Single parents in the military Article Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Single parents in the military - Article Example The discussion in this paper is mainly about single parents, but not in the general population, the main focus would be the single parents in the military. The United States Army consists of combat, and aviation and water transport service forces (Lawrence, 2002). It is well-ordered, trained and well-equipped in order to be capable of combating on land. It has two major responsibilities and they are (1) to prepare the land forces for war, and (2) expand the peacetime components needed by the army to fulfill the war’s needs. In the early 1990s, the number or single parents in the military increased (Zellman, Johansen, Meredith, & Selvin, 1992). Civilian single parents already encounter huge problems with their children that leads to work disruptions, thus, these problems is also likely to occur to single parents in the military as they work with longer and unforeseen hours. In 1992, single custodial parents in the military reached a number or 66,000 and this caused a slight problem as not all of them were able to leave for the Persian Gulf War (Sagawa & Campbell, 1992). The Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces, then, asked the Pentagon to review their policies regarding deployment of military personnel. The single parents in the military are not only the ones having the said dilemmas; there were also the dual military families or those whose parents are both in the military. In the early 1990s, 2.9% of the active duty personnel are dual military families (Zellman et al. , 1992). Along with single parents, they composed 7% of the active duty armed forces and were also hindered to be deployed for the Persian Gulf War due to their incapability of leaving their family behind. The Commission proposed not to allow single parents and dual military families to be deployed for the sake of their children (Sagawa & Campbell, 1992). This paper would focus on answering the problem of how

Compare the portrayal of Clytaemnestra in both Aeschylus Essay Example for Free

Compare the portrayal of Clytaemnestra in both Aeschylus Essay Compare the portrayal of Clytaemnestra in both Aeschylus Agamemnon and Euripides Electra. Which portrayal do you think is more effective and why?  The character of Clytaemnestra is portrayed very differently in both Aeschylus Agamemnon and Euripides Electra. In Agamemnon, we see a very strong female ruler, who is completely absorbed by her passion for vengeance, whereas the figure in Electra is far more maternal, and shows a concern for her family and reputation, which was not apparent in Aeschylus play. This subdued version of Clytaemnestra shows a stark contrast to the fierce and dominant character in Agamemnon, however both characters remain fascinating for different reasons. The Clytaemnestra of Agamemnon seems to be fearless of retribution, with an infallible belief in her own righteousness; I have no fear that his avengers tread shall shake this house. In Electra, however, we see a very different character, humbled over the years, and afraid of Orestes, Im terrifiedthey say he is full of anger for his fathers death. These different reactions to the same topic emphasise how greatly the character of Clytaemnestra differs in each play, from the meek and subdued housewife of Electra, to the self-assured and confident murderess of Agamemnon. One explanation for the changes in character of Clytaemnestra in these plays is the timescale in which they are set. The events in Electra happen several years after those in Agamemnon, and the more mature and calmer Clytaemnestra we see portrayed in Euripides play could be due to the effect of time on her, and the fact that she has had several years in which to reflect upon her actions and realise the full extent of the crimes that she committed against her husband. In Electra, Clytaemnestra states how bitterly I regret it now with regards to the murder she has committed, showing that she has indeed been thinking about the events of the past and repents her actions. This Clytaemnestra is very subdued in comparison to the character portrayed by Aeschylus, and although we can see some evidence of the passion and raw energy that made the character so fascinating in Agamemnon, for instance when she attempts to justify her murder of Agamemnon to her daughter; why should he not die? it is clear in Electra that Clytaemnestra is to take second stage to her daughter in regards to unhindered fury and a lust for vengeance. This older, wiser Clytaemnestra still remains crucial to the plot, but not as a central character, and is merely a shadow of her former self, the confident, powerful creature who dictated the action of Aeschylus play. The style of the two playwrights is