French Speaking Countries Essays - Monaco, Principalities

French Speaking Countries Name of country / Nom de pays: Islamic Republic of Mauritania / La republique de Mauritanie Capital City / le Capitale: Nouakchott Monetary Unit / Monnaie: Ouguiya Population / Population: 2,667,859 (July 2000 est.) Current head of State / Celui qui est gerant: President Col. Maaouya Ould Sid Ahmed TAYA Attraction / Attraction: Name of country / Nom de pays: Principality of Monaco / Principaute de Monaco Capital City / le Capitale: Monaco Monetary Unit / Monnaie: French franc Population / Population: 31,693 (July 2000 est.) Current head of State / Celui qui est gerant: Prince RAINIER III Attraction / Attraction: Name of country / Nom de pays: Republic of Niger / Republique du Niger Capital City / le Capitale: Niamey Monetary Unit / Monnaie: Communaute Financiere Africaine franc Population / Population: 10,075,511 (July 2000 est.) Current head of State / Celui qui est gerant: President Mamadou TANDJA Attraction / Attraction: Name of country / Nom de pays: Canada Note: Quebec is the only French speaking province in Canada Capital City / le Capitale: Ottawa Monetary Unit / Monnaie: Canadian dollar Population / Population: 31,281,092 (July 2000 est.) Current head of State / Celui qui est gerant: Queen ELIZABETH II Attraction / Attraction: Name of country / Nom de pays: Rwandese Republic / Le Ruanda Capital City / le Capitale: Kigali Monetary Unit / Monnaie: Rwandan franc Population / Population: 7,229,129 Current head of State / Celui qui est gerant: President Maj. Gen. Paul KAGAME Attraction / Attraction: Economics Essays

Greek Achievement essays

Greek Achievement essays When discussing ancient civilizations, one of the most prominent has to be the Greek civilization. Under the rule of various rulers, Greece saw a change from a pagan worshiping society that was almost abolished, to an enduring civilization that strived on philosophy, and intellectual thought. As the Greeks dispensed the gods in political life, they based government on human intelligence. The evolution of the Greek polis, or city-state, from a tribal-religious institution to a secular rational institution, that is regarded as one of the greatest in the history of mankind, was only a part of the general transition of the Greek mind from myth to reason. What separated the Greeks from other Near Eastern civilizations, as well as gave it enduring significance, was the Greeks gradual realization that political problems are caused by man and require earthly solutions. The Greeks also had a strong belief in their system of the city-state but it eventually would contribute to their demise. These city-states allowed for much separation within their political life, and thus was the cause for much suffering. Greece would endure two major wars, which would shape their civilization, and have a lasting effect. First was the Persian Wars with Sparta. Because Sparta was a walled city, and couldnt compete with the Athenian culture, Athens eventually triumphed. One of the most fascinating contrasts in this war is how different the two city-states could be. Athens was located on the peninsula of Attica, near the coast, possessed a great navy, and was a commercial leader for the Greeks. Sparta was a land power and was exclusively agricultur al. Spartas leaders pursued an isolationist foreign policy, and believed in keeping their freedom on the homeland. The Athenians had such things as democracy, and extended their hegemony over the Greeks. Unfortunately, after the long battles between Athens and Sparta were finally laid ...

The style of mini skirt in 1960s Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

The style of mini skirt in 1960s - Essay Example Historically, miniskirts have existed since the onset of civilization. However, they have aroused cultural implication and powerful political connotations in recent years. The origin and sustenance of miniskirts have a deep historical context. This article explores various historical contexts of miniskirts as determined by culture, designer, artist, materiality, and model. Miniskirt strongly communicates the breaking loose from cultural strains that bound the young people to older dress codes. Just like the young generations in 1960s, the modern day youths are driven by the need to be different. Placing things into perspective, miniskirts are among the changes that reflect cultural expression. The cultural context of miniskirts can be understood in three significant perspectives. One is that the world is changing rapidly. In this instance, the adoption of miniskirts can be attributed to some of the changes the world was undergoing at the time. For instance, the television sets were being invented, the cameras were being introduced and diversified functions of computers were being implanted among other changes.2 The Cultural context of miniskirts is also marked by aspects many aspects such as attitude changes to existing fashion. Lifestyles and technological advancements significantly shape the behavior and attitude of many young people. Civil rights, the rights of women and concerns over environment were shaping the minds of various young people. The last dimension of the cultural context of miniskirts is the new cultural expressions. The youths had much money to spend than ever before. Many economies had grown particularly in the stability of the aftermath of WWII. They probably spent a lot of the money they had on clothes. Furthermore, during the time, there were several boutiques, which changed their merchandise often. All those

