Take Advantage of These Essay Writing Tips

Here are one of those tips that will enable you to compose a superior school paper, regardless of where on the writing range you lie by essay writing services, 1. Figure out WHAT YOU WILL BE WRITING ABOUT. The fundamental subject of your paper ought to dependably be very much characterized. Try not to influence the judges to think about what your point is. Instead, make the main sentence in your exposition to begin solid. You need to ensure that the point is sufficiently captivating to influence the judges to continue requiring more. 2. Arrange YOUR WRITING PROCESS. Once the theme is picked, make a sorted out guide to control the written work process. At first, this association guide will be untidy since every one of your musings will be in it. In any case, once you have noticed a couple of thoughts, you can begin sorting out your reflections. Getting thoughts down rapidly helps propel the innovative procedure and build up a theme. 3. Do A THESIS. This should tell the reader what the theory is intended to achieve: persuade or educate the reader about the subject. More often than not, you have to make a claim that others will question. At that point, you have to back this claim with supporting confirmation; this is typically a single sentence that is situated in the prologue to exhibit your contention. Reference Giphy.com 4. Utilize helpful WRITING RESOURCES. Each writer, from understudy to distributed writer, should exploit composing instruments to culminate his or her specialty. Before you begin writing your article, check these written work assets accessible to guarantee achievement: ReadWriteThink: This site gives Exposition Maps to manage the writer toward progress. You put in the theme and will control you toward points of interest encompassing sentiments or contentions to help your theory. Framework Generator: This device controls the author through shaping a postulation and article diagram. The writer embeds his or her theme of intrigue and supporting articulations, and this device will create a proposition proclamation. You should not worry about essay writing and marks. What you have to do is, order from one of the best essay writing services in USA which is . They are offering amazing essays at less price. Do not wait and place an order to obtain maximum marks in your exams by providing an A+ quality assignments. If you are looking for the premium writing  and proofreading services,   is the best platform that welcomes the students all across the globe to avail their prestigious editing and proofreading services.

A Few Greek Gods Essays - Titans, Greek Mythology, Names Of God

A Few Greek Gods Essays - Titans, Greek Mythology, Names Of God A Few Greek Gods subject = History 9th grade title = A Few Greek Gods The Ancient Greeks believed in a series of myths which explained nature, set up a moral code for the people, and were just folk lore of the people. In this paper, the beginnings of myths, the Greek gods themselves, and several myths concerning morals, nature, and old lore of the Ancients will be discussed. Because the myths and details about the gods were passed along by word of mouth, some myths or gods might be interchanged or different. The Greek myths started as folk lore until it began to explain nature and storytellers integrated a moral code into the myths. Many myths started out as fairy tales. As new and more efficient farming methods became available to the Greek people they were faced with more time in which to do other things. A people who have waste develop a culture all their own. Because Greece was divided into different city- states, many of the myths are different. The culture of storytelling began to involve explanations of nature such as the creation of the horse, spider, and such changes as winter and fire along with the creation of man himself. Slowly, as with any longstanding government, the morals and laws of society leaked into Greek myths in the form of, "The slain shall be avenged by Nemesis (a force which causes people to get revenge)," or just, "Kindness and humbleness are rewarded by the gods." Some myths were even created to support other myths. The myths started with storytelling and developed into a complex system of morals and explanations. The Greek myths were almost fruitless without the intervention of the gods. The gods controlled nature and fought their own battles on the earth, which sometimes caused problems. The first god was the most powerful one until he had children. The first god is called Oranos or in some myths Uranus. He was the first ruler among the gods. Uranus was the heavens and Gaea was the earth and thus they were married. The couple gave birth to many different and odd children but Uranus was cruel to them. Then, Chronos was born as the youngest titan. Chronos dethroned his father and soon after married his sister, Rhea. He didn't want his children to dethrone him so he ate them. However, Zeus overthrew Chronos and established the first real empire of the gods. Zeus settled disputes between the other gods and made sure the humans weren't treated in the wrong way. Zeus and Hera gave birth to Ares and Hermes along with other minor gods. Hera was a cruel type person in most myths and in one she led a rebellio n against Zeus and almost defeated him when he was rescued. Her favorite sign is the peacock feather and that is her unique sign. Zeus and Hera were the first lasting god couple. Zeus had two brothers, Poseidon and Hades. After Chronos had been defeated, the three brothers threw dice for who would rule in which realm. Poseidon chose the sea because there was the source of the most adventure. Zeus chose the sky where he would rule on Mount Olympus. Hades had no choice and took the underworld because he was notoriously unlucky. Poseidon created many odd sea creatures and the dolphin. He also created the horse and horselike animals. Poseidon had many children by two nymphs and his first son, Achilles, was greater than himself. Hades ruled the underworld and chose what to do with the souls of the people who came across the River Styx. They were judged on what they did in life. He was unloving and terrible and he rarely left the underworld. His only wife was Persephone. She was the daughter of Demeter, goddess of corn, grain, and weather to an extent. Demeter is a minor god except for the great influence she has on the earth. Because her daughter, Persephone, is abducted every year, the crops wither and winter takes control of the land. There were quite a few lesser gods who ruled over small parts of nature. Aphrodite is the goddess of love and passion. She was formed of the foam off the genitals of Neptune which fell into the sea. She manipulated men and was known for her enchanted golden apples. Her son was Eros, where we get the word erotic. Eros is the Greek form of Cupid, the Roman god of love. Aphrodite also has a magical girdle that makes

