Amazing Ice essays

Amazing Ice essays Life as we know it would not exist if ice were denser then liquid water. Rivers, lakes, and oceans control much of our climate, because large amounts of water take a very long time to heat up and cool down. So when at the beginning of summer the water is still cold from the winter, and at the beginning of winter the water is still moderately warm from the summer. That is why it is usually cooler on the lakefront. If ice happened to be even slightly denser the liquid water, then that means that it would sink. When winter came around when the water would freeze it would drop to the bottom of the body of water and sit there, and in the protection of the all the water above heat would never reach it and it would never melt. This means that over time whole oceans could freeze over. This would drastically drop the average temperature of our planet. It would be impossible for any type of water life would be impossible to live. Water is said to be our life source, our whole way about bringin g water to running faucets in homes would have to be different. We would have to figure a way to melt large amounts of this water for household uses. We might even have to buy our water in stores at obviously more expensive prices because of the more expensive process of obtaining water. If there were no water life many different kinds of Indians that relied on fish for their main source of food would have either perished or would have moved inland to find other ways to live. Many towns that rely on fish as a main export would also be less productive, such as Boston where most of the citys income is from lobster or other fish. The whole human body would be different; right now a person can only live without water for a few days. Humans would have to evolve into Camels to have any chance of survival in such harsh conditions. The list can go one forever on about how life would be so completely and utterly different from a slight change in t ...

Anti-Gravity Water Science Magic Trick

Anti-Gravity Water Science Magic Trick Amaze your friends with this simple science magic trick that turns ordinary water into anti-gravity water. Materials for the Water Trick Water glass with a round rim (wine glass or typical water glass)T-shirtWater Basically, all you need is water, a glass, and a cloth. A t-shirt is easy to find. Other excellent choices for the fabric would be a handkerchief, square of silk, or mens dress shirt. Choose a fabric with a tight weave or knit. Perform the Anti-Gravity Water Trick Place the cloth over the glass.Use your hand to push a depression into the fabric. This is so you can more easily fill the glass and also helps wet the material.Fill the glass about three-quarters full of water.Pull the fabric tightly over the glass.You have two choices here. You can quickly flip the glass, using a hand to hold the fabric tight. Alternatively, you can put one hand over the top of the glass, while using the other to hold the material tight and slowly invert the glass. Pull the hand over the glass away.The water doesnt pour out! How It Works Water has a high surface tension. In this trick, the water molecules absorbed into the fabric hold onto other water molecules inside the water glass. Even though there are gaps in the fabric, the attraction between water molecules overcomes the force of gravity trying to pull the water down. What do you think would happen if you lowered the surface tension of the water by using a glass that had a residue of detergent on it? What if you tried the trick with another liquid? Chances are good the surface tension of the water would be lowered enough that youd get wet! Another fun trick that works on the same principle is Magic Colored Milk.

European Politics Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

European Politics - Essay Example The constitution of the European countries have explicitly protected the interests of the minority communities; and encouraged their participation in social, economic and political fronts. Childre (2003) observed that the constitution of the European countries supports democratic practices, and firmly encourages that the democratic notions shall be adopted and implemented on the basis of its merit. The European society is cosmopolitan society, but the majority of the aboriginals are reluctant to consider this as fact. The contemporary political theorists considered cosmopolitanism as "citizenship of the world, which is a critique of ordinary theories of political obligation, with their tendency to focus on our duties to fellow citizens, not to people elsewhere", as discussed by Patrick (2005). The consequence of the cosmopolitanism is expected to be "single world government with corresponding global citizenship"; this was evaluated by Patrick (2005). Surprisingly such aspirations have not discussed by the serious circles. Ulrich (2006) proposed that the modified and renewed version of the cosmopolitanism includes "everyone in the world in a single global web of mutual obligations". However the reservations and criticism mounted against cosmopolitanism is relevant to the negligence of the "obligations of reciprocity"; there has been consensus on the fact that the society has "obligations to give benefits in return for benefits received". The issue commonly observed by the society at large is relev ant to the psychological possibility based upon the desirability claims, "the elimination of a special motivating attachment to fellow-citizens is not possible, but the elimination of special motivating attachments to fellow-citizens is expected to develop "certain desirable form of political life impossible". In this context, the cosmopolitan has revealed two broad options i.e. "the viability of politics as usual depends not upon certain beliefs that fellow-citizens deserve more of one's service, but upon commitments to the polity itself", therefore if the possibility of the strictly cosmopolitan is possible then Patrick (2005) believes that "a commitment to a universal set of principles embodied in a particular political constitution and a particular set of political institutions" is engaged. The practicability of such desirable politics has the potential to disarm the anti-cosmopolitan; Ulrich (2006) believes that this has provided that the denial of the form of political life is practical, and for this purposes the "moral commitments run over into a discussion of political theory". Literature Review Wayne (2001) believed that within the European society we still find traces of non-compliance against democratic principle of equality and justice. Racism and xenophobia has limited and discouraged the participation of the minority or under-privileged communities into political and social affairs. The European society which has been staunch supporter and enthusiast towards the proactive participation of the minority communities into public and private affairs; the current political state of some European countries indicates pessimistic outlook, where the interests and rights of the minority communities have been violated or ignored. The European society is multi-linguistic, multi-ethnic, multi-cultural and multi-religious society. The penetration of the Africans, Arabs

Economics for Managers Japan Case Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2750 words

Economics for Managers Japan Case - Essay Example For almost a decade, the Japanese have started to adopt a risk-averse mindset after the fall of the dotcoms. Due to the circumstances, zero-return in cash has become the mindset of the people. While prices continue to drop, people further delay their consumption for the hope of lower prices. This hoarding of cash or investing in zero-return or non-interest-bearing savings leads to stagnation and later, worsening deflation in the economy. Thus the country wishes for some inflation to happen by increasing aggregate demand either through an increase in consumer spending, or channeling of money to some real investments in order to stimulate growth in the economy. Because of inflation, the relatively low or zero-return of investments most Japanese consumers have produces a negative interest rate. The Japanese Central Bank now hopes that consumers will then shift their investments to interest-bearing or higher-yielding investments to offset the effect of inflation, such as shares and real estate in order to give a boost to the economy. The cost-push inflation in the economy thus requires the Japanese Central Bank to use some monetary policy to curb it. However, Japanese Central Bank cannot just increase the interest rate in the meantime. While the global economy seems to pose a threat, increasing the interest rate will hurt the economy and worsen the impact of this threat if it happens. Thus, the Japanese Central Bank will keep the interest rates low in order to lessen the impact of the economic crisis abroad to the Japanese economy. The aggregate prices or the overall inflation within an economy is set by the interaction of the aggregate demand and aggregate supply. On one hand, aggregate demand is determined by the total amount  of consumption, investment, government spending and net exports in an economy.

