Search Our Essay Database

Essay Instructions: Canadian National Railway Corporation : You have been asked to suggest a merger, acquisition, or alliance partner/target for CN. First, you need to identify an industry of interest. Please explain why you have made this choice. Once that decision is made, please offer a list of potential acquisition or alliance targets from that industry.

Essay Instructions: For this project, you will write an analysis of a Canadian icon you believe is important to the construction of the nation. You may choose a person, place or object, and your example may be text-based or not (i.e. you may choose a piece of artwork, a landmark, music, video material, etc). What makes what you have chosen iconically ?Canadian?? What or who is assumed in/by the icon? What is left unsaid, unrepresented? Who is the presumed audience? Who is left out? What vision of Canada does it prescribe? Your final write up should be about 7-8 pages long, not including references or the Appendix. You must use course concepts or ideas to frame your analysis.

about the way the Canadian nation, values, and/or identities are constructed in or through your icon. In other words, this is an analytical paper that must move beyond describing your symbol and speak to how the icon works to build the Canadian nation. That means you will consider how your icon creates or reinforces specific ideas about the Canadian nation as well as the often exclusionary implications of these ideas

. include at least 6 scholarly sources

icon must be represented as an Appendix (photograph, screenshot, transcription). Don?t forget to include this in your References section.
papers must make the case for the ?Canadianness? of their icon.
the goal of the assignment is to use the icon to think about how Canada is constructed in a way that produces relative privilege and disadvantage among its inhabitants. It is to explain how the icon engages in nation-building.

essay is not just about your icon, but about the way the Canadian nation, values, and/or identities are constructed in or through your icon. In other words, this is an analytical paper that must move beyond describing your symbol and speak to how the icon works to build the nation. That means you will consider how your icon creates or reinforces specific ideas about the Canadian nation as well as the often exclusionary implications of these ideas.
the goal of the class is to understand how ?Canada? is inscribed through cultural, historical, political, and economic structures, and how these inscriptions produce inequality among inhabitants.

Below you will find additional scholarly articles related to some popular essay topic. Please Chose ONE of the topics below and write an analytical essay. Or any other topic/icon related to this essay and Canada.


1. Terry Fox

Deborah Harrison 1985 ?The Terry Fox Story & the Popular Media: A Case Study in Ideology and Illness.? Canadian Review of Sociology 22.4: 496-416.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2791455/
http://www.partnershipagainstcancer.ca/wp-content/uploads/CSCC_CancerPlan_20061.pdf
http://www.cancer.ca/Canada-wide/Publications/Alphabetical%20list%20of%20publications/~/media/CCS/Canada%20wide/Files%20List/English%20files%20heading/Library%20PDFs%20-%20English/Environment_cancer_and_you_Eng2011.ashx

2. Hockey

John Nater and Robert Maciel. ?The Grapes of Wrath: Don Cherry and the Militarization of Hockey. Online here - http://www.cpsa-acsp.ca/papers-2011/Nater.pdf
Howard Ramos and Kevin Gosine. 2002. ??The Rocket?: Newspaper Coverage of the Death of a Quebec Cultural Icon, a Canadian Hockey Player.? Journal of Canadian Studies 36.4: 9-31.
http://www.montrealgazette.com/sports/Montreal+Canadiens+seen+from+academic+perspective/5861202/story.html

3. Pierre Trudeau

Essay Instructions: Your paper is to be an argumentative essay. Therefore you may agree or disagree with it, or come to a compromise position. In your paper, you are expected to explain the context of the statement discuss arguments for and against the statement (backed up by secondary literature and primary evidence where appropriate), and come to your own reasoned conclusion.
Topic: The Canadian Senate should be abolished

Format:The paper that you write on your selected topic should be 4-5 pages in length (12 point font Times New Roman, double spaced). Please respect this limit.
The following can serve as a guideline for how to structure your paper:

1. Introduction: Briefly introduce the topic. In one to three paragraphs, explain to the reader why it makes sense to discuss the statement that you selected. Your introduction may explicitly mention the statement, but you are not required to do so if you can think of another way to introduce the topic more effectively.

