Velveteen Rabbit Coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Velveteen Rabbit - Coursework Example The velveteen rabbit dialogue with the skin horse reveals that, this liberation may be a de-alienation tool to members of the society who do not understand who we are (Bianco & Hague, 1983). This reminds us that we should always evaluate our authentic self and what is genuine in our lives since having overall fulfilment in anything else that is not bona fide may not prove futile. The story unravels that our real aesthetic nature blooms from within and it’s key always to focus from within us and perceive other individuals as they are (Bianco & Hague, 1983). The IOM report centralized on how the nurses could offer the patients the best treatment services as possible by exercising their professionalism to serve humanity (Morris, January 01, 2014). This report affirms that the nurses ought to obtain the necessary credentials prior to presuming their duties. It also highlights the importance of unity in medical workplace setups. It also affirms how critical an effective open communication forum is to this setup and how it facilitates effective workflow (Morris, January 01, 2014). This integration in oneness with others is the key emphasis in the velveteen rabbit story. This unity results to harmony and co-existence among employees who build an aura of tranquility that is fundamental to the success of any organization (Morris, January 01, 2014). In Peace and Power: Creative Leadership for Building Community, Peggy Chinn focuses on how employees or members of a certain community can sustain peace, harmony and power in any institution or society for the ultimate success of all the members involved (Chinn, 2013). The author affirms that the best methodology to achieve this is to come up with strategies that involve all members’ full participation so as to accomplish the assigned tasks effectively. It also involves being kind, accommodative and considerate of one another (Chinn, 2013). This unity bonds the author’s intended message to the core values affirmed in the

Comparison of EUS and ERCP in diagnosis of bile ducts stone Essay

Comparison of EUS and ERCP in diagnosis of bile ducts stone - Essay Example All the authors possess masters degree in medicine and the last two authors possess even PhD degree. They are gastroenterologists with keen interest in study and research pertaining to stones in bile ducts. The first and second authors have published several articles pertaining to this topic. Thus the authors have professional experience and qualifications in this regard. An abstract is included in the study and is described heading wise. The abstract gives clear information in a concise manner about various aspects of the study. The abstract does identify the research problem, i.e., "factors affecting diagnostic accuracy and comparison of patients in the follow-up period for negative outcomes are not thoroughly investigated in a randomized trial." There is no hypothesis in the research. The methodology, sample subjects and major findings in the study are mentioned in the abstract. The rationale for the study is clearly mentioned. The limitations of the study are not mentioned. The literature review in the study is not in detail and very short. However, it is up-to-date. No underlying theoretical frameworks have been identified in the study. The literature review however, does identify the need for the research proposal. There is no hypothesis in the study. The methodology is clear. The study is a prospective unicentric randomized study conducted over one year after appropriate approval from the Ethics committee. 256 patients with suspected biliary stone disease who were hospitalized were included in the study. The aims and objectives in the study are clear and well defined. Even secondary objectives are indicated. All the terms in the research are clearly defined. A standardized criteria defined by Barkun et al 17 was used to determine common bile duct stones. The methodology is clear, reproducible and appropriate to the research problem. The inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria for this study are definite and described

Theories of Justice Essay Example for Free

Theories of Justice Essay Theory of Justice is a work of political philosophy and ethics by John Rawls. It was originally published in 1971 and revised in both 1975 (for the translated editions) and 1999. In A Theory of Justice, Rawls attempts to solve the problem of distributive justice (the socially just distribution of goods in a society) by utilising a variant of the familiar device of the social contract. The resultant theory is known as Justice as Fairness, from which Rawls derives his two principles of justice: the liberty principle and the difference principle. Objective In A Theory of Justice, Rawls argues for a principled reconciliation of liberty and equality. Central to this effort is an account of the circumstances of justice, inspired by David Hume, and a fair choice situation for parties facing such circumstances, similar to some of Immanuel Kants views. Principles of justice are sought to guide the conduct of the parties. These parties are recognized to face moderate scarcity, and they are neither naturally altruistic nor purely egoistic. They have ends which they seek to advance, but prefer to advance them through cooperation with others on mutually acceptable terms. Rawls offers a model of a fair choice situation (the original position with its veil of ignorance) within which parties would hypothetically choose mutually acceptable principles of justice. Under such constraints, Rawls believes that parties would find his favoured principles of justice to be especially attractive, winning out over varied alternatives, including utilitarian and right-libertarian accounts. A society, according to Utilitarianism, is just to the extent that its laws and institutions are such as to promote the greatest overall or average happiness of its members. How do we determine the aggregate, or overall, happiness of the members of a society? This would seem to present a real problem. For happiness is not, like temperature or weight, directly measurable by any means that we have available. So utilitarians must approach the matter indirectly. They will have to rely on indirect measures, in other words. What would these be, and how can they be identified? The raditional idea at this point is to rely upon (a) a theory of the human good (i. e. , of what is good for human beings, of what is required for them to flourish) and (b) an account of the social conditions and forms of organization essential to the realization of that good. People, of course, do not agree on what kind of life would be the most desirable. Intellectuals, artists, ministers, politicians, corporate bu reaucrats, financiers, soldiers, athletes, salespersons, workers: all these different types of people, and more