Organizational Environment Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Organizational Environment - Assignment Example Therefore, the firm should consider the factors such as the availability of the commodity, which will ensure sustained supply hence the customers, are not disappointed (Jones, 2010). They should also consider their technical ability or their ability to invest in the machinery, which will ensure that there is value addition to the product as well as large-scale productivity. The young agile manager should also go out and ascertain the actual market by quantifying it before making the enormous investment. The manger should also consider conducting intensive research on the possible ways of differentiating the product to attract a wider market through the ever-growing technology and the cultural diversity. Technology available should also be considered as the firm tries to venture into production, as technology will facilitate both mechanization and automation, which will go the large way to enlarge the production of the Kaolas. The natural factors enhancing the survival of the animals have to be considered as they affect production (Ito & Rose, 2004/2005, winter). 1. What additional factors should be considered if Krazy Koalas decides to expand to Ireland, Spain, and possibly the Middle East? Due to geographical differences between the US and Ireland, Spain, and the Middle East, the political, social and economic factors will tend to be different. Therefore the other factors which have to be considered before extending the supply of the Kaolas in the Ireland, Spain and middle east are:- political factors, these are the decisions pertaining to taxation, investments and fiscal policies of the country. If the policies of the mentioned governments are not in favor of imports or policies are designed to discourage the importation from certain countries then it would be costly hence unwise to expand their markets to these countries. Socially, the company should consider cultural diversity between these two countries, in one way or the other there might be cultures, whi ch would not support the consumption of koalas in some form (Jones, 2010). Therefore, the essence of research on the different cultures and the name they give to the product or the form in which they are likely to consume it for the sake of providing a better product to the right group of people. Such studies will facilitate differentiation, which is healthy for increased production. Economically, factors such as the inflation rates and exchange rates must be looked at as they are likely to determine whether it is economical to produce and supply to these countries or not. As at this time, the fall in value for the dollar has made the affordability of the koalas in both Spain and Ireland to increase, as they are quite affordable. 2. What are your specific recommendations for Krazy Koalas? What should the company do, and why? Krazy koala is a company, which has shown prospects of growth due to the ever-increasing demand for the products they offer. The management should therefore be tasked with the responsibility of ensuring that they differentiate the products they are providing to widen the base of their supplies as well as try and block the potential competitors. The management can also look for ways of minimizing the production costs as much as possible which would make way for the expansion of the profits to support the firm in its