a notable difference in the two plays, and the representation of Clytaemnestra varies greatly due to this. Euripides, the more modern o the two tragedists, tended to use sophistic arguments to confound the audiences expectations of a character. With Clytaemnestra, for instance, he decided to move away from her monstrous image the audience would have expected after plays such as Agamemnon, and instead portrayed her as a gentler, maternal figure. This technique was enhanced by the fact that we do not see Clytaemnestra until the second half of the play; only hear about her from Electra. The image portrayed by this character is similar to the one portrayed in Agamemnon, so much so as the audience can wonder whether Euripides is intentionally parodying this version of events, as he had done earlier in the play with the recognition scene, a clear parody of The Libation Bearers. Aeschylus, a far more traditional playwright, portrays Clytaemnestra in her c lassic style, as the murderess of her own husband. This portrayal is, however, somewhat sympathetic towards Clytaemnestra, and we can feel some compassion towards her, although this does not excuse her actions. Aeschylus gave the audience a clear moral standpoint in his tragedies, and they are aware through both the use of the chorus, and the play itself, whose side to be on, from a moral perspective. Euripides on the other hand, tended to be deliberately ambiguous, and his treatment of Clytaemnestra is typical of this. The two sides of the woman that are exposed in this play; the ruthless killer of Agamemnon, as seen through the eyes of Electra, and the reformed wife of Aegisthus, as is later portrayed. This use of sophistic techniques in order to confound the audiences expectations is common in the plays of Euripides, and is particularly effective in this portrayal of such a fascinating woman. The fact that Clytaemnestra is the central character in Agamemnon yet only plays a small part in Euripides Electra also accounts for several differences in her character. The Clytaemnestra in Agamemnon appears almost constantly throughout the play, and through this we can see the development of her character from the strong wife looking after her husbands estate whilst he is at war: Our king and leader absentour duty pays his due observance to his wife, to the violent mistress who murders her husband without remorse at the end of the play: caught by the ruthless falsehood of a wife. Aeschylus is able to develop his character over a far greater stretch of time than Euripides as, in Electra, Clytaemnestra only appears in one scene. The fact that Clytaemnestra is the main protagonist in Agamemnon allows us to examine her character to a far greater extent, enabling us to see how obsessed she has become with the idea of vengeance, and the murder of her husband: His death the work of my right hand, whose craftsmanship Justice acknowledges. In Electra, the character of Clytaemnestra is not given as much time to develop, and we have to make assumptions on her based on the short dialogue between her and Electra.

Problems With Profit Maximization Strategy Finance Essay

Problems With Profit Maximization Strategy Finance Essay Shareholder Value is a financial term which is the final measure to see whether the company is successful in enriching its shareholders or not. We have tried to find the difference between shareholder and the owner wealth and have concluded that shareholder wealth is the supreme point of contention for any organization as in the long term it will benefit both owner and shareholder. Hence, both of them will be content. We first look at why shareholder value maximization should be the primary goal of any organization. Then, we look why there is divergence of the organization with the objective of shareholder wealth maximization. Then, we looked at various agency problems that come due to this divergence. Then, we gave strategies on how managers can increase shareholder wealth. At the end, we concluded with the new concept of stakeholder wealth maximization and explained its utility. Who owns any organization which is listed in share market, obviously, the Shareholders. These are those individuals who have bought stocks of the company which shows their ownership of the company. Even if business is a person firm, he is the shareholder. If the Business is big, the board of directors are made up of people who own the right by owning the majority of shares. Since, the shareholder own the company, they are entitled to maximum value generation from the money they have invested (Ahlstrom 2010, pp 11-24). In old times, the traditional approach of companies was to maximize the owners profit, but there were multiple limitations like:- Any firm has multiple targets other than maximizing shareholder wealth. These can be like achieving