besides, will certainly not agree completely on what is a happy, satisfying, or desirable life. Very likely they will disagree on some quite important points. All is not lost, however. For there may yet be substantial agreementenough, anyway, for the purposes of a theory of justice about the general conditions requisite to human flourishing in all these otherwise disparate kinds of life. First of all there are at minimum certain basic needs that must be satisfied in any desirable kind of life. Basic needs, says James Sterba, are those needs that must be satisfied in order not to seriously endanger a persons mental or physical well-being. Basic needs, if not satisfied, lead to lacks and deficiencies with respect to a standard of mental and physical well-being. A persons needs for food, shelter, medical care, protection, companionship, and self-development are, at least in part, needs of this sort. [Sterba, Contemporary Social and Political Philosophy (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co. , 1995). A basic-needs minimum, then, is the minimum wherewithal required for a person to m eet his or her basic needs. Such needs are universal. People will be alike in having such needs, however much they diverge in regard to the other needs, desires, or ends that they may have. We may develop this common ground further by resorting to some of Aristotles ideas on this question of the nature of a happy and satisfying life. Aristotle holds that humans are rational beings and that a human life is essentially rational activity, by which he means that human beings live their lives by making choices on the basis of reasons and then acting on those choices. All reasoning about what to do proceeds from premises relating to the agents beliefs and desires. Desire is the motive for action and the practical syllogism (Aristotles label for the reasoning by which people decide what to do) is its translation into choice. Your choices are dictated by your beliefs and desiresprovided you are rational. Such choices, the reasoning that leads to them, and the actions that result from them are what Aristotle chiefly means by the sort of rational activity that makes up a human life. We may fairly sum up this point of view by saying that people are rational end-choosers. If Aristotle is at all on the right track, then it is clear that a basic-needs minimum is a prerequisite to any desirable kind of life, and further that to live a desirable kind of life a person must be free to determine his or her own ends and have the wherewithalthe means, the opportunitiesto have a realistic chance of achieving those ends. (Some of these Aristotelian points are perhaps implicitly included in Sterbas list of basic needs, under the head of self-development. ) So w hat does all this do for Utilitarianism? Quite a lot. We have filled in some of item (a) above: the theory of the human good, the general conditions essential to a happy or desirable life. The Utilitarian may plausibly claim to be trying to promote the overall happiness of people in his society, therefore, when he tries to improve such things as rate of employment, per capita income, distribution of wealth and opportunity, the amount of leisure, general availability and level of education, poverty rates, social mobility, and the like. The justification for thinking these things relevant should be pretty plain. They are measures of the amount and the distribution of the means and opportunities by which people can realize their various conception of a desirable life. With these things clearly in mind the Utilitarian is in a position to argue about item (b), the sorts of social arrangements that will deliver the means and opportunities for people to achieve their conception of a desirable life. John Stuart Mill, one of the three most important 19th century Utilitarians (the other two were Jeremy Bentham and Henry Sidgwick), argued that freedom or liberty, both political and economic, were indispensable requisites for happiness. Basing his view upon much the same interpretation of human beings and human life as Aristotle, Mill argued that democracy and the basic political libertiesfreedom of speech (and the press), of assembly, of worshipwere essential to the happiness of rational end-choosers; for without them they would be prevented from effectively pursuing their own conception of a good and satisfying life. Similarly he argued that some degree of economic prosperitywealthwas indispensable to having a realistic chance of living such a life, of realizing ones ends. So, ccording to Utilitarianism, the just society should be so organized in its institutionsits government, its laws, and its economythat as many people as possible shall have the means and opportunity to achieve their chosen conception of a desirable life. To reform the institutions of ones society toward this goal, in the utilitarian view, is to pursue greater justice. In the 19th century utilitarians often argued for a laissez faire capitalist economy. More recently some of them have argued for a mixed economy, i. e. , a state regulated market system. Mill, interestingly, argued at the beginning of the 19th century for an unregulated capitalist economy, but at the end argued for a socialist economy (which is not the same thing as a mixed economy). (3) The protection of the sorts of liberties that were guaranteed in the United States  Ã‚   by the Bill of Rights in our Constitution. (4) Democratic forms of government generally. The utilitarian rationale for each of these institutional arrangements should be fairly obvious, but it would probably contribute significantly to our understanding of utilitarianism to review, in more detail, some utilitarian arguments for (2) free market capitalism. This we shall do later, in the next section. Three Theories of Justice: Utilitarianism, Justice as Fairness, and Libertarianism (1) Utilitarianism A society, according to Utilitarianism, is just to the extent that its laws and institutions are such as to promote the greatest overall or average happiness of its members. How do we determine the aggregate, or overall, happiness of the members of a society? This would seem to present a real problem. For happiness is not, like temperature or weight, directly measurable by any means that we have available. So utilitarians must approach the matter indirectly. They will have to rely on indirect measures, in other words. What would these be, and how can they be identified? The traditional idea at this point is to rely upon (a) a theory of the human good (i. e. of what is good for human beings, of what is required for them to flourish) and (b) an account of the social conditions and forms of organization essential to the realization of that good. People, of course, do not agree on what kind of life would be the most desirable. Intellectuals, artists, ministers, politicians, corporate bureaucrats, financiers, soldiers, athletes, salespersons, workers: all