Constructivism Essay -- Philosophy, Piaget, Vygotsky

What is Constructivism? Constructivism has been a popular term used in education since the 1990s but can be traced back to a much earlier time than that (Maddux & Cummings, 1999, p.8). Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky are the two theorists who are closely linked to the development of constructivism. Over the past decade, education has seen an alarming increase in the number of students who are qualifying for special education services as well as students who are being labeled as â€Å"at risk† students. Having such an increase in special education the demand to find a teaching style that works best for students with disabilities has become extremely popular. An increase in popular terms and trendy forms of teaching instruction has developed in education. A popular â€Å"buzz† word that has invaded the educational world is Constructivism; even though constructivism is not a new term it does lack a concrete definition. The term constructivism has been used to explain everything from school reform to teaching styles, and most importantly related to a learning theory. As you can imagine the term Constructivism has the potential to develop many misconceptions since it lacks a universal definition. â€Å"Constructivism is an important theory of learning that is used to guide the development of new teaching methods†(Baviskar, Hartle & Whitney, 2009, p.541). The framework of constructivism is built upon the understanding that â€Å"learning is an active process that is student centered in the sense that, with the teachers help, learners select and transform information, construct hypothesis’, and make decisions†(Chrenka, 2001, p.694). It is important to understand that when speaking about constructivism we are referring to a learning theory not teach... ...dent-centered classroom, which allows students to act upon their prior knowledge and learn through hands on experience. If you have ever been involved with or around students with disabilities you may be extremely hesitant to adopt a constructivist view on education. Students with disabilities require a much more structured learning environment in order to be successful. Many education professionals feel that the appropriate learning experience and learning environment for students with disabilities would be one of a more teacher-directed or explicit teaching style. It would not be fair to assume that a constructivist approach to special education would be a complete failure. However, combining multiple constructivist strategies with some explicit teaching strategies you could quite possibly be able to achieve success when teaching students with disabilities.

Common Sense Economics Paper Essay

With the recent developments in the economy there could have not been a better time to pick up this book and read it. I work for a financial institution which had received a good amount of TARP funds. This was followed by media on the company’s allocation of resources for what appears to be a recreational purchase equaling almost the amount of TARP funding. In turn to find out company â€Å"x† had decided that employees will not be receiving a compensation increase this year. After just the first couple of pages I already knew I wanted to dive in to the first part of the book discussing the â€Å"Ten Key Elements of Economics.† This immediately shifted my interest to the first two key elements that: â€Å"Incentives matter† and â€Å"There is no such thing as a free lunch.† There are many thoughts that came to mind while reading along. The incentive for employees was the annual compensation increase. The problem we are facing now is that the labor and productivity supplied are expected to be maintained, while people need to do more with less. As the book explains, it takes time to adjust. However one may argue that the incentive has changed. Now as the economy has shifted and the company has to make budget and staff cuts; the individual incentive has shifted to â€Å"maintaining employment.† Thus there is no longer an increasing financial incentive, with the exception of the existing financial compensation. We must remember that incentives matter, but also that at the same time they can shift based on the factors providing the incentive. The book examines the increase and decrease in gasoline prices. Consumers responded by changing their behavior, consequently shifting incentives. The cutbacks of company â€Å"x† leads right into the element that â€Å"There is no Such Thing as a Free Lunch.† The compensation for the service we provide now is allocated elsewhere. By deciding to stay employed with company â€Å"x† we have employment. Then again if we chose not to remain employed; it will cost us the potential income that could have been earned, so no free lunch. This also makes me consider key element number seven â€Å"People Earn Income by Helping Others.† Nonetheless what happens to the incentive of providing others with valuable goods and services now? With the lack of understanding the shift in incentive I feel the employees will only care about their personal desires. Their interest to improve can result in lower productivity standards, or the search for a new employer. Considering the company standpoint inefficient workers will find other more personally beneficial opportunities. Cited as one of the reasons for reduced product ivity of labor. The employees will provide less valuable service as the company profit will continue to decline. By changing the ways of how the company operates and the rate of compensation it forces employees to focus even more on their self-interest. Now when presented with work, they will find the most efficient way of service. This in turn goes along with economic progress; along with the correct amount of government intervention as discussed in the later part of the book. This can potentially create areas for new employment opportunities, and advancement of the nation as a whole. Any company can bring their numbers back into the black with the correct allocation of the resources and capital. But also with new innovative ways to provide services and goods. With the responsible people in the right positions and the people with a understanding of economic interactions self-interest will lead to a flourishing nation. In conclusion all the above tie into each other as well as the remainder of the book. Unfortunately self-interest with greed and lack of knowledge leads many of us to make imprudent decisions. I knew that incentives matter, but I also understand now that incentives can shift. With the shift in incentives and the self-interest we can grow prosperous. Yet we must understand the interaction and effects of economics as a whole for the small as well as the big picture. The book should be required reading for all that want the privilege of voting. I will be thinking not only of the one side of the economic hand but the other as well, and so should everyone else.