higher market share, huge sales growth, more stable market position. The traditional approach didnt consider all of these issues. Shareholder Wealth Maximization has multiple things to be looked into like Short term, Medium term and Long term Shareholder Wealth Maximization Shareholder Wealth Maximization over a period of time. The traditional approach lost out to these points. Social Responsibility needs to become the most important aim of any organization. Big Organizations need to give back society in lieu of the resources that they take from them. These big organizations need to devote something out of the profits that they earn. The traditional approach didnt take in account this (Smith 2003, pp 52-76). Modern approach puts more emphasis on Shareholder Wealth Maximization rather than owner profit maximization. This includes increasing the Earnings per share of every shareholder so that their net worth is maximized. Wealth increase is equal to what gross present worth in needed for raising profits in the future. This value needs to be discounted as per the time frame to found out the annualized rate of return for the shareholder. In Shareholder Wealth Maximization, it places priority before any other objective for the organization. Any action which has positive effective on Shareholder Wealth Maximization needs to be given priority. In any capitalistic society, the goal of business should be Shareholder Wealth Maximization as mostly the ownership of goods and services is by individuals, since, they own all the means so that they can make money. Shareholder Wealth Maximization at the end leads to rise in value of the shares which at end maximizes wealth of the shareholder (Ahlstrom 2010, pp 11-24). . Maximizing Shareholder Wealth as the Primary Goal Any financial decision to become effective needs better understanding of organizational goals. Shareholder Wealth Maximization should guide the decision making of the firm which needs to be represented in the common stock price. Profit maximization shouldnt overshadow Shareholder Wealth Maximization as many a times decisions taken to maximize profits of the owner has a short term view and in the long term erodes the value of shareholder wealth. Warren Buffet, who has been the advocate of Shareholder wealth, says that long term economic goal of any organization should be increasing the average annual gain of the intrinsic business value in their firm for their shareholders. Economic progress isnt shown by size of firm but by per share progress (Smith 2003, pp 52-76). Shareholder Wealth Maximization goal should be about management of firm seeking to increase the present value of their future of their shareholder but not increasing the profits of promoters. This return to shareholder needs to be given in the form of periodic dividends as well as if any shareholder decided to sell of the stock. As long as the dividend stream or the value stream is flowing, it increases the value of shareholder. Also, the higher the risk for future wealth growth, it reduce the faith of shareholders on the company. Stock prices always show what is the timing and risk associated with the future benefits which can be reaped by the shareholders. Shareholder wealth is defined as per the total number of shares times the value of per share at which it trades in the stock exchange the company is listed (Van Beurden Gossling 2008, pp 407-424). The advantages of using Shareholder Wealth Maximization as an objective are:- This considers the time period as well as the risk in investing in the firm. Managers must take in account this while making decisions like expenditure so that in contributed to increase shareholder wealth. Shareholder Wealth Maximization can be tested with every decision which is made by organization so that consistency in decisions can be maintained. If the decision increase shareholder wealth it is a good decision, otherwise it isnt, hence it shouldnt be taken. Shareholder Wealth Maximization is impersonal by nature. Shareholder is free to take their funds out and sell the shares and invest anywhere. If the shareholders risk preference isnt according to the decisions made by the firm, the shareholder will sell the sticks owned by him and invest in the organization which has best profile as per his investment needs (Bejou 2011, pp 1-6). For all of these reasons, Shareholder Wealth Maximization should be the primary goal to be achieved by any firm. But, the issues like social responsibilities managerial objectives, agency problems can create departure from pure Shareholder Wealth Maximization behavior shown by managers as well as promoters and more considerate in profit maximization. Nonetheless, Shareholder Wealth Maximization objective gives a standard on which every managerial decision can be judged and screened on (Ahlstrom 2010, pp 