Respond to each post with 75 words
#1
I use various legal theories in my daily life depending on the situation I’m in. Most often I feel I practice Natural Law with the understanding that despite our progress and advancement as a species there are a few inherent things we each desire as Natural Law is a system derived from the observation of human nature to find the proponents intrinsic to our species. In an orderly world with natural law humans primarily want acceptance; this relates to the notion that humans are social creatures. Additionally, Natural Law is dependent on the social contract created from human interaction. This can change over time as perhaps more people begin to accept or reject certain social norms.
Professionally, I use both Rational Choice to find the best solution possible with my team through things like cost/benefit analysis. However, I also have to use Legal Realism as politics (both of the government and internal office politics) can dictate course of actions I’m allowed to take. Additionally, because of office politics there will be bias through favoritism, but that is where Rational Choice can also come into play to shed light on potentially better solutions.
#2
In my professional life, I use the rational choice theory. Rational choice theory influences our understanding of the social-economic behaviors associated with administrative law. Rational theory helps agencies make decisions that have consequences for the public or licensees, as long as they stay within the parameters of their regulatory authority. Board members, directors, deputy chiefs, and lawmakers can thus comprehend the relationship between laws and regulations and themselves through the use of rational theory in administrative law. The administrative laws of legislators outline the manner in which a government agency may recommend a course of action or violation within its regulatory purview. However, the Board has rules that relate to the requirements of our rules in my line of work. The Board is allowed to bend regulations that are breached more than the legislature’s violations of the law.
I believe that classical theory informs administrative law. The goal of classical theory in administrative law is to define the guidelines and protocols. One element of traditional legal theories in administrative law is the framework of governance among administrative agencies, which lays the groundwork for the administration’s power and role. Classical theory places a strong emphasis on the rule of law and relies its rulings on transparency and accountability regarding the legislation’s validity.
#3
Studying the connection between prejudice and education is necessary since it has social ramifications. A theoretic structure is a useful tool for an individual to investigate this relationship. Prejudice is defined as a negative opinion that is formed in advance and is typically based on traits (IBE-Infocus, n.d.). However, education can be evaluated by official success or by a specific exposure to fields that support inclusion and multiplicity. To investigate the connection between the two, techniques using quantitative, qualitative, and experimental data are used. While qualitative approaches provide a deeper knowledge of individual experiences, quantitative research is capable of identifying broad trends. Through experimental designs, researchers can examine causal links.
To narrow the topic that can be studied, it is necessary to focus on a specific type of prejudice, this allows you to focus your study on a specified group of individuals. Examining a certain educational idea would come next followed by selecting the research design. By applying the methods and focusing on specific topics, a researcher can create a study that generates valuable data.
#4
The relationship between education and prejudice is extremely broad and would require intensive research and planning to refine. This relationship might be examined by refining the pool of information to a singular institution and or group of institutions, Ex. Ivy universities. The research question proposed could be “Do Ivy League universities practice prejudice toward X group of individuals when considering entrance to their institution?” The selected pool of institutions for research would need to be willing to provide empirical data to aid research. Once the data is retrieved, a willing population of rejected and approved applicants to the schools would need to agree to share their entrance material, i.e., admission application, GPA, etc. From here, the aggregated information could be leveraged to determine if, compared to other groups of people was, group X less likely to be offered admission when presenting similar entrance material (within a given range like GPA plus or minus 0.05).
Collectively, this question requires a lot more work than many assume at first glance due to the variety of factors and considerations. Namely the procurement of information from the universities, procurement of information from applicants, and the number of contributing persons (to ensure the data is sizable enough to be deemed relevant). If all information was provided, then a researcher could realistically conduct research that has a relationship between education and prejudice and group X. Once the information is provided, the researcher may find that prejudice among group X and Ivy League universities is not necessarily present, but perhaps it is for group Y. From this point, the research question could be refined to better suit the research end state, the research methodology could be refined to better answer the question, or simply the research is tangible, and the end state of the question is met.
