Compare between Russia and America in Economic Essay - 1

Compare between Russia and America in Economic - Essay Example Apparently, with the advancement and reform in the environmental domain, nations’ were engaged in providing effective means of production and distribution to earn high competitive advantages. Thus, overall the concept of economic elaborates the process through which, the nation produces and distributes goods and/or services in a community for its all round development. Moreover, economics is identified as a widely extended concept, which is further sub-divided into different aspects including micro and macroeconomics. It is these distinctions made through the economic behavior of a country that indicates the underlying causes of why a nation performs better than the other or vice-versa (Stanford, â€Å"Economics for Everyone: On-Line Glossary of Terms & Concepts†). These underpinnings of economic assumptions can be better understood through the comparison of two economies, as is intended for this study. The two economies considered herewith are the American and the Russian economies. America, as an economic power, is often regarded one of the most technologically powerful nations, hosting a strong foundation of private businesses. Its skilled labor pool has also been one of the key drivers of its growth. Besides, the businesses in the US hold high level of flexibility in taking the key decisions concerning sustainable growth, which has further contributed towards the overall strengths of the economy (OECD, â€Å"OECD Economic Surveys: Russian Federation†; â€Å"OECD Economic Surveys: United States†). On the other hand, Russian economy had to undergo significant changes and reforms following the collapse of Soviet Union that in turn helped the economy become intensively market based. The reforms Russia had to witness during the ea rly 90’s of privatization have led to significant alterations in its economic model overall (OECD, â€Å"OECD

Mesopotamia Essay Example for Free

Mesopotamia Essay Mesopotamia, also known as the land between two rivers, became the grounds of many ancient civilizations that we know about today. Perhaps one of the most famous is Sumer. Sumer was a civilization that thrived off of the two river, the Tigris and the Euphrates. Using irrigation systems, the Sumerians used the floods of the rivers produced to grow crops and support the growing population. This civilization grew into an early form of a modern city, with things like business, jobs, currency, and social classes. How were the Sumerians able to keep track of money and payments and when floods happened without a writing system? Eventually, the Sumerians were able to create to worlds earliest writing system to keep record of all this. Later, that system evolved and became what we know as the Sumerians predominant style of writing, cuneiform. With all the money transactions and trading going on, people needed to know and keep record of how much the transaction was and keep record of what was being traded. The Sumerians started very simply and began trying things like using pictures to be representations for different items and animals. This was what the earliest form of a writing system was. Using that style hey could tell exactly what things were. Over some time, this system developed into using those same pictographs, but now having certain symbols for certain words. This was established by 3100 B. C. However, as more complex ideas than keeping track of trades arose, a demand for a more complex system of writing had also risen. As time progressed, s system of writing known as cuneiform or wedged-shaped began to develop. This system of writing developed by about 2900 B. C, used symbols to represent ideas, sounds, syllables and objects. The symbols were pressed into tablets of wet clay which later, were dried in the sun preserving records and ideas and their history. This very long lasting style of writing became popular among the Babylonians and the Assyrians began using it for their own languages. The writing style cuneiform began to affect the lives of the Sumerian people. It created more specialized jobs and opened the door to education. Education expanded from learning to do manual tasks into learning how to be a scribe. Being a scribe was an important thing because teaching to write back then is not like it is now. It took a lot of effort and was very time consuming. Being a scribe was what everyone wanted because it was the door to government positions, religious positions, and also got professional jobs. These jobs included architects, engineers, and scientists. What cuneiform really did for Sumer was establish a culture beyond agriculture. Citizens could now express ideas about the world and the deities who ruled it. Besides that, their realm of knowledge increased immensely because since there was now a writing system, the scribes who became scientists were able to study astronomy and record their findings. They discovered the pattern of the earth and that allowed them to accurately predict when to expect flooding from the two rivers. They also developed mathematics for the use of dividing the lands among land owners and also with math were able to establish a time system. Writing also developed into a way to express things more than knowledge. People could now write down and share very intelligent ideas and also could now write stories such as the Epic of Gilgamesh. If not for writing, the ancient civilization of Sumer might now have turned into what it did. Writing did more for them then allow them to keep records of money transactions and trade, it allowed them to turn into a more intelligent civilization and also a more expressive civilization. It created more education and jobs and showed them into a realm of knowledge which was once unreachable but thanks to writing was within their grasp. Writing allowed them to preserve the information that was passed down from generation to generation which allowed later civilization to expand on that knowledge. Their writing system not only changed their lives but also the lives of the people to come.

