Saturday, March 7, 2020

ACT Score Ranges Understand Your Score vs. Class Grades

ACT Score Ranges Understand Your Score vs. Class Grades SAT / ACT Prep Online Guides and Tips Are you wondering what the highest and lowest possible scores you can get on the ACTare? And, once you receive your score, what does it mean? Many people find it difficult to understand their ACTscore because the exam doesn't usethe same kinds of grades your classes do. In this guide, we've converted ACTscores into class grades to make them easier for you to understand. What'sthe Total Range of ACT Scores? For each section of the ACT, the lowest score you can get is a 1, and the highest score you can get is a 36. The ACT contains four required sections, English, Math, Reading, and Science, and scores from each of those sections are then averaged to get a total composite score for the entire exam. The range of the composite score is also 1-36. However, that still doesn't tell you all the information you need to know. This is because it's quite uncommon for someone to get a perfect score of 36 or a low score of 1 on the ACT. Also, you're probably more used to letter grades, like A- or B+, because that's whatyou see in class. To give you a better understanding of the ACT, we've converted ACT scoresinto letter grades as well asnumericalclass grades, like 85% or 55%, that you've likely seen throughout your time in school. How Can You Interpret Your ACT Score? In the table below, we've mappedACT scores to numerical and letter class grades. We thenexplain how to interpret the results and also how we created the table. In the final section of this guide, we also discuss what a good ACT score is. Conversion of ACTScores to Class Grade Equivalents ACT Composite Score Numerical Class Grade Letter Class Grade 36 100.0 A+ 35 99.9 A+ 34 99.8 A+ 33 99.6 A+ 32 99.3 A+ 31 99.0 A+ 30 98.5 A+ 29 98.0 A+ 28 97.4 A+ 27 96.6 A 26 95.7 A 25 94.7 A 24 93.5 A 23 92.1 A- 22 90.6 A- 21 88.9 B+ 20 87.2 B+ 19 85.5 B 18 83.7 B 17 81.5 B- 16 78.7 C+ 15 75.5 C 14 71.6 C- 13 64.1 D 12 45.1 F 27.3 F 10 15.9 F 9 9.9 F 8 6.4 F 7 4.0 F 6 2.5 F 5 1.5 F 4 0.8 F 3 0.5 F 2 0.3 F 1 0.0 F How can you use this table? For example, say you got a 17 on the ACT. You'd then want to find this row: ACT Composite Score Numerical Class Grade Letter Class Grade 17 81.5 B- From the table, we can see that getting a 17 on the ACT is roughly equivalent to getting a score of 81.5% or a letter grade of B- for a class. What DoesThis Table Really Mean? Put simply, the above table takes ACT scores and converts them to class grades. This gives you a rough idea of what letter grade or percentage you would have gotten on the ACT if the exam had used those types of scoring methods. Class grades are familiar to you because you've used them your whole life, but you may not have any experience with the ACT grading scale. The table takes information you may not completely understand and converts it to something you're more familiar with. More precisely, the above table convertsACT scores to class grades based on percentiles. These percentiles were calculated based on scores of previous ACT exam-takers. The class grades percentiles were based on a large academic survey of grading trends in college (which typically closely match high school grades). So, to go from an ACT score of 17 to a class grade of a B-, we found the ACT percentile for 17, then used the survey to determine what letter grade corresponded to that same percentile. Things to Note inthe Table First, note that the distribution ofACT scores and their class grade equivalents are quite different. At the top of the ACT scale, a 36 and a 28 are 8 points apart, yet, after the conversion, they all map to an A+. That's not a typo; both a 36 and a 28 are equivalent to an A+. Why is this true? It's due to the fact that classes often don't do a great job of differentiating between great students andtruly stand-out ones. In a hypothetical class of 20 students, you might have two people earn an A+. That may seem like a small number at first, however; if that same class represented all the students in the US, only two would score a 28 or above on the ACT. This is one of the reasons the ACT is very useful to colleges, particularly highly selective colleges, because it distinguishes between great students and the very best. Another thing to note is that both class grades and ACT scores do a good job of resolving middle-of-the-pack students.Ifyou go from an ACT score of 13 to a 22 just a range of 9 that's equivalent togoing from a straight D to an A-. For students who are about average in their class or a bit below, both ACT scores and class grades have solidresolution. You may also have noted that neither ACT scores nor class grades begin at zero. Why not? Think about what you know about grading patterns and scores you and your classmates have received. When did you last hear of someone getting a 10 out of 100 as their final class grade? Failing grades are given out less than 4% of the time for class grades. Similarly, when did you last hear of someone getting less than a 10 on the ACT? Neither case is common. Even though, technically, the lowest ACT score is a 1, less than 1% of people taking the ACT get lower than a 10.Therefore, it's more realistic tothink of the ACT as starting from 13, not 1. Can You Really Convert ACT Scores to Class Grades? Yes, it's completely possible to convert ACT scores to class grades; however, it's not an exact science, and there are a few things you should be aware of. First, remember that ACTsand your school classes don't testthe same thing. The ACT is a multiple-choice exam takenin one sitting. Classes, on the other hand, require hours of learning and schoolwork over a long period of time. Additionally, you take the ACT alone, but in your classes you work with teachers and classmates every day. Because the two measure very different things, getting a B- in a class does NOT automatically equala 17 on the ACT, and vice versa. Additionally, class grades aren't as rigorous as the ACT. If you got an A- in a class, would you consider that a good grade? If half the class got an A or an A+, then your A- would be considered a bad grade. Conversely, if you were the only person to get an A in that class all year, that A- would be a great grade. Therefore, you shouldn't view the conversion too rigidly. However, those notes aside, you're correct if you think about the table as "lining up," say, different varieties of races at a track meet. For example, you can't compare someone's performance in the 100-meter dash with a marathoner, but you could say that someone who completed the 100-meter dash in 10 seconds was at an Olympic level, while 2 hours 10 minutes would also be considered an Olympic level marathon time. What’s Next? Not sure what ACT score you should be aiming for? Read this guide to figure out your target ACT score. Want to begin or continue prepping for the ACT? We have a guide that explains every single question type on the ACTso that you're completely prepared for the test! Looking for an easy way to boost your ACT score? Learn aboutthe most common mistakes students make when guessing on the ACTand how you can avoid them. Want to improve your ACT score by 4+ points? Download our free guide to the top 5 strategies you need in your prep to improve your ACT score dramatically.

