Press Release


For Immediate Release Media Contacts

Khandis Bostick PR Contact (same)

JCSU Student

Kabostick.2015@mymail.jcsu.edu

79 MILLION AMERICANS ARE CURRENTLY INFECTED WITH MILLIONS MORE BEING ADDED EACH YEAR, PROTECT YOUSELF!
HPV
CHARLOTTE – Approximately 14 million people are infected each year and there is no test to detect it.
Did you know HPV is the most common sexually transmitted diseases in America, with over 100 strains, and there is NO way to detect it until you have cancer or warts? HPV causes genital warts for both sexes, while women can also develop cervical cancer. 
“Anyone who is sexually active can get HPV, even if you have had sex with only one person. You also can develop symptoms years after you have sex with someone who is infected making it hard to know when you first became infected,” according to CDC.gov. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2016)
Anyone who is sexually active can contract HPV. HPV is spread through sex in the vagina, anus, and the mouth. Many people with HPV do not exhibit symptoms for many years after becoming infected and there is no test to screen for HPV to prevent transmission. 
There are vaccines to prevent HPV, such as Gardasil. ALL boys and girls around the age of 11/12 are suggested to get the vaccine. However, if you missed the vaccine at that age, you can still get the vaccine between the ages of 21 through 26 years old. (Visit http://truthaboutgardasil.org/ for more information about how the vaccine impacts children.) As you get older your risk of contracting HPV become greater.
“If you are sexually active use latex condoms the right way every time you have sex. This can lower your chances of getting HPV. But HPV can infect areas that are not covered by a condom, so condoms may not give full protection against getting HPV; and be in a mutually monogamous relationship, or have sex only with someone who only has sex with you.” (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2016)
For more information on HPV visit the Centers for Disease and Control Prevention website http://www.cdc.gov/hpv/ or https://medlineplus.gov/hpv.html to get the facts on how to safeguard against the disease.

-END-

Bibliography

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2016, 05 19). Human Papillomavirus (HPV). Retrieved from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/stdfact-hpv.htm

Change Management in the Workplace 

​Change is inevitable, particularly in the work environment. Change does create an uneasiness in the workplace because of the unknown, as well, change challenges the skillsets of the organization members. Yet, successful managers of change are able to motivate individuals to stay engaged by using a few different strategies including “creating a readiness for change, managing the transition and developing new competencies and skill sets.” (Cummings, T.G. & Worley, C.G, 2015) 

When there is a felt need for change in the work environment, maybe due to not meeting goals consistently, decline in growth or technologies that are outdated, employees and stakeholders are inevitably ready for change. The use of the old way may have caused turmoil and stress, or created a sense of instability so implementing a new way of doing things is seen as good and necessary

 As in the industry of Medicare, if the tools being used to recommend an insurance product to a senior is outdated it could mean not getting the most beneficial plan to that retiree. That could in turn jeopardize the industries credibility. If that were the case, all involved would be ready for change. Implementing a new and improved tool, based on the feedback received from retirees and agents would be necessary. The members will feel as though their voices have been heard, and their motivation to perform and stay engaged will be preeminent. 

In order to sustain such momentum after change has occurred, the transition from the old to the new has to be carefully managed. Moving into a new state happens in steps as opposed to one giant leap. There are at least three steps that have been identified to ease into a new way of doing things. As mentioned in the text (Organization Development and Change), the first step is activity planning which “involves making a road map for change, citing specific activities and events that must occur if the transition is to be successful.” (Cummings, T.G. & Worley, C.G, 2015)

The activity planning step will likely be the most important step in ensuring employees stay engaged. Keeping them informed of their expectations while the transition takes place is going to be a major component to ensure the goals are met along the way and key improvements are taking place, both for the organization and the employee. 