Preparing and Electronic Portfolio Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Preparing and Electronic Portfolio - Essay Example They include; 1. Definition of portfolio context and goals-this is the step whereby the purpose of the portfolio is defined. It’s important to ask oneself what is it that you are trying to show with this portfolio. For instance are there any goals, outcomes or standards that are being exhibited using this portfolio? You will realize that you are prepared for the following stage when; firstly, you have been able to identify the purpose as well as the primary addressees for your portfolio. And secondly when you have identified the standards or objectives that you will be utilizing in organizing your portfolio. And finally, you have been able to select the development software you will be making use of as well as completed the initial stage using that specific tool. 2. Classification/Collection –Some of the questions one needs to ask here include; what type of artifacts will be included in the portfolio and how are such entries going to be classified? This stage therefore involves identification of various portfolio items which may be determined by assessment context as well as the kind of evidence that is to be collected. Selection of the most suitable software development tools for the portfolio context together with available resources. This stage also involves identification of the storage together with presentation medium most suitable for the given situation. 3. Reflection-Reflection generally is the soul and heart of any portfolio. It provides the basis for why these artifacts symbolize attainment of a specific result, objective or standard. The excellence of the learning that comes out of the process of portfolio development will be directly proportional to the excellence of the self-reflection put on the work. 4. Interaction/connection/feedback/dialogue-this is the step that offers an opportunity for not only interaction but also feedback on the kind of work placed in the portfolio. Apparently, this is

Discuss three examples how HIPAA is taught, practiced, and enforced in Research Paper

Discuss three examples how HIPAA is taught, practiced, and enforced in a health care organization. What is HIPAA and why it shou - Research Paper Example It was also designed to prevent employers from hiring persons due to medical conditions that may affect the cost of their job-related group insurance. Under its rules, there is a six month limit for denying coverage for preexisting conditions under employee provided health plans. Specifically, unless an employee has received diagnosis or treatment for a pre-existent condition within six months prior to being hired then they cannot be denied coverage for the issue (http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/faqs/faq_consumer_hipaa.html). A secondary purpose of HIPAA is to protect patient confidentiality. It regulates who can access medical records, the reasons they may do so, and the proper they follow. In most cases, it forbids individuals or organizations from looking at a person’s records without their permission. HIPAA must be followed for ethical as well as legal reasons. Because of its importance, a wide variety of health care and insurance professionals must be trained in HIPAA compliance. Training is offered in several formats, including online. The website http://www.ehipaatraining.com/ offers Internet-based classes on the subject. The Department of Health and Human Services offers similar resources on the web page, www.hhs.gov.

