Drugs in Schools Essay

It is said that the majority of high school students have witnessed illegal drugs being used in their schools, illegal drugs being sold, illegal drugs in the possession of students, students high on drugs and students that are drunk. Parents think that until they get rid the schools of drugs, students will not bring good grades and achieve high marks. In schools in Newfoundland and Labrador, drugs are a huge issue. Smoking weed has become as regular as smoking a cigarette. The youth are even selling marijuana amongst themselves. All kinds of drugs are being used such as crystal meth, pot and ecstasy. In America, 60% of high school students and 30% or middle school students returned to school this year where illegal drugs are used, kept and sold. Many reports found that drug abuse will increase and will add $41 billion to the cost of elementary and secondary education this year for class disruption and violence, special education and tutoring. Parents say that drugs have infested schools and threatened students and their ability to learn and develop their talents. If parents would feel strongly about drugs in schools, we would have drug-free schools. It seems that more and more high school students are using drugs every year. Mostly, 10.5% of the youth that come for treatment are kids who started using drugs before the age of eleven. The media says that it is the parents, school board and the authorities to be held responsible for this because they never asked for drug-free schools.

I Dont Play Golf (An Inspector Calls) Essays

I Dont Play Golf (An Inspector Calls) Essays I Dont Play Golf (An Inspector Calls) Paper I Dont Play Golf (An Inspector Calls) Paper Inspector Goole knocks on the door just when Arthur Birling is making a speech to the rest of the family about how a man has to make his own way so long as he does that he wont come to much harm. He also dismissively mentions that by the way some of these cranks talk and write now, youd think everybody has to look after everybody else. I feel that the reason the Inspector calls at that specific time is to ultimately prove Birling wrong, and try to show him that we are responsible for each other in this world, and how you cannot escape the fact that what goes around, comes around. Birling is quite outraged at the fact that the Inspector has rudely  interrupted their dinner party, and he constantly attempts to tackle  the Inspector with petty little comments: I ought to warn you that  [Colonel Roberts] is an old friend of mine, and that I see him fairly  frequently. We play golf together. Birling continually tries to  intimidate him by mentioning his apparent authority, and patronises  the Inspector look here, Inspector. I consider this uncalled-for  and officious. Ive half a mind to report you. Pompous personality shines through, but the Inspector seems to take it in his stride and merely brushes off the comments that Birling throws at him: I dont play golf. I feel that Priestley decided to portray Arthur Birling as taking the Inspectors arrival quite badly to demonstrate just how shallow and thick-skinned society can be, and how we cannot easily accept our mistakes. The Inspector is the one in the play who brings us back down to Earth and makes us realise that. As well as being the messenger, Inspector Goole is also the strongest character in the play, maintaining complete control of the situation at hand and demonstrating his authority frequently. Its not just his dialect that depicts this, but also his overall persona, which is shown through the stage directions he creates at once an impression of massiveness, solidity and purposefulness, and it comes across to the audience and reader in an array of different ways. For example, the stage directions repeatedly show the Inspector cutting through massively, cutting in massively, massively taking charge, with authority and taking charge, masterfully. This demonstrates to both the audience and reader that the Inspector has the authority to interrupt people without reason, and take charge of the conversation. He dominates the other characters, even Mr and Mrs Birling, who are used to commanding and others obeying: (As Birling tries to protest, turns on him) Dont stammer and yammer at me again, man. Im losing all patience with you people. After this outburst, Mrs Birling is rather cowed. Aside from his rather terrifying outbursts, the Inspector remains calm and collected throughout the play, though he sometimes speaks coolly and imperturbably. The language he uses is often blunt and sometimes deliberately harsh so as to gain a reaction from the Birlings, reader and audience: Two hours ago a young woman died in the Infirmary. Shed been taken there this afternoon because shed swallowed a lot of disinfectant. Burnt her inside out, of course. This kind of emotive  language is sure to trigger signs of emotion in the Birlings, and once  again illustrates the effect the Inspector is having on the family   once the initial shock has seeped in, the Birlings are too stunned to  deny anything about their involvement with Eva Smith/Daisy Renton, although they did frequently dismiss any knowledge they had about the girl as just coincidence.  However, I felt the Inspector overcame these problems with ease.  The Birlings, especially Mrs Birling, refuse to accept responsibility  for Evas death Im sorry she should have come to such a horrible  end. But I accept no blame for it at all. Realising that she will not  remove herself from this train of thought, the Inspector cleverly  turns the tables on Mrs Birling, luring her into a trap that will  consequently land her son into one of his own: Secondly, I blame the young man who was the father of the child she was going to have.  This, of course, is Eric Birling. Unaware of this, Mrs Birling insists  that the Inspector deals with him very severely, and is glad to  hear it when he grimly agrees with her. When it comes to light that  it is in fact her son who is to blame, Mrs Birling is stunned and  the Inspector has slyly incorporated her into the grisly tale, too. Despite her mothers ignorance, Sheila Birling is perhaps the most  sympathetic of the family. A perceptive character, she is the first to  realise that the Inspector is no ordinary policeman, and that he has  an almost supernatural knowledge: Why you fool he knows. Of  course he knows. And I hate to think how much he knows that we dont know yet. Similarly, she is the first to realise that the father of Evas baby is none other than Eric, and tries to get her mother to  stop insisting that he should be held responsible: (With sudden alarm) Mother stop stop! At the beginning of the play, Sheila is perceived as a character who  is quite contented with her life, and has no reason to worry. However, when the Inspector arrives, her opinions start to change. Sheila regards the Inspector differently from the others she stares at [Inspector Goole] wonderingly and dubiously. She begs her mother not to patronise him You mustnt try to build up a kind of wall between us and that girl as she knows that the Inspector will break it down. She warns her mother He hasnt started on you yet, realising that they are all going to be treated in the same way. Her mood becomes slightly hysterical, also; No, hes giving us the rope so that well hang ourselves. When Arthur Birling remarks that Inspector did not come to talk to me about my responsibilities, Sheila responds, Lets hope not. Though Im beginning to wonder. She seems to be the only one in the family to perceive that the Inspector is not just a police inspector, but a spiritual being or emissary with a  moral mission to punish selfish behaviour among the rich and shallow -in this case, the Birlings. The Inspectors dialogue also leaves quite an impression on the  family, audience and reader especially his final speech. This is the  most important remark the Inspector makes in the entire play, as it  sticks in the minds of everybody, and ultimately sums up his role in  the production.  Priestley has used a lot of emotive language in this specific passage,  such as hopes, fears, suffering, happiness, blood and  anguish. In turn, this causes the Inspectors speech to be quite  blunt, as the sentences that these words are woven into are short,  abrupt and straight to the point mirroring the Inspectors duration  at the Birlings residence. As well as this, the Inspectors speech  makes good use of the word we, uniting the Birlings with the people that they feel they are superior to poor people. By the way that the Inspector declares we are members of one body. We are responsible for each other, he makes clever use of the word are, which in turn finalises the idea that we are members of one body, and we are responsible for one another. It is also contradictory to a section of one of Arthur Birlings speeches: By the way some of these cranks talk and write now, youd think everybody has to look after everybody else which is the complete opposite to what the Inspector is announcing. The passage also anticipates World War One, in the sense that at the very end, the Inspector says if men will not learn that lesson, they will be taught it in fire and blood and anguish this, to the Birlings, is a prophetic statement, but the reader and audience are aware of it as it has already come to pass. To emphasise that idea,  the Inspector lengthens the list of words he mentions; instead of just using a comma between fire and blood, he chooses to use and, which sensationalises the comment and makes it sound somewhat more important than if he had just normally listed those specific words.