Commitment planning is the second activity on the road to change. “This activity involves identifying key people and groups whose commitment is needed for change to occur and formulating a strategy for gaining their support.” (Cummings, T.G. & Worley, C.G, 2015) The most likely tactic to gain their support will be direct communication of the reason for change and how it will ultimately and positively impact their ability to do their work going forward. This will also require understanding what the needs are of these stakeholders. Keeping them informed about the changes, and gaining their support, is vital to the success of bringing about the change. 

Notifying an agent that you have a new tool that will streamline their work, and more importantly allow them to become more efficient in their processes, will likely gain immediate support.

Lastly, of the three activities needed to accomplish change is creating a process that manages the structures of change. “These management structures should include people who have the power to mobilize resources to promote change, the respect of the existing leadership and change advocates, and the interpersonal and political skills to guide the change process.” (Cummings, T.G. & Worley, C.G, 2015) The involvement of the organization members to implement change is critical to bringing about inclusiveness and accountability to change, therefore keeping everyone engaged as the change occurs. 

Whenever there is a change in an organization the members of the organization may need to acquire new skills, competencies, knowledge base and behaviors for proper implementation of the change to happen.  This will require the organization to provide proper training opportunities and support to the members as they endeavor to gain expertise. The member’s duty will be to actively participate in the programs being offered.

When a new tool or process is being implemented all employees and members will need training. When Medicare agents need to use a new tool to recommend a product that is not like any tool they have used before, they must be trained to achieve the desired results. To give a new tool, but not train on the new tool, would not benefit the members or their preconceived expectations, nor would it provide the results the organization is hoping to achieve. This lack of bringing it all together would ultimately impact employee loyalty and retention negatively. 

Keeping employees engaged during a transition will require work on all sides of the organization. The organization will have to take onus to execute the change and provide all necessary tools and training to the members. The members will have to see the need for the change and be involved in the steps as the change occurs. 

Motivating members to remain loyal during a transition will also depend on how the organization will monitor and reward performance through control functions as change happens. “Performance management includes practices and methods for goal setting, performance appraisal, training and development, and rewards systems.” (Cummings, T.G. & Worley, C.G, 2015) 

Work performance and employee engagement will be contingent upon these factors and how often they are used to gauge members level of involvement during the shift.

Management will need to first vocalize the vision and set forth the expectations the change is to bring about. For example, this new tool will allow us to better serve our retirees and ensure accuracy in recommendations. All members will be expected to utilize the new tool to ensure consistency with all agents and increase our credibility as an organization. 

By allowing the members to feel a part of the vision they begin to see how their performance will impact the organizations goals. Additionally, the organization will need to set realistic, achievable and measurable goals to be met by the members. “When employees see that other people, groups, or organizations have achieved a specified level of performance, they are more motivated to achieve that level themselves.” (Domm, 2001)

Knowing the vision, understanding the goals, and how they (the member) fit into that vision, will influence the behaviors of the members positively. 

Assessing the performance over time will be a key component of keeping members engaged in the vision. Ensuring members have access to the proper resources to measure their success will be just as vital. Assessing the goals periodically allow for feedback from the members and gives an opportunity for the organization to make the necessary modifications. 

Any goals not being met as a result of lack of training or resources will be the obligation of the organization. 

Additionally, rewards systems impact employee satisfaction and engagement. Organizations will need to implement a system of rewards for improving performance and maintaining performance to meet goals. According to text (Organization Development and Change), “The rewards will need to be available in a timely manner, have a direct link to the performance, have durability and visibility to maintain the results desired by the organization.”  (Cummings, T.G. & Worley, C.G, 2015)

The control functions: goal setting, performance appraisal and rewards systems, “are powerful methods for managing employee and work group performance.” (Cummings, T.G. & Worley, C.G, 2015) Employee loyalty will be a direct result of these functions and how well these functions are executed. Successful managers of change will be sure to properly implement a system that supports the needs of both the organization and the members, and enhances overall performance. 