these different types of people, and more besides, will certainly not agree completely on what is a happy , satisfying, or desirable life. Very likely they will disagree on some quite important points. All is not lost, however. For there may yet be substantial agreementenough, anyway, for the purposes of a theory of justice about the general conditions requisite to human flourishing in all these otherwise disparate kinds of life. First of all there are at minimum certain basic needs that must be satisfied in any desirable kind of life. Basic needs, says James Sterba, are those needs that must be satisfied in order not to seriously endanger a persons mental or physical well-being. Basic needs, if not satisfied, lead to lacks and deficiencies with respect to a standard of mental and physical well-being. A persons needs for food, shelter, medical care, protection, companionship, and self-development are, at least in part, needs of this sort. [Sterba, Contemporary Social and Political Philosophy (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co. , 1995). A basic-needs minimum, then, is the minimum wherewithal required for a person to m eet his or her basic needs. Such needs are universal. People will be alike in having such needs, however much they diverge in regard to the other needs, desires, or ends that they may have. We may develop this common ground further by resorting to some of Aristotles ideas on this question of the nature of a happy and satisfying life. Aristotle holds that humans are rational beings and that a human life is essentially rational activity, by which he means that human beings live their lives by making choices on the basis of reasons and then acting on those choices. All reasoning about what to do proceeds from premises relating to the agents beliefs and desires. Desire is the motive for action and the practical syllogism (Aristotles label for the reasoning by which people decide what to do) is its translation into choice. Your choices are dictated by your beliefs and desiresprovided you are rational. Such choices, the reasoning that leads to them, and the actions that result from them are what Aristotle chiefly means by the sort of rational activity that makes up a human life. We may fairly sum up this point of view by saying that people are rational end-choosers. If Aristotle is at all on the right track, then it is clear that a basic-needs minimum is a prerequisite to any desirable kind of life, and further that to live a desirable kind of life a person must be free to determine his or her own ends and have the wherewithalthe means, the opportunitiesto have a realistic chance of achieving those ends. (Some of these Aristotelian points are perhaps implicitly included in Sterbas list of basic needs, under the head of self-development. ) So w hat does all this do for Utilitarianism? Quite a lot. We have filled in some of item (a) above: the theory of the human good, the general conditions essential to a happy or desirable life. The Utilitarian may plausibly claim to be trying to promote the overall happiness of people in his society, therefore, when he tries to improve such things as rate of employment, per capita income, distribution of wealth and opportunity, the amount of leisure, general availability and level of education, poverty rates, social mobility, and the like. The justification for thinking these things relevant should be pretty plain. They are measures of the amount and the distribution of the means and opportunities by which people can realize their various conception of a desirable life. With these things clearly in mind the Utilitarian is in a position to argue about item (b), the sorts of social arrangements that will deliver the means and opportunities for people to achieve their conception of a desirable life. John Stuart Mill, one of the three most important 19th century Utilitarians (the other two were Jeremy Bentham and Henry Sidgwick), argued that freedom or liberty, both political and economic, were indispensable requisites for happiness. Basing his view upon much the same interpretation of human beings and human life as Aristotle, Mill argued that democracy and the basic political libertiesfreedom of speech (and the press), of assembly, of worshipwere essential to the happiness of rational end-choosers; for without them they would be prevented from effectively pursuing their own conception of a good and satisfying life. Similarly he argued that some degree of economic prosperitywealthwas indispensable to having a realistic chance of living such a life, of realizing ones ends. So, ccording to Utilitarianism, the just society should be so organized in its institutionsits government, its laws, and its economythat as many people as possible shall have the means and opportunity to achieve their chosen conception of a desirable life. To reform the institutions of ones society toward this goal, in the utilitarian view, is to pursue greater justice. In the 19th century utilitarians often argued for a laissez faire capitalist economy. More recently some of them have argued for a mixed economy, i. e. , a state regulated market system. Mill, interestingly, argued at the beginning of the 19th century for an unregulated capitalist economy, but at the end argued for a socialist economy (which is not the same thing as a mixed economy). (3) The protection of the sorts of liberties that were guaranteed in the United States  Ã‚   by the Bill of Rights in our Constitution. (4) Democratic forms of government generally. The utilitarian rationale for each of these institutional arrangements should be fairly obvious, but it would probably contribute significantly to our understanding of utilitarianism to review, in more detail, some utilitarian arguments for (2) free market capitalism. This we shall do later, in the next section. What do you think a Utilitarian would say about universal medical care? Would he or she be for it or against it? What about affirmative action programs, anti-hate crime legislation, welfare, a graduated income tax, anti-trust laws? For or against? What would decide the issue for a utilitarian? (2) Utilitarianism and Competitive Capitalism The key claim about market capitalism for the utilitarian is that free, unregulated markets efficiently allocate resourceschiefly labor and capitalin the production of goods. By a market is meant only any pattern of economic activity in which buyers do business with sellers. In the classical system of economics competition is presupposed among producers or sellers. Toward the end of the nineteenth century writers began to make explicit hat competition required that there be a considerable number of sellers in any trade or industry in informed communication with each other. In more recent times this has been crystallized into the notion of many sellers doing business with many buyers. Each is well informed as to the prices at which others are selling and buyingthere is a