Role of Employees is Formulating Organizational Culture Research Paper

Role of Employees is Formulating Organizational Culture - Research Paper Example The organizational culture of an organization can be defined as the values which contribute to the creation of a conducive psychological and social environment within which to work. These values are based on the previous and existing knowledge of the organization which forms the philosophies that hold the organization together. There may however be many different conflicting cultures within an organization, especially the large ones, due to the different characteristics displayed by the various management teams that work in the organization. Organizational culture may have both positive and negative effects on the individuals involved and these among others will be discussed in this paper. While the management of an organization plays a major role in the formulation of organizational culture, the employees of such an organization also have a role to play in its formulation. According to the book Changing Organizational Culture: The Change Agent's Guidebook by Marc Schabracq, the orga nizational culture involves the social expectations and standards which determine the values and beliefs which hold the people working within an organization together. ... Organizational culture is the single most important thing that determines whether and organist ion will be successful or not. There are four major elements of culture which determine the success of an organization: the values which define the beliefs at the heart of corporate culture; the individuals within the organization who embody its values; the routine interactions between members of an organization which are full of strong symbolic qualities to make them feel like part of a family; and finally, the informal communication system within the organization. Although it is a very difficult thing to happen, the culture of a particular organization is subject to change. This does not come easily and may require a very competent person or people to succeed in changing it. In order to change organizational culture, one has to be aware of what exactly it takes to change the existing culture. Moreover, the ability to change the culture is in the hands of the top management of the organiza tion and it is they who are responsible for the institution of such change. Lastly, organizational structure helps to resolve the dilemma of bureaucracy because although formal procedures are necessary for business integrity, bureaucracy also ends up stifling autonomy and creativity. The organizational culture consists of many subcultures which interact with one another for the sake of the running of the organization. It can be said that this culture is not as homogenous as one would expect and may, in fact, consist of many coexisting cultures which work hand in hand out of necessity.  

Conquering the Incas Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Conquering the Incas - Essay Example The History of the Aztecs The civilization that has come to be known as the â€Å"Aztecs† was by no means made up of one, solitary culture. It was first made up of migratory barbarians, called â€Å"the last of the Nahautal-speaking cultures†, that wandered the area from the great migration out of the northern city of Tula, late in the twelfth century2. It is believed that the Aztec originally migrated from the island of Aztlan, which would come to be substantiated by their name, Aztec, meaning â€Å"people of Aztlan†3. Furthermore, they did not call themselves â€Å"Aztecs†, but â€Å"Mexica†, or â€Å"Colhua-Mexica†, in keeping with their lineage4. The Mexica people, or the Aztecs as they are now known, held no friends among their neighbors. Shunned largely because they were not a polite, civilized tribe, but made up of vicious barbarians willing to do whatever it took to survive, they migrated towards the Valley of Mexico and lived on the fringes of society, as they were the last of the peoples to settle in the area and by no means welcomed to it5. It was on the islands of Lake Texcoco in 1345, surrounded by marsh conditions, that they found refuge6. Unfortunately, they had not picked a desirable spot in which to settle. The land itself was fine, and suitable for their pursuits; this was hardly the problem. The issue lay in the fact that they were distinctly in the middle of two kingdoms, Azcapotzalco and Texcoco7. Though the first three kings of the Aztecs ruled as vassals for the despot king of Azcapotzalco, it was in the year 1426, when Itzcoatl, a direct descendent of the first Aztec king, ascended to the throne, the tensions between the Aztec and the Tepanec lords of Azcapotzalco reached the breaking point8. War broke out, though the Aztecs did their best to evade this, both by sending a special messenger and offering diplomatic relations9. The new king, however, possessed the gifts of leadership and speech; he gave one such speech that ignited the passions of his people and led them to war10. When all was said and done, a new alliance had been formed, the Triple Alliance between Texcoco, Tenochtitlan, and Tlacopan, which would become the heart of the Aztec Empire11. These acts set the stage for a new way of life for the Aztecs, a life as a warrior people. Though in truth the life that they were now leading had come full circle from the days of their savage barbarism when they first migrated into their lands, it is not hard to imagine the years of subjugated rule taking their toll on such a proud people. It is from Itzcoatl that Montezuma I (Montezuma the Elder), and his son, Montezuma II (Montezuma the Younger) would descend12. The younger Montezuma would meet headfirst the Spaniard contingents, headed by Hernan Cortes, and face the downfall of his empire. Hernan Cortes The man that would cause the downfall of the Aztec empire was born in 1485 in Medellin, a town that was considered †Å"an unimportant town in Estremadura†13. His parents were poor, though able to send him to university at the age of fourteen, where he was prepared for a career in law, due to the fact

Investigation of outdoor play in early years