When change is upon an organization, communication, and timely communication, to the members is going to be one of the most important factors to fight resistance. Effective communication of any change will also be an important factor in retention of organization members.

 Communicating the change will happen at two levels: the strategic and the tactical levels. The strategic level will focus more on the future and long terms goals of the organization, and will likely be implemented by upper/senior management. The tactical level will focus more attention on the day to day activities and the short term goals needed to bring the long term goals to fruition. This level of communication typically happens and comes from lower-level/frontline management. 

Both levels of communication will require timeliness and planning, as well as working together. Upper/Senior management will communicate with lower/frontline management and lower/frontline management gets the information to the employees. Initial communication of change may only be presented to those in upper management.  This is to ensure the information gets out to those who need to have immediate knowledge of the change without causing uncertainty amongst members. This also gives the organization an opportunity to plan for objections in a small setting. 

Lower-level management will then disseminate of the information to those members who may be directly impacted by the change or traditional way of doing things.  In regard to implementing a new tool for the Medicare agents, this could mean on the strategic level that senior level management communicates to the frontline managers when the tool would become available and when it would make sense that all agents are using the tool and properly. The tactical level would be for those frontline managers to then communicate to the agents what steps are necessary to access the tool, test the tool and be ready to use the tool by the target date.

According to the Harvard Business Review, how change is communicated has a direct impact on how change is received and implemented. Sending a mass email communication will not go over as well as having frontline management speak directly to those impacted. In the same token, senior management is more likely to go along with change that has been directly communicated with them versus reading about the new change in a news publication. (Larkin, T.J., Larkin, Sandar, 1996)

With any change, positive reaction and engagement along with employee loyalty will rest upon direct and timely communication of change. When there is a clear need for change and it has been effectively communicated, both strategically and tactically, those who will be impacted are more open to the change; thereby leveling the response, sustaining member engagement and promoting employee loyalty and retention. 

References
Cummings, T.G. & Worley, C.G. (2015). Organization Development and Change. Cenage.

Domm, D. R. (2001). Strategic Vision: Sustaining Employee Commitment. Business Strategy Review, 39-48.

Larkin, T.J., Larkin, Sandar. (1996). Reaching and Changing Frontline Employees. Harvard Business Review, 95-104.

Peter Richardson, Denton D. Keith. (1986-1998). Communicating Change. Human Resource Management.

Zero Tolerance: Suspension, Expulsions and Exclusion

Child discipline in the schools (school discipline) has become less about reinforcing positive behaviors and more about kicking students out of school, and ultimately pushing them toward the “justice” system. In the early 1990’s, with the adoption of the Gun Free School Act, and No Child Left Behind of the early 2000’s, schools began to take a much different approach than they had in previous years disciplining students.  The Gun Free School Act states ”Each State receiving Federal funds under any title of this Act shall have in effect a State law requiring local educational agencies to expel from school for a period of not less than 1 year a student who is determined to have brought a firearm to a school, or to have possessed a firearm at a school…” (U.S. Department of Education, 2004) and No Child Left Behind (NCLB) mandates, “that all students in a school must be “proficient” by the 2013/2014 school year.” (Chen, 2015) Lawmakers had good intentions when introducing these laws. Children were in danger at school from those looking to do them harm and from the failing school systems itself. Good intentions, however, led to bad decisions by those trying to implement these laws. New policies were put into place that changed the school environment, and how administrators disciplined. These laws, in effect, caused schools to become more like prisons, where they implemented strategies akin to visiting a correctional facility, than educational facilities that train children for work and adult life. Schools brought in police officers, metal detectors and wands to begin cracking down on school violence- such as school shootings like those of Columbine High and the many others to follow, but they also took on the task of disciplining those referred for minor infractions. Children should be disciplined, but they deserve the chance to grow from their mistakes. Children do not deserve to have lifelong impacts of childhood mischief. 