going price of which everyone is aware. Most important of all, no buyer or seller is large enough to control or exercise an appreciable influence on the common price. The notion of efficiency as applied to an economic system is many-sided. It can be viewed merely as a matter of getting the most for the least. There is also the problem of getting the particular things that are wanted by the community in the particular amounts in which they are wanted. In addition, if an economy is to be efficient some reasonably full use must be made of the available, or at least the willing, labor supply. There must be some satisfactory allocation of resources between present and future productionbetween what is produced for consumption and what is invested in new plant and processes to enlarge future consumption. There must also be appropriate incentive to change; the adoption of new and more efficient methods of production must be encouraged. Finallya somewhat different requirement and one that went long unrecognizedthere must be adequate provision for the research and technological development which brings new methods and new products into existence. All this makes a large bill of requirements. Rawlss Theory of Justice as Fairness The reformulation of Utilitarianism we just saw comes from John Rawls, who did not present it as a version of Utilitarianism at all. He presented it as a first approximation to a quite distinct conception of justice from Utilitarianism, a conception that he calls Justice as Fairness. I presented Rawlss idea as a reformulation of Utilitarianism, anyway, because it seems to me to be greatly clarifying of whats wrong with Utilitarianism to have an alternative to compare it to, an alternative that blocks the kinds of fairness objections that are typically raised against Utilitarianism. In Utilitarianism everyone, in a way, is given equal consideration at the outset inasmuch as everyones happiness is taken into consideration and is given the same weight in the reasoning by which a form of social organization is settled on as the one that, in the circumstances, yields the greatest average utility. But, as we saw, Utilitarianism may in some circumstances settle on a form of social organization that treats some people unfairly, by imposing undue burdens on them for the sake of the greater average utility or happiness of the whole social group. In the light of this fact it is reasonable to conclude that something is wrong with the Utilitarian procedure for weighing the interests of the individual members of the social group in deciding on what forms of social organization best serve those interests. The procedure puts individuals at and undesirable and unfair risk of being sacrificed for the overall social good. In the principle that we suggested as a revision of Utilitarianism, people would not be put at quite the same risk. Rawls in fact argues for a more elaborate principle of justice in social organization, one that we havent seen yet, and he does so by employing a hypothetical model of a situation requiring people to choose the fundamental principles by which the basic institutions of their society are to be evaluated and organized. He argues that in the hypothetical conditions under which the choice of principles is to be made, only fair or just principles can be chosen. He argues that this is so because of the hypothetical conditions he imposes on the situation of the people making the choice. Then he argues that under those conditions people would choose the following conjunction of principles: The Equal Liberty Principle: Each person is to have the maximum civil liberties compatible with the same liberty for all. The Difference Principle: Inequalities are permissible only if (a) they can be expected to work to everyones advantage, especially to the advantage of the least well off, and (b) the positions, offices, roles, to which the inequalities attach are open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity. Libertarianism The Libertarianism, as the name suggests, emphasizes individual liberty as the central and indeed exclusive concern of social justice. A just society, according to the Libertarian, must grant and protect the liberty or freedom of each individual to pursue his desired ends. In the Libertarian view people are essentially rational end-choosers, to use our earlier term, and the kind of life appropriate to rational end-choosers requires them to be free to choose their own ends and free to pursue them without interference from others. This may seem to imply that the Libertarian holds that everyone should be able to do whatever he or she wants, but really the Libertarian holds no such view. The Libertarian view is that each person should have the same freedom to pursue his chosen ends, that each is therefore obligated to refrain from interfering with others in their freedom to pursue their ends, and that the function of the state is solely to protect each individuals freedom to pursue his chosen ends. The Libertarian therefore conceives of everyone as having certain rights, which protect his or her liberty to pursue a desirable kind of life. What is distinctive about Libertarianism is its conception of the rights that each individual has. The libertarian philosopher John Hospers states the fundamental libertarian principle in a variety of ways that it may clarify the Libertarian view to repeat here. He says (in The Libertarian Manifesto, reprinted in Justice: Alternative Political Perspectives, edited by James P. Sterba, Third Edition (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1999), pp. 24, 25): [E]very person is the owner of his own life[;] no one is the owner of any one elses life,  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   and consequently every human being has the right to act in accordance with his own choices, unless those actions infringe on the equal liberty of other human beings to act in accordance with their choices No one is anyone elses master and no one is anyone elses slave. Other mens lives are not yours to dispose of. The rights recognized by the Libertarian include all the rights we called civil or personal liberties in our discussion of Rawls, but in regard to property the Libertarian favors a scheme in which each person has a quite unrestricted right to acquire property, including full capitalist rights to acquire ownership of the means of production and full rights of bequeathal. Libertarians emphasize property rights as essential to the liberty essential to the life of a rational end-chooser. Property does not mean only real estate; it includes anything that you can call your ownclothing, your car, your jewelry, your books and papers. The right of property is not the right to just take it from others, for this would interfere with their property rights. It is rather the right to work for it, to obtain non-coercively the money or services which you can present in voluntary exchanges.