Statutory Protection of Employment Law

Statutory Protection of Employment Law The Failed Promise of Statutory Protection The subject of the legal regulation of labor is one of great complexity. Up to the present time a priori objections to such regulations have delayed their introduction, and only gradually, as experience has demonstrated their usefulness, have they been extended to situations which seem to require them. In †¦ the United States the notion that the legislative power should not be used to regulate conditions of employment has been abandoned by most thoughtful persons, but the prejudice against interference is as strong as ever. Henry R. Seager, Economics, 1904, p. 431 Following a period of legislative inaction, selective statutory restrictions on the right to dismiss came into existence largely as a byproduct of labor legislation of the late 1920s and early 1930s. The introduction of limitations to the at-will rule within the NLRA framework, in particular, marked the long overdue recognition that, as long as employers had the right to dismiss employees, at-will public policy goals, such as industrial peace and the extension of orderly collective bargaining, were unattainable. Following a roughly historical chronology, this chapter explores how, from the 1920s onwards, restrictions on dismissals were constructed around notions of â€Å"orderly† collective bargaining. Thematically, the focus of the chapter is on the creation of new institutional structures and their impact on the status of workers in terms of job security. Underlying this analysis is the tentative hypothesis that the NLRA, and the practices which evolved from it, provided unions and their members with a sense of control over dismissal rights which was largely illusionary. This mistaken sense of control, in turn, encouraged unions to put efforts into job security enhancing measures at the plant and company level which ultimately did not constrain managerial prerogatives effectively. This lack of real control became apparent in the mid 1960s, when the Supreme Court handed down several decisions which reaffirmed the right of management to close branches and discharge employees without u nion interference. Apart from excluding non-unionized workers, the NLRA system, perhaps against the intentions of its original sponsors, ultimately came to severely circumscribe the right of unions to bargain over job security at the very time when such protection was needed. The Promised Lands of Protected Bargaining At the turn of the century, many US industrial relations scholars questioned the assumption that injustices in the labor market could be remedied through legislative acts and/or, more generally, via a strengthening of individual employment rights. Opposition to legislative approaches was grounded primarily in the belief that solutions to the â€Å"labor problems of industrial societies† could be created more easily by strengthening the standing of organized labor as collective bargaining agent rather than by creating a host of specific employment regulations.[1] Accordingly, in 1911, the Harvard economist Taussig suggested that the most urgent task in reforming US employment relations was not detailed new legislation per se, but rather the protection of bargaining representatives:[2] The workmen clearly gain by having their case in charge of chosen representatives, whether or not these be fellow employees; and collective bargaining and unionization up to this point surely bring no offsetting disadvantages to society. As to the immediate employees, there is often a real danger that he who presents a demand, or a grievance, will be â€Å"victimized.† He will be discharged and perhaps blacklisted; very likely on some pretext, but in fact because â€Å"he has made trouble.† In the 1930s, Taylors influential Labor Problems and Labor Law argued, very much along the lines of earlier reform advocates, that individual workers had been deprived of their ability to bargain primarily because of the expansion and centralization of management.[3] To remedy this situation, Taylor argued, the state had to enable workers to bargain collectively, both for wages and for the protection of their jobs. Said Taylor:[4] Legally free to dispose of his services at any price he deems just, immediate necessity in the face of an oversupply of labor reduces that freedom to empty words. His [meaning the workers] inferior bargaining position is not wholly due to economic inequality, but in part to a lack of knowledge of labor conditions, and a bargaining skill less effective than that of his employer. The injustices growing out of the individual bargaining burden affect not only the individual worker but the entire group to which he belongs. Unregulated competition resulting from individual bargaining tends to pull down the terms of employment to the level of the weakest employer Taylors notion that inequalities of labor were due to the exposure of workers to individual rather than collective bargaining echoed the opinions of some of the nations leading judges of the time. Judges Holmes and Field had earlier opposed bans on union activity on account of the fact that union activity merely counterbalanced the combination of capitalists.[5] Despite the gradual acknowledgement of the legitimacy of strike action by some courts, up until the 1920s, few judges had been willing to offer protection to those workers who were discharged for union membership or strike activity. In theory, collective bargaining could serve to limit the power disequilibrium between the employer, who, as Holmes says â€Å"is free to discharge the worker, and the worker who depends on his job for his livelihood.†[6] In practice, however, the relationship between job security and collective action had remained largely antonymous. Post World War I, workers who participated in collective action, be it as organizers or as strike participants, were likely to face retaliatory discharges or even blacklisting.[7] Industrial actions in which in excess of 1,000 workers were permanently dismissed included the Homestead strike of 1892, the Pullman strike of 1894, and the steel strike of 1919-20, which involved approximately 365,000 workers and resulted in over 10,000 permanent discharges. In the Boston police strike of 1919, in which the policemen struck for the right to organize with an AFL affiliate, meanwhile, more than one third of the police force were permanently discharged. The first congressional statute addressing issues of dismissal and organizing activity, the Erdman Act, had attempted to prohibit the retaliatory discharge of union members working on the railroads; at a time when the railroads were the only area where the Federal Government had the authority to regulate such matters. Passed by Congress in 1898, Section 10 of the Erdman Act made it an offense to threaten an employee â€Å"with discharge† or to blacklist the employee after a discharge because of membership in a labor organization. Specifically the Act read: [8] That any employer subject to the provisions of this act and any officer, agent or receiver of such employer who shall require any employee, or any person seeking employment, as a condition of such employment, to enter into an agreement, either written or verbal, not to become or remain a member of any labor corporation, association, or organization; or shall threaten any employee with loss of employment, or shall unjustly discriminate against any employee because of his membership †¦ or who shall, after having discharges an employee, attempt or conspire to prevent such employee from obtaining employment or who shall after the quitting of an employee, attempt or conspire to prevent such employee from obtaining employment, is hereby declared to be guilty of a misdemeanor, and †¦ shall be punished for such offense by a fine of not less than one hundred dollars and not more than one thousand dollars. In 1908, section 10 of the Erdman Act was declared in violation of the Fifth Amendment by the Supreme Court in Adair v. United States. This rather predictable decision again rendered members of labor organizations unprotected from retaliatory discharges.[9] Unionized workers were given some support by the courts in the Brandeis and Holmes Supreme Court decisions of the 1920s.[10] Explicit legislative protection of those engaging in organizing activity however commenced as late as 1926 with the passage of the Railroad Labor Act (RLA), which, apart from requiring employers to bargain with unions, prohibited employers from discriminating against union members.[11] The RLA applied originally to interstate railroads and related undertakings, but was later amended to include airlines engaged in interstate commerce. The Norris La Guardia Act (NLGA) of 1932 gave some federal sanction to the right of labor unions to organize and strike.[12] Implicitly, it also limited the ability of federal courts to enforce â€Å"yellow dog contracts,† under which workers promised not to join a union or promised to discontinue union membership.[13] The National Industrial Recovery Act (NRA) of 1933, the predecessor of the National Labor Relations Act, in troduced the idea of codes of â€Å"fair competition† which fixed wages and hours in certain industries. Title I of the Act, which was declared unconstitutional in 1935, guarantied the right of employees to collective bargaining without interference or coercion (which included the dismissal of employees). [14] The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) of 1935, or Wagner Act, included some previously invalidated labor sections of the NRA, as well as a number of additions. Primarily concerned with restricting employer activities against union organizing and bargaining efforts, the NLRA prohibited employers from, firstly, â€Å"dominating or otherwise interfering with the formation of labor unions†; secondly, â€Å"interfering or restraining employees engaged in exercising their rights to organize and bargain collectively; and, thirdly, from â€Å"refusing to bargain collectively with unions representing a companys employees.† In doing so, sections 7 and 8 of the NLRA effectively tied the legal protection of employees from retaliatory discharges to the right of employees to organize collectively. The Act stated to this effect that:[15] Sec. 7. Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in concerted activities, for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection. Sec. 8. It shall be an unfair practice for an employer— (1) To interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in section 7. (2) To dominate or interfere with the formation or administration of any labor organization or contribute financial or other support to it†¦ (3) By discrimination in regard to hire or tenure of employment or any term or condition of employment to encourage or discourage membership in any labor organization†¦ (4) To discharge or otherwise discriminate against an employee because he had filed charges or given testimony under this act. (5) To refuse to bargain collectively with the representatives of his employees†¦ Under the NLRA regime, employers were required â€Å"not to refuse to bargain collectively with the representatives of his employees† with regard to â€Å"rates of pay, wages and hours of employment, or other conditions of employment.†[16] While the Act had made it clear that retaliatory dismissals of union members were illegal, it gave no guidance on the question of whether bargaining over â€Å"other conditions of employment,† included issues relating to job security.[17] Moreover, despite the appearance of sweeping legislation, coverage under the NLRAs protective umbrella was narrow. Public employees at the federal, state, and local level, agricultural workers, domestic workers, and supervisory employees all were excluded.[18] Nonetheless, for those covered by the Act, statutory dismissal protection was available in connection with established categories of protected activity the courts had created. This included dismissals for strike action, union membership and related activities. Indeed, at its outset, the NLRB rulings allowed significant numbers of dismissed employees to gain reinstatement. From the appointment of the Board in the Fall of 1935 until March 1939, the Board handled a total of 20,192 cases involving over 4.5 million workers. Of these cases 19,018 or four fifths were closed. Of the total cases closed, about 52% were decided by agreements, while the remainder were dismissed, withdrawn or closed in some other way before coming to the Board. About two thousand cases were strike cases, involving 356 thousand workers, of which 75% were settled and in which 227 thousand workers had to be re-employed. An additional 15 thousand cases were decided in favor of workers alleging non-strike related discriminatory discharges, and resulted in the reinstatement of the respective workers. Between January 1 of 1938 and April 1 of 1939 alone, the Board heard 1,675 cases alleging discriminatory discharges and ordered the reinstatement and/or compensation of 1,022 wo rkers.[19] In theory, there was a potential for collective bargaining agreements to include job security guarantees of some form. Given existing cultural pre-dispositions, both amongst the judiciary and managers, however, the possibility of partial union control over personnel and investment decisions was remote. Judicial support for the right to manage had a strong pedigree and its influence would not wane quickly. In the 1890s already, some state courts had felt the need to defend the right to manage. In the view of most courts this right was as much a part of the free labor creed as was the right to work. â€Å"Free labor† required that both employers and individual workers were fully responsible for their decisions. Permitting workers to organize and successively influence managerial decisions was viewed as a danger to free economic competition. In State v. Glidden, an outraged Connecticut judge stated, that once workers could influence managerial decision, no longer would the heads of industrial and commercial enterprises rise from the â€Å"ranks of the toilers, no longer could self-reliant ambitious men push to the fore.†[20] Unable to manage as they saw fit, businessmen would stop risking their capital, time and experience. â€Å"At best, the nations business would be conducted by paternalistic enterprises, at worst anarchy pure and simple † would prevail. At the turn of the century, Taussig had already predicted that union demands for job security would clash with managers insistence on â€Å"the right to manage.