With the implementation of the laws, many schools adopted a zero-tolerance policy that led to exclusionary style discipline and got away from the more restorative approaches that allow children to learn from their mistakes and make corrective actions to improve their behaviors. “Exclusionary discipline describes any type of school disciplinary action that removes or excludes a student from his or her usual educational setting” (Exclusionary Discipline, n.d.) Schools are no longer concerned with discipline that corrects student behavior, instead children are being treated like adults and being made to live with their childhood blunders for a lifetime with the new and improved zero tolerance stance the schools have taken. Zero tolerance is described as “school discipline policies and practices that mandate predetermined consequences, typically severe, punitive and exclusionary (e.g., out of school suspension and expulsion), in response to specific types of student misbehavior—regardless of the context or rationale for the behavior.” (Zero Tolerance, n.d.)  The problem now is that every infraction qualifies: from perceived disrespect to administrative staff and teachers to fighting and carrying weapons. These behaviors extend from the lower level to the highest level. Zero tolerance is impacting children that prior to would not have been labeled rebellious or misfits. Additionally, almost every school in the Unites States has implemented School Resource Officers (SROs) to handle disciplinary action, and they are turning the children over to the juvenile justice system. Even those minor infractions that were once handled by the school’s administrative staff, such as fighting, have been outsourced to the SROs and children are ending up with criminal records. 

 Discipline in schools has changed, and more often poor, disabled and under-represented populations (Black and Latino children) are often highlighted as the “troubled child.” Unfortunately, the new policies are disproportionately impacting children who lack resources. These Black and Latino children are the ones who suffers most from the “discipline gap”, or “unequal punishments to different groups of students.” (Resmovits, 2013) Zero tolerance in schools should not have a color, race or ethnicity assigned to it, but many times it does. Zero tolerance in schools is breeding failure in communities with lower socio-economic status and forcing kids out of school and into a prison system. Between 2009 and 2010, 24 percent of Black students were suspended from school while only 7.1 percent of their white counterparts had been suspended. This does not mean that black children are more violent or disrespectful, but implicit (indirect/hidden) bias has played a major role in targeting the black children. Per the Seattle Post Intelligencer Reporter, Rebekah Denn, in her article “Blacks are disciplined at far higher rates than other students”-regardless of the contributing factors (socioeconomic status, living in a non-traditional home setting, being in a special education class, being an immigrant or living in poverty) black children were still 2.6 times more likely than other students to be expelled or suspended even after factoring out the effects of their condition or situation. These results are true in Seattle and around the nation. In the state of Rhode Island the numbers are staggeringly much higher. If you are a black child in the elementary school system, where you only make up nine percent of the children in the system, you are six times more likely to be suspended or expelled. “Between 2004-2012, 17,000 suspensions were issued in the state’s elementary schools,” and black children received 28 percent of those. (Townes, 2015) These numbers follow the children into high school where they eventually are forced out of school by dropping out due to disengagement or by referral to the juvenile justice system. Think Progress states, 

“These disciplinary patterns set the stage for a racially uneven justice system in the state. Black males in the state are 9.3 times more likely than their white counterparts to spend time in juvenile detention. When looking at Rhode Island’s black population, there were 331.8 black arrests per 1,000 residents compared to just 36.3 non-black arrests. In 2010 alone, 30 percent of the state’s prison system was black, even though black people only constitute 6 percent of the general population.” (Townes, 2015)

Black and Latino children are being targeted by these laws. The behaviors they exhibit are no different from those of their white counterparts, but teachers are not aware of the cultural differences of their students and expect that all children should behave in the same “white” fashion.  An example given by NPR shows exactly the type of behavior that teachers punish because they don’t understand the different cultures of their students. The example is of a Hispanic child being disciplined more because while being disciplined he didn’t look his teacher in the eyes, so in effect he was being disrespectful toward his teacher. The Hispanic culture is that you do not look in the eyes of an adult while being reprimanded because that is disrespect. Cultural differences play a major part in how and why these children are disciplined, in addition to the many other factors. (Donovan, J. (Host), 2012) They are being kicked out of school and the statistics show that they are more likely to become involved in criminal behavior, or teenage mischief, and end up in a correctional facility. 