Ideal Age Paper Essay Example for Free

Ideal Age Paper Essay One will fall into one of Marcia’s identity statues: identity diffusion, identity foreclosure, moratorium, and identity achievement. With finding out who you are and taking on new challenges in this stage you are consistently moving backward and forwards. Than after you have figured out who you want to be, you look for love and a career. Early adulthood in my opinion is the most important and best time of your life. The first reason I think that early adulthood is the ideal age is because in this age everything is new and exciting. After you graduate high school you get to leave the nest and go off to college and make something of yourself. It is s a time of growth and change and therefore, of confusion, self-doubt and insecurity, but it will make the person you going to be. â€Å"The college and post-college years can be an incredibly exciting time as one looks ahead and plans for the future. However, the options can sometimes feel overwhelming† (1). As I said before in early adulthood you are constantly moving backward and forward. As Belsky said, â€Å"early adulthood is testing out different possibilities, focusing on self-development, and feeling in between†. This may be why early adult hood to me may be the most exciting because it is one on the hardest times of your life because everything is new, but its so new its exciting. The second reason I think early adulthood is the ideal age is because you figure out who you are in this stage of your life. In the book Belsky said that we are transforming our childhood self into the person were going to be as adults and he called this process the search for identity. You learn responsibility and learn that you have to take on your new role in life as an adult. This is one of the most important things in life, finding out who you are and where you fit in the world, that’s why early adulthood is so important. Also since this period in your life is so important serious conditions, such as violent events, depression and eating disorders, can negatively impact early adults and hurt the finding of your identity (2). On the path to finding identity four different identity statues come up. The first is identity diffusion where teens are transition into adulthood with no goals and life has no appeal. The second is identity foreclosure, where they uncritically adopt a life handed down to them by some authority. The third is moratorium, which is engaged in the exciting, healthy search for adult life. And the fourth is identity achievement, the end point where one finally knows what they want to be as an adult. This process can be so exciting and stressful but when you look back you will realize it was all worth it to get to the person you want to become. The third and most important reason why I think early adulthood is the best age group is because you find love in this stage. This is Erikson’s second emerging adult task, intimacy or finding committed love. Over the decades it has changed dramatically in recent decades. In the book Belsky spells out a three-stage process leading to marriage called Stimulus-value-role theory. First we select a potential partner who looks appropriate, the stimulus phase. Then the value-comparison phase, we find out whether that person shares our interests and worldviews. Then finally during the role phase we plan our lives together. Homogamy is the main principle in this theory. Finding love is so important and fun because with out it you could spend your whole life alone. Then once you find love to keep it you just have to follow Sternbug’s triangular theory of love. Which is passion, intense, physiological desire for another person, intimacy self-disclosure leading to connection, warmth, trust and commitment staying with that person through thick and thin (3). In conclusion early adulthood from your twenties to forties is the ideal age. Physically, it is a time where we are our healthiest and will reach our peak performance. Cognitively, it is a time to grow up and make life decisions. And emotionally, it is a time to take on roles of independence, lifestyles, and marriage (4). Also Seven out of 10 people aged 40 or older said that 33 was the best year of their lives, with many saying they had more fun and felt more optimistic and that age falls under early adulthood (5). Early adulthood is full of excitement and is the most important stage in your life. You find out who you are and you find love. So in my opinion thirty flirty and thriving are the best years of your life.

Observation of Child Play

Observation of Child Play Using observations of children at play in your setting, evaluate how you would scaffold the children’s learning in the future and improve the quality of play. Using a range of fully completed observations from placements (six in total), evaluate how you would improve the children’s learning experiences. Refer to expected â€Å"norms† of development (fully referenced) and explain how your knowledge of theories of child development would give you an understanding of how you might scaffold their learning. It is recognised that play is a valuable and effective way of learning within the early years. The experiences children have within their early years settings work towards promoting their development, learning and their overall outlook on life. Throughout my time in placement settings, I have observed a wide range of children from the age of 3 months to 11 years old. Within this text, I shall be outlining six of the observations I have conducted over the past two years and explain the child in terms of their development, identifying areas where there are deviations of the expected â€Å"norms† of development. Where appropriate, I will also explain my role of scaffolding these children. Scaffolding is defined by Read, C (2005) as the â€Å"metaphorical concept used to describe the interactive verbal support provided by adults to guide a child through the ZPD and enable them to carry out a task that they would be unable to do without help†. The area in which the child can perform an action or task, provided that a more skilled or knowledgeable person is available to help, Vygotsky termed the ‘zone of proximal development’ (ZPD). Scaffolding is temporary and can be put in place, strengthened, taken down piece by piece or taken away completely, as the child develops knowledge and skills and is increasingly able to act competently and independently. My role of scaffolding is to be the â€Å"more knowledgeable other† Vygotsky explained, as I provide the child was minimal assistance that they require to achieve and understand a concept. Scaffolding refers to the particular kind of help, assistance and support that enables a child to do a task wh ich they cannot quite manage on their own and which brings them closer to a state of competence that will enable them to carry out other similar tasks. Child One (0-3 Years) CONGITIVE Time Observation 09:30am Child A had pointed to the snack table and said â€Å"food† – I told child A â€Å"not now, but later† and child A was able to understand these simple time concepts and continued to play. 09:40am Child A had lifted one of the staff members’ observation book, Child A was told to â€Å"put the book back on the table† in which they completed this action, showing understanding of this sentence. 