Wast Management in Construction and Demolition Research Paper

Wast Management in Construction and Demolition - Research Paper Example C&D waste would typically include most construction materials, such as concrete, wood, metals, gypsum wallboard, asphalt, and roofing materials; some have the opinion, however, that land-clearing debris that includes soil, tree stumps, and rocks should be included among C&D waste. Some would not consider these waste as they are materials that naturally occur in such form in nature, and are merely being relocated from the construction site. Some consider them as within the scope of C&D waste that must be addressed, because in the course of construction they would normally be hauled away for disposal (EPA, 2000, p. 2-1). 1.1. Historical background of C&D waste management and recycling industry There was a time when buildings were made to last, and it was not unusual to plan for structures to last for a hundred years or more. More recently, however, the â€Å"throwaway society† made it a practice to regularly demolish relative new buildings in order to build new ones in its place , which were deemed better suited to the changing tastes and needs of society. The forecast is that between 2000 and 2030, about 50% of all buildings at present shall be reconstructed, and 27% will be completely replaced. According to Priesnitz (2007:21), this practice is now viewed as wasteful and environmentally unsustainable. As a consequence, the green building industry focuses on creating structures that will last a long time, consistent with former practices. However, unlike the earlier practices, the new state of the art is aimed at creating structure that easily adapt and may be completely recycled if need be, instead of just being made to endure in the same state forever. The C&D recycling industry in the U.S. began to take shape in the 1990s, when â€Å"green† construction philosophies became the norm among companies in line with efforts to promote their corporate citizenship and social responsibility thrusts. In order to keep up with the competition, there likewise emerged the need to acquire Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification for renovations as well as new structures. LEED points are awarded construction firms which have effectively implemented C&D waste management programs (Fickes, 2011). Aside from internal industry competitive pressures, government regulation had a lot to do with the furtherance of systematic C&D waste recycling. Many localities, including several counties in California, Oregon, and Washington, and the state of Massachusetts, had banned outright the disposal of C&D waste in landfills. Furthermore, landfill fees have steadily increased, increasing the costs to construction companies and fuelling the incentive to recycle C&D wastes. By 2009, the industry has grown to the point that Waste Management Inc. of Houston and McGraw Hill Construction of Massachusetts collaborated in profiling the fledgling C&D recycling industry, with some 200 building contractors surveyed and growth projections draw n until 2014. Their study shows that presently, contractors generate as much as 143 million tons of C&D waste yearly; roughly one-fourth of this (approximately 35 million tons) is recycled (Fickes, 2011:78). 1.2 Description and classification of C&D wastes The definition of C&D waste is a matter of importance, because the nature of the waste matter and the degree to which it is not contaminated by other waste materials determines the manner

Service Experience Report Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

Service Experience Report - Essay Example In fact, employees showed a negative at attitude towards customers like us, which is evident from the details posted in my blog 1. They tried to discriminate us from other customers. On the other hand, the manger was an understandable person who knows the importance of treating all customers equally well for the development of the business. He tried to settle the issues rather than complicating it. Thus, the manager’s behavior generated a good impression of the hotel in our minds. Moreover, the manager had shown high levels of maturity and responsiveness while attending our problems and settling it (Shiqi: Service Industries Marketing Blog 1) Reflection on second service encounter My second experience Palazzo Versace Hotel, in Gold coast is also generated mixed feeling about the customer services in hospitality industry. I encountered the best and worst customers’ service experience from this hotel at the same time. Check is has been taken more than half an hour which s hould be avoided to satisfy the visiting customers. The person who is charge of the check in operation was getting lot of phone calls and hence the customers forced to wait for a substantial period of time to find out their rooms. However, customer service after the check in process was satisfactory and outstanding. In short, the reception at the entry level was poor whereas the rest of the services were excellent. The receptionist and the welcome staff in this hotel need more training and empowerment. However, the rest of the services were outstanding (Shiqi: Service Industries Marketing Blog 2) Report: Customer servicing is the most important thing in any business in the modern era and the hospitality business is not an exception. Marketing activities in the service industry in the past concentrated mainly on the canvassing of customers at any cost. In order to attract customers to the hotels and restaurants, marketing executives provided fake offers and attractions to the custome rs. They concentrated more on attracting the customer rather than servicing the customer. They thought that their job is only to lead the customers towards their hotel or restaurant and the rest of the jobs should be look after by others. Modern customers are particular about the service they receive from hotels and restaurants. The reflections given at the top of this report clearly indicate the problems in customer servicing in service industries. This report analyses the critical service points/theme in the service encounters that are informed by services marketing theory and concepts, based on the above reflections. My analysis and evaluation of critical service points/theme in the service encounters that are informed by services marketing theory and concepts All the employees in a service organization should work for the betterment of the organization rather than the betterment of their careers alone. Even if a visiting customer experiences hundreds of good service from a hotel , one bad experience may prevent him from visiting that hotel again. In other words, all the employees should work collectively for the improvement of customer servicing. Responsiveness of the employees paly vital role in the success and failure of service organizations. Pleasant attitude, timely servicing, and helping mentality of the employees encourage customers to revisit the same hotel or restaurant regularly. It should be noted that the employees and