Pistis in Classical Rhetoric

Pistis in Classical Rhetoric In classical rhetoric, pistis can mean  proof, belief, or state of mind. Pisteis (in the sense of means of persuasion) are classified by Aristotle into two categories: artless proofs (pisteis atechnoi), that is, those that are not provided by the speaker but are pre-existing, and artistic proofs (pisteis entechnoi), that is, those that are created by the speaker.A Companion to Greek Rhetoric, 2010 Etymology: From the Greek, faith Observations P. RollinsonThe opening [of Aristotles Rhetoric] defines rhetoric as the counterpart of dialectic, which seeks not to persuade but to find the appropriate means of persuasion in any given situation (1.1.1-4 and 1.2.1). These means are to be found in various kinds of proof or conviction (pistis). . . . Proofs are of two kinds: inartificial (not involving rhetorical art- e.g., in forensic [judicial] rhetoric: laws, witnesses, contracts, torture, and oaths) and artificial [artistic] (involving the art of rhetoric).Daniel BenderOne aim of speech within a Western rhetorical tradition is to produce pistis (belief), which will, in turn, produce consensus. A student trained to imitate models, to speak in different ways, could conform language and reasoning to the capacities of different audiences, and thus create that consubstantiality between speaker and audience, the rhetorically created scene of community.William M. A. GrimaldiPistis is used to represent the state of mind, namely, convict ion or belief, at which the auditor arrives when the correctly chosen aspects of the subject-matter are placed before him in an effective manner. . . .In its second meaning, pistis is the word used for a methodological technique . . .. In this sense, pistis means the logical instrument used by the mind to marshal the material into a reasoning process. It is a method which gives the matter a logical form, so to speak, and thus produces that state of mind in the auditor which is called belief, pistis. . . . It is this meaning of pistis which is applicable primarily to enthymeme, but also to paradeigma (example). For in rhetoric enthymeme (the process of deduction) and paradeigma (the inductive process) are the logical instruments which one is to use in constructing argumentation directed toward krisis, or judgment, on the part of another.