09:50am Child A was asked if they needed their nappy changed, Child A responded by nodding for yes. 10:00am Child A was given a sorting toy which had spaces to place different shaped objects. Child A was able to complete this task by placing the correct shapes in the corresponding spaces. 10:10am Child A continued to play with this sorting toy, Child A used the attached phone to pretend to speak to â€Å"mummy† on the phone. 10:20am Child A was able to point out a cat, a dog and a fish from a storybook I was reading. 10:30am At snack time, Child A was able to choose a fork rather than a spoon to use to eat chicken curry. For this observation, I used a time sampling method over a time period of one hour to observe a 2 year old during free flow play in a day care. From this observation, I was able to understand that Child A was developing normally as she was able to accomplish and show many areas of cognitive development of an average two year old child. Child A showed the capability of the usual cognitive milestones usually shown by a two year old child and has a wide understanding of words and phrases when spoken to. I do not believe there are any deviations of the norms of cognitive development and that no concerns are in place for this child. To help scaffold this child in the future, I can ensure the child is provided with more appropriate provision or her level of learning, such as more advanced reading books that are still age appropriate, but also capability appropriate to the child as to ensure continuous learning. Child Two (0-3) Years LANGUAGE Tries to copy your sounds Understands many more words than he can say Understands simple directions and questions such as Where is your nose? Get the ball. Demonstrates some pretend play with toys like give the teddy bear a drink Makes at least four consonant sounds from p,b,m,n,d,t,w,h Identifies pictures in a book when asked such as â€Å"Show me the baby. Enjoys being read to and looking at books Understands the concepts of in and out, off and on Points to three body parts when asked Says No Asks for something by pointing and using sounds or words Imitates animal noises Tries to get attention by calling out, repeating words and pointing For this next observation, I carried out a longitudinal study on a child aged 18 months. Over the period of around one month, I was able to identify that Child Two is developing extremely rapidly and accordingly with reference to general norms and milestones of children aged 12 to 18 months. Child Two’s language development appears to be flourishing every day and should not be a cause for concern. By reading new books and introducing new words to the child, I can scaffold their learning in the future to ensure the child’s development and learning is still continuing as normal. Child Three (0-3 Years) LANGUAGE Milestones for 2 to 3 Year Olds Achieved? Yes/No Pays increasing attention to speech No Responds to simple verbal requests No Responds to â€Å"no† Yes Uses simple gestures Yes Babbles with inflection (changes in tone) Yes Says â€Å"dada† and â€Å"mama† No Tries to imitate words Yes Points to objects or picture when it’s named for him Yes Recognizes names of familiar people, objects, and body parts No Says several single words No Uses simple phrases No Uses 2-to-4 word sentences No Follows simple instructions Yes Repeats words overheard in conversation No Child Three is 30 months old, (2 Years, 6 Months) and was observed in a Day Care setting. This observation was carried out over a period of one week and by using a Checklist method. Throughout this observation, I witnessed that Child Three’s attitudes towards language are not of the expected norms, as unlike the other children around the similar age were shouting words, able to point to areas on the face when named, saying â€Å"mama† and â€Å"dada† and in some cases, a variety of other two syllable words. Throughout the target week, Child Three did not speak a single word, which is rather worrying for his age range. Child Three does however, point and make grunting noises when he requires help, attention or is pointing to something he wants. These characteristics witnesses are more around the birth to 12 month area of language development and can suggest that Child Three’s language development is progressing, but at an extremely slow rate compared to other children within the setting within this age range. Child Three does not try to say words but continues to murmur and grunt and does not interact with words with other children, which has shown an impact upon his social development as no children approach Child Three physically or verbally, leaving him to play alone, which does not provide a positive influence to promote language development to Child Three. A further observation was that Child Three tends to dribble a great deal whilst making noises, eating and in general, which may show signs of further teething that has continued and may impact Child Three’s speech as he may refuse to speak as his mouth is in pain, which may be a suggestion to make to Child Three’s parents to get checked by their GP. Child Three’s overall language development appears to vary from the traditional norms as many of the milestones that are assumed of Child Three’s age are not achieved and may produce worrying results which need to be explained to the child’s parents In order for them to seek further professional advice, possibly from a speech and language therapist in order to determine if there are any underlying issues which are affecting Child Three’s language development. It could also be argued that these results are not a full representation of Child Three’s language development as they were only conducted within the time period of one week, however I believe this is long enough to uncover any varying characteristics which affect development. The child was familiar with myself and other’s present and I had been present within that setting for a number of months, so this would not produce