Investigation of outdoor play in early years Outdoor Play in Early Years In whose best interest? This review examines the definition of play and outdoor play as well as the perspectives of the early years pioneers spanning over two centuries who has shaped our understanding of outdoor play such as Friedrich Froebel, Maria Montessori, Margaret McMillan, Susan Isaacs and Majorie Allen, better Known as Lady Allen of Hurtswood. It will also seek to address how outdoor play can be optimised in early years setting to improve childrens learning and development outcomes. The scope of this review includes debates surrounding outdoor play, concerns and the advantages of using the outdoor environment. This review would also analysis previous researches on outdoor play and evidence which suggests that outdoor play improves childrens development and well-being. Play is a difficult concept, and by its very nature cannot be pinned down or precisely defined. There is nothing tangible, predictable or certain about childrens play, and this makes thinking about play more difficult and sometimes uncomfortable for those who like things neat and orderly. Play sits uneasily in a culture of standards, measurable outcomes, testing targets and quality control. While most of us know play when we see it, academics have had trouble defining it (Johnson, Christie, Yawkey, 1999). Play involves a free choice activity that is non-literal, self-motivated, enjoyable and process oriented. Critical to this definition is the non-literal, non-realistic aspect. This means external aspects of time, use of materials, the environment, rules of the play activity, and roles of the participants are all made up by the children playing. They are based on the childs sense of reality (Wardle, 1987, p. 27). Children do not play for a reward-praise, money, or food. They play because they like it.(p. 28). Children who compete to make the best wooden ship are not playing. Children who are told they must use the block with an A on it to create a word are not playing, and children who are asked to label the colours of their paints, instead of using them to create a picture, are not playing. Article 31 in the United Nation Convention on the rights of the Child stipulates that play is a fundamental right of all children (Human Rights Directorate, 1991 cited in Steampfli 2008) and that play is essential for children to develop intellectually, physically, emotionally, and socially. Through play children learn to express their thoughts and feelings, develop language and social skills and become aware of cultural diversity in their community. Filer, (2008), describes creative outdoor play as play which gives children the opportunity to use their imaginations, helps promote original thinking, flexibility, adaptability, empathy and the ability to generate multiple solutions to a problem. She express play as the most important activity that children will take part in outside as it is a means through which they find stimulation, well-being and happiness in order to grow physically, emotionally and intellectually. She express that the outdoor environment is well suited to meeting childrens needs for all aspects of play and is the most relevant way of offering learning based upon first-hand experiences and individual interests. Waite et al. (2006) cited in Waller, T (2007) journal article point out, outdoor learning is not a single entity but comprises many different sorts of activity with distinct purposes. Outdoor environments afford opportunities for a balance between adult-led structured activities and giving children access to interesting outdoor spaces. Friedrich Froebel(1782-1852) emphasised the importance of the garden and the educational importance of learning out of doors more than a century ago. To Froebel, the garden was both literal and metaphorical. He used the word kindergarten, a garden for children, rather than the word school and saw the kindergarten as a place where the child could develop in harmony with nature. Educators would provide a rich environment for growth, and would tend, nurture and cultivate each child just as a good gardener would tend a young plant. Froebel believed in a divine unity and connectedness between all living things, and it was therefore important for children to be close to nature in the outdoor environment. Through gardening and play outdoors children learnt about nature and about the growth of plants and animals, but they also learnt to care for and take responsibility for nature, and gradually to recognise their own place in the natural world. Childrens freely chosen game games outdoors wer e a source of fascination to Froebel. He saw in such games evidence of childrens growing sense of justice, self- control, comradeship and fairness. (Tovey, 2008). Forest Schools which are closely associated with the Danish early years programme is inspired by the ideas of Froebel, traditionally favoured play, movement and fresh air (Stigsgaard, 1978, cited in Maynard, 2007), while a sense of connection with nature and the environment has been linked to the Danish notion of an ideal childhood (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), 2001 cited in Maynard, 2007). The development of young childrens understanding about the natural environment is seen as being an important aim of all day-care facilities (OECD, 2000 cited in Maynard, 2007). For Maria Montessori (1869 -1952), working in a poor inner city community in Rome, Italy it was not the garden, but the house that was the enduring metaphor for her approach to early childhood. The environment, she argued, should allow children to be like the masters in their own houses, that is it should be child-sized, offer independent movement and be well organised with everything in its place. It was not nature, but science and her notion of scientific pedagogy, which was a guiding principle. Using Froebels metaphor of the gardener she argued that behind the good cultivatorà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦.stands the scientist. This is a very different philosophy from Froebels garden where weeds were valued as much as the flowers. It was Montessori, who pioneered the idea of open access from indoors to outdoors and free choice and self direction, but choice was restricted. Unlike Froebel, Montessori did not believe the natural materials were educative and, therefore, she made no provision for pla y materials like sand and water. Rather she argued that structured materials, which had been subject to the perfecting hand of a higher intelligence (Montessori 1983 cited in Tovey 2008), were necessary to identify the real or true nature of the child. Margaret McMillan (1860-1931) was a socialist politician. Her experience of running an open air camp for children in the slums of Deptford, South of London, where disease was rife, convinced her that time spent outdoors could dramatically improve childrens health and that the youngest children should be the focus of attention. She developed an open air nursery school for children, and literally designed and built a garden for children. The garden was central and the indoor spaces were merely shelters for use in very bad weather. Everything, she argued could take place outdoors, play, sleep, meals, stories and games. She argued that there was no need for artificial didactic apparatus to stimulate childrens senses in isolation when real first-hand experience offered richer and more meaningful opportunities. A nursery garden must have a free and rich place, a great rubbish heap, stones, and flints, bits of can, and old iron and pots. Here every healthy child will want to go, taking out things of his own choosing to build with. (McMillan 1919 cited in Tovey 2008). Susan Isaacs (1885-1948) worked in a very different social context from McMillan. She opened the malting House School in Cambridge in 1924, a school for highly advantaged children of professional parents. It was an experimental school that had two aims: to stimulate the active enquiry of the children themselves rather than to teach them and to