Wednesday, February 19, 2020

Strategic Workforce Measures Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Strategic Workforce Measures - Essay Example Differentiating workforce strategy refers to the company’s management investing disproportionally in a few or a group of employees depending on their strategic contribution to the company’s outcome. For instance Memorata is a shoe company that deals with manufacturing and distributing ladies footwear. In order for this company to be successful, the human resource professionals should identify the employees that place the company at a competitive advantage (Beatty, Becker, & Huselid, 2005). They should identify the team that produces the best shoes that are favored in the market. The human resource professionals should then guide the managers into investing more in this employees so as to be at an advantaged position over their competitors (Becker, Huselid , & Beatty, 2009). Differentiating the workforce has been found to be crucial as it helps to identify the best employees that will drive the company towards achieving their set strategic goals. This entails allocating more resources on these employees for the good of the company (Beatty, Becker, & Huselid, 2005). Memorata deals with both flat and heeled shoe wear. However based on the sales reports, flat shoes are preferred to their counterpart in the market. This is because they are cheaper and are affordable. More resources should therefore be geared towards this line of production as it puts them at a better position to compete favorably with the other companies dealing with ladies shoes. The Human resource professionals at Memorata should not forget to invest in the supporting employees. For instance it is not only the sales persons that are making the sale of flat shoes successful. Those behind the production of those shoes are contributing to its success as well. Therefore the HR professionals should put in mind that the supporting elements of those individuals who are considered crucial should not be left out (Becker, Huselid , & Beatty, 2009).

Tuesday, February 4, 2020

Paper 1 edit Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Paper 1 edit - Essay Example As a result, the Department of Homeland Security (D.H.S) was established in 2002, to protect the American citizens from terrorist threats (Koestler-Granck 67). However, after Hurricane Katrina in 2005 the definition of threats shifted from focusing merely on terrorist threats to include the threat of catastrophic natural events (Koestler-Granck 55). Therefore, the DHS works with other agencies to ensure that all American safety is assured whether emanating from natural calamities or threats from terrorism. In fact, the Department of Homeland Security multitasking mission and with it different agencies that come from a different culture, aim to protect, reduce and recover American from unsafe conditions. Indeed, the Department of Homeland Security became the heart and the mind that deal with issues of national security. This paper illustrates the reason the United State is attached to DHS by demonstrating the important role DHS plays in protecting the U.S from threats (terrorist attac ks and natural disaster). The Department of Homeland Security contains 22 federal entities. Therefore, despite their different duties and tasks, these entities are tasked with specific roles that help prevent, counteract and mitigate terror threats (Koestler-Granck 67). Based on the activities each entity performed in the past and the event of 9/11, the DHS role was identified to assist national effort to prevent, minimize and recover from terrorist attacks within the United States. Moreover, DHS is tasked with reducing the U.S weakness against terrorism. Later on, and specifically after Hurricane Katarina in 2005 the role of DHS increased to include protecting the homeland from terrorism, human made calamities and natural disaster. In fact, the DHS role focused on five main missions, which include, preventing terrorism, enhancing security and securing and managing the U.S borders. Moreover, the body also enforce and administrate immigration law, safeguard and secure