Choosing the Right School Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Choosing the Right School - Essay Example Therefore, the selection of a school is one of the most important decisions in the life of an individual. This paper discusses some of the factors that need to be taken into consideration while selecting for studying in up to a certain level. the paper addresses the concerns of adolescents, so they are primarily the audience for this paper. There are several factors that need to be considered while evaluating the choices available. An individual can not always decide to join a particular school of its quality of education is good because he/she might not be able to afford the expenses of the school. Schools that have a good reputation among the public and are known for their quality of education are generally quite expensive. An individual needs to select a school that has a good reputation and is also affordable. Affordability and quality are difficult to achieve in the same school, though the school that offers optimum benefits should be selected. The first and foremost trait one l ooks for in a school is the quality of education. The quality of education depends upon the level of commitment of the school administration and the whole staff of the school with their duties and responsibilities in the school. The quality is not merely an outcome of the selection of curriculum. In many schools, the curriculum is quite rich and thoughtfully designed, yet it does little to improve the intellect of the children. The real determinants of the quality of education are the tutors. Some teachers are so committed to their job that they encourage the students to approach them out of the regular duty hours if they have any problems, in education or otherwise. They do not even mind if the students come up with personal problems that have no educational significance. They are the spiritual guides and counselors of students in addition to being their teachers. In the company and under supervision of such a teacher, students tend to build strong ties with the education and take interest in the studies. This essentially speaks of the quality of education. In addition to the teachers, the school administration also plays a fundamental role in determining the quality of education. They may or may not participate directly in the education, but they have an important duty of establishing the educational setup, which has both direct and indirect impacts on the education. An individual should consult the students and their parents regarding these factors in a school before deciding to join it. Another factor that has a lot of weight in the consideration of a school for joining is the distance of the school from an individual’s home. The expenses of a school can significantly increase if the school is far away from the home because of the additional charges of transport to the school. Some people tend to live in a hostel in order to study in a particular school of their choice which has its own repercussions. Life in a hostel can be very unsuitable for some people. Living in a hostel is totally different from living in the home while studying. There are so many distractions in the culture of a hostel that an individual may find it very difficult to concentrate upon the studies while living in the hostel. In a hostel, the individual may have to share his/her room with others which can have negative impact on the individual’s tendency to gain education. Quite often, people acquire negative habits when they start to live in the hostel like smoking and drinking under the

How Self Evaluation is implemented for school improvement

How Self Evaluation is implemented for school improvement The aim of the study is to investigate how School Self-Evaluation (SSE) is implemented for school improvement. There is an increasing international trend of democratisation and decentralisation of education, from the bureaucratic national to an autonomous school based education, in terms of financial management, human resource management and curriculum management. The Department of education observes that with the democratisation of education and associated decentralisation of authority, schools are increasingly being held accountable for their performance (DoE, 2004). School Self-Evaluation is defined as a procedure involving systematic information gathering which is initiated by the school itself and aims to assess the functioning of the school and the attainment of its education goals for the purpose of supporting decision-making and learning for fostering school improvement as a whole (Schildkamp, 2007). Paradoxically, the quality of education that is offered, especially in rural schools of South Africa, is decreasing dramatically. This is confirmed by national and international assessment bodies like the Systemic Evaluation (SE), the Trends in Mathematics and Science Studies (TIMSS), the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS), and the Southern and Eastern Africa Consortium for Monitoring Educational Quality (SACMEQ). The Department of Basic Education, (2010) contends that both the Systemic Evaluation in 2004 and SACMEQ in 2000 indicated that less than one in four Grade 6 learners passed minimum standards in mathematics (DBE, 2010). It further stipulates that the international tests that South Africa participates in show that the top 10% of learners in South Africa do worse than the top 10% of learners in other developing countries such as Kenya, Indonesia and Chile (DBE, 2010). School improvement is defined as a systematic, sustained effort in changing learning conditions and other related