King Kong Remake Analysis Essay

Movies have shown throughout our time that there is a strong underlying theme or message that can be unseen to most. It can be a minuscule significance to some, who focus on the violence and special effects, but once you start looking back at the big picture of certain films, there is so much more. A lot of people tend to focus on what is being filmed instead of how it’s being filmed. The difference is remarkable between the two films King Kong (1933) and the remake of King Kong produced in 2005. The perspective of how the story played out is very different between the two films. On one end, in the original, Kong is portrayed as a violent beast similar to a Godzilla type figure that is a huge threat to civilization. In the remake, it brings a deeper relationship to Kong to humanize his character. The audience can feel his emotions and reactions in a much bigger way to show he might be a powerful beast, but has a big heart too. The difference of how scenes are depicted by each director seems to be complete opposite visions of how the story plays out in each film. It’s interesting to see overtime how the outlook on how man deals with nature has dramatically shifted. Both films underlying messages can be very unnoticed with all the action, adventuring, and amazing special effects going on in the film. This ultimately makes it harder to pick out how power obsessed America was in the original, and how destructive we really are with nature today. It’s very apparent that both movies follow the same story line and plot, but how it is seen through the director’s eyes is very different. In both movies, the humans seem to be very destructive and disrespectful to nature. This is seen a lot more in the remake. Throughout original King Kong you never get that close to Kong to see how he feels and why he feels certain ways. A lot of the scenes with him in it displays very destructive behavior of him killing and tearing things apart. It sets him up as a monstrous figure similar to Godzilla, whereas the other movie personifies Kong as more of a humanized beast that is just looking for love and understanding. The newer film shows this by longer drawn out scenes between Ann and Kong that are almost intimate. Even though Kong cannot talk, the audience can tell how he’s thinking by facial expressions, along with his grunts and roars. It’s understandable the older film wasn’t able to show these certain sides of Kong due to technology and outdated special effects, but they still repeatedly display Kong’s actions and intentions strictly out of violence. In the original Kong, he is captured and put on display in New York City; he breaks out and is immediately enraged by the situation. He begins to run around the city damaging buildings, killing innocent civilians, and causing complete chaos. This again shows how Kong is a problem with society and a huge threat to anyone near him. Putting his image as this out of control beast brings the element that we have to conquer nature to express our true power with weapons and technology. This scene dramatically differs in the new film. Once Kong breaks free of captivity while being put on display on the stage, his focus is not on destroying and causing harm. His motivation is fully on being reunited with his love Ann. When he finally gets back together with her, they show just the two of them playing together in the snow at central park. They are laughing and enjoying themselves in a peaceful setting, showing that Kong means no harm at all. Until all of the sudden police and military forces interrupt the two with bombings, which puts a sense of how we are the evil force in the movie. Putting Kong on display like he was shows how we really do not respect nature. Its seen so much today that we start to treat animals as objects or material things to be used for our pleasure. Whether animals are used for food, or put in an exhibit at a zoo, it’s very apparent the respect for them is fading. A lot can argue that we need these things to survive or for our entertainment but we definitely go overboard. Our country does not think twice to slaughter millions of animals each day just for our benefit. It also wouldn’t be uncommon to see an animal’s head put up on display on a wall similar to a trophy or family picture. This develops a huge consequence because we don’t ever stop to think from the animal’s point of view. It seems to result in a lot of selfish acts by humans who don’t think twice about treating animals this way, which ultimately destroys their true worth of living beings. In the remake of King Kong, Kong is seen as a protector to Ann. He does not let anyone else harm her and never takes his eye off of her. No matter what the situation seems to be, his full focus is on Ann. In the original she doesn’t seem to be his top priority, and seems like he’s more about showing off how strong and powerful he can really be throughout the film. It’s very apparent in the