bring within their immediate experience every range of fact to which their interests reached out (Issacs 1930 cited in Tovey 2008:46). Children were given considerable freedom for Isaacs argued that play has the greatest value for the child when it is really free and his own (Isaacs 1929 cited in Tovey 2008:46). The garden included grass, fruit trees, a climbing frame, slides, movable ladders, trees for climbing, flower and vegetable garden with individual plots for each child and a range of animals. The garden provoked childrens curiosity and enquiry. It offered challenge and risk and children had considerable freedom to try things out, to question, to experiment and to follow wherever their curiosity led. However, this freedom also had constraints. Eg. Children were allowed to climb on the summer house roof, but only one child at a time was allowed. Like Froebel and Montessori before her she argued that freedom brought responsibility, but it also empowered the children to develop skills to be safe. Isaac view of childhood is one of passion. Young children had a pas sion for finding out about and striving to understand the world. Although she tried to observe children in free conditions she also recognised, unlike Montessori, that it was impossible to discover the natural child. Marjorie Allen (Lady Allen of Hurtwood) 1897-1976 featured less in education literature but nevertheless deserves an important place as a pioneer of outdoor play areas for young children. She was active in campaigning for better provision for young children and became president of the nursery school association, and a founder member of the worldwide organisation Mondiale Pour LEducation Prescolaire (OMEP). She designed play areas for many nursery schools including gardens with sand pits and paddling pools on roof tops of blocks of flats in Camden, London. She is associated most for bringing the idea of adventure or junk playgrounds to Britain. She argued that children seek access to a place where they can dig in the earth, build huts and dens with timber, use real tools, experiment with fire and water, take really great risks and learn to overcome themà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦.(Allen cited in Rich et al 2005:46) She was damning in her criticisms of conventional playgrounds that are static, dull, unchallenging, and which do not account for young childrens drive to explore, imagine, create and to seek companionship. The tendency for ordering a complete playground from a catalogue is greatly to be deployed: this lack of enterprise spells dullness and monotony and only the manufacturers benefit (Allen 1968 cited in Tovey 2008:50). Lady Allens vision for challenging outdoor play environments, her belief that children with disabilities were entitled to equally rich and exciting environments, and her knowledge, from careful observation, of the impact of design on childrens play is still influential today particularly in the playwork field. These developmental emphasis on play and playgrounds for nursery school playgrounds and kindergartens was later reinforced by the work of early 20th century child research centres and figures such as Piaget (1951), Vygotsky (1978) Bruner, et al (1976), and Huizinga (1950). The developmental emphasis continues in the early 21st century. Until recently, preschools were relatively unaffected by contemporary high stakes testing and continued to focus on play as a primary vehicle for learning and development.(Frost 2006). A research study by Clements (2004) reveals that children today spend considerably less time playing outdoors than their mothers did as children. The study reveals several fundamental reasons for this decline, including dependence on television, digital media, and concerns about crime and safety. The study also conveys findings related to the frequent use of electronic diversions. Maynard (2007) also linked the growing interest in Forest School to a concern that childrens outdoor play is in decline. Parents, it is suggested, are reluctant to let their children play outside as they once did for fear of strangers, traffic or violence and as a result, it is also suggested, childrens play revolves around organized recreational activities or is home-centred and focused on computers, video games and television. This, it is maintained is having a negative impact on childrens social and emotional competence while also contributing to an epidemic of child obesity. Maynard Waters (2007), in their journal also identified recent years reports about the use and abuse of the outdoor environment have rarely been out of the media. These reports, often backed by the latest research findings, have focused on concerns about environmental damage as well as issues such as stranger danger, childrens lack of physical activity, the rising levels of childhood obesity, as well as a more general lack of connectedness with nature. A view which agrees with Froebel who sees garden as a spiritual place where children could grow and develop in harmony with nature, and begin to sense their own place in the natural world. It was a place for creative and imaginative play. There is growing public policy interest in childrens play. Politicians and opinion formers are interested in exploring how good play opportunities can help improve quality of life and safety in neighbourhoods, tackle obesity and promote childrens well being, support children development and build community cohesion. Alongside, there is a growing view that good play experiences are not only an essential part of every childhood, but also a key public responsibility and an expression of our social obligations towards children. (Filer, 2008:14). Dr Aric Sigman, of British Psychological Society, recommends that children under three should be banned from watching TV, and older children, aged 3-5, should be restricted to viewing one hour a day of good quality programmes. Children spend more time looking at the screens than they do outside doing real things, which is detrimental to their health and well being, particularly in the long term. He recommends that children should be outside experiencing real life and real things (Sigman, 2005 cited in Filer 2008). One way in which government has attempted to address these concerns has been to raise awareness of, for example Healthy Schools programme, Food in Schoool programme, School Fruit and Vegetable scheme, Physical Education, School Sport and Club Links programme (DSCF, 2008) The introduction of Early Years Foundation Stage Curriculum (EYFS) in September 2008 in England for children from birth to five (DSCF, 2008) emphasise the need for the provision of regular outdoor experience. However, Waller (2007), in his article identified that a clear pedagogy for the use of the outdoors as a site for learning has not been established and, as (Fjortoft, 2001 cited in Waller 2007) and (Waite et al.2006 cited in Waller 2007) point out, there has been relatively little research on what actually happens in outdoor environments. The EYFS now recognises that the environment plays a key role in supporting and extending childrens