Monday, January 27, 2020

Changing The Competitive Landscape Of The Smartphone Industry Marketing Essay

Changing The Competitive Landscape Of The Smartphone Industry Marketing Essay Abstract Innovation can be defined as a process of converting opportunities into new ideas and of the wide application of these ideas in practice (Tidd, Bessant, Pavitt, 2005). The past decade saw constant innovations in ICT aimed at increasing self-efficacy of the end users of communication devices. Elements such as miniaturization and ubiquitous computing (Open Handset Alliance, 2007a) have literally brought the personal computer to the palm of the consumer, in the form of a smartphone. The smartphone is rich with features such as internet browsing, touch screens, mobile-camera, improved connectivity and entertainment with the capability to adopt new applications (Burgelman, Silverman, Wittig, Hoyt, 2009). Recent years witnessed an explosive growth in mobile subscribers, where in 2008 alone global shipments rose 28%, as the smartphone gained momentum in the mobile phone industry (Canalys, 2008). The next few years are predicted to show a compound annual growth rate of 13.5% in handset shi pments leading to 1.9 billion handsets at the end of 2012 compared to 1 billion in 2007 (DataMonitor, 2008). Today, due to its portability and versatility the smartphone is a key player that facilitates the integration of technology with modern consumerism as the end user is given the capability to engage many computational devices and systems simultaneously (Tsai, Wang, Hwang, 2008). Mark Weiser (1991) refers to this as Ubiquitous Computing. The demand for smartphone has been the key driver for innovations (such as the touch screen, internet browsing, Wi-Fi) in the mobile industry in the past decade and the Open Handset Alliance and the Android platform are recent products of such pursuits. This study analyses how the OHA and Android has and will alter the terms of competition in the mobile industry, with relation to Porters five industrial forces. The Smartphone Industry Industry Participants Analysing the industry value chain of the smartphone the key components can be identified as chipset manufactures (Intel) , infrastructure developers and platform manufactures (Microsoft, Palm, iPhone) who provide the hardware and software components for handset manufactures. Application developers produce the applications that run on the operating platform whereas content providers such as Google provide the information for these applications. Mobile operators such as ATT and T-Mobile distribute handsets and provide the subscribers with network connectivity. In 2006 the global handset market was an oligopoly dominated by 5 companies which accounted for 85% of the market where Nokia and Motorola together accounted for 58%. Traditionally manufacturers competed through design. The entry of iPhone 3G to the market in 2008 created a new standard by combining design, performance, utility and functionality (Burgelman, Silverman, Wittig, Hoyt, 2009). It is considered by some industry analysts to be a blockbuster where Apples market share increased from 3.6% in 2007 to 17.3% in 2008, making it the now second largest player. Googles Entry into the Smartphone Industry Established in 1996 as the brainchild of two Stanford University computer science graduates, Google is now considered to be a blockbuster concept that has expanded beyond its core business as a search engine to a portfolio of products and services (Bhattacharya, Gopal, Samad, 2009). Today, a vast majority of Googles revenue is generated through the companys advertising products, Adword and Adsense (99% in 2007 and 97% in 2007) (Burgelman, Silverman, Wittig, Hoyt, 2009) that provide targeted advertising on its search pages, by placing advertisements relevant to a search on the results page. Googles entry to the smartphone industry was facilitated by its acquisition of the start-up open source software firm, Android in 2005 (Business Week, 2005). This event was a result of Google identifying the future growth potential of the smartphone and its capacity for mobile advertising. Eric Schmidt, the Chairman and CEO of Google stated You carry your phone everywhere. It knows all about you. We can do a very targeted ad. Over time we will make more money from mobile advertising. (Schmidt, 2010). Open Handset Alliance and Android In November 2007 Google unveiled the Open Handset Alliance, a consortium of 34 companies in the mobile industry representing the industry value chain (Fig 1), consisting of multinational companies such as T-Mobile, HTC, Intel, Qualcomm and Motorola. The objective of the alliance was to create an Open Software, Open Device and an Open Ecosystem (Open Handset Alliance, 2009b) fostering open innovation for development of mobile technology based on the open source platform. Today the OHA has expanded its membership to 65 companies. Fig. 1: The Wireless Value Chain (Hendrix, 2009) In November 2007 OHA released Android, an integrated software pack consisting of the Operating System, middleware, user-friendly interface and applications and the Android SDK free to the development community. Open Innovation and Open Source Open innovation is innovating through the collective creative input and knowledge of internal and external resources (Chesbrough, 2003). Open source technology is one method of open innovation (von Hippel von Krogh, 2006). It grants the developer the ownership of the source code without a cost of license fee or royalties giving them the freedom to further develop and distribute the product free or at a fee (Open Source Initiative, 2010). The openness of the platform creates more advance and cheaper innovations with shorter time-to-value, improving RD productivity and creating better value for money