11-24). . Divergent Objectives The goal of shareholder wealth maximization is about how financial decisions should be made in an organization. But, not all management decisions need to be made by this. Using the index of managerial performance, we can measure the managerial success in achieving the shareholder wealth maximization objective. They should try and work to maximize Economic Value addition which is the difference between profit after tax and the cost of capital employed to generate that profit. Multiple corporations like Coca Cola, AT T, and General Electric use this concept of Economic Value added (Husted de Jesus Salazar 2006, pp 76-91). It has been seen that all those firms which dont give attention to stockholder interests and are more indulged in promoter profit maximization perform poorly in long term. There is always a divergence in shareholder wealth maximization goal and the other objectives which are undertaken by management. The main reason for this divergence is shareholders are real owner but control is with promoters in all corporations. This separation of ownership and control allows manager to pursue self-promoting goals which are not in line with shareholder wealth maximization. They are consistent to maintain the control of the company. Instead of pursuing the goal of shareholder wealth maximization, managers just work for satisfying or look for acceptable levels of shareholder wealth increase, while working for their interest improvement (Shaw 2009, pp 565-576). The maximization of personal welfare of managers can lead to long run job security of themselves. The focus on long term survival of managers limits the risk taken by firm as unfavorable outcomes can lead to disastrous outcomes for the firm. Similarly, the need for job security is one reason why management doesnt allow any merger offers given by other companies. The Golden Parachute approach is usually in the interests of managers more than the shareholders wealth. Now days, multiple companies give top management stock options which ensures their ownership in the company. Pan-American gives retirement option in common stocks which ensures that they think on the options to increase the share price. This helps in alignment of interests of managers with those of shareholders (Bejou 2011, pp 1-6). Agency Problems The presence of different objectives of owners and managers is one kind of agency relationship problem. Agency relationships happen when one individual hires other individual so that he can perform duties on behalf of his. They delegate the decision making to the agent. These kinds of agency relationships exist between stockholders and managers and those of stockholders and creditors. When we talk about agency relationship between stockholders and managers, the inefficiency rises as each party works in a way to maximize its interests and utility. The management thinking for looking for long term survival rather than thinking about shareholder wealth maximization. Other example is about using company airplanes, limousines and offices without having any ownership in the firm. This shirking by managers is an issue. Enron Corp lost $1 billion of investments in 2001. In 1991, Enron permitted their CFO to purchase assets and minimize the risk of Enron. The CFO made million personally. This conflict of interests made way for Enron filing for bankruptcy in Chapter 11 (Smith 2003, pp 52-76). In Enron Case, the agency issue was poorly handled which led to shareholders feel the brunt of this mismatch. Agency costs include 1) Expenditures made for minimizing the incentives for management which management took for removing decisions in contrast of shareholder interest, Such as giving management compensation in from of stock option of the firm. 2) Expenditure to oversee management action like audits both external and internal. 3) Protection of organization from managerial dishonesty. 4) Opportunity cost of lost chances due to complex structure of organization (Husted de Jesus Salazar 2006, pp 76-91). Managerial motivation act in the stockholder interest when they have stock in form of compensation, the threat of losing their job and threat of being taken over by any other organization. Agency problems and related costs can be decreases if financial markets are efficient enough. Also, it can be done with the use of complex contracts in financial terms. Agency problems lead to costs which reduce the value of firm on market place (Bejou 2011, pp 1-6). The Other agency conflict is between shareholder and creditors starts from the relation between owners and creditors. Creditors always stake a fixed claim on companys resources in lieu of long term debts, bank loans, commercial agreements and other instruments. The returns given to creditors are fixed while those to shareholders are variable