† His Principles of Economics stated to this effect that:[21] Private ownership carries with it the seeds of conflictthe inevitable clash between those who employ and who are employed. Disguise it as we may, smooth over to our utmost, adjust where we can, there the conflict is, ever liable to break out. The private employer regards his business as his own, its methods of management as subject to his own judgment. It is almost invariably urged by him and his spokesman that the effective working of the business machine depends above all on unfettered freedom in the selection and tenure of employees. So long as this attitude prevails, the workman will feel in turn that he must retain his weapon of defense, the strike, even though it entail injury to a wide circle of persons. Even if employers were to consent to restrictions on their power of discharge, contests would remain, strikes would brew. And on the other hand discharge is but one of the matters in which employers absolute rule is to be questioned. Discharge is conspicuous because it is t he outstanding weapon. As long as unions and their members had little formal protection through the law, management had been able to assert its dominance with relative ease, if only by dismissing those who questioned it. Once NLRA legislation protected concerted action, this situation had changed radically, and conflicts between unions and management over dismissal rights were pre-destined. When President Truman called the second National Labor Management Conference in 1945, labor and management representatives found themselves unable to agree on the boundaries of collective bargaining. Disagreement had arisen particularly with regard to managements right to make workers redundant, close and/or relocate branches. The statement of the management representative at the conference expressed the employers dismay over this matter:[22] Labor members of the Committee on Managements Rights to manage have been unwilling to any listing of specific management functions. Management members of the Committee conclude †¦ therefore, that the labor members are convinced that the field of collective bargaining will, in all probability, continue to expand into the field of management. The only possible end of such a philosophy would be the joint management of the enterprise. To this management members naturally cannot agree. Management has functions that must not and cannot be compromised to the public interest. If labor disputes are to be minimized, labor must agree that certain specific functions and responsibilities of management are not subject to collective bargaining. In theory, the evolving conflict about the appropriate limits of collective bargaining, and particularly the rights of labor to interfere with managements redundancy and dismissal decisions, was resolved by reference to new management concepts such as the residual rights doctrine. In practice, a set of employer friendly court decisions and the decline of unions in the US settled the issue, first, in rough terms, during the first decade of NLRA rule, and then, in greater detail, over the following three decades. The notion of residual rights, which deserves a passing mention in this context, developed from the 1940s onwards to become a prominent feature of the management of industrial relations in the 1960s and 1970s. The residual rights doctrine postulated that management rights were the result of an evolutionary process, whereby initially management possessed total freedom in ordering the affairs of the enterprise. This included freedoms with regard to whom to hire and dismiss and when to do so. Union demands and labor legislation encroached on this freedom. It followed that every time a manager made a contractual concession, and/or every time a labor law restricted management options, the original rights of management were reduced. What remained then were the residual rights, not specifically renounced by management or restricted by law.[23] If, for instance, management renounced the right to dismiss according to productivity or any other performance criterion and agreed to dismiss accord ing to seniority, seniority replaced managements previous decision criteria. Meanwhile other issues, such as how many workers could be dismissed in a specific time period, remained within the exclusive sphere of managerial decision making.[24] Adopting this view, many arbitration decisions applied a two-stage approach to questions about the appropriate bargaining remit of a union. If union representatives and management disagreed on whether an issue was a legitimate bargaining item, previous contractual agreements as well as legal requirements had to be investigated. If no explicit statement restricting managements rights in the respective matter could be found in these sources, the issue typically had to be considered as falling within managements remit. Since explicit renunciations of the rights to dismiss were typically rare, management usually maintained broad discretion over dismissals, which fell outwith causes covered explicitly by just-cause rules. Because existing practices and informal agreements had little legal bearing on conflicts over the interpretation of the NLRA, the residual rights doctrine offered almost no guidance to the courts in evaluating the legitimacy of union involvement in termination decisions. Here an alternative, and in many ways even more restrictive approach, evolved over time. While the NLRB of the early years generally looked favorably upon workers whose discharge could in some way be linked to union activity, it also condoned a wide set of permissible grounds for dismissal. In this context, several NLRB decisions early on vindicated traditional assumptions about managerial prerogatives. Discharges were sustained by the NLRB in cases involving gross inefficiency of a worker, incompetence, change in equipment, â€Å"ruckus and horseplay†, absenteeism, brawling, cursing of the boss, and the violation of company rules.[25] Most importantly, discharges in the absence of employee misconduct were fre quently declared permissible if there was no evidence for anti-union activity. This included discharges for lack of work, which were generally approved by the Board even in absence of union consultation, as long as anti-union bias could not be proven. In its Seagrave decision of 1938, for instance, the Board set a precedent for the preservation of employment-at-will within collective bargaining.[26] Seagrave, an automotive equipment plant had discharged an employee three weeks after he got his job. The foreman testified to the fact that the employees work was satisfactory. The worker, a CIO member, had previously been arrested for disorderly conduct during a strike and alleged that he was fired because of this previous involvement, and, more specifically, because his foreman had received a blacklist showing his name. The spokesman of the company explained that the polisher was hired because of a temporary emergency arising from the receipt of a special order, and that he was dismiss ed when the work on that order let up. The Board found no evidence for anti-union activity and declared the dismissal legal. In the case of Sheba Ann Frocks (1938), similarly, thirty employees, who had been dropped from the payroll of the Sheba garment plant, complained to the Board alleging that their discharge was based on their CIO membership.[27] Company officials testified that the layoffs took place because of a lack of work at the end of the regular production season. The Board accepted this explanation because the company retained over half of its CIO employees and discharged non-union employees as well, although not proportionally. In its conclusion the Board stated that, in the case of a dismissal for legitimate business reasons, such as slack work, no consultation with union members was required. While NLRB decisions of the late 1930s, such as Seagrave and Sheba, delineated the space between dismissal protection and managerial prerogatives more or less by default, several court decisions attempted to give guidance which was general enough to be applied to other contexts. This tendency towards establishing a formula which ringfenced managerial decision making from union intrusion could already be detected in the Supreme Courts ruling on NLRB v. Jones Laughlin Steel, the landmark case better known for its acceptance of the NLRA. In Jones, the Supreme Court stressed that although the Act required bargaining, it did not â€Å"compel† agreement.[28] For the Supreme Court, in other words, the NLRA was legal because, and only because, the Act did not interfere with â€Å"the normal exercise of the right of the employer to select employees or to discharge them.†[29] That, in defining normal rights, the Supreme Court emphasised the right to discharge workers did not bod e well for those who expected the Act to significantly reduce arbitrary dismissals. With Jones, the court had indicated that outwith matters directly related to collective bargaining, employment-at-will was still very much in place, with restrictions only affecting those discharges which were explicitly declared illegal in the NLRA. More importantly, it had implied that would be difficult to create an agreement sanctioned and protected by the Act which would eliminate the right of employers to discharge workers for â€Å"legitimate† reasons. In NLRB v. Sands Manufacturing (1938), a federal appeals court was even more explicit in affirming managements freedom to dismiss workers.[30] In Sands, a collective agreement between the company and MESA, a labor union, was broken by the union. The company apparently bargained collectively with MESA. After two months, the company signed an agreement with another union, some of whose members were employed in order to replace MESA members. The NLRB ordered reinstatement of the MESA employees and requested the circuit court to enforce its order. The 6th circuit set aside the order and dismissed the petition to enforce. With respect to the termination of the employer-employee relationship the court stated that:[31] The statute [meaning the NLRA] does not interfere with the normal right of the employer to select or discharge his employees If employees violate their contract they may be discharged for that reason and this does not constitute a discrimination in regard to tenure of employment nor an unfair labor practice, nor does it continue a discharge because the employees are members of a union. [T]he statute does not provide that the relationship held in status quo under Title 29, Section 152(3) [meaning the prohibition of dismissals during strikes] shall continue in absence of wrongful conduct on the part of the employer and of rightful conduct on the part of the employees. If such were its meaning, the right of the employer to select, and discharge his employees would be cut off. The Sands decision was in many regards more radical than previous rulings. In Sands, the court had concluded that, provided the employer had engaged in bargaining, NLRA legislation had to be interpreted so as not to otherwise constrain the employers rights to select and discharge employees. In other words, the court indicated that any action which would effectively restrict the right of employers to discharge, after basic bargaining obligations were met, could be struck down. While both the Jones Laughlin Steel and the Sands cases redefined space for at-will discharges relatively broadly, the Supreme Courts 1942 Montgomery Ward decision attempted to give a comprehensive definition of managements rights which gave managers broad control over discharge decisions.[32] In its Montgomery Ward decision, the 9th Circuit excluded from arbitrable grievances:[33] changes in business practice, the opening and closing of new units, the choice of personnel (subject, however to the seniority provision), the choice of merchandise to be sold, and other questions of a like nature not having to do directly and primarily with the day-to-day life of the employees and their relations with supervisors. Although Montgomery Ward supported traditional concepts of management rights with respect to day-to-day arbitration, it left open a number of important questions with regard to dismissals arising as a consequence of longer term strategic decisions. This included questions relating to the dividing line between a rational business decision to relocate a plant, and one involving, for example, the elimination of a unionized plantan illegal antiunion activity. Moreover, the Courts decision to exclude changes in business practice from arbitrable grievances, merely prohibited unions from insisting on arbitration in these matters; and hence relieved management from the legal duty to discuss these matters in good faith. This did neither mean that union representatives could not bargain about these issues when contracts were negotiated, nor did it imply that once management conceded to union involvement in these matters, this involvement was illegal or unenforceable. The latter issue of bargaining about alleged management prerogatives was addressed first in 1952 in NLRB v. American National Insurance Group.[34] In American National, the Supreme Court held that management could enforce limits to bargaining on the basis of a management prerogative clause, under which the union was ousted from involvement in certain matters. American Nationals management prerogative clause included issues of discipline and work schedules; that is, statutory rights with respect to mandatory bargaining. The court, nonetheless, rejected the Boards position that employers were obligated to establish ongoing bargaining during the terms of the collective agreement on issues subject to defined managerial prerogatives. While in American National the company had attempted to impose broad limitations on bargaining rights, many companies insisted â€Å"only† on the type of management prerogatives listed in the Montgomery case, such as the freedom to decide on the closure of units. In the mid-1950s, Haber and Levison reported that over 80% of the contracts signed in the building industries contained one or another form of a managerial rights clause. Many of these clauses explicitly prohibited bargaining over issues of job security.[35] The management literature, meanwhile, welcomed American National because companies were now less likely to face NLRA proceedings if they refused to discuss issues of employment security. This was the case, not only where companies had gained past assurances that union representatives would respect managerial prerogatives, but also where such clauses could be â€Å"inferred† from existing bargaining agreements.[36] Management rights in matters of dismissals and layoffs were â€Å"clarified† further in the 1958 Supreme Court decision on Borg-Warner. In NLRB v. Wooster Division of Borg-Warner the Court held that there were three subjects of bargaining: mandatory, nonmandatory, and illegal.[37] The obligation to bargain, as specified in the NLRA, applied only to mandatory subjects. A nonmandatory subject was â€Å"permissive,† meaning that it could be raised by either party. However, when a party insisted on a position regarding such an area to the point of impasse, it was acting illegally under the provisions of the Act.[38] Since the law had defined the mandatory subjects of bargaining, Borg-Warner played an important role in the preservation of managerial prerogatives with regard to redundancies and dismissals. Under Borg-Warner, union demands for job security or employment guarantees could be rejected, as they could not be reasonably classified as mandatory bargaining items.[39] When determining what were mandatory and nonmandatory bargaining subjects, the NLRB and the courts of the 1950s and 1960s typically referred to the relevant NLRA section 9(a) which mandated bargaining for pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of employment. Given these specifications, any issue involving pay and hours was obviously a mandatory bargaining item, requiring both parties to bargain in good faith or face sanctions through NLRB proceedings. More problematic was the clause including, â€Å"other conditions of employment.† When issues like redundancies, mass layoffs and mass discharges were at stake, the courts and the Board usually interpreted â€Å"other conditions of employment† to mean that union involvement in decisions about which workers were to be laid off or made redundant, was mandatory. To this effect union representatives were to be informed about planned manpower reductions. Union representatives were free to address issues related t o discharges, make suggestions with regard to manpower relocation, or suggest alternative ways of cutting costs. If the company refused, unions, however, could not insist on a settlement of the issue. While strike action relating to these matters was not per se illegal, any protracted industrial action on non-mandatory manpower issues was likely to be declared an unfair labor practice by the NLRB or the courts.[40] This approach, needless to say, gave unions with little power to influence a companys manpower decisions even in industries where levels of organization were high. Since it was often difficult to link a redundancy decision to union avoidance or to invoke contractual clauses which