development and learning under theme 3: enabling environments which is line with the Macmillans theory which allowed children free access to play areas and gardens and was not predicated upon a fixed time schedule. The importance of outdoor learning is also emphasised in the effective practice: outdoor learning as below: Past generations of children benefited from extended amounts of unsupervised time outdoors, and as adults they look back fondly at these early experiences. Indeed it is widely recognised that such experiences make a positive impact and as adults we are aware that it shaped many aspects of our own development and healthà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦. Despite this cultural shift away from outdoor play and learning, it remains essential to childrens health, development and well-being. Consequently, it is vital that early years settings maximise childrens opportunities to be outdoors: for some it may be their only opportunity to play freely and safely outsideà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦. Outdoor learning encompasses all that children do, see, hear or feel in their outdoor space. This includes the experiences that practitioners create and plan for, the spontaneous activities that children initiate, and the naturally occurring cyclical opportunities linked to the seasons, weather and nature. (DCSF, 2007) It is evidenced that a lot of recent and old research into outdoor play are in agreement that it is beneficial for children to be outside experiencing real life, real things, in order to grow and develop holistically. Most of the researches also concluded outdoor is a place where the child could develop in harmony with nature, a place to begin to sense their own place in the natural world and a place for creative and imaginative play. Good play experiences are seen as an essential part of every childhood which would lead to improve quality of life, tackle obesity and promote childrens well being. However, Majorie Allen criticized the conventional playgrounds seen at majority of the nursery and pre school these days as static, dull, unchallenging, and which do not account for young childrens drive to explore, imagine, create and to seek companionship. Finally, according to the literatures, one of the main advantages of using the outdoor environment is that it provides children with th e space to move freely. (Fjortoft 2001, 2004 cited in T.Maynard et al 2007) report on research from Scandinavia, which demonstrates that children who play in flexible, natural landscapes appear to be healthier, have improved motor fitness, balance and co-ordination, and demonstrate more creativity in their play. It can be concluded based on the literature review above that experiences of the outdoor play and learning suggests that early years practitioners should recognise the significant potentials of outdoor learning highlighted above, in addition to developing outside play opportunities within their gardens; they should also consider giving children regular opportunities to experience wild natural environments. CONTENT Page No ABSTRACT 1 INTRODUCTION 2-3 LITERATURE REVIEW 4-14 METHODOLOGY/RESEARCH DESIGN 15-16 ANALYSIS/FINDINGS 17-20 CONCLUSION 21-22 REFERENCES 23-25 APPENDICES NARRATIVE OBSERVATION A-C TRACKING OBSERVATION D-E SANDRINGHAM SCHOOL PICTURES F-J BLOOMING GARDEN PICTURES K-M ABSTRACT: I have worked in different setting during my course and I have noticed that outdoor play is not particularly well planned by the practitioners. It seems to be seen as an opportunity for the staff have a break and for the children to let off steam. Play is childrens natural way of doing stuff to build for children to build self-esteem and social skills and the philosophy behind the Early Years Foundation Stage Curriculum supported this very much. The aim of my study is to look at how children participate in outdoor play in Sandringham school environment compared with regular setting with limited outdoor space with fixed and movable apparatus such as climbing frames, slides and bikes etc as well as to encourage practitioners to reflect on their practices. My research draws on observation (both narrative and tracking method) of one nursery located in London borough of Newham- Sandringham Schools nursery in London and a regular nursery with fixed garden apparatus in Redbridge b orough, Uphall School. My observation was used to find out how children attending both school nurseries react during outdoor session and how practitioners assist the children in extending and stimulating their learning and development. The play experiences of children at my own school Sandringham School nursery in comparison with the children at Uphall Schools nursery clearly indicate that children at Uphall school nursery spend less time playing outdoors than those at Sandringham schools nursery. The study reveals that children at my school at Sandringham schools nursery are engaged in depth active learning with their peers and practitioners, objects, allowing the children to use their imagination more creatively. For example, during my observation, a child uses a tree branch to sweep an area under a large tree, which she described as Goldilocks grandmas house. INTRODUCTION In searching for my research topic, I have drawn on my experiences and interest during my placements. It struck me fairly quickly from observations in my various placement that outdoor play space in most of the settings is still just about physical development and not given the equal status to indoor play it deserves in terms of the planned experiences that are provided for young children. Majority of the settings outside play area are small with static, dull, and unchallenging equipments, and do not allow young childrens drive to explore, imagine, create and to seek companionship. Practitioners should promote and enhance the development of playground that offer a rich, multi sensory environment that is meaningful, imaginative and stimulating for all young children, providing them with real experiences that help embed their early learning and holistic development and not just their physical development. Parents and practitioners agree from conversation with them that outdoor play is a natural and critical part of childs well being, health and development and the importance of outdoor play is also reflected in recent government policies such as the Every Child Matters agenda (2003) and Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS, 2008) curriculum embraces outdoor learning as it enables the children to follow their interest, make choices, forge links between their learning and develop ideas over time. This study will evaluate the effectiveness of opportunities provided for children under five to learn in the outdoors, in a garden, or other open air space e.g. in Sandringham school nursery environment and a regular day nursery setting. The research aimed to investigate the impact that the type of outdoor play experiences in the two settings has on all areas of learning and development for children under five. In this study I will use (Filer, 