for the end user (Open Handset Alliance, 2009b). The OHA was a value network fostering open innovation by pooling of knowledge and Intellectual Property of the members. Android, was its first product built on the Linux open source kernel (Open Handset Alliance, 2007a). The Competitive Industry Forces Michael Porter (1979; 2008) defines five forces that define the competitive dynamics of an industry by shaping the interactions within that industry. These forces can be defined as bargaining power of suppliers and customers; the threat if new entrants and substitutes and established industry rivals (Fig.2). These are the figures that drive the profitability of the industry in the short and long terms (Porter, 2008). Analysis of these competitive forces and their drivers will provide insight into the basis of the industrys profitability and future growth potential. The entry of Android and Google into the smartphone industry has significantly affected its competitive landscape. Through the creation of an open ecosystem and a wide developer community it has created a sustainable competitive advantage against non-Andriods. Fig 2: The Five Forces that Shape Industry Competition (Porter, 2008) The Five Forces of the Smartphone Industry Bargaining Power of Suppliers There are a number of players in the smartphone Operating Systems (OS) market, led by Nokias Symbian, followed by Apples iPhone OS X, RIMs (Research in Motion) Blackberry, Microsofts Windows mobile, Linux and Palm (Hashimi Komatineni, 2009). These OS developers charged a license fee from handset manufactures, which was usually a variable cost of $0.50 to $25.00 per handset shipped. Further, in order to build applications on a specific OS, developers required SDK (Software Development Kit) and an API (Application Developer Interface), essential support tools for which they paid expensive certification and at times high membership fees (Burgelman, Silverman, Wittig, Hoyt, 2009). Due to the high bargaining power of these OS developers the cost to handset manufacturers was significantly high. Porter (2008) identifies standardization as an avenue of reducing the bargaining power of suppliers, and it is essential for innovation in the mobile telecommunication industry (Tilson Lyytinen, 2006). In the past collaborative RD and sharing of intellectual property were means of standardization in this industry (Bekkers, Verspagen, Smits, 2002). Android was developed to achieve an industry-wide standard in open source code making it freely available to all. By establishing OHA for this purpose creates an environment for open innovation reducing development, distribution and time costs of parallel innovation. The open nature of the Android platform makes it fully adaptable on any handset which triggers a high demand for the Android OS, which in turn reduced the bargaining power of the suppliers of OS. Bargaining Power of Distributers In the smartphone industry the distributers mainly consist of the network carriers who sell the phones to subscribers as a part of a mobile service plan. The bargaining power of the distributers is high since they have a large variety of handset manufactures with different features to select from. Although the failure of the Google Android may be due to a multitude of factors one key reason was their decision to sell the phone in their own web store independent of a carrier, in an attempt to shake up handset retailing . They changed this strategy by introducing the Nexus One in Vodafone (UK) in April 2010 (Parker Waters, 2010). Handset manufactures try to gain leverage through branding, networking and advertising to generate brand loyalty. iPhone for example has a very strong brand community. However the entry of the Android phone has created a new buzz word among subscribers, which gives members of the OHA a higher bargaining power over other handset manufactures. Another key aspect that affects carriers is the new avenue of voice communication that is available in the smartphones due to the Wi-Fi capabilities and applications that are provided such as Skype and Google Voice. With time this would reduce talk time over the carriers network impacting their revenue. Recently iPhone blocked Google Voice on its platform (Menn, 2009). Through collaborative innovation OHA has built a standard platform (Cusumano, 2010) and reduced RD costs of parallel innovation and increased time efficiencies. These economies will eventually flow to the end user creating higher value for money giving Android phone makers a better bargaining power over their subscribers compared to their competition. Rivalry between Incumbents Within a few years of entering into the market the mobile phone became a commodity due to the competition in the market and the fast innovations that resulted in similar phones competing on price. When the smartphone entered the market it required a premium price for the added functionality of the phones. Now the creation of a standardized OS platform through Android has the potential to commoditize the smartphone. Since it was introduced to the market Android has emerged as a strong brand whereby every smartphone running on the Android platform is co-branded as an Android phone. The very 1st Android the T-Mobile G1, Motorola Droid and the latest HTC Magic are few such examples. This creates a convergence in branding between the members of the OHA further consolidating the smartphone industry through the alliance. The value network and open ecosystem that is OHA has a large potential for future developments in the smartphone industry due to the knowledge pool they have created. This is a critical asset for the members of the OHA over the other players in the industry. Further, having Google as a strong leverage in terms of branding, information and human resources adds