Although each of these policies were put in place to provide children with a safer, and more enhanced learning environment, it is unfortunate that not all children have a chance to benefit from these policies in a positive way. Children, those who are deemed a misfit, are being thrown out of school for minor infractions and missing valuable learning time. Zero tolerance, in this way, helps supporters of NCLB to meet its objectives of high stakes testing by dismissing those students they see as troubled and unteachable. Although NCLB was put in place to see that schools are meeting objectives and children are learning the material, the consequences attached to the failing schools has caused them to manipulate test scores in ways that involve removing children out of schools. Per the Advancement Project, 

“Because of the focus on test scores and the severe consequences attached to them, if a student acts up in class, it is no longer in educators’ self-interest to address it by assessing the student’s unmet needs or treating the incident as a “teachable moment.” Within this business model, it is much easier and more “efficient” to simply remove the child from class through punitive disciplinary measures and focus on the remaining students. With so much riding on these tests, being able to transmit as much of the test material as possible often overrides concerns about the impact such practices have on students. As a result, the practice of pushing struggling students out of school to boost test scores has become quite common. There are a number of widely used strategies for manipulating test scores, such as withdrawing students from attendance rolls, assigning students to alternative schools, coercing or encouraging students to drop out or enroll in General Educational Development (GED) programs, along with using suspensions, expulsions, and referrals to alternative school.” (Advancement Project, 2010)

Excluding these children from the opportunity to learn will have a huge impact on the entire nation economically. Per the Civil Rights Project in a study conducted in Texas, “The delayed workforce entry related to grade retention has an effect of over $68 million for the state, including $5.6 million in lost tax revenue. Given the higher discipline rate for minorities, these costs disproportionately affect them….” (Marchblanks, M.P & Blake, J.J. & Booth, E.A. & Carmichael, D. & Seibert, A.L. & Fabelor, T., 2013) Unfortunately, these numbers are representative of many states in the United States.  By removing these children from educational platforms through expulsion and suspensions we are removing a large sum of Americans out of the economic population because they are unable to obtain work. Children who are repeatedly suspended or expelled do not have the basic skill of reading or writing. When you cannot read, or write it is nearly impossible to apply for or obtain a job. A new way of disciplining students must be developed as the old way does not work. There must be a way to increase the graduation rate among black and Latino student and decrease the dropout rates.  As mentioned in the Civil Rights Project, “school discipline relates to a 29% increase in high school dropout. These additional dropouts account for an economic effect of $711 million per year.” It is costing the states more money to keep children out of school than it cost to educate or retain them. 

 So, what are the alternatives? How do we keep children in school who may be misbehaving and give them the opportunity to continue with their education while keeping order in the school? What other approaches could the schools take that would keep the risk of drop-outs low and ultimately improve the economic status of many of the minorities who are impacted by these “get tough” approaches? There have been suggestions on how to strategically change how disciplined is handled in schools. Studies have been conducted by the government for the past 10 years and many of these approaches work, it is now time to implement them.  The first recommendation is to “reserve zero tolerance disciplinary removals for only the most serious and severe of disruptive behaviors, and define those behaviors explicitly.” (Skiba) Having a definitive definition of what behaviors would qualify a child for suspension or expulsion allows the child to make a better-informed decision as to whether they will engage in that behavior. Not knowing what behavior qualifies as severe leaves too much of a gap for teachers to refer for any and everything. The second recommendation is to “replace one-size-fits-all disciplinary strategies with graduated systems of discipline, wherein consequences are geared to the seriousness of the infraction.” (Skiba) This would mean to implement other strategies for different behaviors. Children could serve in-school suspensions, do community service, clean up the school, recommend counseling for the child and even involve the parent to help resolve the behavior. The third recommendation is to “define all infractions, where major or minor, carefully.” (Skiba) Having clear defined infractions takes away the opportunity of bias from the teachers. It doesn’t necessarily withdraw bias in reporting the activity itself, but it will take away the bias as to what behaviors require disciplinary action and what behaviors do not. The fourth recommendation is to “expand the array of options available to schools for dealing with disruptive or violent behaviors.” (Skiba) Many schools are not aware of more effective options for deterring behaviors. Implementing more school psychologist and counselors to help develop alternative approaches to discipline would help to reduce the number of SROs needed in schools and improve the school’s climate.  