Hemingway :: essays papers

Hemingway Ernest Hemingway once said, "As you get older, it is harder to have heroes, but it is sort of necessary." Hemingway knew this because he actually invented his famous code hero. The Hemingway code hero was a macho man that indulged in liquor, women, and food, and usually did not fear God. While reading The Old Man and the Sea, the reader is not exposed to the usual Hemingway code hero. Hemingway creates an aging hero that proves to be the opposite of the normal code hero by his disinterest in physical pleasures, the presence of religion, and the presence of a companion. Santiago, the main character in the story, does not divulge in any pleasures what so ever. It almost seems as though he is trying to make himself suffer. Everyday, Santiago hardly eats anything but a little fish or coffee. He does not have any relationships with women in the story, as many Hemingway novels have included. While Santiago is out on the boat, he does not let himself stray from the task at hand even though it is very uncomfortable. The Hemingway code hero would be the exact opposite of Santiago. He would eat large meals every day, make love to many women, and never put himself in a position that he did not like. The code hero would do everything as though it was the last time he was doing it because he did not believe strongly in the presence of God. Santiago was different because he believed in God, and prayed to him for help throughout the story. While he was at sea, he often prayed that he would get the fish or that he would live to see the fish brought to the village. Santiago did not fear death and the reader senses that Santiago believes that if he dies, he will go to heaven. The story is also filled with many biblical references and the whole book has a religious theme. Hemingway does not usually have his code heroes be religious, and most of them feel that they only have this time on earth and they had better make the best out of it. Finally , Hemingway's code hero differs in The Old Man and the Sea because of the presence of the boy that is Santiago's companion.