to the benefit of the OHA. By introducing a standard platform for smartphones Android has reduced any competition between handsets over the OS, opening a new avenue of competition, which is applications. One of the key issues that arise between incumbents in the industry is the Intellectual Property violations. Apple recently sued HTC for 20 patent infringements over HTCs Android phones (Gelles , 2010). Barriers to Entry The main barrier for the smartphone industry for a new entrant was the significant fixed costs of RD and advertising. The introduction of Android has reduced these barriers significantly. First, by freely providing the SDK to the development community any new entrant can use this OS without a cost. Further the applications that are developed for the Android phones are highly adaptable and open. Therefore they can be adapted by any new entrant. Similar Apples Apps Store, there are multiple applications that are available with no cost. Further the Android brand is a powerful platform upon which new entrants can leverage their marketing. References Aguero, J., Rebollo, M., Carrascosa, C., Julian, V. (2009). Does Android Dream with Intelligent Agents. In J. M. Corchado (Ed.), International Symposium on Distributed Computing and Artificial Intelligence 2008. 50, pp. 194-204. Berlin: Springer. Bekkers, R., Verspagen, B., Smits, J. (2002). Intellectual Property Rights and Standardization: The Case of GSM. Telecommunications Policy, 26(3), 171-188. Bhattacharya, M., Gopal, B. S., Samad, S. A. (2009). Googles Android A Threat to Mobile Giants. IBS Research Center. UK: ecch. Burgelman, R. A., Silverman, A., Wittig, C., Hoyt, D. (2009). Googles Android: Will it Shake Up Wirelss Industry in 2009 and Beyond? Standford Business School. USA: ecch. Business Week. (2005, August 17). Google Buys Android for Its Mobile Arsenal. Retrieved April 14, 2010, from Canalys. (2008, November 6). Global smart phone shipments rise 28%. Retrieved April 13, 2010, from Canalys. (2009, November 3). Worldwide Smartphone Market in Third Quarter. Retrieved April 13, 2010, from Carter, N. M., Stearns, T. M., Reynolds, P. D., Miller, B. A. (1994). New Venture Strategies: Theory Development with an Empirical Base. Strategic Management Journal, 15(1), 21-41. Carton, P., Crumrine, J. (2010, January 4). New Survey Shows Android OS Roiling the Smartphone Market. Retrieved April 2010, 2010, from ChangeWaveResearch: Cusumano, M. (2005, February). Google: What it is and What it is not. Communications of the ACM, 48(2), 15(3). Cusumano, M. (2010). Technology Strategy and Management The Evolution of Platform Thinking. Communications of the ACM, 53(1), 32-34. DataMonitor. (2008, December). Global Mobile Phones: Industry Profile. Datamonitor. Fortt, J. (2010, March 11). Top 5 moments from Eric Schmidts talk in Abu Dhabi. Retrieved April 15, 2010, from CNN Money: Gelles , D. (2010, March 2). Apple sues HTC over iPhone patents. Retrieved April 14, 2010, from The Financial Times: Grotnes, E. (2008). Standardization as an Arena for Open Innovation. In G. Leon, A. Bernardos, J. Casar, K. Kautz, J. DeGross (Eds.), Open IT-Based Innovation: Moving Towards Cooperative IT Transfer and Knowledge Diffusion (Vol. 287, pp. 343-359). Boston: Springer. Hashimi, S. Y., Komatineni, S. (2009). Pro Android. New York: Springer-Verlag. Helft, M., Hansell, S. (2008, September 24). Google Introduces an iPhone Rival Open to Whims. The New York Times, p. C4. Hendrix, P. (2009). Research on Emerging Market and Disruptive Technology. Retrieved April 14, 2010, from IMMR Institute for Mobile Markets Research: Menn, J. (2009, July 29). Apple Bans iPhone Applications based on Google Voice Service. Retrieved April 15, 2010, from The Financial Times: Nuttall, C., Waters, R. (2010, April 8). Apple to battle with Google for mobile ads. Retrieved April 13, 2010, from The Financial Times: Open Handset Alliance. (2007a, November 12). Open Handset Alliance Releases Android SDK. Retrieved April 14, 2010, from Open Handset Alliance Press: Open Handset Alliance. (2009b, November 12). Open Handset Alliance Press. Retrieved April 14, 2010, from Industry Leaders Announce Open Platform for Mobile Devices: Open Source Initiative. (2010). The Open Source Definition. Retrieved April 15, 2010, from Park, Y., Chen, J. V. (2007). Acceptance and Adoption of the Innovative use of Smartphones. Industrial Management Data Systems, 107(9), 1349-65. Porter, M. (1979). How Competitive Forces Shape Strategy. McKinsey Quarterly, 4(2), 34(17). Porter, M. (2008, January). The Five Competitive Forces that Shape Strategy. Harvard Business Review, 1-18. Schmidt, E. (2010, March 11). Innovation. In Keynote Speech at the Abu Dhabi Media Summit. Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates: Schmidt, E., Tseng, E., Neven, H. (2010, February 16). Googles Vision of the Mobile Future. In Speech at the Mobile World Congress. Barcelona, Spain: Tidd, J., Bessant, J., Pavitt, K. (2005). Managing Innovation Integarating Technological, Market and Organizational Change. Chichester, West Sussex, England: John Wiley Sons. Tilson, D., Lyytinen, K. (2006). The 3G Transition: Changes in the US Wireless Industry. Telecommunications Policy, 30, 569-586. Tsai, S., Wang, C., Hwang, R. (2008). Ubiquitous Phone System. In F. E. Sandes (Ed.), Ubiquitous Intelligence and Computing (Vol. 5061, pp. 201-215). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. Vance, A., Bilton, N. (2010, April 12). After iPad, Rivals Offer Variations on a Theme. The New York Times, p. B6. Waters, R., Menn, J. (2010, August 2009). Googles Schmidt quits Apple board. Retrieved April 13, 2010, from The Financial Times: Weiser, M. (1991). The Computer for the Twenty-First Century. Scientific American, pp. 94-104. reprinted in IEEE Pervasive Computing, 19-25 (2002).