internal conditions in one or more schools with the ultimate of accomplishing educational goals more effectively (Van Veltzen, Miles, Ekholm, Hamemyer, and Robin, 1985). The above observations do not presume that the decline in the quality of education in South Africa is due to the democratisation and decentralisation of education, but rather depicts an inevitable demand for a more relevant mechanism, at school level, to be put in place to ensure high quality education and continuous school improvement. This condition imposes that an effective implementation and monitoring of School Self-Evaluation (SSE) is indispensable. Vanhoof, Maeyer and Petegem (2011) confirm that schools are increasingly required to assume a greater share of the responsibility for developing and guaranteeing educational quality (Vanhoof, Maeyer and Petegem, 2011). SSE is a school-based evaluation that is supposed to be implemented by principals, School Management Teams (SMTs), School Governing Bodies (SGBs) and the community, on an annual basis, to ensure continuous improvement and high quality education in all schools. problem statement and rationale for the study School self-evaluation was introduces by the former Minister of education, Professor Kader Asmal in 2001. It is the initial phase of Whole School Evaluation (WSE), preceding external evaluation. In his foreword, the minister states that the National Policy on Whole School Evaluation introduces an effective monitoring and evaluation process that is vital to the improvement of quality and standards of performance in schools (DBE, 2002). This policy aims at improving the overall quality of education in South African schools, and its purpose is to facilitate improvement of school performance through approaches characterised by partnership, collaboration, mentoring and guidance (DBE, 2002). According to the National Education Policy Act (No.27 of 1996), the Minister is mandated to direct that standards of education provision, delivery and performance are monitored though out the country. It remains a worrying factor that rural schools seem not to be considered as part of South African sch ools by these education policies. This view is confirmed by the New Vision for Rural Schooling, (2005) which states that the states commitment to social justice in all matters and especially to universal access to education, written into the Constitution, remains unfulfilled for a large number of children, youths and adults living in rural areas (DoE, 2005). A plethora of education policies have been developed in the new political dispensation, but the serious challenge is that they do not translate into school improvement. Schildkamp and Visscher (2010) argue that enormous resources are invested to develop and implement school self-evaluation instruments, but how schools actually use the instrument has never been thoroughly evaluated longitudinally (Schildkamp and Visscher, 2010). Furthermore, they contend that several studies report a lack of effect of school self-evaluation feedback, but this lack of effect may be caused by a lack of use of school self-evaluation feedback (Schildkamp and Visscher, 2010). McNamara and OHara (2008) note that there has been a remarkable rise in the regulation of public services and servants, especially in education, in an attempt to counterbalance the autonomy of schools. Furthermore, external evaluation and inspection has been an important element of this trend, however as their limitations become more apparent, the concept of internal or self evaluation has grown in importance (McNamara and OHara, 2008). These authors proceed to warn that the greater emphasis an evaluation system places on teacher appraisal and accountability, the less useful that system is likely to be for school improvement and professional development (McNamara and OHara, 2008). The European Parliament and Council on European Cooperation in Quality Evaluation in school education, in McNamara and OHara (2008), argue that improvements in European schools evaluation provisions are dependant on the enhancement of schools abilities to evaluate themselves and call for all member states of the European Union (EU) to encourage school self-evaluation as a method of creating learning and improving schools (McNamara and OHara, 2008). This analysis is echoed by the OECD report which views development of school evaluation skills within the education system as being a critical component of the drive to improving educational provision in OECD member states (McNamara and OHara, 2008) During the apartheid era, prior 1994, traditional quality assurance approaches like school inspection were vehemently opposed by teacher unions who felt that their members were intimidated. When WSE was introduced, there was hope that this democratic process would bring satisfaction to educators and yield better learner attainment results, particularly in previously disadvantaged areas, but that positive change is still being awaited. Despite the surfeit of education policies, South Africa is facing a serious challenge of a growing trend of dysfunctional and underperforming schools, especially in previously disadvantaged areas. Efforts by the government to swivel this proclivity have been in vane. This is confirmed by the fact that the government has made some strides to develop education policies that should have culminated in school improvement, but that outcome has not yet been realised. The Whole School Evaluation policy was introduced in 2001 to improve school performance, but c onversely, schools are performing worse as time goes by, as revealed by national and international studies like Systemic Evaluation, TIMSS, SACMEQ and PIRLS. It should be a worrying factor to every educationist as to why this education policy is not yielding the expected outcomes. It is a cause for concern to find out if this policy is being implemented as prescribed by the relevant policy document. Even though the Mpumalanga province of South Africa has reported an 8,9 % improvement in grade 12 results in 2010, it is still the lowest province in terms of learner attainment in the country, sitting at 56,8 % (MDoE, 2011). Poor performance is shoddier in rural schools where socio-economic challenges and challenges of providing qualified teachers, adequate physical and financial resources are still overwhelming. This situation is exacerbated by the fact that a good number of these rural primary schools are multi-graded farm schools. As a principal of one of the rural primary schools in the neighbourhood of one of the