due to stock price. Owners can try to make risky investment decisions, but creditors need to be paid back in full but investments need to be made as early as possible. Creditors to protect their money ask for other protective covers from company line bond indentures, limitation on dividend payments, types of Investments Company can make, poison pills and new debt application. This all can reduce the potential market value of the firm (Ahlstrom 2010, pp 11-24). Problems with Profit Maximization strategy If Managers of any firm want to work in the direction of shareholder wealth maximization, they should look beyond their conventional thinking of owner profit maximization. Profit maximization model isnt useful for decision making due to multiple reasons like 1) The standard macroeconomic model for any firm is static. Profit maximization cant compare short term and long term profits. Profit decisions should be reflected on time basis. And should have a long term impact on the firm 2) Profit is defined in accounting terms between costs and revenue, but it doesnt define any priority on multiple things like maximization of absolute profit, rate of profit as well as earnings per share. 3) The last problem is profit maximization of owners gives no way for managers to seek the risk assessment option. Tw projects giving same profits can have different risk profile (Cosans 2009, pp. 391-399) Conclusion The complete concentration on shareholder wealth maximization has been under criticism since the dot com burst. A shareholder value increase talks about benefit of the owners only but doesnt talk about the social issues like employment, environment and ethics. Any management decision can maximize shareholder value but can lower welfare of other stakeholders listed above. A Company while making decisions for maximizing shareholder value can also prove detrimental to interests of its customers as multiple decision regarding product lines can have effect. Also, shareholder wealth maximization strategy needs to have a long term view not a short term one. The intrinsic value of any business is brought up by the combination of financial might, societal contribution, employee satisfaction and shareholder interests maximization. This is said to be stakeholder value maximization. However, this concept is very hard to implement as every decision cant be useful to all stakeholder. They need to be prioritized and weighted upon before implementing nay managerial decision

Austin Museum Of Art :: essays research papers

The Austin Museum of Art was the first of the three galleries attended. At the time, the museum had a touring â€Å"Rock and Roll† exhibit, which had its focus on the influence of the Rock –and-Roll culture on art. The pieces were arranged in a chronological order and started with the Pop Art of the early 1960’s. Located in the section were two silk screens, one of Mick Jaggard and the other of Prince, done by Andy Warhol. There were a few other pieces in this time period that helped to point out a major turning point in both art and photography. It was now okay to use other people’s photographs in an art piece. Also, it symbolized a beginning of the manipulation of the photograph. No longer were the artists bound to having their work on paper, there were new and limitless areas to explore now in photography. These were the main works that caught my attention in the museum, but there were many other pieces. Other works went through the abstract and full of color 1960’s, until the newer more mechanical art of the 1980’s and 90’s.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  After attending the Austin Museum of Art, the students headed for a smaller, more informal gallery. The Dumont Gallery contained works from various photographers that were entered into a contest earlier in the year. Now the pictures were traveling around the state of Texas, and had even made a stop at the MSC in College Station. The pieces in the exhibit made visible the numerous ways in which art and photography can be presented. There were huge photographs, Polaroids, pictures developed onto clothing, series photographs, bound pictures, and a large amount whose methods of production could not be identified. There was one group of photographs done by the same artist that truly caught my attention. The artist, while a young woman did not have a very interesting life, and often sought refuge in the Nancy Drew mystery novels. Now, she has often caught herself talking to people about her life and actually telling the events that happened in the books instead of her l ife. It was because of those events that she did a series of photographs were she dressed up like Nancy Drew and posed in her pictures that played out the different stories from the books. She decided, why not be her if you think you are her.