Sunday, January 19, 2020

Men Makes Better Teachers Than Women

Men Make Better Teachers than women (Just for comment)The simple answer is women should teach by men teacher and boy should teach by women teacher so both are study interestingly and paying attention on their subject so students get a good marks I will discuss in general view about men make better teachers than women and in my point of view both are good and bad. There are many characteristics, techniques and other factors that make a successful and exemplary teacher. These may be varied as the teachers themselves.However, there are certain time-tested attributes, characteristics, practices and environmental actors which contribute immensely to teacher success. The main topic of today is to be categorized as Teacher-Personality and Attitude, Teacher-Student Psychology and Teacher-Institute Relationship and who can be teach better men and women? If teacher doesn’t have knowledge and clear concept of his teaching he shouldn’t teach. There are some cases that, a teacher ma y be a good student in his class but he cannot be a good teacher. Good teacher requires communication skills and Teacher-Student Psychology between students and teachers.A teacher also a good friend of you. He understand the nature of students either they are in mood of study or not and how should I convey my knowledge to students in a fun or serious, in story or in joke. That’s make the teacher best that he/she understand the student on their level and if some students asks any question he/she try to understand that what students want to say and try to clear this concept on his mind. One thing also play a big role in class, â€Å"Teacher-Personality and Attitude with students†. There are certain personality characteristics and attitude issues which will help a teacher excel at his/her work.It is widely believed that if a teacher is presentable, he/she will give a good impression to the students especially in the first few days of the class. This indicates that the tea cher is taking his/her job seriously and acting professionally and the students eventually will appreciate that. In addition to looking presentable, the teacher’s personality in class plays a big role in how efficiently the class will be conducted. It is essential that the teacher send the right signals to the students so they will understand the basic rules in the class. A teacher also should active and energetic, some teachers are good in nowledge but they don’t have much communication skills with student in the result, the students are sleeping in the class and they don’t much concentrate on that subject. According to my point of view I generally categorized the teacher in different situation that are: An average teacher just tells the students that what did they do? But, A good teacher explain the students that how did they do? And also, A very good teacher demonstrate the students that like this way they can do? And a great and best teacher inspires you, he gives motion to student to achieve the target for not be a good student but also a very good person in community.That teachers are very rare today that they sincere with their students and wish they always done a best in every field of life. A famous quote â€Å"In every successful student behind a teacher, and in failure a strict teacher† So that’s reason our villages people don’t study more because teacher treat them strictly and they prefer work instead of study. The teacher who follow these things it is a good teacher either it is women or men. But in my personnel point of view a man teacher is more best then women teacher because he behaves sometime strict and he doesn’t compromise with their students as women teacher.