any factors which may change Child Three’s attitudes, which therefore might have affected his attitude, impacting the results of his development, ruling out this potential impacting factor. Child A (3+) SENSORY/COGNITIVE Vocabulary increasing significantly with words such as Composing sentences of 5 or more words, and with all parts of speech Identifying coins Counting to 10 and above Properly naming the primary colours and secondary Questioning more deeply, addressing meaning and purpose Responding to why questions Behaving more responsibly and apologizing for mistakes Accepting other points of view (but may not understand them) Demonstrating increased mathematical skill Questioning others, including parents and teachers Strongly identifying with the parent of the same sex Having a group of friends Engaging in imaginative play For Child A, I was able to carry out a longitudinal study over a time period of 5 months. Over these five months, I was able to establish a great understanding of Child A’s cognitive and sensory development. At the age of 5, I believe Child A is developing extremely well in terms of cognitive and sensory progress and appears to show no deviations of cognitive or sensory norms. Child A’s parents should be informed (if not already) that their child’s progress is flourishing well and that if they are encouraging this at home, they should continue to do so and this may have been an influential factor for her rapid progress in these developmental areas. Child B (3+) LANGUAGE Narrative Interpretation Child B talked about being a Bridesmaid. Described her dress as being â€Å"beautiful† and that she was in a â€Å"Limousine†. She also discussed the weather during that day. Child B drew a paper plate face and was able to add features independently, using correct colours and names. Child was able to retell a story I had read to class the previous day. Child B used identified a â€Å"Magnifying glass† and used this to â€Å"investigate acorns†. Child B was able to identify her name from a story book. Child B was able to concentrate for 5 minutes to complete a 24 piece jigsaw. Child B talked about the animals from the jigsaw and stated that a â€Å"baby sheep is called a lamb†. Child B prefers to use her right hand, and is able to write correctly using the tripod grip. Child B writes her name with recognizable letters and in correct formation. Child B talked about her experience at the hospital. â€Å"I got my blood pressure taken, it went really tight but I didn’t cry†. Child B was able to retell the story of the Three Little Pigs during an arts activity, using her own words and from memory. Child B was able to talk in length and in great detail about her experience, using more advanced vocabulary such as â€Å"Limousine† which expressed her capability of understanding more words, phrases and sentences. This good recollection of experiences and ability to retell a story to myself showed significant language development through taking part in conversations with adults. The ability to draw herself using correct colours – such as identifying her own hair colour and eye colour and naming facial features independently shows recognizable progress within language development. Good use of story language was evident and signs of progress as Child B was able to recollect the story from previous day. Further vocabulary advancements observed as child identified â€Å"magnifying glass† and was â€Å"investigating†. The ability to recognize and spell her own name is another step within language development. Further intellectual sentences are observed, using correct terminology of â€Å"lamb†. By selecting a preferring hand to write with and by using the appropriate grip, this shows further advances within language development milestones. Child was able to form an intellectual sentence consisting of her own personal experience, from memory and by using appropriate terminology, â€Å"blood pressure†. Another observation of the ability to use her memory to retell a story. This observation was carried out within a Nursery school environment and the target child was 3 years old throughout the duration of this observation. Child B was observed over a period of 5 months playing within this environment, within the format I used to observe the child, I have added my thoughts and evaluation within the â€Å"Interpretation† column. The child appears to be within an advanced area with her language development, as I observed her capability to recognize and spell her own name, which a large amount of other 3 year olds within the class cannot grasp. Child B was also very confident in retelling many personal experiences to both adults and her peers, along with the ability to retell stories from memory and through the use of pictures, such as drawing out the â€Å"Three Little Pigs† story from memory during the Nursery Rhyme topic and by using pictures taken from the storybook â€Å"The Crunching, Munching Caterpillar† to retell the story to me correctly and in her own words. I can state positively that Child B shows the signs of a confident child that is able to fulfil a variety of expectations of language development milestones within this age group, and I believe strongly that this child is developing appropriately according to the norms observed of children within this age group, and that there are no abnormalities or characteristics that need to be addressed. Child C (3+) LANGUAGE Pays attention to a short story and answers simple questions about it YES NO Hears and understands most of what is said at school YES NO Uses sentences that give many details YES NO Tells stories that stay on topic YES NO Communicates easily with other children and adults YES NO Says most sounds correctly except for a few (l, s, r, v, z, ch, sh, and th) YES NO Uses rhyming words YES NO Names some letters and numbers YES NO Uses adult grammar YES NO The final observation was also carried out within a Nursery setting and Child C is 4 years old. From this observation, I was able to notice varied aspects of Child C’s development. In many cases, according to the developmental milestones checklist for language development of children aged 3 to 4, Child C was only able to fulfil 3 of the 9 areas for observation. In general, I have noticed that Child C does not talk, and when he does, it is quiet mutters of words. From this observation however, Child C was not able to use sentences, but instead mumbled quiet words which in many cases were unrecognizable. From what characteristics Child C was able to show, such as being able to pay attention to short stories and answer simple questions about them (usually yes or no answers), hear and understand most of what