worse performing secondary schools in the sub-region, I have an obligation to find out the root course of underperformance in rural school. It has also come to my realisation that during school visitations by the circuit management, district office or provincial external evaluation team, the school self evaluation instrument is neither enquired about nor monitored. There is no link or correlation between inspection and school-based evaluation. According to the WSE policy, schools must complete and submit self evaluation forms A and B before the end of March on an annual basis (DoE, 2004). On the contrary not even a single school submits such a document to the regional office. I have also noted that in my three years of experience as a principal, not even a single official from any of the structures of the education department has ever enquired about the self evaluation instrument. One then tends to wonder what purpose is this education policy serving. Whether they are meant to improve the quality of education or they were just developed for symbolism still remains mysterious. I am therefore determined to come out with a turn around strategy to ensure effective implementation of the self-evaluation instrument of the WSE policy so as to ensure accountability and improvement in the education quality of rural schools. This study will investigate how and to what extent the school self-evaluation instrument is utilised in rural schools. It will further explore the perceptions of school principals towards school self-evaluation. Lastly, it will determine how school self-evaluation could be better utilised to ensure school improvement and quality education. It is my conviction that if school self-evaluation can be efficiently implemented, school improvement and quality education can be achieved. Moreover, the school self-evaluation findings must easily accessible to all stakeholders, analysed, and its recommendations must be implemented so as to realise the desired outcomes of school improvement. This study will advocate for keeping all stakeholders informed about the performance of their school, and encourage them to positively contribution to the improvement of their school. It will also assist different officers in all structures of education, from the school principal to the provincial Superintend ent Generals, to perform their designated duties diligently. Finally policy makers will get feedback of implementation of the policy such that they can evaluate its impact and make possible amendments if necessary. main research question In order to address the problem statement, this study must give an explicit answer to the following question:- How and to what extent is school self-evaluation implemented for school improvement in rural schools? structure of the proposal Section 1 of the proposal is the introduction of school self-evaluation, enunciation of the problem statement and rational, and elocution of the main research question. Section 2 portrays the context of the study and section 3 presents the literature that has been reviewed. Section 4 will demonstrate the research design and methods that will be implemented and section 5 will illustrate the timeline for the whole research process. Section 6 will give the outline of chapters and section 7 will be the list references. Context for the study The study will take place in the rural schools of Mpumalanga province. Mpumalanga is one of the provinces that have the lowest socio-economic status. Consequently, most schools are in quintiles one and two, indicating that the learners in these schools are from destitute families. Learners have to travel for over five Kilometres every single day, to get to school, posing absenteeism problems to educators. Some of these schools have no electricity and sanitation, such that introduction of the new forms of technologically advanced equipment is implausible. Mpumalanga has the least percentage decrease in the number of learners at farm schools. The new vision for rural schooling states that between 1996 and 2000, it decreased by -65% (DoE, 2005). This figure shows that there is a steady increase in the number of learners at farm schools. The Ermelo sub-district has three circuits with ninety seven schools, out of which only eight are in town. The rest of them are located in very remote farms such that access to such schools for the support teams in a daunting task. There are no secondary farm school, but combined schools. This is because the enrolment of these schools does not allow them to be fully fledged secondary schools. A good number of primary schools have multi-graded classes, combining learners from different grades into one class. This situation does not only present management problems but pedagogical challenges as well. It is unbearable for educators to manage curriculum delivery under such adverse conditions. Even though conditions seem to be unfavourable for provision of quality education, rural schools are also expected to improve their performance. School self-evaluation must be implemented just in the same way or better than it should be implemented in urban schools. The WSE policy however recognises that the inauspicious conditions may retard the pace of school improvement. A provision was made in the policy, to evaluate each school based on its contextual factors. One of the principles of the WSE policy is seek to understand why schools are where they are and to use the particular circumstances to the school as the main starting point of evaluation (DoE, 2001). literature review introduction This section reviews researches that were conducted in Ireland, Netherlands, England and South Africa, based on School Self-Evaluation (SSE). A comparison is made to identify and best international practices and set them as a benchmark for implementation of School Self-Evaluation for school improvement in South Africa. A DISCUSSION OF research conducted internationally AS WELL AS studies in south africa SCHOOL SELF-EVALUATION IN IRELAND In Ireland, the first system of evaluation that was piloted between 1990 and 1999 is the Whole School Evaluation (WSE). This system culminated in a series of rancorous industrial disputes that lasted until 2003. The reason for these quarrels was that educators viewed evaluation as reductionist and managerialist interference in their profession while stakeholders such as parents, learners and business community demanded hard data from a transparent school evaluation process (McNamara and OHara, 2006). In 2004, a new framework for school evaluation, Looking