Saturday, January 11, 2020

Factors and Motivations That Influence Biological Warfare

Many troops during the years of World War I met their demise in what is arguable the most terrifying and inhumane of all military tactics – biological warfare. Soldiers inhaled a deadly acidic gas that burned them from the inside out, suffocating them in an excruciating and unimaginable pain. Kurth Audrey, a professor of strategy at the U. S. National War College in Washington, stated: â€Å"Science is as neutral as a knife; it may maybe a blessing or a curse depending on the heart and the mind of the man who holds it. †[1] Terrorists organizations are motivated by many factors to use biological warfare. If a terrorist organization has the concepts of science down, as a neutral knife, then they can produce weapons that can fulfill their agenda, whether it is something that has to do with reputation, politics, or religion. Many factors contribute to terrorists using this type of warfare, which stimulates the motivations of terrorist organizations. These factors range from; access to information, cost, ease of dissemination, availability, access to technology, and difficulty of detection. Biological warfare is a dangerous type of warfare, than can cause severe damage to a population of people, crops, or animals. It can also cause harm to the one that is dispersing the biological agent, which causes one to think, why would someone use this type of warfare? Biological agents are often simpler to attain and produce than chemical weapons that can cause mass destruction in a population. The material for biological agents can easily be grown or purchased. There are some agents, such as Anthrax or Brucellosis, which occur naturally in animals in certain parts of the world , and individuals can acquire these agents just by traveling the globe to where these agents grow. For an example, the Aum Shinrikyo cult was reported to have gone to Zaire, a place in Africa, to seek the strains of Ebola for its use in its bio-weapons program. [2] Until recently, anyone could order agents from supple houses around the world. In 1995, American Type Culture Collection (ATCC), a mail order company that provides biological products, shipped the bacteria, Anthrax, to Saddam Hussein's biological warfare program in Iraq. [3] Just like the increase of technology throughout the decades, there is also an increase of availability of information related to chemical and biological weapons. Information on how to create biological weapons can be taken from articles within scientific literature on a variety of topics, which only requires a trained scientist to understand. The Internet has created forums on which terrorists groups can reach out, recruit members, and spread messages. It also makes a large library of information available to just about anyone who is interested on the production of biological agents. One resource that is found online is, Bacteriological Warfare: A Major Threat to North America, which is written by Larry Wayne Harris of the Aryan Nation. 4] This manual describes the reproduction and growth of biological agents, and can be purchased for only $30. [5] Another resource available is called, Silent Death, which instructs the reader in ways to kill using chemical and biological poisons. According to the publisher of this book, it sells thousands of copies each year. [6] Bio-engineers are now armed with knowledge on how to cease biological agents, as well as the effects of the agents upon a population. According to Ken Alibek, who supervised the Soviet bio warfare program, â€Å"Although the mos-sophisticated and effected versions [of biological weapons]require considerable equipments and scientific expertise, primitive versions can be produced in a small area with minimal equipment by someone with limited training†¦ They would be relativity inexpensive and easy to produce. †[7] To produce bio-weapons, a terrorist organization must have access to a scientist with some graduate training in the fields of microbiology or genetic engineering. The political and economic situation in Russia created a supply of bio warfare scientists who were not being paid and were unable to provide for themselves or their families. Regardless of the political, moral and ethical standards of these scientists, it is reasonable to expect that many of those scientists are now working for terrorist organizations around the world. Iraq scientists discovered which strains to order by reviews in American scientific journals, which are located at American Type Culture Collection in Rockville, Maryland. For thirty-five dollars, they also picked up strains of tularemia and Venezuelan equine encephalitis once targeted for weaponization at Fort Detrick. [8] The knowledge that is learned, and the availability of the biological agents, caused the relative ease of production of the agents, storage they can be contained in, dissemination factors, increased safety for the troops handling the binary agents, and the less complicated processes of demilitarization. The cost of producing and deploying biological weapons is less expensive than chemical weapons; the materials, equipment, and production space are all so inexpensive, any terrorist organization can afford them. According to an Office of Technical Assessment (OTA) Report, the cheapest overt production of one nuclear bomb costs $200 million, with larger programs costing up to 50 times more. In contrast, a large arsenal costs less than $10 million dollars. 9] Kathleen Bailey, found through interviews with professors, students, and scientists, that all that was needed to create a biological weapons program capable of producing large amounts of agents, would be several biologists with $10,000 worth of equipment – all of which who could fit into the same room. [10] This then causes many terrorists organizations to actually be capable of producing a biological agent. Dissemination of biological agents can be simple and inexpensive. There are a variety of different ways they can be de livered. The simplest methods of dissemination are through the contamination of food products or water. This method only requires direct access to any food product or water- preferably during the purification stages of that food product or of that water. Biological agents can also be dispersed through the contamination of agriculture, indirect transmission through animals, and direct contact, such as the assassination of Georgi Markov in 1978 through a ricin- containing pallet that was shot into his thigh. Dissemination through aerosol or vapor into an enclosed area or the open air is more complex than just through food products or water. Biological agents released into the air, such as through the release of vapors from a crop duster, are subject to biological decay, physical decay, atmospheric thermal stability, wind speed, and dimension of the land surface. The dissemination of agents is more