Stephen King Essay -- Essays Papers

BIOGRAPHY ON STEPHEN KING Stephen Edwin King was born in Portland, Maine, on September 21, 1947, the son of Donald and Nellie Ruth king. His father, a merchant seaman, deserted the family in about 1950. His mother took a succession of low-paying jobs to support him and his brother, David. A lonely, rather introverted child, King invented a more outgoing alter ego – Cannonball Cannon, a daredevil who â€Å"did good deeds† – and derived other vicarious thrills from listening to tales of horror on the radio, reading such spine-tingling comic books as Weird Science, Tales from the Crypt, and Tales from the Vault. He also went to see science fiction and monster movies. In October 1957, the local theater manager interrupted a Saturday matinee screening of Earth vs. the Flying Saucers to announce the Soviet Union’s launching of Sputnik, the first artificial earth satellite. It was then that King sensed for the first time â€Å"a useful connection between the world of fantasy a nd that of what my Weekly Reader used to call current events.† Eventually, countless viewings over the years of such classic horror films as The Invasion of the Body Snatchers, The Creature from the Black Lagoon, The Thing, and It came from Outer Space convinced him that the horror movie’s chief value is â€Å"its ability to form a liaison between our fantasy fears and our real fears.† The fortunate discovery of his father’s paperback collection of fantasy-horror fiction gave King, in his own words, a â€Å"...