2008) definition of outdoor play a creative outdoor play as play which gives children the opportunity to use their imaginations, helps promote original thinking, flexibility, adaptability, empathy and the ability to generate multiple solutions to a problem. She expresses play as the most important activity that children will take part in outside as it is a means through which they find stimulation, well-being and happiness in order to grow physically, emotionally and intellectually. Outdoor play also offers play spaces that enable children to create play spaces themselves and to exercise greater choice over materials, location and playmates. Being outdoorsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦..offers opportunities for doing things in different ways and on different scales than when indoors. It gives children first-hand contact with weather, seasons and the natural world and offers children freedom to explore, use their senses, and be physically active and exuberant. (EYFS card 3.3 cited in Hitchin, 2007) METHODOLOGY The research takes place in two different borough schools nursery in their early years settings in England over a period of 4 months. Setting 1: This is my own schools nursery based separate building for the infants school building, this is located in a most multicultural state in town in Forestage, London area of the UK. Children aged 3 years to 5 years old attending the nursery on a half day and the next lot come for the afternoon session. The garden is a large part of it concrete and the other part was gated and covered with tree barks, with plastic climbing frame and slide, large tree on the other end of the gated part end bench under the tree and a large plastic turtle shape sand and water tray. On the paved area, there is a large wind chime resting on the fence and the other areas are left free for obstacle activity, easel, construction blocks, bicycles etc. Setting 2: This is a school based in borough of Redbridge, In order to establish childrens involvement levels in the two settings, I considered issuing questionnaires to both parents and practitioners. On discussing this with my School mentor, it transpires that the result will only give parents/ practitioners view on outdoor play and not necessarily give an answer to childrens level of learning and development physically, emotionally, imaginatively, and creatively through outdoor play. In conjunction with the setting staffs, I have collected data using participant observations in the form of tracking observation method which was handed out to the practitioners to follow selected children during outdoor play at each of the setting to find out the childrens interest while outdoor as well as direct observation method conducted by myself in the form of narrative observation to assess childrens involvement levels in two different outdoor environments. Observation is an important, if underrated, form of assessment. It may seem subjective, but it has a great deal of potential. Assessments can be made when the children are actively engaged in outdoor play and therefore the process on interaction with other children and adult can be observed. According to Creswell (2002) observations in a setting requires good listening skills and careful attention to visual detail. It also required management of issues such as the potential deception by people being observed and the initial awkwardness of being an outsider without initial personal support in a setting (Hammersley Atkinson, 1995). ANALYSIS/FINDINGS The results indicates that there is quality adult-child verbal interactions at the sandhringham school than the other setting which was my main concern and according to EPPE (2004) and REPEY (2002) research findings which identified that more sustained shared thinking was observed in settings where children made the most progress. Sustained shared thinking occurs when two or more individuals work together in an intellectual way to solve a problem, clarify a concept, evaluate an activity, extend a narrative etc. For example, a child sat under a large tree with few other children with an adult and she told the adult this is a forest, where the wolf is hiding and waiting me, Ill be the goldilocks and you can be the bad wolf and the adult engaged the child in open-ended questioning which is associated with better cognitive achievement according to the EPPE research findings. The forest was later turned into grandmas house they used drapes and plastic cover and securely pinned and another child sweeping off the dry leaves I am sweeping my grandmas room, because she is unwell and I need to help keep it clean. Where as at my other setting, the adults intervened mainly to ensure the safety of the children by encouraging a child to participate in an activity. For example, during an obstacle activity, the adult encouraged the child to walk on the blocks and offered a hand to boost the childs confidence. An interesting observation is that there are a lot of initiated activities at the Sandringham school with interventions by practitioners when invited by the child to extend the child/rens thinking. Opportunities are provided for adult initiated group activities which according to EPPE (2004) research findings are most effective vehicles for learning. For example, a game of silence ball? hide and seek game where the children have to listen to where the voices responding to their call is coming from to help them locate the people hiding. This game promotes listening skills. However, majority of the activities at the other setting is usually free play with mainly fixed climbing frames and slides, large wind chime, and selection of choices made available by the adult such as sand and water tray, lego blocks on a carpet or tray, writing materials, dressing up clothes, balls and books which is alternated on a daily basis. There is mostly child to child verbal interaction. The children in Sandringham school are engaged in more creative and imaginative play such as finding treasures, digging, treasure hunting lifting logs to look for worms which was in line with Friedrich Froebel (1782-1852) who described garden then as a spiritual place where children could grow and develop in harmony with nature, and begin to sense their own place in the natural world. It was a place for creative and imaginative play for investigation and discovery for songs, music and ring games. Froebel was perhaps unique in amongst the pioneers in linking garden design to his philosophy of childrens learning and in recognising the holistic nature of young childrens learning. He saw in such games evidence of childrens growing sense of justice, self- control, comradeship and fairness which I also noticed during my observation at the sandringham, school setting. For example, each child is given opportunity to lead with an adult when doing the head count before entering and leaving the forest school. A child was upset because she wanted to lead on this occasion and the adult explained to her that she has had a turn last week and that everyone has to have a go before it could be her turn again and this helps