Blog Coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3500 words - 1

Blog - Coursework Example The effect of this is that global polity and affairs were modified to integrate and accept all peoples through the acceptance of human rights. This has led to the creation of laws that protect the minorities and allows people of all backgrounds to operate within societies. This has led to the creation of multicultural and multiracial societies around the world Naturally, diverse societies mean diverse markets. And the implication is that a bank will be serving customers of diverse backgrounds. Thus, diverse teams used in the banking sector implies that consumers are not going to be of one single background. Typically, a bank in London will serve not only Anglo-Saxon customers including English, Irish, Scot and Welsh customers. In the 21st Century, there are customers with diverse origins including Indians, Arabs, Afro-Caribbean, Chinese, Africans and a wide diversity of people. There is therefore the chance and opportunity for a diverse team to produce better results through the operation of a service that considers and integrates all people and all communities. Thus, in terms of marketing and income generation, diverse teams have a much better chance of surviving and producing optimum results ahead of non-diverse teams. In the technical sense, diversity in teams involve the presentation of people from diverse occupation backgrounds. This involves people who have different expertise and different competencies. Due to this, a leader is likely to have a pool of different competencies and different thinkers. This allows the team to get a wide range of people who can add up to a rich and a diverse group of conversations to deal with matters in a positive sense and manner. A common problem in the banking sector is what the experts term groupthink. Groupthink is defined by Johnson and Scholes (2012) as a situation whereby all group members tilt towards a given solution and members fail to think and analyse things critically before giving a decision. As

Stress Lab Report Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Stress - Lab Report Example Various risk factors are found to be associated with the job-related stress which may act independently or in amalgamation, including (Risk factors for work-related stress, n.d.)- A. Work Demands- As every individual possesses a limited capacity for work, exceeding these confines may generate job-related stress such as time pressure, getting insufficient time to accomplish tough tasks, greater mental tasks necessitating decision-making or requiring concentration. Monotonous work may generate stress due to unutilized skills or work that demands overtime or taking work home or erratic shift rosters disturbing personal life. B. Low levels of control- Poor control over the situation, lack of autonomy, needless inspection and burdened responsibilities with diminutive authority may generate stress. In some cases individual is also responsible for inadequately managing the work or not accomplishing the task on time due to poor control over the work may generate stress. C. Poor support from supervisors and co-workers- In certain cases the workers may not feel adequate transparency to talk to the supervisors regarding the work issues or the administration is unable to fix the issue may generate stress at work place. ... E. Poorly managed relationships- Co-workers may act as a support or a source of stress. Positive and negative relationship may generate conflict which could serve as an momentum or drive for betterment or it may generate strain. F. Low level of recognition and reward- Appreciation is a way of communication which is an expected of every person who is performing a task, this generates stimulus for diligence. On the contrary, no recognition of the work generates stress and frustration. G. Poorly managed change- Work condition may alter; poor management of uncertainties may generate stress. H. Organizational Justice- Evenhandedness is highly desirable in the organization, this not only generates healthy working environment but also protect the precipitation of stress in individuals. Organizational biases, bullying and harassment may culminate into generation of stress. To promote growth and development of the organization it is essential that both employee and employer work in co-ordinat ion to minimize stress at work-place. The employee must take the responsibility to be physically and mentally well, should avoid snags and negative approaches and by establishing better communication with the management and co-workers (Stress at work: Tips to Reduce and Mange Job and Workplace Stress, n.d.). The employer on the other hand must provide the employees with maximum control over their jobs, maintaining clear communication about important facts, by talking about the goals of the company, customer demands, company's efforts and directives, the supervisors must be able to bring out the best in sub-ordinates, encouraging open discussions and free talks, providing the employees with the freedom to design their job in a