At Our School (LAOS), was implemented (McNamara and OHara, 2006). McNamara and OHara explain that the School Self-Evaluation (SSE) is based on a broad framework for inspection and evaluation of schools that includes five areas of evaluation that are subdivided into 143 themes for self-evaluation, which are used to prepare for external evaluation by the inspectorate (McNamara and OHara, 2006). In short, SSE precedes external evaluati on and it is conducted by each schools stakeholders, unlike external evaluation which is conducted by external officials called inspectorates. McNamara and OHara (2006) also contend that Ireland is adopting a model of quality assurance that emphasizes school development planning through internal school-review and self-evaluation, with the support of external evaluation carried out by the Inspectorate (McNamara and OHara, 2006). This model concurs with MacBeaths idea which argues that the role of external evaluation and inspection is merely to ensure that internal systems of evaluation and self-review are implemented effectively (McNamara and OHara, 2006). In their study, McNamara and OHara (2006) reveal that principals expressed their view that any form of external evaluation was by its nature superficial, underestimated the non-academic achievements of schools and raised deep concerns among teachers, yet to the contrary, self-evaluation with no external mandate or monitoring was perceived as a major success (McNamara and OHara, 2006). According to McNamara and OHara, self-evaluation in Ireland had its negatives. Firstly, LAOS documents lack suggestions as to how schools should collect the data on which the effectiveness and credibility of the whole system must rest (McNamara and OHara, 2006). Secondly, the judgments in the areas, aspects and components requires data that in the present system does not exist- there is, for instance, no data regarding the ability and general expectations of pupils (McNamara and OHara, 2006). McNamara and OHara argue that evaluation, whether external or internal, mandated or self-driven, requires at a minimum the collection and analysis of real data on which firm conclusions can be based (McNamara and OHara, 2006). Thirdly, the Chief Inspector shifted the responsibility of addressing weaknesses identified during inspection to self-governing and self-evaluating institutions. McNamara and OHara argue that the weaknesses identified during inspection should not be a responsibility of sch ools to address them since they do not have the capacity to control over resources, teacher tenure and conditions of employment, and issue. Moreover, schools cannot solve all problems themselves in-house-that is a fiction (McNamara and OHara, 2006). After the court judgment, the honours of whether to release none, some or all of the Inspection Report lies solely on schools management team. Fourthly, LAOS is silent about the appropriate role of parents, teachers and learners in the school evaluation process. One other worrying factor is that the concept of an ongoing self-evaluation was said to be puzzling to most schools (McNamara and OHara, 2006). Lastly, McNamara and OHara (2008) lament that the lack of any guidelines in LAOS as to criteria or research methods that might inform judgments has led to what amounts to data-free evaluation in practice, and moreover, it is clear that without such guidelines and the provision of training and research support for schools, the situation is not likely to change (McNamara and OHara, 2008). The study by McNamara and OHara reveal acceptance of the new themes of self-evaluation to give a comprehensive picture of all schools activities and not just their academic outcomes (McNamara and OHara, 2006). According to McNamara and OHara (2006), the above point was particularly stressed by respondents from the two primary schools designated disadvantaged, which felt very strongly that the affirmation of good practice provided by the inspectors was of extraordinary importance to teachers in disadvantaged school who rarely feel valued or supported. This was perceived as a considerable achievement in an education community deeply suspicious of evaluation, inspection and appraisal (McNamara and OHara, 2006). SCHOOL SELF-EVALUATION IN SCOTLAND Croxford, Grek and Shaik (2009) state that despite the change from Conservative to Labour government in 1997, education policy in Scotland and elsewhere in the United Kingdom (UK) continued to reflect an emphasis on quality assurance and a belief that competition and setting standards would enhance quality and ensure accountability (Croxford et al., 2009). They further stipulate that Scotlands approach to Quality Assurance and Evaluation (QAE) has a greater emphasis on self-evaluation by schools, whereas England had a stronger focus on hard performance indicators (Croxford et al., 2009). The Inspectorate is a major influence on the formulation of education policies. In 1980, the Inspectorates set up a Management of Education Resource Unit (MERU) that later became the Audit Unit, to promote good management achieve value for money in education. It started publishing papers that identified characteristics of effective schools in an attempt to encourage secondary schools to evaluate thei r own practice and performance (MacBeath and Mortimore, 2001). In 1990/91 it began publishing annually information for parents series-reports giving the details of schools attainment data; school costs; attendance and absence rates and school leaver destination for secondary schools. In 1991, it published the role of school development plans in managing schools effectiveness as well as statistical information about examination performance per school, which was used for school self-evaluation. Standards Tables were used each year to compare the performance by subject departments within each school and nationally, the Relative Ratings and National Comparison Factors, respectively (Croxford et al. 2009). The Scottish Office Education Industry Department (SOEID) in Croxford et al. ( 2009) state that the process of self-evaluation and development planning were set out more explicitly by the Audit Unit publication How good is our school? (HGIOS?), which provided a set of performance indic ators of what a good school should look like (Croxford et al. 2009). Schools were encouraged to use the same performance indicators as those used by the HMI in school inspection to identify, report and take action where required on strengths and weaknesses (Croxford et al., 2009). In 1997, HMI set out its vision