the children to develop sense of fairness and justice. The staff leading at the sandringham school seemed to have good knowledge and understanding of the curriculum as well as knowledge of child development and they have gained additional training on forest school approach, which I assume has helped the adult in facilitating childrens learning. For example, the children learn to use natural materials such as sticks to make a shelter, two other children uses large paint brushes with water to paint the wooden fence. Another girl went to paint a tree, which a boy was climbing on and he said no Amisha, its going to be slippery. Other activities observed at Sandringham school arethey are climbing, move over obstacles, carrying logs from one area to the other, eating outdoors, getting dirty while digging or hiding, opportunity to wander freely without constant adult supervision in a large space with lots of nature to see and explore at their own pace. All these will support the childrens emotional, social development, environmental awareness a nd spiritual wellbeing. It also encourages active learning, improve creativity and critical thinking. From my observation of children at the other setting with garden equipment from a sale, the older children mostly run around the small garden or climb on the plastic frame and slide which I agree with Allen, M (1897-1976) spells dullness and monotony and only the manufacturers benefit. Marjorie Allen 1897-1976 also criticized the conventional playgrounds seen at majority of the nursery and pre-school these days as static, dull, unchallenging, and do not account for young childrens drive to explore, imagine, create and to seek companionship. However it is interesting to note during each observation at the other school that the tree bark that covers the garden floor offered scope for children with learning difficulty. For example, the children use the tree bark to represent food served by one child to the other children and as they received each said thank you. While at the sandrigham school, a space under the tree was transformed into a Grandmas house, Vygosky (1978) cited in Tovey 2007 argued that such play leads to higher level thinking because children are using objects symbolically. The act of transformatio

Espionage Act of 1917 and Sedition Act (Amendment) of 1918 Essay

Espionage Act of 1917 and Sedition Act (Amendment) of 1918   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  On April 2nd 1917, President Woodrow Wilson of the United States of America, went before Congress and called for a declaration of war. Both the House and the Senate voted overwhelmingly in favor of going to war with Germany.?# This was an act that led to much resistance among the American people. Not four months earlier the American people re-elected President Wilson, partly because of his success in keeping the United States out of this European war. However, a series of events, such as the Germans continuing submarine warfare and the attacks on five American ships, led President Wilson to sever diplomatic relations with Germany and send the United States into what would be labeled as World War I. As a result of the war the government enacted the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918 which led to the suppression of anti-war documents and sentiments, as well as the prosecution of over two-thousand individuals.#   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Despite earlier resistance to the war by the American people, once war was declared patriotism swept over the nation. However, patriotism rose to it?s peak and quickly turned to an intolerance for any kind of dissidence of the war.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  With a general intolerance for opponents of the war the government began to repress groups advocating against the war, as did private organizations. One such organization created to suppress anti-war ideals was the Committee on Public Information (CPI). CPI was put in place to provide trustworthy information to the public, as well as stifle any misleading wartime rumors. However, the CPI ended up creating propaganda for the government to distort the views of the American people and worked to destroy and discredit all those who opposed the government?s ideology.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  ?The effect of such incessant propaganda was to promote hysterical hatred of all things German.?# Any individual who had the audacity to speak against the war was assaulted either verbal or physically, and on many occasions murdered.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  With the ideals of the government on the war growing in the nation, Congress passed the Espionage Act of 1917. After a joint session of Congress, where President Wilson reported on relations with Germany, the first of three bills that would create the Espionage Act of 1917, was introduced. The Congr... ...istory.? 2002. PageWise.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   (22   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  November 2004). ?Espionage.? 2000-2004. The War to End All Wars. Michael   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Duffy. Original Material. Primary Documents Online.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   (22   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  November 2004). ?Clear and Present Danger? Test. 2004. Exploring   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Constitutional Conflicts.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   (22 November 2004). ?The U.S. Sedition Act.? 1996. World War I Document Archive.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   (22 November 2004). ?The Sedition Act of 1918.? 2003. (22 November 2004). ?Espionage Act.? 2004. Education on the Internet & Teaching   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  History Online.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  (22   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  November 2004). Stone, Geoffrey. Judge Learned Hand and The Espionage Act   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  of 1917: A Mystery Unraveled. Schenck v. United States; Baer v. United States. Essential   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Documents in American History. 1919. Essential   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Documents. ?The Sedition Act of 1918.? 1918. From The United States   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Statues at Large.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  (22 November 2004). ?Text of The Sedition Act.? 2004. Wikipedia, the Free   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Encyclopedia. (22 November   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  2004). ?The Wilson Administration.? 2002. U.S. History.com.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   (22 November   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  2004). Zinn, Howard. Progressive. May (2004). 16-20.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  ?Opposing the War Party?.