Gp 3 managing organizational change Research Paper

Gp 3 managing organizational change - Research Paper Example Shared’ in which the members will be asked to form the teams and in each team there will be a note taker who will write the common traits of the team members and then the unique traits of the individuals (Unique and Shared). This activity will help each team member to understand the behavior of entire team to ease and open the intra-group communication and they will learn to manage the conflicts. Johari Window is used to create open communication by sharing information of each other to build trust and then attain feedback for further improvement (The Johari Window). Day 2 will be suitable for Johari window introduction as the day is dedicated to setting themes and priorities. Once the team members are fluently communicative with each other, they can easily work on priorities and themes. Unique and Shared - Icebreakers, Ice Breakers, Ice Breaker Games. (n.d.).Icebreakers, Ice Breakers, Ice Breaker Games. Retrieved May 17, 2014, from

Analysis Of Giddens On Agency And Structure Sociology Essay

Analysis Of Giddens On Agency And Structure Sociology Essay Anthony Giddens, a famous writer on society, had developed his thoughts in his books year after year. His book titled, Constitution of Society, written in the year 1986, has leaded him far ahead to achieve his goals. Each of the chapter, in this book; has covered the agency and structure theory and proposes good statements (Giddens, 1986). The author has clearly described what he means with the agency term. He has also given due focus on time and the social actions for space. The discussion on the ways of handling different norms by the people, and the social constraints that exists in the society, are done as well. In addition, he uses empirical research in his book to elaborate further the aspects associated with structure and agency within the society. The text thus discusses the routine practice, which becomes a social act as a principle of duality for the agency- structure relationship. It aims to understand what the strength areas covered in the text is. Additionally, weaker sections are also given consideration. Thus, the report here discusses about various aspects of relationship that exists between agency and structure. The notion of duality by the author is considered too, with due focus on the book Constitution of Society, by Giddens. The notion of studies done to relate the two terms is also covered within the scope of this report. Furthermore, the researchers involved to explore the term are also discussed hereon. This helps in understanding the extent to which both the terms are integrated in this society. These all have helped to reach to certain outcomes of the report at the end. Discussion Agency and structure have been termed as indispensible parts in the social context. These terms are required to relate at one or the other instance. Agency is termed as the capability of individuals to generate wide variety of powers in causal term, while the structure is the set of rules and regulations existing within the society (Frohlich et al., 2001). The relationship between these two instances is yet to explore. Some of the researchers stand in the point, that the two terms inter- relate in themselves, while others consider these as different terms. There does not exist, any discussion of relationship between structure and agency in real terms (Macintyre, 1997; Frohlich et al., 2002) according to some of the researchers. While others state that, these structure and agency are considered as co- dependent and recursive in nature (Nussbaum and Sen, 1993; Sen, 1992). This clearly demonstrates how conflicting the terms are in social context. There is no generalized thought in this arena, instead complete satisfaction and dissatisfaction is noted for the question at hand. This needs to be further explored to understand the concepts associated with the terms. There are different contexts, which integrates the agency and structure. Structural forces are the main determinants for the relationship between agency and structure (Williams, 2003). Thus, the structural forces shall be considered in discussion to understand the concept associated with the terms. This might also help in exploring the text by Giddens in a better manner. Although, in his writings, the discussion of structural forces is missed, he has attempted to use time and geography as basic parameters in his studies. There are number of authors who studied about the relationship of agency and structure (Musolf, 2003; Callinicos, 2004), however the work done by Giddens is important to note in his books such as Constitution of the Society (1986). Most of the writers believed that agency and structure are different terms; however, Giddens consider them as similar. Giddens consider these two as different ways to look one thing. Researchers contribute to routine activities, i.e. those that take place in a similar manner for continuation. Routine activities are considered as social for the organization, as these activities occur in regular fashion. This regular fashion further becomes the set of rules for the society. These rules act as the social orders for an organization. Giddens also consider that time and space results into organizing us in a better manner. Time and place are being considered as important aspects not only for the agency but also for the structure of society. The author considers the time as an aspect, which affects the routine practices. Proper time management is helpful in attaining good routine activities. Thus, author lays focus on right use of time to obtain maximum outcomes. In case one wishes to generate results, there is the need to perform with dual nature. The collaborated approach of using structure and agency is required at such instances. This would entail proper use of time management technique to minimize the wastage of social time. The author thus lays importance on the time. Time is the aspect that demonstrates routine activities. Time is an indispensible part for ones life. He considers people to utilize properly the daily schedule, to make optimal use of time. In case one does not use time in a proper manner, it mi ght result in losses of ones routine plan. Giddens also discussed about the consequences attached with improper use of time management. In case, one does not use the time in a proper manner, it affects the routine activities of an individual. However, if one wishes to work on his knowledge, he can act well