Bible Essay

There are many accounts in the Bible that state God as the creator. Genesis 1 and 2 are both creation stories but slightly differ in their accounts; Genesis 1 is a day by day account of all the things God created in not so much detail whereas Genesis 2 explains the creation story in a way that focuses more on the creation of man and woman than just the lands. Having two accounts of the creation story means that it is easier to come up with your own conclusion as to how the earth was created. The first line of Genesis 1 is â€Å"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth† There is no explanation as to where God came from or why He is there, He just exists and creates the heavens and the earth. This alone is showing God as the creator. Genesis then carries on to state all the things God created all with no scientific or physical proof or evidence as to why and how God is doing so. â€Å"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them† This quote is from line 27 and is on the 6th day. The repetition of the word ‘created’ is enforcing to the reader that God is the creator of everything and this is done so that there is no doubt in the readers mind whether God is the creator or not. God creating man and woman in his own image is showing that we are superior to other beings such as animals which shows that God is the humans superior. Being made in Gods image is his way of blessing the humans in life as we are made in the ‘Creators’ image. â€Å"Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air†¦Ã¢â‚¬  This quote is saying that God is passing down his ‘ruler ship’ on to the humans. This means that God is starting to ‘back away’ from his previous role and now feels that he has created a world that the inhabitants (humans) can look after. Genesis two is another creation story but has a few differences to Genesis 1. While Genesis 1 speaks a lot more of the specifics of how and when each part of the earth was made, Genesis 2 speaks a whole lot more about the creation of humans rather than the land. The most time that the creation of land is mentioned is at the beginning of Genesis 2. â€Å"This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created. When the LORD God made the earth and the heavens-â€Å" This is the first thing said in Genesis 2 and it is stating that God is the creator. It says that God created both the heavens and the earth; there is never any question or vagueness about God creating the heavens and the earth it is all very matter of fact. Although Genesis 2 doesn’t always speak of God ‘creating’ things it often personifies God in such a way that he is planting or making objects. â€Å"And the LORD God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground-â€Å" This quote doesn’t say that God created the trees but made them grow from the ground, this is essentially saying that He created them as it was the first sighting of trees but is said in a different way as so not to force the ‘creation’ down your throat like Genesis 1 does. This is so that you can come to your own conclusion about which one is more plausible or correct but there is still no doubt as to god being the creator. Job 38 from the Book of Job is a story of how Satan and God have a disagreement where Satan was saying that Job only worships God because he is prosperous in his life, God then agrees to take away all his possessions and leave him with nothing to show Satan that Job would still worship him even if he was left with nothing. Job’s three friends Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar try to comfort Job but they end up doing the opposite and tell Job that the reason for all his losses is because he has sinned and now God is making him suffer. In the end Job has had enough and questions God, this makes God angry and then Job has a better understanding and realises that he should have trusted God all along. God then returns all of Jobs health and possession in better amounts than they previously were. This story is God showing his power and his superiority to humans. â€Å"Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation? † This is God saying that he is mightier than any human and they do not compare to His power. This is also showing that God is omnipotent and that we know nothing compared to him. This is all enforcing that God is the creator and better than all the humans. â€Å"Have you ever given orders to the morning, or shown the dawn it’s place,† This is saying that God has dominance over everything in the world, humans and nature. After Gods account of all his majestic works (such as the world and humans) and power, Job has to acknowledge God’s right as creator to do as he pleases and to not be questioned. Job is essentially the personification of all humans who do not believe god as the creator, Job doubted God and his ability so god became angry; this is supposedly what happens every time someone doubts God. Psalm 8 is a song about the lord God and his creation. â€Å"You have set your glory above the heavens† While this quote form the first verse isn’t directly linked to God being the creator it is saying that God has stated his glory in a way that so far in this psalm we do not know yet, we know that God has glory which could mean he has done something great. â€Å"When I consider the heavens, the work of your fingers† Now we start to work out what it is that causes God to have glory, â€Å"the work of your fingers† we are literally told that God has made the heavens with his ‘fingers’. This personification of God shows that people saw him as one of them but also appreciated his greater power, this could possibly relate to humans being made in God’s image. â€Å"you made him a little lower than the heavenly beings† This quote is, like Job 38, stating God’s dominance over the humans. God made humans a little lower than heavenly beings so that they knew their place and that they were lesser than himself ‘the creator’.