Criminology Essays Left Realism Critique

Criminology Essays Left Realism Critique Left Realism Critique. Left realism emerged as an influential theory during the 1980s. Its drive was partly dissatisfaction with the dominant criminological perspectives of the time and partially attributable to the prevailing political climate. This essay will outline the emergence of left realism as a means of explaining its main principles. The discussion will also engage with the criticisms of left realism and identify the criminological perspectives with which it conflicts. An understanding of left realism cannot be gained without an awareness of the prevailing intellectual, ideological and political context that surrounded its emergence. Therefore, it is important to appreciate the background from which left realism emerged. In the period immediately preceding the genesis of left realism, the most prevalent and influential criminological perspectives were based largely upon Marxist theories based upon notions of utopianism that were increasingly coming to be viewed as irrelevant in light of the political ethos of Margaret Thatchers Britain (Jones: 2001, 245). In particular, left realists were extremely critical of the way that radical criminological theories presented a characterisation of criminals as political catalysts against bourgeois hegemony and therefore to attempt to explain criminal behaviour in terms of it being a revolution against the injustices imposed upon the majority of the population by the ruling classes (Moore, 1991). Radical criminological theory saw crime as a consequence of (real or imagined) economic deprivation and under-privilege. Left realists were opposed to this view which allocated responsibility for crime to the State, which was seen as an instrument of the ruling class designed to consolidate the position of the powerful and promote the interests of the rich and powerful, rather than with the individual offender. Left realists also objected to the characterisation of the offender as the victim of the labelling process; a view which was popular with symbolic interactionists who were providing a popular alternative voice to the radical criminologists during the late 1970s and early 1980s: For over two decades [criminology] has neglected the effect of crime upon the victim and concentrated on the impact of the of the state through the process of labelling on the criminalIt became an advocate for the indefensible: the criminal became the victim, the state the solitary focus of attention, while the real victim remained off-stage (Matthews and Young, 1986: iv). The rejection by left realists of these constructions of the offender demonstrated one of their central beliefs which was that the offender should be not be absolved of responsibility for his actions and that it was not appropriate to cast blame on either the institutional or structural nature of society as was the tendency of the radical and interactionist schools of criminological thought. Rather than concur with this characterisation, left realists saw criminals as well-socialised individuals who exercised conscious and rational choice in deciding to offend and who saw crime as a way of resolving their particular problems. For left realists, the problems that offenders were trying to solve came from the capitalist ideology that was predominant in 1980s society. Left realists saw this capitalism as producing egalitarian notions such as that of political equality and the deterioration of views that each individual had an immutable place in the social hierarchy that was pre-determine d at birth. With these views came feelings of deprivation amongst those who were not possessed of material wealth but who were desirous of the benefits that were enjoyed by other members of society. Left realists felt that these individuals would see criminal enterprise as a way of rectifying this perceived inequality and securing their access to the commodities of capitalist society which they craved (Hopkins Burke, 2005: 220). In this respect, left realism could be seen as promoting a return to traditional Marxist views whereby crime was seen as an individual response (by the offender) to structural inequalities created by those in power in society which actually was a counter-active diversion away from the real problems of the causes of these inequalities that could only be solved by political change. Left realism rejected the post-Marxist radical theories that characterised crime as a revolutionary endeavour. In their seminal work, Lea and Young (1984) depicted criminal behaviour as almost an amplification of capitalist normalcy. In other words, the dominant view in the 1980s was that of capitalistic self-advancement in which individual endeavours were rewarded with material gain. Lea and Young asserted that a significant percentage of criminals shared these beliefs and replicated what had become conventional social values based upon the value of individual (and self-interested) effort in a society based upon competition and motivated by material success. However, criminals did not channel their energy into legitimate pursuits such as the endeavour for advancement in employment or entrepreneurial success, preferring instead to pursue socially acceptable goals through illegitimate avenues (criminal activity). As such, left realism viewed crime as the expression of capitalist values but though non-conventional means. In one respect, left realists agree with radical theorists in that it is common ground that crime is a reaction to an unjust society (Lea and Young, 1984: 45). However, there is also disagreement in that, unlike radical criminologists, left realists do not believe that the criminal should not be blamed for responding by engaging in offending behaviour: Crime is one form of egoistic response to deprivation. Its roots are in justice but its growth often perpetrates injustice (Lea and Young, 1984: 72) This notion of crime as the illegitimate manifestation of capitalist values is one of the central principles of left realism. However, although crime is seen as a self-interested and individual enterprise, left realists also believe that crime is a group response rather than an individual decision. They believe that crime is an inevitable consequence of a social situation in which a particular group feels that it is subject to disadvantage such as in a situation whereby there is a common ideological drive to measure success in material goods but there exist barriers to the attainment of these goals for some members of society. In such a situation, particularly if there appears to be no way of circumventing the obstacles, crime is certain to result. One of the key criticisms that has been levelled against left realist explanations of crime and criminality is that its focus on economic deprivation explains only economic crime but does nothing to account for the other manifestations of offending behaviour that are prevalent in society. Left realism is prepared to counter this criticism by drawing upon strain theory (Merton, 1968) to explain how the exclusion from legitimate economic opportunity may result in financial crime to rectify the situation or violent crime as a vent for frustration at the denial of a seemingly equitable access to benefits and resources. This actually consolidates one of the key principles of left realism in that reliance is placed upon subculture theories to support the argument of left realism that those who are excluded from the benefits of mainstream society develop their own cultures, norms and principles and operate within these. Inevitably, for those excluded from legitimate avenues of enterprise, t his involves criminal behaviour (Young, 1975). One of the central principles of left realism was a conceptualisation of crime that did not take an offender-centred view. Young proposed a square of crime in which the four key components were the offender, the victim, the agencies of formal control (such as the police) and the agencies of informal control (such as other members of society). This was an important tenet of left realism because it challenged a major paradox within radical theories; that of the powerless working-class criminal driven to offending behaviour as a result of the oppression of the privileged classes. Lea and Young examined official crime statistics and victim report surveys (such as the British Crime Survey) and concluded that although members of the working class appear to commit a disproportionate amount of crime, they often target the other members of the working class as their victims. Left realism addressed the issue of the ordinary victim of crime and thus changed the