Maturational, Environmental and the Constructivist theories Essay

Theories of development are much more specific than paradigms or worldviews (Miller, 1993). A theory of development deals with change over time and is usually concerned with three things. First, it should describe changes over time within an area or several areas of development. Second, it should describe changes among areas of development. Third, it should explain these changes. No one theory has proved adequate to describe and explain learning or development. Numerous theories of development have influenced educational practices during the 20th century (Aldridge, Kuby, & Strevy, 1992), and currently a shift is affecting theories of child development and education. Some of the historical and current theories that have influenced education include Gesell’s (1925) maturational theory, Skinner’s (1974) behaviorist approach, Freud’s (1935) psychoanalytic theory, Piaget’s (1952) constructivist theory, Vygotsky’s (1978) socio-historical approach, Bronfen brenner’s (1989) ecological systems theory, and Gardner’s (1983) multiple intelligences theory. More recently, critical theory (see Kessler & Swadener, 1992) has influenced education and child development practices, even though critical theory is not a theory of development. Finally, postmodern conceptions have changed the way we think of children and how to educate them (Elkind, 1995, 2000/2001). There are several theories of a child development but three of them have a profound impact on kindergarten readiness practices. These three theories include maturational, environmental and constructivist perceptions of development. We will take a look to each one individually, and then we will compare them against each other. The maturational theory was highly developed by Arnold Gesell and continues to affect what goes on schools, mainly in early childhood classrooms. Arnold Gesell (1880-1961) followed the works of Darwin and other evolutionists, eventually developing the Gesell Maturational Theory. His theory contends that development in childhood and adolescence is primarily biological, or genetic, in origin. Biology and genetics inheritances determine predictable patterns of biological behavior that Gesell termed norms. He felt that children’s development patterns opened automatically by biology, as the unfolding of a flower does because it is genetically programmed to do so in the right environment. As the flower requires proper soil and rain, children require a nurturing, stable environment, and little else to mature both biologically and psychologically. In the company of renowned author and physician Benjamin Spock, who wrote Spock’s Baby and Child Care, Gesell was among the first professionals to compile developmental stage information with which parents could learn to understand their children. Because childhood and adolescent development is the product of millions of years of evolution, he mainly advocated sensitivity and understanding as parental approaches to development. Biology has already given children what they need to understand their own development. Gesell worked in a lab at Yale University, studying children and their developmental stages. He cataloged children’s behavior at various ages and described the norms in their collective development. As such, his theory is often grouped with normative-descriptive approaches, because it uses norms of development to describe the process of maturation. Gesell’s theory was groundbreaking because it implied that learning, illness; injury and life experiences were secondary, if at all influential, to biology and the evolution of the genetics that program a child’s development. Unless the child’s environment were so distorted as to be harmful, he felt that children were born with all the information their bodies needed for development and maturation. Genetics determine the developmental process and the timing of maturation, and parents could affect very little of this, except by being sensitive to cues learned from the descriptive norms. Maturational theory believers, think that development is a natural process that occurs automatically in conventional, chronological stages over time. This perspective leads many teachers and families to assume that young children will gain knowledge naturally and automatically as they mature. According to maturational theory, school readiness is a condition at which all healthy young children can perform tasks such as reciting the alphabet and counting. If a child is developmentally unready for school, maturationists might suggest referrals to transitional kindergartens, retention, or holding children out of school f or an additional year (DeCos, 1997). These practices are sometimes used by schools, educators, and parents when a young child developmentally lags behind his or her peers. The young child’s underperformance is interpreted as the child needing more time to acquire the knowledge and skills needed to perform at the level of his or her peer. Today, maturational theory is partially responsible for the existence of prekindergarten and pre first grades aimed at children who supposedly need the† gift of time,† because of immaturity or a late birthday. These classrooms tend to have a ratio of boys to girls of anywhere from 7:1 to 10:1 (Aldridge, Eddowes, & Kuby, 1998). These practitioners of maturational theory consider that any difficulty that a child is experience is found within the child. Another problem of the maturational theory is the late birthday. This means that children in the classrooms, who are the youngest, are being labeled as â€Å"late birthday† and are often branded by the teachers as being slower and less ready for instruction. Maturational theory strongly influenced the teaching of reading in the mid 1900s (Morphett & Washburne, 1931). Children were not thought to be ripe for reading until they had a mental age of six and a half years. Consequently, readiness activities were developed for children who were not yet ready to read. Some of this nonsense still occurs in preschool, kindergarten, and even primary-level classrooms. Today, maturational theory is partially responsible for the existence of prekindergarten and pre first grades aimed at children who supposedly need the† gift of time,† because of immaturity or a late birthday. These classrooms tend to have a ratio of boys to girls of anywhere from 7:1 to 10:1 (Aldridge, Eddowes, & Kuby, 1998). The environmental theory has at its development theorists such as J. Watson, B.F. Skinner and Albers Brandura, who contributed greatly to the theory perspective. Environmentalists believe the child’s environment shapes learning and behavior. The environmental theory emphasizes the role of the environment on an individual’s development. This environmental point of view leads many families to believe that young children develop and gain new information by reacting to their surroundings. Kindergarten readiness, according to the environmentalists, is the age or stage when young children can respond appropriately to the environment of the school and the classroom (e.g., rules and regulations, curriculum activities, positive behavior in group settings, and directions and instructions from teachers and other adults in the school). Teachers who are followers of this theory, believes that the ability to respond appropriately to this environment is necessary for young children to participate in teacher initiated learning activities, and that the child success depends on following the teacher instruction. Many environmentalist-influenced educators and parents believe that young children learn best by rote activities, such as reciting the alphabet over and over, copying letters, and tracing numbers. These viewpoints are evident in kindergarten classrooms where young children are expected to sit at desks arranged in rows and listen attentively to their teachers. While at home children are provided with workbooks containing activities such as coloring or tracing numbers and letters. Also this theory proposed that children are influenced by the multiple systems in which they reside, either directly or peripherally. These systems include the microsystem, the mesosystem, the exosystem, and the macrosystem. Applications of this contextual theory focus on the seemingly endless variables within the child, and between the child and the numerous contexts affecting her. Although few people would quarrel with the importance of these influences, trying to account for all the endless interactions and variables affecting a child is exhausting and impractical. How would we ever have enough information about children’s temperament, activity levels, attentional states, or learning capaciti es as they relate to the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and macrosystem? The next theory is the constructivist. Its perspective was advanced by theorists such as Piaget, Montessori and Vygotsky. It can be described as a theory that deals with the way people create meaning of the world through a series of individual constructs. Constructs are the different types of filters we choose to place over our realities to change our reality from chaos to order. Von Glasersfeld describes constructivism as, â€Å"a theory of knowledge with roots in philosophy, psychology, and cybernetics†. Simply stated, it is a learning process which allows a student to experience an environment first-hand, thereby, giving the student reliable, trust-worthy knowledge. The student is required to act upon the environment to both acquire and test new knowledge. This theory relies heavily on logical-mathematical knowledge and universal invariant stages of development to the neglect of other forms of knowledge and the importance of context in a child’s development. Even though knowledge is constructed from the â€Å"inside out† through interaction with the environment, the focus is more on the individual’s coordination of relationships rather than on socially constructed knowledge. Constructivists view young children as dynamic members in learning process, and are consistent in their belief that learning and development take place when young children interact with the environment and people around them. Because active interaction with the environment and people are necessary for learning and development, constructivists believe that children are ready for school when they can initiate many of the interactions they have with the environment and people around them. During kindergarten, classrooms are separated into different learning centers, and are prepared with developmentally materials for young children to play and manipulate. During home parents engage their young children in reading and storytelling activities and encourage children to participate in daily household activities, in a way that introduces concepts as counting and language use. In addition, parents may provide young children with picture books containing very large print, and toys that stimulate interaction (such as building blocks and large puzzles). When a young child encounters difficulties in the learning process, the constructivist approach is neither to label the child nor to retain him or her; instead, constructivists give the child some individualized attention and customize the classroom curriculum to help the child address his or her difficulties. Autonomy is the aim of education in constructivism (Kamii, 2000). Constructivist theory, however, has not adequately addressed either individual differences or cultural and contextual contributions to development and education (Delpit, 1988; Kessler & Swadener, 1992; Mallory & New, 1994). Thus, the needs of children who are different often are not met in constructivist classrooms. Today, most researchers have come to understand child development and learning process as expressed by the constructivist. However many parents and teachers still believes that children who cannot recite the alphabet or count are not ready for school. References Buchwald J (1987), â€Å"A comparison of plasticity in sensory and cognitive processing systems†, in Gunzenhauser N, Infant Stimulation, Skillman NJ: Johnson & Johnson Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes (Translation by Michael Cole), Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978 (Published originally in Russian in 1930) Mossler, R.A. (2011). Child and adolescent development. Bridgepoint Education, Inc. Powell, D.R. (1991, July). Strengthening parental contributions to school readiness and early school learning (Paper commissioned by the Office of Educational Research and Improvement). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Vygotsky, L.S. (1998). Child psychology. The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky: Vol. 5. Problems of the theory and history of psychology. New York: Plenum. White, S.H.(1968). The learning maturation controversy: Hall to Hull. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly

