist assumptions and quickly latch onto the moralist; juror #8 and then #9. Jurors #2 #5 and #11 are beneficiaries of group process.   They cannot do alone what is made easier in a group once jurors #8 and #9 have voted for the innocence of the accused. Alone, they could never have done what #8 and #9 had done: stand up to vocal ridicule and to do it alone. But once the first step has been made towards an attempt to judge the facts and not the race, age or background of the accused, jurors #2, #5 and #11 are relieved to vote their consciousness instead of giving into the pressure levied against them by specifically jurors #3 #4 and #10. The negative aspects of group process would have been guilty for defective decision making if it hadn’t been for the fact that juror #8 has the courage to vote for the innocence of the accused. 12 Angry Men will continue to stand the test of time since it speaks eloquently on many different areas: that prejudices are an impediment to everyone in a democratic society and that standing up for a belief, despite knowing the dangers of such a stand, is honorable and should be recognized as courageous. But also, people do in groups what they wouldn’t do in private. Individuality within a group of strong opinions comes at a price and that price is most often ridicule and misunderstanding. If at the beginning of the movie, the foreman had taken a secret vote, juror #8 may not have been the lone dissenter. The jurors that did not put a great deal of value in the democratic process of trial by jury and didn’t feel that a daily salary of $3 was not worthy of their methodical analysis of the facts, were content to go with the majority, no matter what that decision said. But for the jurors who made it a point to shift group process away from a guilty verdict based on racist assumptions and in light of strong ridicule and little monetary compensation, this movie will continue to be studied and appreciated for years to come.       How to cite 12 angry men, Essay examples 12 Angry Men Free Essays 12 Angry Men Motivation Paper Written By: Olivia Bumgardner Imagine having to decide a young boy’s fate who is accused of murder in the first degree. This is the case in â€Å"Twelve Angry Men†, the prize-winning drama written by Reginald Rose. Some jurors address relevant topics, while others permit their personal â€Å"judgments† from thoroughly looking at the case. We will write a custom essay sample on 12 Angry Men or any similar topic only for you Order Now After hours of deliberation, the jurors reached the decision that the boy is not guilty, due to the fact of reasonable doubt. While few jurors are motivated by their respect and determination for the justice system, Juror 10 is motivated by his personal prejudice. Juror 10 is clearly motivated by his prejudice. He uses his intolerance to determine his vote for the accused defendant. For instance, in the beginning of Act I, Juror 10 haphazardly said, â€Å" Look at the kind of people they are, you know them,† (13) without even digging deep into the case. It is quite obvious that Juror 10 is generating an â€Å"opinion† of the defendant based on the color of his skin and his background. He does not refer to them as regular people, but as â€Å"they† and â€Å"them† on certain pages. In the courtroom though, no juror is to have any judgments, they are supposed to bring the facts to the table, not their opinions. Juror 10’s outlook of the defendant is blinding him from thinking of any reasonable doubt. Further more, when Juror 10 said, â€Å"†¦I lived among em’ all my life, you can’t believe a word they say. You know that,† he yet again was referring to the defendant’s people as â€Å"em† and â€Å"they†. You can clearly infer that while Juror 10 was living amongst them, he must have experienced or witnessed situations which has caused him to have judgments on these specific people. These same judgments he brings to the courtroom just add difficulty into solving the case. Following Juror 10’s views further, when Juror 5 was explaining how the person who did stab the father was un-experienced, but the defendant was indeed experienced and Juror 3 stated he didn’t believe it, Juror 10 responded with, â€Å"Neither do I. You’re giving us a lot of mumbo-jumbo. † (56) His racist views of the one accused once again got in the way and made him think differently on what Juror 3 had said. Juror 10 didn’t even bother thinking the idea through! A reasonable person would have at least deliberated instead of just shutting down the thought completely. In addition to that thought, as the other jurors are realizing that there is reasonable doubt and changing their votes from guilty to not guilty, Juror 10’s temper begins to rise. His reaction to the other jurors for not agreeing with his opinion results to him throwing a rampage. He ends up screaming at the top of his lungs and thinking of everything he can possibly say to make the rest of the jurors side with him. But the only response he receives from the jurors is as they turn away from him in disgust. After Juror 10 gets his racist opinions across, he realizes he simply cannot win this fight. His judgmental views of