emphasis within criminological th eory and, gradually, within the practices of the criminal justice system. In particular, the square of crime ensured that crime prevention strategies were evolved which took account of the contributions of each of the four factors: To control crime from a realist perspective involves intervention at each part of the square of crime: at the level of the factors which give rise to the putative offender (such as structural unemployment), the informal system (such as lack of public mobilisation), the victim (such as inadequate target hardening) and the formal system (such as ineffective policing) (Young, 1986: 41). This emphasises one of the main principles of left realism; the belief in a joined up approach to tackling the problems of crime. However, this multi-causal approach that takes account of a variety of factors in explaining criminality could be accused of borrowing from a range of sociological explanations of crime, such as strain and control theories, and amalgamating selected aspects of these and giving them a Marxist slant. It seems reasonable to state that there is nothing particularly new in left realism; it is a pragmatic restatement of a number of established criminological principles taken from a particular ideological perspective (Downes and Rock, 2003: 292). However, left realism did become influential in raising awareness of the plight of victims of crime thus negating their invisibility and overcoming their marginalisation. Lea and Youngs studies showed that official statistics gave an incomplete picture of the extent of victimisation and therefore presented an inaccurate impression of the nature and extent of criminal activity. For Lea and Young, victim studies gave a fair more comprehensive and accurate account of victimisation, firstly because they included information about crimes which had occurred but which victims may not have reported to the police and, secondly, because they were capable of analysis on the basis of geographic location thus giving a true impression of the localised nature of much criminal behaviour. One of the other most notable contributions of left realism to criminological theory that emerged from victim surveys is the recognition of fear of crime as a significant social problem that is just as in need of re solution as actual crime . By acknowledging the existence of victims of crime, left realists gave voice to notions of pre-emptive strategies to counteract attempts at criminal behaviour: The organisation of communities in an attempt to pre-empt crime is of the utmost importance (Lea and Young, 1984: 267). This emphasis on the community and its role and importance in combating crime typifies the principles of cohesion and inclusion that characterises left realism. At its core, left realism is seeking for realistic strategies that will have a quantifiable impact upon crime (and fear of crime) within communities, especially amongst the poor and disadvantaged who are the most frequent victims of crime. This has been said to be a central component of contemporary left realism (Matthews and Young, 1992: 2). Notwithstanding this emphasis on the prevention of crime, it is a fundamental principle of left realism that the attainment of justice is more important than controlling crime. As such, the police play a key role in maintaining social control by establishing, maintaining and nurturing good community relations so as not to alienate the populace to whom they should be fully accountable (Kinsey, Lea and Young, 1986). Many of the criticisms levelled against left realists were voiced by the radical theorists of whom the left realists themselves were so critical. For example, Lea and Young criticised radical theorists for their excessive concentration of corporate crime and their marginalisation of real crime that affects ordinary people even though they accept that corporate crime is worse than working-class crime. Radical theorists counter by questioning why Lea and Young are prepared to view working-class crime as more serious merely because it is what ordinary people fear. Surely, it is argued, the actuality of crime is more potent and more serious than the fear of falling victim to a crime that may never occur. Left realists have no effective rejoinder for this criticism, other than to draw attention to the way in which fear of crime can have a real and negative impact upon ordinary members of society, by preventing them from going about their ordinary business, for example, or avoiding particu lar activities or places (Young, 1999). The multi-causal approach of left realism can also be criticised for failing to explain all forms of criminal behaviour. Feminist criminological theorists have also been critical of left realism in its tackling both of female criminal behaviour and of its failure to explain crimes that are traditionally seen as targeting women, such as rape. Just as it could be criticised for failing to provide an adequate explanation of different types of criminal behaviour, left realism can be accused of an overly one-dimensional focus on young, male, working-class criminal behaviour to the detriment of offenders from other socio-demographic backgrounds. Female criminality is largely unaddressed and, moreover, exposes a central weakness in one of the key principles of left realism; the reliance on relative deprivation as an explanation of criminal behaviour. For example, Lea and Young assert that crime results from the exclusion of a particular group from legitimate opportunities for success and material gain. In light of this, it would be expected that female criminality, which was always extremely low, would decrea se even further as women gained greater equality in the workplace as this would ensure that they were less excluded from legitimate avenues of success. However, the converse proved to be true and the greater prominence of women in the workplace was mirrored by a growth in female offending; an outcome that is directly contrary to the explanation of criminal behaviour propounded by left realists (Smart, 1989). Equally, it is difficult to see how left realism can explain sexual crimes against women unless this falls within the same category as violent crimes that are the result of frustration following a failure to achieve legitimate success. This seems an extremely tenuous argument for such complex crimes and, in any case, left realists have tended not to engage with the issue of rape to any great degree thus the explanation remains speculative (Heidensohn, 1985). Overall, it is clear that the emergence of left realism was both a product of the prevailing political climate and a strong influence on the social and political development of more cohesive approaches to crime control and prevention that drew together a range of players in the criminal justice process rather than focusing exclusively on the offender. As a theoretical perspective, it expanded the focus of criminological enquiry and moved beyond the dominant ideology of the 1970s and early 1980s. As such, its contribution to criminological debate cannot be under-estimated. However, it can be criticised as a rather narrowly-focussed theory that fails to provide an adequate explanation of the full gamut of criminal behaviour. It has, however, provided a building block upon which other theories can build a broader and more wide-ranging explanation of criminality. Bibliography Downes, P. and Rock, P., (2003) Understanding Deviance, 4th ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press Heidensohn, F., (1985) Women and Crime, London: Routledge Hopkins Burke, R., (2005) An Introduction to Criminological Theory, Cullompton: Willan Jones, S., (2001) Criminology, 2nd ed., London: Butterworths Kinsey, R., Lea, J. and Young, J., (1986) Losing the Fight Against Crime, Oxford: Blackwell Press Lea, J. and Young, J., (1984) What is to be Done About Law and Order, Harmondsworth: Penguin Press Matthews, R. and Young, J., (1992) Issues in Realist Criminology, London: Sage Publications Merton, R., (1968) Social Theory and Social Structure, New York: Free Press Moore, S., (1991) Investigating Crime and Deviance, London: Collins Educational Publishers Smart, C., (1989) Feminism and the Power of the Law, London: Routledge Young, J., Left Realism and the Priorities of Crime Control in Stenson, K. and Cowell, D., (eds.) (1999) The Politics of Crime Control, London: Sage Publishing Young, J., Ten Points of Realism in Matthews, R. and Young, J., (1986) Issues in Realist Criminology, London: Sage Publications Young, J., Working Class Criminology in Taylor, I., Walton, P. and Young, J., (eds.) (1975) Critical Criminology, London: Routledge