of working in partnership with local authorities and schools through the quality initiative in Scotland schools. This was endorsed in the standards in Scotlands schools Act 2000. According to Cowie and Croxford, in Croxford et al. (2009), this act places local authorities under great pressure to implement the required quality assurance procedures by the threat of adverse inspection by HMI of education (HMIE) (Croxford et al., 2009). A new professional group of Quality Improvement Officers (QIO) has been established to challenge and support schools. They scrutinise statistics on school performance, seek to ensure a robust self-evaluation structure within schools and identify areas that need to be addressed (Croxford et al., 2009). They carry out a regular cycle of visits to schools to: assess the schools progress with its school development plan; discuss improvement issues with management and staff; and support the schools management in making improvements (Croxford et al., 2009). The local authorities themselves are inspected by HMIE, with special regard to their own self-evaluation and the extent to which they support and challenge their schools (Croxford et al., 2009). In Scotland, schools are required to evaluate their own performance each year using the 30 quality Indicators from HGIOS and their performance on the indicators is extremely judged on a regular basis through inspection of schools carried out by HMIE. The indicators are based on key performance outcomes, delivery of education, policy development and planning, management and support staff, partnership and resources, leadership capacity for improvement (Croxford et al., 2009). Self-evalua tion procedure requires schools to look at each aspect of provision and ask: How are we doing? How do we know? What are we going to do now? For each indicator, schools must gather evidence in order to evaluate their performance, on a six-point scale from 1 [unsatisfactory], to 6 [excellent] (Croxford et al. 2009). SCHOOL SELF-EVALUATION IN ENGLAND Prior 1990, the government of England implemented a top down strategy to school monitor performance of schools. A change was seen in 1997 when the government showed some commitment to support and promote school self-evaluation (Turnbull, 2007). The Department for Education and Skills (DfES), 2004 notes that in 1999, a revised framework was of inspecting schools that included guidance for schools on using it for school self-evaluation, and not just inspection was introduced (DfES, 2004). Local authorities had been providing support for head teachers as they increase their efforts to manage and lead the self-evaluation process and procedures now expected in their schools (Plowright, 2008). The Office for standards in education (Ofsted), in Plowright (2008) contends that the school that knows and understands itself is on the way to solving any problem it hasà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ self-evaluation provides the key to improvement (Plowright, 2008). In his empirical research, Plowright discovered that head teachers held a positive view of the use of self-evaluation in contributing to school improvement (Plowright, 2008). The introduction of the new inspection framework in September 2005 in England culminated in an obligation that every school had to maintain and submit an online Self-Evaluation Form (SEF) that records the judgments of its current performance and its priorities for improvement (Bubb, Early, Ahtaridou, Jones and Taylor, 2007). According to Ofsted in Bubb, et al. (2007), intelligent accountability is based on a schools own views of how well it serves its learners and suggests that all schools need to be able to answer two key questions: How well are we doing? And how can we do better? Bubb, et al. (2007) further argue that even though the SEF is not statutory but all schools seem to use it, which is unsurprising as their inspection is largely based around the SEF which includes the performance data (Bubb, et al., 2007). The areas of evaluation are: the characteristics of the school; views of learners, parents/carers and other stakeholders; leadership and management; overall effectivenes s and efficiency (Bubb, et al., 2007). Leung, 2005 emphasises that unless teachers beliefs are changed, and shared meaning is achieved, for example believing in the importance of evidence-based evaluation methods for self-evaluation and the importance of continuous self-improvement, there will not be commitment towards the reform initiatives and success cannot be guaranteed (Leung, 2005). She further warns that restructuring, changing only procedures, designing performance indicators and mandating the public announcement of evaluation results cannot help us but providing assistance to schools, supporting professionals networks and providing school-based on-going school development is vital (Leung, 2005). Scholars like Hargreaves and Fullan ascertain only that recruiting can facilitate educational professionals to transform their old beliefs and practices (Leung, 2005). In their research on 38 schools across England, where they were investigating self-evaluation and school improvement progress, Bubb, et al. (2007) discovered that SEF are completed in many different ways, ranging from individual efforts by head teachers to involvement of external consultants to collective efforts by all staff members (Bubb, et al., 2007). They also found out that some dissatisfaction demonstrated by support staff who felt left out and expressed that they could have made crucial contributions if they were not excluded. The process started with training the whole staff so as to raise awareness of the process and its requirements. Each staff member, including heads of departments, would the complete his/her form under supervision of their Senior Leadership Group (SLG) (Bubb, et al., 2007). In her study, Turnbull, (2007) discovered that head teachers in England saw that self-evaluation in some form became a reality of practice through the intervention of Local Education Authorities (LEAs), reflecting the growing impact of globalisation and accountability of schools (Turnbull, 2007). SCHOOL SELF-EVALUATION IN SOUTH AFRICA Prior 1994, schools performance was monitored through inspection, but there was no requirement or expectation of schools to undertake self-evaluation in South Africa (Turnbull, 2007). Some form of self-evaluation was introduced in 1998 through the Developmental Appraisal System (DAS), and Whole School Evaluation (WSE) in 2001 for full implementation in 2003 (Turnbull, 