Biography of Lenny Bruce

Biography of Lenny Bruce Lenny Bruce is considered one of the most influential comedians of all time as well as a notable social critic of the mid-20th century. Yet during his troubled life he was often criticized, persecuted by the authorities, and shunned by the entertainment mainstream. In the conservative America of the late 1950s, Bruce emerged as a leading proponent of what was called sick humor. The term referred to comics who stepped out beyond stock jokes to poke fun at the rigid conventions of American society. Within a few years, Bruce gained a following by skewering what he considered the underlying  hypocrisy of American society. He denounced racists and bigots, and performed routines focused on societal taboos, which included sexual practices, drug and alcohol use, and specific words considered unacceptable in polite society. His own drug use brought legal problems. And as he became famous for using forbidden language, he was often arrested for public obscenity. Ultimately, his endless legal hassles doomed his career, as clubs were dissuaded from hiring him. And when he did perform in public, he became prone to ranting onstage about being persecuted. Lenny Bruces legendary status developed years after his death in 1966 from a drug overdose at the age of 40. His short and troubled life was the subject of the 1974 film, Lenny, starring Dustin Hoffman. The film, which was nominated for an Oscar for Best Picture, was based on a Broadway play, which had opened in 1971. The same comedy bits  which had gotten Lenny Bruce arrested in the early 1960s were prominently featured in respected works of dramatic art in the early 1970s. The legacy of Lenny Bruce endured. Comedians such as George Carlin and Richard Pryor were considered his successors.  Bob Dylan, who had seen him perform in the early 1960s, eventually wrote a song recalling a taxi ride they had shared.  And, of course, numerous comedians have cited Lenny Bruce as an enduring influence. Early Life Lenny Bruce was born as Leonard Alfred Schneider in Mineola, New York on October 13, 1925. His parents split up when he was five. His mother, born Sadie Kitchenburg, eventually became a performer, working as an emcee at strip clubs. His father, Myron Mickey Schneider, was a podiatrist. As a child, Lenny was fascinated by movies and the very popular radio programs of the day. He never finished high school, but with World War II raging, he enlisted in the U.S. Navy in 1942. In the Navy Bruce began performing for fellow sailors. After four years of service, he obtained a discharge from the Navy by claiming to have homosexual urges. (He later regretted that, and was able to have his discharge status changed from dishonorable to honorable.) Returning to civilian life, he began to aspire toward a show business career. For a time he took acting lessons. But with his mother performing as a comedian under the name Sally Marr, he was exposed to clubs in New York City. He got onstage one night in a club in Brooklyn, doing impressions of movie stars and telling jokes. He  got some laughs. The experience got him hooked on performing and he became determined to become a professional comedian. In the late 1940s he worked as a typical comedian of the era, doing stock jokes and performing at Catskills resorts and in nightclubs in the northeast. He tried out various stage names and eventually settled on Lenny Bruce. In 1949 he won a contest for aspiring performers on Arthur Godfreys Talent Scouts, a very popular radio program (which was also simulcast to a smaller television audience). That bit of success on a program hosted by one of the most popular entertainers in America seemed to put Bruce on the road to becoming a mainstream comedian. Yet the Godfrey show triumph attention quickly. And Bruce spent years in the early 1950s bouncing around as a traveling comedian, often performing in strip clubs where the audience didnt really care what the opening comic had to say. He married a stripper he met on the road, and they had a daughter. The couple divorced in 1957, just before Bruce found his footing as a prominent performer of a new style of comedy. Sick Humor The term sick humor was coined in the late 1950s and was used loosely to describe comedians who broke out of the mold of patter and banal jokes about ones mother-in-law. Mort Sahl, who gained fame as a stand-up comedian doing political satire, was the best-known of the new comedians. Sahl broke the old conventions by delivering thoughtful jokes which were not in a predictable pattern of set-up and punch-line. Lenny Bruce, who had come up as a fast-talking ethnic New York comedian, did not entirely break away from the old conventions at first. He sprinkled his delivery with Yiddish terms that many New York comedians might have used, but he also tossed in language he had picked up from the hipster scene on the West Coast. Clubs in California, particularly in San Francisco, were where he developed the persona that propelled him to success and, ultimately, endless controversy. With Beat writers such as Jack Kerouac gaining attention, and a small anti-establishment movement forming, Bruce would get onstage and engage in stand-up comedy that had a more free-form feel than anything else found in nightclubs. And the targets of his humor were different. Bruce commented on race relations, skewering the segregationists of the South. He began to mock religion. And he cracked jokes which indicated a familiarity of the drug culture of the day. His routines in the late 1950s would sound almost quaint by todays standards. But to mainstream America, which got its comedy from I Love Lucy or Doris Day movies, Lenny Bruces irreverence was disturbing. A television appearance on a popular nighttime talk show hosted by Steve Allen in 1959 seemed as if it would be a big break for Bruce. Viewed today, his appearance seems tame. He comes off as something of a meek and nervous observer of American life. Yet he spoke about topics, like children sniffing glue, that was certain to offend many viewers. Months later, appearing on a television program hosted by Playboy magazine publisher Hugh Hefner, Bruce spoke well of Steve Allen. But he poked fun at the network censors who had prevented him from performing some of his material. The television appearances in the late 1950s underlined an essential dilemma for Lenny Bruce. As he began to achieve something close to mainstream popularity, he rebelled against it. His persona as someone in show business, and familiar with its conventions, yet actively breaking the rules, endeared him to a growing audience which was beginning to rebel against what was termed square America. Success and Persecution In the late 1950s comedy albums became popular with the public, and Lenny Bruce found countless new fans by releasing recordings of his nightclub routines. On March 9, 1959, Billboard, the leading trade magazine of the recording industry, published a brief review of a new Lenny Bruce album, The Sick Humor of Lenny Bruce,  that, amid strained show-business slang, favorably compared him to a legendary cartoonist for the New Yorker magazine: Off-beat comic Lenny Bruce has the Charles Addams knack of getting guffaws from ghoulish topics. No subject is too sacred for his rib-tickling efforts. His odd brand of humor grows on the listener and is currently growing on nitery crowds to a degree that hes becoming a favorite at the smart spots. Albums four-color cover shot is an eye stopper and sums up Bruces off-beatnik comedy: Hes shown enjoying a picnic spread in a graveyard. In December 1960 Lenny Bruce performed at a club in New York and received a generally positive review in the New York Times. Critic Arthur Gelb, was careful to warn readers that Bruces act was for adults only. Yet he favorably likened him to a panther who prowls softly and bites sharply. The New York Times review noted how peculiar Bruces act seemed at the time: Although he seems at times to be doing his utmost to antagonize his audience, Mr. Bruce displays such a patent air of morality beneath his brashness that his lapses in taste are often forgivable. The question, though, is whether the kind of derisive shock therapy he administers are legitimate night-club fare, as far as the typical customer is concerned. And, the newspaper noted that he was courting controversy: He often carries his theories to their naked and personal conclusions and has earned for his pains the sobriquet sick. He is a ferocious man who does not believe in the sanctity of motherhood or the American Medical Association. He even has an unkind word for Smoky, the Bear. True, Smoky doesnt set forest fires, Mr. Bruce concedes. But he eats Boy Scouts for their hats. With such prominent publicity, it appeared Lenny Bruce was positioned to be a major star. And in 1961, he even reached something of a pinnacle for a performer, playing a show at Carnegie Hall. Yet his rebellious nature led him to continue breaking boundaries. And soon his audiences often contained detectives from local vice squads looking to arrest him for using obscene language. He was busted  in various cities on charges of public obscenity, and became mired in court fights. After an arrest following a performance in New York City in 1964, a petition was circulated on his behalf. Writers and prominent intellectuals, including Norman Mailer, Robert Lowell, Lionel Trilling, Allen Ginsberg, and others signed the petition. The support of the creative community was welcome, yet it didnt solve a major career problem: with the threat of arrest always seeming to hang over him, and local police departments determined to hassle Bruce and anyone dealing with him, nightclub owners were intimidated. His bookings dried up. As his legal headaches multiplied, Bruces drug use seemed to accelerate. And, when he did take the stage his performances became erratic. He could be brilliant onstage, or on some nights he could appear confused and unfunny, ranting about his court battles. What had been fresh in the late 1950s, a witty rebellion against conventional American life, descended into a sad spectacle of a paranoid and persecuted man lashing out at his antagonists. Death and Legacy On August 3, 1966, Lenny Bruce was discovered dead in his house in Hollywood, California.  An obituary in the New York Times mentioned that as his legal problems began to mount in 1964 he had only earned $6,000 performing. Four years earlier he had earned more than $100,000 per year. The probable cause of death was noted to be an overdose of narcotics. The noted record producer Phil Spector  (who, decades later, would be convicted of murder)  placed a memorial ad in the August 20, 1966 issue of Billboard. The text began: Lenny Bruce is dead. He died from an overdose of police. However, his art and what he said is still alive. No one need any longer be subjected to unfair intimidation for selling Lenny Bruce albums - Lenny can no longer point the finger of truth at anyone. The memory of Lenny Bruce, of course, endures. Later comedians followed his lead and freely used language that once drew detectives to Bruces shows. And his pioneering efforts to move stand-up comedy beyond trite one-liners to thoughtful commentary on important issues became part of the American mainstream.