Predestination and Freewill Essay

Predestination does not interrupt free will. Actually the two go hand in hand. Our God is such a loving God that through his divine will he gave us free will. God did not predestine anyone to salvation or damnation. He has the Divine foreknowledge of who will live a righteous life and who will follow the path to damnation. Knowing this, He gave us the option to choose our path in life, therefore, placing our salvation in the decisions that we choose throughout our lives. Christians believeâ€Å"16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.†1 This is why we are called Christians due to Christ. God gave the ultimate sacrifice so that mankind can choose his own destination. . In my opinion, Christians of, all people, should believe that free will and predestination are not separates entities. The first question that one should ask is what is predestination? Predestination to some is the belief that God, who has sovereignty over all creation, uses His divine foreknowledge to predestine some humans to receive everlasting salvation and some to suffer an eternity of damnation. In comparison, the Christian belief is that God does have foreknowledge but does not use this knowledge to save or condemn –God does not predestine. Therefore, the next question should be â€Å"how does God determine who goes to heaven and who goes to hell?† Well the one true Christian answer is that no one, not even the elect, gets into heaven without Christ. So does Christ choose you or do you choose Christ? A Christian must know Christ prior to choosing Him. There are two categories of theologians that argue how we come in contact with Christ, the monogistic and synergistic view. The bible verse Isaiah 53:1 â€Å"Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?†2 can be used as an example. The monogistic view is that God reached out his arm to save the people that he foreknowingly knew would choose Christ and predestined them to have eternal salvation. This view of salvation removes humankind’s gift of free will. The other part of humanity, however, would be left to receive eternal suffering. The synergistic view is that God â€Å"offers† His hand out to the true belie ver to save them and in return they have the free will to choose it, accept Christ and receive eternal salvation. The monogistic position defines predestination. The  controversy of predestination started with St Augustine’s interpretation of Apostle Paul’s bible verse Romans 8:29: â€Å"29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters.†3 True Christians interpret this verse believing that when Paul speaks of foreknew, he is referring to God’s divine foreknowledge of sight. Christians believe that God is able to look through the windows of time and foresee those who will use the free will given to walk with him throughout their life. He did not predestine, as in verb form, but he has always known the path of our destination, â€Å"pre† mankind. God would like for all of His children to conform to the image of Christ and become eternal brethren and even though God knew each individual person’s choice, He still gave us the option to choose our path in life. Hence, God placed humanity’s salvation in our own individual hands through the grace free will. Augustine’s interpretation, in contrast, was translated as â€Å"For God knew his own before ever they were, and also ordained that they should be shaped to the likeness of his son, that he might be the eldest among a large family of brothers.†4 This interpretation, accepted by many and also scorned by many, revealed a different God than Paul referred to. Augustine believed God’s foreknowledge and predestination was not centered upon the deeds of humanity. Instead, he believed that God, who has Divine autonomy to do as he pleases, selected his chosen at his discretion and predestined them to eternal salvation. Through this monogistic view, the gift of free will is nonexistent, therefore removing any chance of humanity’s’ ability to save itself from reprobation. Augustine centered this monogstic view on Adam’s fall from grace. Adam’s fall from God’s grace resulted in humanity’s fall as well, thereby removing the gift of free will, leaving humanity totally dependent upon God’s â€Å"merciful grace†. Free will to make righteous choices throughout one’s life is not a consideration. He centers his belief around grace not free will because he believed that none of humanity deserved redeeming and it is only through God’s grace that some are predestined for salvation . Only the elect will receive God’s grace and salvation and no one knows the number or names of the elect but God himself. In other words man does not need any type of religious order, because, according to Augustine, we are to live throughout our lives hoping that we are one of the â€Å"elected† that God decides to â€Å"grace† with exaltation. John Calvin, another theologian, also preached predestination. John Calvin, however, sermonized on double predestination. He stated that â€Å"out of the common multitude of men some should be predestined to salvation, others to destruction.†5 According to Calvin double predestination is when God predestines humanity to salvation and also to damnation. He believes that not only does God predestine the elect to receive his grace and know Christ for an eternity, but he also predestines those he will not allow to know Christ and sentence them to eternal suffering. His deduction for this belief, as was Augustine’s, was Adams fall from grace. Calvin expounds on the belief that God only creates perfection, thereby, Adam created in God’s image, was created perfectly. However, through Adam’s gracious gift of free will, Adam chose unwisely and â€Å"since in Adam all are sinners, deserving of eternal death, it is obvious that nothing but sin will be found in menâ € 6 causing the whole of humanity to suffer the loss of God’s grace. In other words, Calvin’s view is God does not condemn man to damnation; man condemned himself through God’s grace and free will. Calvin believes that humanity does not deserve God’s grace and it is not for us to reason why or how God decides who receives redemption and who reprobation. Therefore, to answer the questions afore mentioned, God does not determine who will receive salvation or damnation: we do. God does not autonomously destine a chosen few elect to know and love Christ because in 1 Timothy 2:4 it is written that God † desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.†7 He gave us free will to live our lives as we please. God reaches out his hand to every soul on earth but it is ultimately our choice to reach out and grab it. Through God’s merciful grace of free will, he has foreknowingly placed us in charge of our own destiny. WORKS CITED http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%203:16&version=NIV 1 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+53%3A1-12&version=NIV 2 Preaching, predestination by Mathis Lamberigts page 6783, 4, Institutes of the Christian Religion Book III by John Calvin Chapter XXI page 9215 Commentaries Election and Predestination by John Calvin page 2546 http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/whatismonergism2.html http://biblehub.com/1_timothy/2-4.htm7

The Positive Part Social Networking Web Sites.