There are many more options to help change the atmosphere of schools and improve the disciplinary approaches the schools have taken that do not work. Restorative approaches to misbehavior would benefit our children, our schools and ultimately our society as the zero-tolerance stance is not working. Children need discipline for growth. Corrective actions help one to know what they are doing wrong and make improvements and zero tolerance does not give a child that opportunity. These children have a right to an education and zero tolerance style discipline strips that away from them. It’s time to remove zero tolerance and School Resource Officers and instead fund more guidance counselors that bring solutions to behavioral disruption in the classroom. 
Bibliography

Advancement Project. (2010, March). Test, Punish, and Push Out: How “Zero Tolerance” and High-Stakes Testing Funnel Youth into the School-To-Prison Pipeline. Retrieved from http://b.3cdn.net/advancement/d05cb2181a4545db07_r2im6caqe.pdf

Chen, G. (2015, March 3). Public School Review. Retrieved from Understanding No Child Left Behind: http://www.publicschoolreview.com/blog/understanding-no-child-left-behind

Denn, R. (2002, March 14). Blacks are disciplined at far higher rates than other students. Retrieved from seattle pi: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Blacks-are-disciplined-at-far-higher-rates-than-1082691.php

Donovan, J. (Host). (2012, March 12). Black Students More Likely To Be Disciplined. Retrieved from NPR: http://www.npr.org/2012/03/12/148460543/black-students-more-likely-to-be-disciplined

Exclusionary Discipline. (n.d.). Retrieved from National Clearinghouse on Supportive School Discipline: http://supportiveschooldiscipline.org/learn/reference-guides/exclusionary-discipline

Lewis, C. W. (2010). African American Male Discipline Patterns and School District Responses Resulting Impact on Academic Achievement: Implications for Urban Educators and Policy Makers. Journal of African American Males in Educaion, 1(1), 1-19. Retrieved from http://journalofafricanamericanmales.com/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2010/03/African-American-Male-Discipline-Patterns1.pdf

Marchblanks, M. &. (2013, April 6). The Economic Effects of Exclusionary Discipline on Grade Retention and High School Dropout . Retrieved from The Civil Rights Project: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/7zc0c135#page-1

Resmovits, J. (2013, April 4). School ‘Discipline Gap’ Explodes as 1 in 4 Black Students Suspended, Report Finds. Retrieved from The Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/08/school-discipline-gap-_n_3040376.html

Skiba, R. &. (n.d.). Children’s Needs III: Development, Prevention, Intervention. Retrieved from http://www.indiana.edu/~equity/docs/Alternatives_to_Expulsion.pdf

Townes, C. (2015, February 20). Black Primary School Students In Rhode Island Are 6x More Likely To Be Suspended Than White Peers. Retrieved from Think Progress: https://thinkprogress.org/black-primary-school-students-in-rhode-island-are-6x-more-likely-to-be-suspended-than-white-peers-69f762f8fbcf#.95imlbdpl

U.S. Department of Education. (2004, September 15). Retrieved from Laws & Guidance/ Elemantary & Post Secondary Education: http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg54.html

Zero Tolerance. (n.d.). Retrieved from National Clearinghouse on Supportive School Discipline: http://supportiveschooldiscipline.org/learn/reference-guides/zero-tolerance