scene where Kong battles two Tyrannosaurus Rex in the jungle on Skull Island. In the original, Ann is sitting off to the side watching from a distance very frightened. Kong continues to battle and barely acknowledges Ann and seems to worry more about his own well-being. There was even a point where she is pinned under a tree during the battle, and Kong doesn’t seem to notice her presence or screams until he’s finished with his fight. It is completely different in the new film. During the whole scene while fighting the Tyrannosaurus Rex, Kong has Ann wrapped up in his hand, and never lets go. He keeps her close to him at all times and makes sure she doesn’t get harmed. It really shows how Kong means well and looks out for her, almost as her guardian as they go around Skull Island. By doing this, the film really shows how Kong ultimately has good intentions with Ann. Seeing how he will defend Ann by any cost, shows that she has a place in Kong’s heart and he really does mean well. Even though Kong shows his loyalty out of violent acts, it’s still very obvious he does this strictly to protect the ones he cares about, bringing the viewers on Kong’s side. It shows how she is a true priority to Kong and his intentions are for the best, making him a more respectable character that doesn’t deserved to be captured. Building Kong’s character up as a protector and intelligent beast really puts the spotlight on us that we are the destructive force. This seems problematic today with all of the poaching and extinctions of our beloved animals, which we are the main contributors to. There are many cases where laws have been established because of people killing animals for clothing or cosmetic purposes. It shows we don’t believe these animals’ lives are worth much. It’s almost every day where you can see a commercial about donating money to help save or adopt some type of animal in need. When in reality, we probably wouldn’t need to do that if we made sacrifices ourselves to help protect our animals and environment. The last scene where Kong is shot down climbing the Empire State building makes arguably the biggest impression on how destructive we really can be to nature. As seen in the original, Kong is a huge problem in society and an untamable beast. This is a big reason why when the military and police forces are called in, they are portrayed as the hero type image saving the day. It shows it in a big way that we won’t be conquered by something like this, and humans can over power nature at the end of the day. However in the remake, it seems to be the complete opposite. Throughout the film the audience grows closer to Kong, and the last thing that is wanted is for him to be harmed. He has shown that he is loyal to Ann and just wants to be loved. That’s why when the airplanes are called in to destroy Kong; it’s almost hard to watch. It’s apparent that Kong did not want to be captured, and we now have to use violent force against him just because us humans can’t respect nature. It really shows how hypocritical we are and selfish the society can be. When captured he was praised and displayed as â€Å"The Eighth Wonder of the World†, but after breaking free, he needs to be killed. Humans never really look back and see how he might be feeling about ripping him out of his home, thinking he is just some type of ignorant animal that is to be put on display for everyone to look at. It definitely symbolizes how power hungry our country is. We are always trying to fix other countries problems and colonize the world when we have enough issues of our own to work out. In the end the military forces and planes bring Kong to his death, which presents another problem of how we use our technology available to take control and overpower situations. A lot of people view Kong as a problem and a threat to society because you see how violent and powerful he can really be. This is true, but that’s the exact reason we do not need to be capturing and taking Kong out of his environment. If we would have just let him be in peace in his own environment where he belonged, there would be no reason for having to kill him, But America’s greed for fame and money overpowers that in this film. It really goes to show how we are the destructive ones that have no respect for nature and it’s ultimately our fault this happened. It’s very vital to the viewers watching to see the significant themes shown throughout the films. It’s surprising how the same story can be displayed but with completely different underlying messages. The newer and drawn out film really enables the audience on how Kong is feeling throughout the film. It makes a huge impact on how you view everything else. Protecting and conserving nature seems to be the least of our priorities and degrades the worth of animal’s lives. Many viewers always look at it as â€Å"Beauty killed the Beast†, when really I believe we killed the beast with our destructive and selfish plans regarding nature’s finest things.