Foundation and Empire 10. The War Ends

Lathan Devers felt definitely uncomfortable, and vaguely resentful. He had received his own decoration and withstood with mute stoicism the turgid oratory of the mayor which accompanied the slip of crimson ribbon. That had ended his share of the ceremonies, but, naturally, formality forced him to remain. And it was formality, chiefly – the type that couldn't allow him to yawn noisily or to swing a foot comfortably onto a chair seat – that made him long to be in space, where he belonged. The Siwennese delegation, with Ducem Barr a lionized member, signed the Convention, and Siwenna became the first province to pass directly from the Empire's political rule to the Foundation's economic one. Five Imperial Ships of the Line – captured when Siwenna rebelled behind the lines of the Empire's Border Fleet – flashed overhead, huge and massive, detonating a roaring salute as they passed over the city. Nothing but drinking, etiquette, and small talk now. A voice called him. It was Forell; the man who, Devers realized coldly, could buy twenty of him with a morning's profits – but a Forell who now crooked a finger at him with genial condescension. He stepped out upon the balcony into the cool night wind, and bowed properly, while scowling into his bristling beard. Barr was there, too; smiling. He said, â€Å"Devers, you'll have to come to my rescue. I'm being accused of modesty, a horrible and thoroughly unnatural crime.† â€Å"Devers,† Forell removed the fat cigar from the side of his mouth when he spoke, â€Å"Lord Barr claims that your trip to Cleon's capital had nothing to do with the recall of Riose.† â€Å"Nothing at all, sir.† Devers was curt. â€Å"We never saw the Emperor. The reports we picked up on our way back concerning the trial, showed it up to be the purest frameup. There was a mess of rigmarole about the general being tied up with subversive interests at the court.† â€Å"And he was innocent?† â€Å"Riose?† interposed Barr. â€Å"Yes! By the Galaxy, yes. Brodrig was a traitor on general principles but was never guilty of the specific accusations brought against him. It was a judicial farce; but a necessary one, a predictable one, an inevitable one.† â€Å"By psychohistorical necessity, I presume.† Forell rolled the phrase sonorously with the humorous ease of long familiarity. â€Å"Exactly.† Barr grew serious. â€Å"It never penetrated earlier, but once it was over and I could†¦ well†¦ look at the answers in the back of the book, the problem became simple. We can see, now, that the social background of the Empire makes wars of conquest impossible for it. Under weak Emperors, it is tom apart by generals competing for a worthless and surely death-bringing throne. Under strong Emperors, the Empire is frozen into a paralytic rigor in which disintegration apparently ceases for the moment, but only at the sacrifice of all possible growth.† Forell growled bluntly through strong puffs, â€Å"You're not clear, Lord Barr.† Barr smiled slowly. â€Å"I suppose so. It's the difficulty of not being trained in psychohistory. Words are a pretty fuzzy substitute for mathematical equations. But let's see now-â€Å" Barr considered, while Forell relaxed, back to railing, and Devers looked into the velvet sky and thought wonderingly of Trantor. Then Barr said, â€Å"You see, sir, you – and Devers – and everyone no doubt, had the idea that beating the Empire meant first prying apart the Emperor and his general. You, and Devers, and everyone else were right – right all the time, as far as the principle of internal disunion was concerned. â€Å"You were wrong, however, in thinking that this internal split was something to be brought about by individual acts, by inspirations of the moment. You tried bribery and lies. You appealed to ambition and to fear. But you got nothing for all your pains. In fact, appearances were worse after each attempt. â€Å"And through all this wild threshing up of tiny ripples, the Seldon tidal wave continued onward, quietly – but quite irresistibly.† Ducem Barr turned away, and looked over the railing at the lights of a rejoicing city. He said, â€Å"There was a dead hand pushing all of us; the mighty general and the great Emperor; my world and your world – the dead hand of Hari Seldon. He knew that a man like Riose would have to fail, since it was his success that brought failure; and the greater the success, the surer the failure.† Forell said dryly, â€Å"I can't say you're getting clearer.