the defendant blocked any potential thought Juror 10 would have had if he went in to the courtroom with an open mind. Juror 10 stands out to the reader for his extreme prejudice look at the defendant and his culture. With out giving the case a glance, he already created an unchangeable opinion. From his view, Juror 10 doesn’t think of â€Å"them† as regular people, but as these animals who get away with every crime they commit. Also his extremely prejudiced opinions made him resistant from â€Å"separating the facts from the fancy. † One of the largest issues in our justice system is when jurors already have generated an opinion on the defendant, where as Juror 10 clearly did, which then causes the final vote to be affected. All in all, if the members of the court went into the jury room with an open mind we would most likely have more proved innocent cases in today’s society. It has been at least 60 years since the drama â€Å"Twelve Angry Men† was written. And even today, do we really believe all men and women were created equal? How to cite 12 Angry Men, Essay examples

Forged in February Fire free essay sample

I sat with my girlfriend on the porch, watching my cousins dancing with their boyfriends. Most guests had left for the night. The decorations shifted in the summer wind: orange and white balloons among banners that read, Happy Anniversary. Did you like the party? I asked her. Jodie smiled at me. She wore my jacket over her shoulders and rubbed her bare arms for warmth. Underneath it, she was wearing the same sleeveless dress as my cousins. My mom had asked them all to be bridesmaids, and together, theyd chosen a jovial, tangerine outfit for the renewal of her wedding vows. I love your family, she said. Just she began, her voice trailing off. She glanced at my cousins, waltzing to Latin songs. I just love everything about them. Bendita Tu Luz started playing. Wed danced to it before, on a wintry February day a long time ago. I looked at her hopefully and, with all the elegance of a medieval suitor, rose and outstretched my hand. We will write a custom essay sample on Forged in February Fire or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Quieres bailar conmigo? I asked. She smiled again, gazed through me with her cerulean eyes. Of course, she said. She took my hand and we joined my cousins, stepping to the Hispanic fairy waltz, to what my mom calls, the dance that makes girls fall in love. A month later, I was at Governors School for the Arts, standing beneath the dim lights of the creative writing lab. Id given a brief introductory lesson to Latin dancing, and amidst tables littered with short story drafts and half-filled coffee mugs, my friends floundered with their partners. Jill and Tim were among them. She was an actress and he was a saxophonist, and his eyes widened as I pulled her over to him, placing her delicate fingers into his veined hands. The guitar pickings fell crisply from the ceiling speakers, like the soft timbre of wine glasses. This is a bachata, I smiled. They laughed, nervously, playfully, as they took the first steps. Tim always looked frightened of something, especially now. Beneath his expression, though, I glimpsed the beginnings of a genuine smile. Tim and I would often chat in the Grotto, the main hangout at Governors School. The area usually hummed of conversing students until curfew, and the night before the Latin dance party, wed talked about living life within a community of artists. No one heres afraid to be your friend, I remarked. â€Å"It’s like†¦everyone just lets loose.† Tim agreed with me. The people made the real magic of Governors School. One night, standing on a wooden bench, I improvised on my yazz flute, a djembe suddenly joined in, and soon, a spontaneous drum circle arose complete with guitars, hand drums, and dozens of dancing students shouting like crazed natives. But Tim never took part in anything like that. He just sat and watched. Even so, I understood that a fiery passion for jazz burned inside him, and I tried to bring him out of his shell. I knew that he wanted to become part of the group, because I used to be just like him. Ever have any girlfriends? I asked. One, he said, but it didnt work out much. She spent a lot of time with this other guy. I asked him, Why only one? I guess Im just afraid to put myself out there, he said. He told me about Jill. I nodded, and remembering my own shyness, hatched the master plan: to have him dance with her at least once. Theres something about Latin dancing’s swaying hips, lovelorn lyrics, and proximity that melts barriers between people. My dance with Jodie, on that first February night, kindled a flame that brought us together. Tims dance with Jill, although full of clumsy toe-stepping, was beautiful, and that night, his frosty exterior melted. Like my own family and the students at Governors School, I invite others into the mix as if they were family members. At Governors School, in particular, I embraced others (literally and figuratively) and shared my experiences, all to make my time there truly meaningful. Its in those moments, of sharing with one another, that immortal memories are forged.