Human Rights1 essays

Human Rights1 essays Human rights are universal, indivisible, and interdependent. Human rights are what make us human. When we speak of the right to life, or development, or to dissent and diversity, we are speaking of tolerance. Tolerance will ensure all freedoms. Without it, we can be certain of none. The raging ethnic cleansing in Kosho is an example of intolerance. The Serbians will not tolerate the Albanians at any cost. They are forcing them from their homes, turning the streets into killing fields. This civil war seems unstoppable because of the intolerance of one race against another. No respect for individual rights, basic human rights. Another example is right in our own back yard. I am speaking of hate crimes, which plague our society. They are no different today than centuries ago when slavery was allowed. One race against another. One religion against another, it is all the same. Hate is the opposite of tolerance. We can only live together through an expression of tolerance of the differences each of us brings into this world. We should embrace the differences and share the differences. For this is how we learn, through each others differences. Tolerance in all cultures is the basis of peace and progress. Our country was founded on the basic idea that all man and women are created equal with liberty and justice for all. We must respect and preserve the rights of all, for when the rights of one is threatened the rights of all are diminished. I would like to leave you with this story to ponder. In Germany, they came for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me and by that time no one was left to speak up. Remember tolerance and mercy have always and in all cultures been ideals of government rul...

Biography of Max Weber

Biography of Max Weber Max Weber was born in Erfurt, Prussia (present-day Germany) on April 21, 1864. He is considered one of the three founding fathers of sociology, alongside Karl Marx, and Emile Durkheim. His text The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism was considered a founding text in sociology. Early Life and Education Weber’s father was greatly involved in public life and so his home was constantly immersed in both politics and academia. Weber and his brother thrived in this intellectual atmosphere. In 1882, he enrolled at the University of Heidelberg, but after two years left to fulfill his year of military service at Strassburg. After his release from the military, Weber finished his studies at the University of Berlin, earning his doctorate in 1889 and joining the University of Berlin’s faculty, lecturing and consulting for the government. Career and Later Life In 1894, Weber was appointed a professor of economics at the University of Freiburg and then was granted the same position at the University of Heidelberg in 1896. His research at the time focused mainly on economics and legal history. After Weber’s father died in 1897, two months after a severe quarrel that was never resolved. Weber became prone to depression, nervousness, and insomnia, making it difficult for him to fulfill his duties as a professor. He was thus forced to reduce his teaching and eventually left in the fall of 1899. For five years he was intermittently institutionalized, suffering sudden relapses after efforts to break such cycles by traveling. He finally resigned his professorship in late 1903. Also in 1903, Weber became the associate editor of the Archives for Social Science and Social Welfare where his interests lied in more fundamental issues of social sciences. Soon Weber began to publish some of his papers in this journal, most notably his essay The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, which became his most famous work and was later published as a book. In 1909, Weber co-founded the German Sociological Association and served as its first treasurer. He resigned in 1912, however, and unsuccessfully tried to organize a left-wing political party to combine social-democrats and liberals. At the outbreak of World War I, Weber, aged 50, volunteered for service and was appointed as a reserve officer and put in charge of organizing the army hospitals in Heidelberg, a role he fulfilled until the end of 1915. Webers most powerful impact on his contemporaries came in the last years of his life, when, from 1916 to 1918, he argued powerfully against Germanys annexationist war goals and in favor of a strengthened parliament. After assisting in the drafting of the new constitution and the founding of the German Democratic Party, Weber became frustrated with politics and resumed teaching at the University of Vienna. He then taught at the University of Munich. Weber died on June 14, 1920. Major Publications The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1904)The City (1912)The Sociology of Religion (1922)General Economic History (1923)The Theory of Social and Economic Organization (1925) Sources: Max Weber. (2011). Biography.com. biography.com/articles/Max-Weber-9526066Johnson, A. (1995). The Blackwell Dictionary of Sociology. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishers.