† â€Å"A moment,† continued Barr earnestly. â€Å"Look at the situation. A weak general could never have endangered us, obviously. A strong general during the time of a weak Emperor would never have endangered us, either; for he would have turned his arms towards a much more fruitful target. Events have shown that three-fourths of the Emperors of the last two centuries were rebel generals and rebel viceroys before they were Emperors. â€Å"So it is only the combination of strong Emperor and strong general that can harm the Foundation; for a strong Emperor can not be dethroned easily, and a strong general is forced to turn outwards, past the frontiers. â€Å"But, what keeps the Emperor strong? What kept Cleon strong? It's obvious. He is strong, because he permits no strong subjects. A courtier who becomes too rich, or a general who becomes too popular is dangerous. All the recent history of the Empire proves that to any Emperor intelligent enough to be strong. â€Å"Riose won victories, so the Emperor grew suspicious. All the atmosphere of the times forced him to be suspicious. Did Riose refuse a bribe? Very suspicious; ulterior motives. Did his most trusted courtier suddenly favor Riose? Very suspicious; ulterior motives. It wasn't the individual acts that were suspicious. Anything else would have done which is why our individual plots were unnecessary and rather futile. It was the success of Riose that was suspicious. So he was recalled, and accused, condemned, murdered. The Foundation wins again. â€Å"Look, there is not a conceivable combination of events that does not result in the Foundation winning. It was inevitable; whatever Riose did, whatever we did.† The Foundation magnate nodded ponderously. â€Å"So! But what if the Emperor and the general had been the same person. Hey? What then? That's a case you didn't cover, so you haven't proved your point yet.† Barr shrugged. â€Å"I can't prove anything; I haven't the mathematics. But I appeal to your reason. With an Empire in which every aristocrat, every strong man, every pirate can aspire to the Throne – and, as history shows, often successfully – what would happen to even a strong Emperor who preoccupied himself with foreign wars at the extreme end of the Galaxy? How long would he have to remain away from the capital before somebody raised the standards of civil war and forced him home. The social environment of the Empire would make that time short. â€Å"I once told Riose that not all the Empire's strength could swerve the dead hand of Hari Seldon.† â€Å"Good! Good!† Forell was expansively pleased. â€Å"Then you imply the Empire can never threaten us again.† â€Å"It seems to me so,† agreed Barr. â€Å"Frankly, Cleon may not live out the year, and there's going to be a disputed succession almost as a matter of course, which might mean the last civil war for the Empire.† â€Å"Then,† said Forell, â€Å"there are no more enemies.† Barr was thoughtful. â€Å"There's a Second Foundation.† â€Å"At the other end of the Galaxy? Not for centuries.† Devers turned suddenly at this, and his face was dark as he faced Forell. â€Å"There are internal enemies, perhaps.† â€Å"Are there?† asked Forell, coolly. â€Å"Who, for instance?† â€Å"People, for instance, who might like to spread the wealth a bit, and keep it from concentrating too much out of the hands that work for it. See what I mean?† Slowly, Forell's gaze lost its contempt and grew one with the anger of Devers' own.

Eymp 1 Context and Principles for Early Years Provision

EYMP 1 – Context and Principles for Early Years Provision Part 1 An explanation of the legal status and principles of the EYF and how national and local guidance materials are used in settings The legal status and principles of the Early Years Foundation stage is used with children aged from birth to five years. The Government have outlined three primary and four specific areas and seventeen early learning goals that they think are important to a child’s development and planning is used to meet a child’s individual needs.An explanation of how different approaches to work with children in early years have affected current provision in the UK Over the years many people have made studies of what they believe were the important factors in providing for children’s needs. All of these pioneers believed that there should be an integrated approach to the early years provision. One of these pioneers that had the greatest influence was Freidrich Froebel.Froebel foun ded the first kindergarten in 1840 and learned how important it was for children to have real experiences and to be physically active, learning outdoors as well as indoors. He believed that schools should be communities where parents could join their children, and that parents were the first educators of children. Other pioneers were Maria Montessori who devised a structured teaching programme based on watching children with learning difficulties and building on the work of Froebel.She have a different view to him in some areas, for example believing that children should learn to work alone to help them become independent learners and did not see the benefit of play. Rudolf Steiner believed that the first seven years of a childs life were the most important and that they needed a carefully planned environment to develop in a rounded way. Margaret McMillan used many of Froebel’s ideas and thought that play was very important. She believed that nurseries were an extension of th e home and not a replacement for it.In the 1920s she set up nursery schools that were copied across the world, having gardens and welcoming families and not just children. One of her most important achievements was introducing school medical services and school meals. She did this because she believed that children could not learn of they were hungry or sick. All of the work of