The blind leads the blind once again!!!
So I just checked my email for the first time since Saturday morning. I received an email from one of the girls in my Management group concerning our assignment.
As a group we're to choose a failing company and write up a three page report as to the failings that this company has encountered and how we would manage the company better. By 02.09.04 (today) we are supposed to have 24/50 references to turn in. Our group decided that since there are seven people, we would split it up so that six of us would search for four references each and turn those into the seventh group member who would type them up and submit it to the professor.
The email had an attachment that had 27 references in it. At the beginning were my four references that were submitted in correct MLA citation format with a link to a specific website that I drew information from or a link to a downloadable .pdf file that would contain the referenced material we site in our paper. As I scroll through the document it seems that everyone did the same thing (except the MLA citation format which is no big deal) except for the last person (not sure who it is) that only submitted references such as http://www.fox.com and http://www.msnbc.com. Now correct me if I'm wrong but this does not seem to be a reference but more of a general place that someone may have drawn information from in a search. I emailed the group Sunday afternoon when I got in from work and asked if we were supposed to turn in general resources or specific articles to support our specific arguments. I just got in from watching Big Fish and received an email from one of the team members that said he thinks general resources should suffice. I have a good idea that maybe it is his submission as he stated last week that he did a report on the same company last semester and has the paper with the exception of the appendix containing the referenced material. This member is also the same person that is now taking the class for the second time after he dropped it last semester.
I hate to ask this question again but, why are we listening to this guy again?
As a group we're to choose a failing company and write up a three page report as to the failings that this company has encountered and how we would manage the company better. By 02.09.04 (today) we are supposed to have 24/50 references to turn in. Our group decided that since there are seven people, we would split it up so that six of us would search for four references each and turn those into the seventh group member who would type them up and submit it to the professor.
The email had an attachment that had 27 references in it. At the beginning were my four references that were submitted in correct MLA citation format with a link to a specific website that I drew information from or a link to a downloadable .pdf file that would contain the referenced material we site in our paper. As I scroll through the document it seems that everyone did the same thing (except the MLA citation format which is no big deal) except for the last person (not sure who it is) that only submitted references such as http://www.fox.com and http://www.msnbc.com. Now correct me if I'm wrong but this does not seem to be a reference but more of a general place that someone may have drawn information from in a search. I emailed the group Sunday afternoon when I got in from work and asked if we were supposed to turn in general resources or specific articles to support our specific arguments. I just got in from watching Big Fish and received an email from one of the team members that said he thinks general resources should suffice. I have a good idea that maybe it is his submission as he stated last week that he did a report on the same company last semester and has the paper with the exception of the appendix containing the referenced material. This member is also the same person that is now taking the class for the second time after he dropped it last semester.
I hate to ask this question again but, why are we listening to this guy again?