is said in class and also being able to name a short range of numbers and letters, I can suggest that these are the easier targets to fulfil, and may suggest that there are gr eat deviations of the norms of children this age. I would recommend a speech therapist or a general consultation from the child’s GP to his parents as the child does not make much of an attempt to speak to others and contribute, which is strange for a child who is of the age of exploration and interaction with others. References: Berk, L et al (1995) Scaffolding Children’s learning: Vygotsky and Early Childhood Education. National Association for the Education of Young Children. Frick, P et al (2009) Clinical Assessment of Child and Adolescent Personality and Behaviour. Springer. Herr, J et al (2002) Creative Resources for Infants and Toddlers. Cengage Learning. Justice, L et al (2013) Engaging Children with Print: Building Early Literacy Skills through Quality Read-Alouds. Guilford Publications. Leech-Riddall, S (2005) How to Observe Children. Heinemann. Read, C (2005) Scaffolding Children’s Talk and Learning. Available: http://carolread.com/articles/s%20talk%20and%20learning.pdf Smith, V et al (2009) Norms in Human Development. Cambridge University Press. Courtney Hill

High Cholesterol :: Health, Dementia, Alzheimers Disease

Evidence is increasing concerning an association among vascular risk factors in midlife with an increased risk of both Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementia decades later (citation). Diverse studies have found total cholesterol measured in midlife to be a significant predictor of subsequent dementia (Whitmer et al., 2005), mild cognitive impairment (Kalmijn et al., 2000) or cognitive decline (Kivipelto et al., 2001). Total cholesterol on midlife was also associated with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) in some studies (Kivipelto et al., 2001) and especially with concomitant hypertension (Beeri et al., 2009). Meanwhile, the exact mechanism of high blood cholesterol in dementia is not known, because cholesterol is not able to pass the blood-brain barrier (BBB) (Bojanic et al., 2010). Beyond that, observational studies have yielded mix results for lipids levels and cerebrovascular disease risk (Bowman et al., 2003). Of interest, lipid abnormalities have been also implicated in the pathogenesis of ischemic cerebrovascular disease (Demchuk et al., 1999; Goldstein, 2007). Stroke contributes to the development of cognitive disorders in nearly 20% of elderly patients (citation). Stroke related features such as multiple strokes, white matter lesions, left hemisphere infarct location, atrophy, and volume of infarcted tissue are associated with an increased risk of post-stroke dementia (Rasquin et al., 2004). Nevertheless, even though a decrease in cholesterol concentrations with statins can reduce the incidence of stroke in high-risk populations and in patients with a stroke or transient ischemic attack (Amarenco et al., 2006), serum cholesterol traditionally has been considered a poor predictor of total stroke risk (Ansell, 2000) and epidemiological evidence has failed to demonstrated a clear relationship between the risk of stroke and serum cholesterol levels (citation). Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) refers to the transitional state between the cognitive changes of normal aging and very early dementia (Petersen and Negash, 2008). MCI is defined as memory deficits with preservation of other cognitive and functional brain activities (Nestor et al., 2004). However, whether the MCI results from neuronal loss within circuit-specific pathways involved in learning and memory (Verkhratsky et al., 2004) and/or from cerebrovascular deregulation within these pathways (Iodecola et al., 2004) remain debatable. The aim of the current study was to determine whether a cognitive impairment associated with elevated plasma cholesterol levels over aging is related with structural pathology or white matter disease (vascular lesions?

A Comparison And Contrast Of The Supernaturals Active Role In The Liv :: essays research papers

A Comparison and Contrast of the Supernatural's Active Role in the Lives of Mary Rowlandson and Benjamin Franklin The literature written during this time period reflects the important part the supernatural (God) played during those changing times. The new world was struggling for a new identity. Were these individuals also defining the role of God to themselves? In the preceding discussion the lives of Mary Rowlandson and Benjamin Franklin will be discussed. Each wrote a narrative of their life experiences. There are marked contrasts and comparisons between these two individuals related to their perceptions of God. Religion was a vital part of life in colonial America. A shift from theism to deism was occurring. The Puritans of this time were fleeing the Church of England. Their hope was to return to the more primitive ways, to reject the churches hierarchy and ritual. Mary Rowlandson, a puritan in Lancaster, Massachusetts was captured by Indians, along with three of her children in the year 1676. In her narrative she relates the story of her survival in the wilderness for a period of three months. She is taken away from her home and husband, "all was gone (except my life); and I knew not but the next moment that might go too" (127). Benjamin Franklin's The Autobiography is an account of his life and begins with his boyhood life in Boston. He later flees to Philadelphia to escape his brother's rule over him. He relates how he was "dirty", "fatigu'd", and "Want of Rest" (222). In these depictions we can see an analogy. These individuals are removed from their homes and families. Although Benjamin Franklin's removal was of his own free will. They each suffered as they no longer had the comforts of which they were accustomed. Rowlandson's faith was remarkable considering all that she endured. Through out the narrative she must rely on her faith in God. She incorporates numerous verses from the Bible to offer explanations for all that she has suffered, "Wait on the Lord: be of good courage, and he shall strengthen thine heart: wait, I say on the Lord" (129). It is also noted that she was able to use her trade to survive, "knitting a pair of white cotton stockings for my mistress"(130). This is also a parallel to Franklin in that he also used his trade to survive. But one must ask what is motivating Rowlandson? Is she writing for posterity or is she merely egocentric? Rowlandson has depicted herself as the ultimate Puritan. Was the glory to God or to herself? She also relates here "how many Sabbaths I had lost and misspent" (128).