predictable in rural areas than urban regions. The agents must be able to withstand the stress of the dissemination, environmental factors, and physical obstructions. Researchers have found, however, that dissemination of agents at night or enclosed dark areas, such as subways or tunnels, can be particularly effective. [12] Biological agents can be extremely lethal, some biological agents create more deadly affects than others, such as Anthrax. According to the Department of Defense, ten kilograms of Anthrax can cause more damage than a ten kiloton nuclear weapon. [13] This form of warfare can lead a military down by 90% through the intentions of militarization, by giving the military that dispensed the biological agents a form of character. Since most individuals are not vaccinated for different types of diseases, such as smallpox, it can lead to millions of people dying. Small pox is an example of a bacteria that can cause up to 2 million people, if being exposed to a society, to die because of the complete absence of prevention and control measures since 1970, because people do not believe that this disease will emerge again. It has such a high mortality rate (one in three people die) and infectiousness (on average, one person will infect three additional people). Politics seams to be the cause of many disasters from the corrupt French government in 1740 which led to the brutal French Revolution, to the rebellions of Aum Shinrikyo, which formed their own structure based on the Japanese government. Aum Shinrikyo attracted followers that opposed the Japanese government, in the late 1980's and 1990's, which caused their group to become larger. Their goal was to pursue terrorist violence in competition with rival groups that Shoko Asahara, the leader of this violent group, feared would attract support away from Aum Shinrikyo. Their next goal was to take over the Japanese government. On March 1194, Aum Shinrikyo tried to assassinate the leader of a rival religious sect, the Soka Gakkai, but failed because the spraying system mounted on a van malfunction and contaminated its operators. However, the second attempt occurred in Mastumoto on June 27th, 1994, the members working with the biological agents of Aum Shinrikyo, improved the spraying system, which targeted three judges who were expected to rule against the sect in a land dispute. This later resulted in the injuries of 500, including the three political judges they were after. In September 1984, Rajneeshee religious cult the Dalles, Orgeon grew Salmonella typhimurium to manipulate the results of the November 1984 election. They planned to buss homeless people into their commune and register them as voters, and make the opposing voters sick and unable to vote. They then poisoned to county commissioners by using the method of dissemination of contaminating water with salmonella typhiurium, which caused both the commissioners to become sick. The cult then contaminated ten Dallas restaurants, which opened up 751 cases of salmonella. 16] The uses of these pathogens by both these two different groups, had the attentions of manipulating whatever they deemed was politically corrupted. Biological agents can be small and easy to transport. William Patrick, who left the US biological Weapons Development Program around 1969, regularly carries a vial containing a stimulant for anthrax, just to test whether or not it will be detected. In 1999, he brought the vial with him into a hearing of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence without being detected and claimed to make the same move at the State Department, the Pentagon, and the CIA. 17] Many have traveled through airports, with high-tech security, around the world carrying equipment for deploying these biological agents through the air and never were stopped to explain the purpose for the equipment. The first signs of an attack may not even come until weeks after the agent has been deployed. Thus, by the time the authorities determine an attack has taken place, the perpetrators could be anywhere in the world, trying to escape what they have done. Biological attacks can be mistaken for naturally occurring disease outbreaks. Because of the difficulty in detecting a biological weapons attack, it is almost impossible to lay blame on a particular group or individual for the outbreak. As technology, and information on the biological fields of science increase, so do the potential threats of this type of warfare. It has been examined closely to how the factors help contribute to this type of warfare, as well as how motivation leads for this type of warfare to become some-what successful. The main major factor of groups to use this type of warfare would be religion. Religion plays a tremendous role in human misery, from wars, such as the crusades, to the use of biological weapons targeted at specific religious groups. When terrorism is involved in the name of religion, such as Al-Qaida, it is often motivated by violence that is regarded as â€Å"divine duty† which justifies bloodshed. One of the hallmarks of a religious terrorist is the unquestioned willingness to kill a large number of people without conscience behind their agendas. Since biological warfare is very effective in killing mass number of people, many religious extremist groups use this form of warfare to justify their actions, and views on religion. Terrorists groups have reputations that attract many people. Acquiring such massive biological weapons, or producing such complicated weapons, brings the terrorist group a high-rank reputation as well as to be seen as having no boundaries. It then makes it easier for the terrorist group to achieve their agendas. Aum Shinrikyo cult is an example that uses both of these motivations. Their attack in the subway system in 1995 not only caused the successful attack of fifty-five hundred people, according to their agenda, but had gotten people to realize their dangerous element; the involvement of highly intelligent and educated people, in which some are considered to be Japan's brightest scientists, computer technicians, and trained professionals. Even by the standards of cults, the Aum were a strange bunch. Among other things, members believed in the virtues of levitation and coffee enemas. They also wore elaborate radio sets on their heads so as to better hear the thoughts of their Leader. Despite their unusual ideas, the cult attracted a number of educated followers with scientific and technical abilities. It is a discouraging fact: religious cults may be strange and oblivious, but that doesn't prevent them from attracting capable intelligent followers – or to pursue their doomsday agendas. This type of warfare is an inhumane, dangerous type of warfare, that has killed dozens of people. If we actually take the factors into consideration, than we can lower the motivation and the prevent the further productions of these biological weapons. Bibliography