2. Background: Explain the context of the statement that you are discussing. Consult secondary literature to clarify or interpret an author’s theory.

3. Discussion of the statement: This section can be spit up into two or three sections as required. What you are expected to do here is provide arguments on both sides of the controversy. Explain why one might make the statement in question, explain why one might disagree with it, and come to your own conclusion. You may come out clearly on one side of the controversy or advocate for a compromise solution. There are no wrong answers here: What will be evaluated is not the substantive stance you take on the statement, but they way in which you make your case for it. Refer to academic discussions about the issue in the secondary literature, to primary evidence if it is relevant, and give examples if they are helpful. Don’t hide behind other authors – make sure that your own voice is heard loud and clear.

4. Conclusion: Link back your discussion to the introduction, and discuss the larger implications of your findings. There is no need for extensive repetitions of arguments from the preceding sections; rather, you should reflect on the significance of what you have found. Do not introduce new evidence in this section. In drawing conclusions, try to find a good balance between self-confidence (dare to take a position!) and modesty (be aware of counter-argument or potential limitations!).

Note that the above is only an example, and should not be understood as a straitjacket for your paper. There may be good reasons for structuring a paper differently. Individual sections may be subdivided.

Your paper must be based on high-quality academic literature. This does not mean that lower-quality sources (newspaper articles, websites, etc.) may not be included, but it is essential that your paper is not based exclusively on such sources. You must use at least 3 sources, 1 of which may be the textbook.

Appendix: Citation and references

(a) Citing literature in your text

All ideas or facts that you take from someone else must be cited in the text. While there are various admissible formats, I recommend using the parenthetical citation form. Here are some examples:

? Jeremy Waldron (1998) argues that giving judiciaries the power to override legislation violates the principle of democracy.

? Giving judiciaries the power to override legislation can be seen as violating the principle of democracy (Waldron 1998).

? Critics argue that judicial review by a Supreme Court amounts to “an undemocratic arrangement” (Waldron 1998, 280).

Footnotes can be added if you want to make more extensive remarks on a particular source. References are not necessary for easily accessible and non-controversial data, such as a state’s population, or a legal text (such as the UN Charter – just write: Chapter VII UN Charter). Direct quotations should be used sparingly; if you use them, always include a precise reference (including page number). Quoting (or paraphrasing) without acknowledging the source constitutes plagiarism (see below).

(b) Bibliography

The paper should include a bibliography (or reference list) at the end of the text that lists all sources that you have cited (in alphabetical order, based on authors’ last names). Please use the APSA referencing format. The complete APSA Style Manual can be found at

Essay Instructions: 1. Review Incident 9-1 in the text on pages 361-362 and answer the following questions:

? What laws are likely being violated with respect to compensation administration? What are the particular issues associated with each law you have cited? Please make sure that you are referencing Canadian law?you will likely have to research requirements somewhat and there is information in Chapter 4 that will be helpful!! (10 marks)
? What problems do you see with the incentives for a) executives, b) production workers, c) sales people and d) hourly employees? (8 marks)
? Develop a step by step plan of actions you would recommend and the order in which you would undertake those actions in order to resolve Reynolds? compensation issues. Make sure to provide a rationale for both your suggested actions and the order in which you propose to complete them. (10 marks)

2. Review Incident 10-1 in the text on page 386. Answer the following three questions with respect to this Incident:

? What additions do you think should be made to the company?s benefit program? Provide a rationale for your suggestions based on the information in the Incident and in the text. (10 marks)
? What problems in the Incident might be solved by using a flexible for cafeteria approach to benefits? Why do you believe that this is the case? (5 marks)
? What other suggestions might you make to overcome the company?s recruitment problems? (3 marks)