2007). These systems aimed at involving all educators in evaluating their practice, enabling self-evaluation of the WSE and impact of management, and they were to be monitored by the external supervisors from the provincial office of the Department of Education (DoE) (Turnbull, 2007). Both systems failed to realize their objective and a new Integrated Quality Management System (IQMS) was introduced in 2003, combining DAS, WSE and Performance Measurement (PM). School Self-Evaluation (SSE) is the initial phase of the two-phased WSE. The second phase is external evaluation conducted by provincial supervisors in a three year cycle. Both phases utilise the same instrument for evaluation. There are 9 key areas of evaluation namely: basic functionality of the school; leadership, management and communication, governance and relationships; quality teaching and learning and educator development; curriculum provision and resources; learner achievement; school safety, security and discipline; school infrastructure and parent and community (DoE, 2001). The process of evaluation cycle includes pre-evaluation; school self-evaluation; detailed on-site evaluation, post-evaluation reporting and post evaluation support. Each supervisory team will have a team leader who has the responsibility to build a brief profile about the general level of functionality of the school and to share with the school the procedures that will be followed by the evaluation team. The team leader also has overall responsibility for the evaluation process and the conduct of the supervisors. Supervisory teams will comprise accredited supervisors capable of evaluating the nine areas for evaluation. Members should have the experience to evaluate at least one subject/learning area and have an awareness of the key elements of good provision for Learners with Special Education Needs (LSEN). The number of supervisors will normally be within the range of four to six, depending on the school size and resources available. Evaluations will normally be conducted between th ree to four days of the week, depending on the size of the school. A school will be helped by district support services to formulate and implement an improvement plan based on the recommendations in the report and provide the school with support as it seeks to implement the plan (DoE, 2001) The findings in Turnbulls research disclose that all educators interviewed identified that the various attempts to introduce self-evaluation had failed, though all saw that the concept was one that should be in place, but attempts to use self-evaluation to improve the quality of teaching and learning in individual schools were taking place, with individual teachers working together on classroom practice and in some schools using IQMS, with senior team ensuring that every member of staff was observed at least once a year, met with the observer, and those seen to have issues being visited (Turnbull, 2007). The failure of introduction of self-evaluation is attributed to two groups of factors. The first issues are managerial and they include: the linking of the use of self-evaluation to the annual pay increments making it impossible to award someone less than satisfactory even though he/she deserves it, especially in township schools; the unwieldy nature of the system needed to implement policy; and the lack of capacity of the local DoE to either monitor the process, or provide support for schools where a need was identified. The second issues are cultural/historical and they include: the limited experience of educators of any form of self-evaluation and limited training provided; the limited practical training of the majority of township teachers and principals; the impact of the previous political system leading to a resistance to change; and in township schools the real danger o

Aspects of Marriage Present in Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen :: Jane Austen Pride and Prejudice Marriage Essays

Aspects of Marriage Present in Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen There are lots of aspects of marriages in Jane Austen’s novel Pride and Prejudice. There are marriages of love, convenience, physical attraction and mercenary. The marriage between Mr. Wickham and Lydia is partly due to physical attraction and mercenary. The marriage between Elizabeth ad Mr. Darcy and Jane and Mr. Bingley are due to love. The marriage between Mr. Collins and Charlotte Lucas is base on convenience. The Marriage between Mr and Mrs Bennet is also due to physical attraction. The novel was set in 1796 and was published in 1813. The England during this period of time was far more class conscious. The main characters in this novel come from a class called gentry; this is the class above the emerging professional class and below aristocracy. Class was more to do with breeding than with wealth. Rules were set for everything, rules for dressing, rules for travelling, rules or introducing yourself to others and rules for behaving. In this period of time women were not allowed to work. However they could become governesses. They could not inherit wealth from their father, and the Bennet sisters were no exception therefore Mr. Collins was their heir to Mr. Bennet’s property. The marriage between Mr. and Mrs. Bennet was based on physical attraction. You can see that they do not understand each other. There is a contrast between both of their character. Mr.Bennet is intellectual and likes to spend time reading in the library while Mrs. Bennet is loud, hasty and likes to spend her time gossiping and trying to finding husbands for her daughters. Mr. Bennet enjoys mocking his wife â€Å"†¦ I have respect for your nerves they are my old friends†¦Ã¢â‚¬ . Mr. and Mrs Bennet also have different opinions and ideas of their daughter’s future â€Å"†¦ Your mother will never see your face if you do not marry Mr. Collins, and I will never see you again if you do†¦Ã¢â‚¬ . You can tell that this is a marriage based on physical attraction because Mr. Bennet advises his daughter not to make the same mistake that he did my marring Mrs. Bennet â€Å"†¦I know that you could be neither happy nor respectable to your husband, unless you truly esteemed your husband†¦. My child, let me not have the grief of seeing you unable to respect you partner in life†¦Ã¢â‚¬  he is in a way hinting that he cannot respect his wife. Mrs. Bennet is unaware of this as she dose not know her husband very well. Mrs. Bennet’s character is very similar to the character of Lydia. Both like officers and both act loud and hastily.