Solutions, Dilutions and molarity calculations

Why is a conical flask, rather than a beaker, used in the experiment? – To allow easy mixing of solutions by swirling. 2. Why is the funnel removed from the burette after adding the acid solution? – so that the drops from the funnel will not fall into the burette. 3. In using a burette, why is it important to (a) rinse it with a little of the solution it is going to contain? – to remove any residual water and so avoid dilution of the acid solution when it is poured into the burette. (b) to clamp it vertically? – to enable the liquid level to be read correctly. ) to have the part below the tap full? – to ensure that the actual volume of liquid delivered into the flask is read correctly. 4. Give one reason for carrying out the following procedures during the titration. (i) The sides of the conical flask were washed down with deionised water? – To ensure that all of the acid added from the burette can react with the base. (ii) The conical flask was frequently swirled or shaken? – To ensure complete mixing of the reactants. 5. Why is a rough titration carried out? – To find the approximate end point.This nformation enables the subsequent titrations to be carried out more quickly. 6. Why is more than one accurate titration carried out? – To minimise error by getting accurate readings within 0. 1-3 cm of each other. 7. Explain why hydrochloric acid is not used as a primary standard? – The exact concentration of any hydrochloric acid solution is not known, unless it is prepared from standard ampoules. Laboratory grade hydrochloric acid is not sufficiently pure. 8. Can any of the following be used as primary standards: NaOH, H2S04, HN03? Explain your answer.A primary standard should be available in a highly pure state and stable. None of these substances are available pure because: (a) NaOH readily absorbs water and carbon dioxide from the air. (b) Concentrated H2S04 readily absorbs water from the ai r. (c)HN03 breaks down releasing N02 gas. 9. If you used only 10cm3 of sodium carbonate solution in the conical flask, calculate how much acid would be required to neutralise it. x 10-3 moles Na2C03 10cm3 Na 2CO 3 solution used at concentration of 0. 1 M 1 2 x 10-3 moles HCL required Concentration of HCL is 0. M 1000 x 2 x 10-3 / 0. 23crn3 required = 10. 5crn fi13. 10. Describe briefly how a pure dry sample of sodium chloride could be obtained having carried out the titration? – Using the information provided by the titration results, add Just enough hydrochloric acid to exactly neutralise 25cm 3 of sodium carbonate. The indicator should not be added. Gently heat the solution until all the water has evaporated to dryness. A sample of sodium chloride will remain in the beaker. Solutions, Dilutions and molarity calculations By AbigailHerbert