8 Ways to Help Students with Dyslexia Succeed

8 Ways to Help Students with Dyslexia Succeed Homework is an important part of the school learning experience. Guidelines for homework are 20 minutes for elementary age children, 60 minutes for middle school and 90 minutes for high school. It is not unusual for students with dyslexia to take 2 to 3 times that amount of time to get their homework completed each night. When this happens, any benefit a child might derive from the extra practice and review is negated by the frustration and exhaustion they feel. While accommodations are often used in school to help students with dyslexia complete their work, this is rarely done with homework. Teachers need to be aware that it is easy to overburden and overwhelm a child with dyslexia by expecting the same amount of homework to be completed in the same amount of time as the students without dyslexia.The following are suggestions to share with general education teachers when giving homework: Outline assignments Write the homework assignment on the board early in the day. Set aside a portion of the board that is free of other writing and use the same spot each day. This gives students plenty of time to copy the assignment into their notebook. Some teachers provide alternate ways for students to get homework assignments: A bulk email is sent to all students, or their parents, listing the homework assignmentAn online calendar lists homework assignmentsThe classroom telephone message is changed each morning to reflect the homework assignments. Students can call the classroom to get the assignmentStudents with dyslexia, ADHD or other learning differences are paired with another student who checks the students notebook to make sure the homework assignment was written correctlyForm a homework chain. Each student writes the name of two other students in the front of their notebook who they can call to ask questions about the assignment. If you must change a homework assignment because a lesson was not covered, give students plenty of time to amend their notebooks to reflect the change. Be sure each student understands the new assignment and knows what to do. Explain the reasons for the homework There are a few different purposes for homework: practice, review, previewing upcoming lessons and to expand knowledge of a subject. The most common reason for homework is to practice what has been taught in class but sometimes a teacher asks the class to read a chapter in a book so it can be discussed the following day or a student is expected to study and review for an upcoming test. When teachers explain not only what the homework assignment is but why it is being assigned, the student can more easily focus on the task. Use less homework more frequently Rather than assigning a large amount of homework once per week, assign a few problems each night. Students will retain more information and be better prepared to continue the lesson each day. Let students know how homework will be graded Will they receive a checkmark simply for completing the homework, will wrong answers be counted against them, will they receive corrections and feedback on written assignments? Students with dyslexia and other learning disabilities work better when they know what to expect. Allow students with dyslexia to use a computer This helps to compensate for spelling errors and illegible handwriting. Some teachers allow students to complete an assignment on the computer and then email it directly to the teacher, eliminating lost or forgotten homework assignments. Reduce the number of practice questions Is it imperative to complete every question to receive the benefits of practicing skills or can the homework be reduced to every other question or the first 10 questions? Individualize homework assignments to make sure a student gets enough practice but isnt overwhelmed and will not be spending hours each night working on homework. Remember: Dyslexic Students Work Hard Keep in mind that students with dyslexia work hard each day just to keep up with the class, sometimes working much harder than other students just to complete the same amount of work, leaving them mentally exhausted. Reducing homework gives them time to rest and rejuvenate and be ready for the next day at school. Set time limits for homework Let the students and their parents know that after a certain amount of time working on homework the student may stop. For example, for a young child, you may set 30 minutes for assignments. If a student works hard and only completes half of the assignment in that time, the parent may indicate the time spent on homework and initial the paper and allow the student to stop at that point. Specially-designed Instruction When all else fails, contact your students parents, schedule an IEP meeting and write new SDIs to support your students struggling with homework. Remind your general education partners to protect the confidentiality of students who need accommodations to homework. Learning disabled children may already have low self-esteem and feel as if they dont fit in with other students. Drawing attention to accommodations or modifications to homework assignments can further damage their self-esteem. Sources:Â   A Dyslexic Child in the Classroom, 2000, Patricia Hodge, Dyslexia.comEffects of Instruction in an Assignment Completion Strategy on the Homework Performance of Students with Learning Disabilities in General Education Classes, 2002, Charles A.Hughes, Kathly L.Ruhl, Teaching LD Newsletter,Volume 17, Issue 1

Impact of In Home Counseling on at Risk Youth Essay

Impact of In Home Counseling on at Risk Youth - Essay Example By this occurring, children become very withdrawn in the classroom even though they do attempt express their emotional pain to their teacher. From there, it has been concluded from research in home counseling for at risk youths help them not to have more emotional and social issues than those who come from a two-parent home. When children do not have the attention that they need at home, they show aggression in the classroom, which indicates in home counseling works. Human subjects will be utilized for data collection. Data will be collected by observing two controlled groups, one group will be of at risk youth that are receiving in home counseling and the other group has not received home counseling. Both groups attend the same school and classes. Their reaction to the counseling will be measured by questionnaires regarding perception of school and life while attending counseling. At the end of the period, they will fill out another questionnaire to measure any improvements or declines in their behavior and perception. The sample size for the current study will be 100 students; procedures will include but are not limited to distribution of fliers to obtain participants. The population has been selected due to the varying races and the percentage of males and females that are at risk. The questionnaire will include gender, race and questions that determine the perception of life, school and academic achievement by those individuals. Furthermore, the counseling session will obtain details of both groups that the questionnaire missed about their in-depth perception on life and academics. Review of the Findings In these findings, despite more home are not familiar with in home counseling, over ninety percent would want to use it to help better their children. If children have socially supportive arrangements as the attributes of socially legitimate roles which provide for the meeting dependency needs without loss of esteem, they are less likely to show aggression while suppressing destructive behavior. From there, socially supportive environments were presented as pattern interpersonal relationships mediated through shared values and sentiments as well as facilitate the performance of social roles through which needs are met. In summation, social support has been defined as an intervening factor tied directly to the coping process (Pearson, 1986). Social support can also serve as a salve to pains encountered along the way. It gives people the confidence to making a positive change and testing their limits when they know they have a community of support they can call upon. Social support refers to social interactions that are perceived by the recipient to facilitate coping and assist in responding to stress. Social support is thought to reduce the total amount of stress a person experience as well as to help one cope better when stressed (House, & Landis, 2003). It is apparent that for children, the lack of positive adult support and communication from parents, teachers, pastors, or coaches leads to increased behavior issues in the classroom, which can consist of them being destructive. Additionally, if the outlook of adults were more positive, adolescents will be more comfortable seeking support without fear of ridicule or rejection. Furthermore, the result of more positive adult su

The Main Problems Of Fast Food Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

The Main Problems Of Fast Food - Essay Example Fast food restaurants have become a factor that makes families spend less time together since mealtime is the only time a family has for all its members to come together for sharing experiences. With fast food restaurants, the family time has been eaten away, and especially for the youngsters who prefer fast food restaurant because of it a place where they hang out with their fellow peers. Even though I see fast food restaurants as an intervention of current generation in the way ready-made food is served in a faster way, it is a big concern the way these foods have high amounts of salts and fats hence have adverse effects on our health. It is important, therefore, to make good choices during the process of ordering food in a restaurant while being active in our daily lifestyle in order to minimize adverse effects of fast foods. Preventing overweight usually involves balancing of energy while addressing factors that greatly affect eating and the physical activity (Boyle, Long and Rot h 328). A hard-working professional who is working in a city will definitely prefer readymade food due to various reasons, and with the benefits and setbacks that come with fast foods, many of them have centered their interests on the positive effects of eating fast foods. Many people who often find no time to prepare food at home opt to take fast food because it takes few minutes to be ready. Nevertheless, besides all the advantages that come with fast foods, they also come with setbacks hence they are not an exception.