Mexican American Essay

The document of WWII and Mexican-Americans of 1945 writen by LULAC which was found in 1929 stated that â€Å"some hald a million Mexican-Americans served in the armed forces during WWII†, but yet Latinos continued to face discrimination towards them. LULAC then demanded equal rights for minority groups after them experiencing the War and serving the Country. As many signs in many place clearly stated to the Mexicans-Americans that their â€Å"uniforms and service ribbons† meant nothing to them and they were simply not allowed in anywhere. It left said that the so-called â€Å"Mexicans† were worthless of having equality wether they served the Coutry or not. Mexicans were and are racials characterisctly stated as Caucasian since there was only 3 races which were, Caucasians, Negroid, and Mongoloid. For that LULAC said that â€Å"this condition is not a case of difference; it is a case of ignorance†. They said that ignorance was † a Disease that was contagious to those who wish to suffer from it†. Ignorance tied hate, jealousy, misunderstandings, confusion, etc. The hate was not just beacause of the race or because they weren’t smart enough nor because of the language. The hate was because the ignorance affected many for them to think the â€Å"Mexicans† did not deserve the equal rights. As â€Å"Mexicans† proved to be loyal Americans after every test that was thrown at them, they â€Å"delegated right guaranteed by their constitution as a reward for their faithful servive. † The whole purpose of this document was for Mexican-Americans to be given â€Å"social, political, and economic equality. † Mecians had proved that they deserved the right of equality as all the other Americans. I agree with the authors point of view which was stated that ignorance was the biggest cause of the hate and discrimination toward the â€Å"Mexicans†. Ven withoutservice ribbons the â€Å"Mexicans† and other minorities deseved equality for the simple fact the the world needs to have equal rights for everyone, wether they served the country in any way or not, because they were born in American teritory.