these and other pioneers had an impact on the way that the current provisions in the UK have developed. Why the early years framework emphasises a personal and ndividual approach to learning and development The early years framework emphasises a personal and individual approach to learning and development because valuing a child’s individuality, ideas and feelings is an important part of developing an individual approach to the learning and development. A child has universal physical needs such as food, drink and shelter and psychological needs such as love, affection, security, friendship which are es sential to maintaining their quality of life.In recognising and trying to meet an individual child’s needs each child’s age, physical maturity, intellectual abilities, emotional development, social skills and past experiences and relationships need to be considered. Part 2 An explanation of the partnership model of working with carers This enables different services and professionals to join together to prevent problems happening. It is used to support children, young people and families to help secure improved outcomes.A review of the potential barriers to participation of cares and an explanation of how these barriers may be overcome There can be barriers to effective partnership working these include problems in sharing information, people not being clear on their roles and concerned that they may make a mistake. An explanation of strategies that can be used to support carers who may react positively or negatively to partnership opportunities Some people may feel th reatened that new approaches are being used which mean that they have to work in different ways to which they have been used to.Some may also not like being managed by someone that has different skills and experience from their own. To overcome these issues team meetings can be used for everyone to help them work together. It will also allow everyone to fully understand the roles and responsibilities of the other services and practitioners. An explanation of how effective multi-agency working operates within early years provision and benefits children and carers The Common Assessment Framework is used to by practitioners to assess the additional needs of and their family and to help identify the services that will be required to meet their needs.The Common Assessment Framework starts with assessment and information sharing of the childs development within the EYFS, the care and support offered, the overall family and environment. Using this information the lead professional will wor k with the team and the parents to put in place a plan to support the child’s development. The Common Assessment Framework has a standard form that is used to record and share with others the details of the assessment. The things that are important are clear and effective communication between the professionals and the agencies, keeping accurate records and maintaining confidentiality.

“Bless Me, Ultima”: The Role of Parents Essay

The novel â€Å"Bless Me, Ultima† by Rudolfo Anaya shows the complexity and changeability of human nature and destiny. The author reveals that in the process of maturation and development every person is being influenced by parents, friends and acquaintances. Anaya tells a story of a young boy Antonio who is troubled of uncertainty of his destiny and parents’ influence on his life. Gabriel and Maria Merez are Antonio’s parents, but they have conflicting views towards the future of his child. Therefore, it is very difficult for Antonio to accept either mother’s or father’s belief system. Antonio’s mother is very religious and she is devoted to Catholic Church. She teaches Antonio to follow God’s commandments, as well as to accept values and beliefs of the church. Moreover, she wants her son to become a priest following her Luna family traditions. Maria thinks that it is a sin to grow and she doesn’t want Antonio to choose his own destiny. But the heart prevails and â€Å"the tragic consequences of life can be overcome by the magical strength that resides in the human heart†. (p.34) Antonio’s father is rather important for his spiritual growth. Despite the fact that he wants his son to become Llano vaquero, he wants Antonio to feel independence and freedom. From the first glance Gabriel seems a common drunkard, but with the novel progression we see the depth and dignity of his relations with Llano. Antonio inherited father’s inquisitive and questionable mind. When one of the villagers dies Antonio asks: â€Å"God! Why did Lupito die? Why do you allow the evil of the Trementinas? Why did you allow Narciso to be murdered when he was doing good? A thousand questions pushed through my mind, but the Voice within me did not answer†. (p.23) Maria forces Antonio to follow her family traditions, whereas Gabriel wants him to choose the life of vaquero only if he wants. He doesn’t want Antonio to be in a state of regret as he is. In such a way, Gabriel is the first person who teaches Antonio to make his own decisions about the future. Works Cited Anaya, Rudolfo. Bless Me, Ultima. New York: Grand Central Publishing, 1994.