in this arena. This affects the agency structure by the mismatch that generates due to lack of control on structure concerned of an entity. For the society to develop with its full potential, it shall discuss the relation between structure and agency (Hay and Wincott, 1998). This shall not be ignored. Giddens had worked to elaborate the point further. However, his writings were not able to describe clearly the point due to lack of clarity in his thought process. His attempt to contribute to agency structure relationship was though worth noting, but for a new reader, it becomes a point of confusion. Giddens, in his book named as Constitution of Society, had not given any clear definition of the terms considered in his writings. The content seems tough to be understood by a reader who has not gone through the previous writings of the author. Thus, it necessitates the basic concept to be clarified, before going through the book. The relation between agency and structure is always at perennial (6). It is not a one-time process. The author thus attempted to describe the relationship considering the time-geography too. This was in line with the time management of the author. This demonstrates the importance of time, and its relation to the geographic unit. The ways geographical parameters change with time are also discussed. Additionally, the variation of structure and agency with different time and geographic locations is considered in the study as well. This relationship between agency and structure is also well studied by researchers such as Rothstein and Hall (1993), Thelen, and Steinmo (1992). This is the reason, many researchers attempted to explore the relationship. However, the complexity associated with them in social context has acted as a hurdle to describe the two characteristics. Giddens further followed the tradition in his writings. He was unable to thoroughly explore the relationship between the two terms. The agency and structure were not thoroughly discussed in his writings. The discussion on duality of these terms was there though; the basic concepts associated with them were not described. Thus, on looking other side of the coin, we can see that the book of Giddens lacks in clearly describing the duality and social practice concept. It does not describe the ways in which practices are constituted, the way in which it relates social system etc. The book also misses practice concept, which is important to attain sust ainable analysis. Thus, the book is tough to understand for someone, who has not read previous books of the author. It directly summarizes the duality structure for understanding the agency- structure relationship. This way, he created a sort of confusion situation in the minds of readers who have not read his previous writings. For an individual to understand the text by Giddens it becomes mandatory to understand the basic concepts associated with the topic; else, it would become tough for them to understand the discussion done in his writings. The authors lacks in discussing the reason, why people want certain things. It just discusses the wants of people. The subject here is constituted in a social manner. There is also the discussion laid that wants arise from the needs, which are related to ontological security. The theory discusses the way individuals can achieve proper results using the agents. Thus, the concept of agency- structure relationship has always been a tough task. It is with not only Giddens, but also the researchers such as Dahlgren and Whitehead (1991) had failed to establish a relationship between these two characteristics of society in the daily life of the world. There is thus the need to understand the basic concepts in hand. The social context, with reference to time is to be understood at initial stages. This would help in creating a framework for the point at hand, and the integration of these two characteristics of society will be done in a better manner. The research in todays life is exploring further the structure and relationship and the behavioural pattern (Williams, 1995). These further explorations are expected to help the society in analyzing these duality and routine practices in the right manner. There would be lack of clarity, and the outcomes will be with a stronger research background. Thus, the main point of confusion exists to know the re lationship between structure and agency (Gerhardt, 1979), which if explored by the researchers, can lead to attain certain outcomes, which would help us in further understanding the concept at hand. This would entail the need to use proper time management techniques. The weak background of Giddens shall not be over- focused, but shall be given an opportunity of further exploration using the basic concepts at hand, to reach to the outcomes. This would help us to attain the results at a greater pace, and with clear outcomes, which does not have conflicting situations, as at present. Conclusion On considering the notion of duality and the social practice of relationship between agency and structure, we have come up with some important findings. We can interpret that the writings of Giddens are quite conflicting at certain instances. These act as the constraining and enabling at the same time. At certain instances, Giddens talk about the practical aspect of life. He considers time as real and factual to work out on the life. However, at other instances assumptions are encouraged by the author. This raises the problem of lack of clarity in his thought process. Additionally, the complexity involved with the writings of Giddens, enforce one to go through the basic concepts, prior to reading the text under review. Thus, there was a mixed approach obtained. At some instances, it was noted that the structure and agency are well integrated with each other, while at others there was noted the lack of control and dependency of one characteristic on the other. This mixed approach has resulted in further elaboration of the associated concepts, which would help in understanding the point. Else, it would be tough to understand this text in hand, with lack of control over the text and lack of clarity by the author. The basic concepts can however be of great help in understanding the concept at hand, and the associated relationship. Thus, overall the text was a good collection of data, but lacks clarity and mandates the reader to go through basic concepts, prior to going through the text at hand. This way, one would be able to understand the associated characteristics in a better manner.