THE POSITIVE PART Social networking Web sites are helping businesses advertise, thus social networking Web sites are benefiting businesses – economically. Social networking Web sites are helping education by allowing teachers and coaches to post club meeting times, school projects, and even homework on these sites. Social networking Web sites are enabling advancements in science and medicine. Job hunting Stay in touch with friends Positive causes/awareness THE NEGATIVE PARTThe very nature of such sites encourages users to provide a certain amount of personal information. But when deciding how much information to reveal, people may not exercise the same amount of caution on a Website as they would when meeting someone in person. This happens because: * the Internet provides a sense of anonymity; * the lack of physical interaction provides a false sense of security * they tailor the information for their friends to read, forgetting that others may see it.Sharing too much informa tion on social networking sites can be problematic in two ways: firstly, it can reveal something about you that you’d rather your current or future employer or school administrator not know, and second, it can put your personal safety at risk. Another potential downside of social networking sites is that they allow others to know a person’s contact information, interests, habits, and whereabouts.Consequences of sharing this information can range from the relatively harmless but annoying—such as an increase in spam—to the potentially deadly—such as stalking. Another great issue of concern with social networking web sites is that of child safety. Research has shown that almost three out of every four teenagers who use social networking web sites are at risk due to their lack of using online safety. Joly, Karine, 2007) A lot of the web sites do have an age requirement but it is easily bypassed by the lying about of one’s age. Even if they donâ €™t lie about their age the average age requirement is around fifteen years old. Predators may target children, teens, and other unsuspecting persons online—sometimes posing to be someone else—and then slowlyâ€Å"groom† them, forming relationships with them and then eventually convincing them to meet in person.

How to Increase Your Happiness by Giving Gifts

How to Increase Your Happiness by Giving Gifts I saw a post on Facebook this week from a mom who is advocating that all families get inexpensive gifts for their children so that kids with less aren’t â€Å"heartbroken.† I’m no social economist, but I’m pretty sure if this mom got her way, it would not be good for the global economy. And, while I’m also not a huge fan of conspicuous consumption and I’d like to see everyone getting meaningful gifts for their children, something struck me as â€Å"off† about trying to protect poor children from the pain of seeing other children get big fancy gifts. Isn’t it more important that we all appreciate the value of the gifts we are given? And that we put care into the gifts we give? Studies have shown that giving gifts is a source of happiness even more than receiving them. As reported by Harvard-trained researcher Shawn Achor in his Success Magazine article, â€Å"How (And Why) To Give The Perfect Gift,† â€Å"people who are constantly giving to their families and friends are significantly happier than those who are not.† Regardless of the gift, says Achor, it’s the thoughtfulness that counts- not only for the receiver, but for the giver too. Increasing the anticipation and time put into gift choice and, when applicable, gift creation, gives more joy to the person giving! Even if the recipient doesn’t appreciate the gift as much as the giver desired, the giver has had weeks or months of joy leading up the moment of giving. That’s worth a lot. Choosing the Right Gift I’m in a leadership group where we throw birthday parties for every member of the group and purchase gifts for the birthday boy or girl. The process of choosing a gift is always enlightening. We want it to be something they’ll enjoy, that they wouldn’t get for themselves, and that they won’t throw in the corner and never use. We prefer not to default to Amazon gift cards since we want to show that thought was put into the gift- even if the person has been in our group for only a week! To jump start the process, we get a list from the recipient of things they would want, and we collaborate from there. Gifts have included energy healing sessions, movie popcorn machines, shirts and ties, cologne, and tickets to Disney World. Without fail, the gifts we give hit the mark and we all get to watch birthday person’s excitement when they discover what we’ve given them. When we know people well, it’s usually easy to choose a gift that will light them up, whether that’s something we make by hand, a computer-generated photo album, or an expensive electronic gadget (drone anyone?) I recently discovered the â€Å"subscription-box† option where you can give someone a monthly box of something they will love! In particular, BetterBox seems like a thoughtful choice: a service which delivers monthly boxes with themes like gratitude, creativity, better sleep, and paying it forward. What a great gift for someone who can use incentive for self-care or slowing down! If are close to someone, you’ll probably be able to find the perfect box subscription for them- and it will last all year! Creating Satisfaction There are all kinds of ways to make gift-giving satisfying and joy-inducing for everyone involved. Choosing a charity to give money too has become another popular, and fulfilling, option. One thing’s for sure: Throwing money at a last-minute gift won’t produce a lot of joy- while regardless of cost, a thoughtful gift will bring light to both the giver’s and the recipient’s lives. To the mom on Facebook, I say this: Instead of trying to limit the types of gifts other people give to their kids, how about starting a campaign for all of us to be thoughtful about our gifts, and to value thoughtfulness over price tag, no matter what our budget? Now that would be a cause I could support with gusto.