Virgils Aeneid Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Virgils Aeneid - Essay Example Believed to have been written circa 20 BC, this rhapsody illustrates the virtues of piety and duty on part of the hero. The grand scale and difficulty of the adventure of Aeneas provides several moments of examination of his virtuous qualities. In his mission to find the prophesied place where he is to build a new Troy, he is accompanied by his father, his baby son Iulus and a group of loyal companions. One could liken the sense of duty of Aeneus to that of Augustus. This is particularly true with respect to the filial piety shown by Aeneas, as illustrated by â€Å"his care for and deference towards his aged father Anchises.† (Whitehorne, 2005, p.1) The epitome of Aeneas’ sense of duty is the scene where he leaves the destroyed city of Troy by carrying his father on his back. After his father’s death, Aeneas will pray to the Gods to invoke divine honors for the deceased soul – an act reminiscent of Octavia appeasing the departed soul of his father Julius C aesar after the completion of the civil war. Aeneas’ sense of duty is also witnesses in his relationship toward his son Julus. For example, during the funeral games for Anchises, Aeneas leads the boys’ equestrian event in the first celebration of the Lusus Troiae, the Game of Troy. The death of his father is a crucial event in the moral development of Aeneas, whose sense of responsibility and resoluteness in accomplishing his objectives increases after the event. His sense of piety and duty thus undergoes a transformation for the good. For example, during the later half of the poem, we witness how Aeneas is brave and willing â€Å"to put duty before his own feelings, however great the cost personally as when he obeys the gods and leaves Dido† (Whitehorne, 2005, p.1). The view that Aeneid is a political poem is given credence by the details of his life and adventure. For example, Aeneid illustrates Aeneas’ ability as a politician and â€Å"a maker of alli ances as well as his personal valor (and vengeful ruthlessness) which we see come to the fore in the second half of the Aeneid. There is his foundation of cities and his scrupulous observance of religious rituals.† (Whitehorne, 2005, p1) Since in Ancient Rome, the message and moral content of classic literary works were respected by the ruling elite, the subject was used as a vehicle for politics and propaganda. For example, â€Å"The subject furnished political advantages. The legend unfolded in the Aeneid provided justification for Rome’s complex relationship with the Hellenic world, which involved military and political domination coupled with a certain cultural dependency. Representing Rome as a resurgence of a Troy destroyed by the Greeks gave the Roman conquest of Greece the coloring of legitimate revenge. Virgil did not miss the opportunity to put into the mouth of Jupiter, in a lengthy prophecy addressed to Venus, a proclamation that Rome would destroy the most renowned cities of Greece, which were responsible for the fall of Troy† (Brisson, 1989, p.22) Moreover, the view that the Aeneid has propagandist elements in it is learnt from how its author, Virgil, panders and praises Augustus, the then emperor of Rome. In his book Warrior Politics: Why Leadership Demands a Pagan Ethos, author Robert Kaplan criticizes Virgil for his assumed role as an Augustan panegyrist. But this characterization of the author and his work is contested as it overlooks centuries of critical comment on Virgil’s works, questioning his â€Å"role as a state-sponsored propagandist†. (Harper, 2008, p.117) To narrow down Virgil to a mere propagandist and to equate his work to hyperbole

Changes in Firm's Capital Structure add Shareholder Value Research Paper

Changes in Firm's Capital Structure add Shareholder Value - Research Paper Example The higher the level of debt the higher the level of risk. But nevertheless the higher the level of risk the higher the possible returns on a given level of investment. Shareholder value comes from the demand for and supply of company shares. If the management of the company were to decide in favor of more equity issues, then depending on the demand for the company shares the company value would rise or fall. With that, the shareholder value also would rise or fall. A risk is inevitably associated with the value of the firm viz. managers or agents always prefer a higher level of debt because it increases the value of the firm or its assets. Indeed the risk also increases though from the viewpoint of the manager it’s irrelevant because equity issues would glut the market with company shares and bring down the value of the company. As a result, the existing shareholders cannot be happier. They would get a windfall if they sold their shares now. Similarly when more debt is issued the company becomes entitled to more tax benefits. That, in turn, increases the value of the firm and thereby the shareholder value. The capital market structure of the firm can be examined with reference to a number of theories. The Modigliani-Miller Theorem is the earliest of such theories to consider the relevance of capital structure to determine the value of a firm. In recent times these theoretical constructs have been developed in line with an ever increasing tendency to consider the leverage issue of the company. Leveraging by managers to achieve exclusive personal goals is nothing new. In fact, it’s the conflict of interests between the principals or owners (or shareholders) and the agents (or managers) that have thrust the issue of leverage to the fore. In other words, the complex issues revolving around the capital structure of the firm are basically influenced by this conflict in which managers tend to have more information about the probable outcomes of future investments.