Business Technology Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Business Technology - Essay Example It actually enhances the communication process between people and the organizations. Despite the advantages, several demerits and disadvantages of the application of advanced technology in the business process affects the relationship between an individual and his or her particular organizations, such as bank, school or shops. Several business organizations and banks are implementing online transaction system in the business processes to bring efficiency in the payment making process. People are still trying to avoid this online payment process due to the threat of account hacking by cyber thieves or theft of privacy or personal relationship. In terms of social relationship between friends and families, lack of security in several social media networking sites allow people to access the accounts of different users. These issues generally affect the social and business relationship of people. It is clear from above discussions that the introduction and implementation of technology in daily operations have several advantages as well as disadvantages. Online shopping, online order placing, online distribution, online application and e-CRM are the several advantages of the implementation of advanced technology in the business operation process. In addition to this, emergence of several social media networking sites help people to maintain effective relationship with the friends, families, colleagues and several business organizations (Sternheimer, 2013). But, issues like, online hacking and theft of privacy is affecting the relationship between the people and their respective organizations. It is important for both the users of technological equipments or applications and the organizations to maintain efficiency in the adoption and... This essay approves that several demerits and disadvantages of the application of advanced technology in the business process affects the relationship between an individual and his or her particular organizations, such as bank, school or shops. Several business organizations and banks are implementing online transaction system in the business processes to bring efficiency in the payment making process. People are still trying to avoid this online payment process due to the threat of account hacking by cyber thieves or theft of privacy or personal relationship. In terms of social relationship between friends and families, lack of security in several social media networking sites allow people to access the accounts of different users. These issues generally affect the social and business relationship of people. It is clear from above discussions that the introduction and implementation of technology in daily operations have several advantages as well as disadvantages. Online shopping, online order placing, online distribution, online application and e-CRM are the several advantages of the implementation of advanced technology in the business operation process. This paper makes a conclusion that organizations are using advanced technology in the business processes in order to maintain strong relationship with the target customers. Despite the advantages, people can face several through these online business or social applications.

Response Paper Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Response Paper - Assignment Example Additionally, with an introduction of innovative Korean entertainment products such as Korean movies and television programs, the situation is more likely to improve. The writer, therefore, analyses the integration of Korean culture in Japan through the perspectives of Japanese women who are fans of Winter Sonata (Chua & Iwabuchi, 2008). In the article, the writer creates a social conflict by explaining the differing opinion in the perception of Korean culture. In this regard, the writer’s mother has a pre juristic hatred against Koreans living in Japan despite her having a strong preference for the Winter Sonata, a Korean based television drama. The writer is very concerned because she had many Korean friends, she had learned the Korean language and had at one time taught it to primary school students. Her mother on the other had had limited information on Korean culture, as well as limited interaction with Koreans (Chua & Iwabuchi, 2008). The writer is puzzled by the popularity of the Winter Sonata in Japan despite the Korean prejudice. In the research, the author evaluated the differences among the Sonata fans. In addition, the writer also examined on the reason behind Sonora’s high popularity in middle-aged and elderly women. The author questions as to whether the show can be used to transform the negative perception of Korean culture by the Japanese society. Traditionally, the Japanese society had undermined the Korean culture due to historical reasons that are dated back in the early 1940s during the Second World War. Political and social injustices of the Korean society by Japan worsened the situation. In spite of this, the Korean culture has popularized a contemporary modern culture that is acceptable to Japanese culture. In this regard, the writer appreciates the role of Korean films, contemporary Korean music and international events (including the 2002 FIFA World Cup) as the main cornerstones of promoting integration of Korean society in

Should We Be so Quick to Judge People Essay Example for Free

Should We Be so Quick to Judge People Essay I ask this question in an attempt to focus on the tendencies of judging and the norm. Everybody has their own perceptions of what is normal and they make judgments based off of these perceptions. Many of these perceptions cause biases to be formed. A bias is â€Å"a particular tendency or inclination, esp. one that prevents unprejudiced consideration of a question; prejudice. † This essentially means that everyone has formed their own prejudice beliefs from life experience. Everyone has their own bias, whether it is towards a certain race, gender, music genre, what a person wears, and so forth. Biases are formed for almost everything you could possibly think of. So can someone truly understand a person by making quick judgments? Must we not first analyze and truly understand a person before we make a judgment about something like their personality or character. Thesis It is my belief that, in society today, everyone has the tendency to judge people. These judgments, whether rational or irrational, are, more often than not, based on biases and prior beliefs. These judgments could be right but, is it right to judge people? In a sense, can judging people based on your own perceptions be acceptable? There is the age old proverb: Don’t judge a book by its cover. This idea seems to be very true, because often we make judgments when we first meet a person. As we begin to understand and associate with this person we tend to find our judgment was not exactly correct, and that we misunderstood the true nature of this person. However, what if we stop making our judgments and not following our first instinct? Suppose we do not judge someone as a bad person, and therefore they take advantage of us. So should we try and avoid judging people? That too could become harmful to us in the future. In the oncoming sections I will show how judging people can be helpful in some cases; however I will also show how judging people so quickly can be wrong as well. In the end, I do believe that judgment is acceptable under certain terms which will be explained throughout. Analytical Section with Close Reading In Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, Philip K. Dick constantly addresses the idea of judgment. In this book it seems that there is a lot of disapproval with judgment and yet it is still made. When talking about the androids, Phil Resch states: â€Å"This is necessary. Remember: they killed humans in order to get away. And if I hadn’t gotten you out of the Mission police station, they would have killed you. That’s what Garland wanted me for; that’s why he had me come down to his office. Didn’t Polokov almost kill you? Didn’t Luba Luft almost? We’re acting defensively’ they’re here on our planet- they’re murderous illegal aliens masquerading as-. This quote, to me, does show some judgment. Now looking at this statement it does someone like some rational thought was put into it; however, at certain points there is a sense of bias which makes me second guess the rationality of Phil Reschs’ thinking. When Resch states, â€Å"Didn’t Polokov almost kill you? Didn’t Luba Luft almost† , he is making judgments about these androids. However, these judgments have been based on prior actions made by the androids. That is to say, he does not simply try and say that Polokov and Luba Luft are bad because they are androids. Instead, he has seen how these androids have reacted to Rick and that has allowed him to judge their character. But, later in the quote he does make a much more irrational statement. When Resch states, â€Å"†¦ they’re here on our planet-they’re murderous illegal aliens†¦Ã¢â‚¬  , we see a completely new sense of judgment. When Resch claims that â€Å"they’re murderous illegal aliens† he has made a generalization about all androids. Yes, he has experienced androids who have attempted the murderous acts that he speaks of; however, because of this experience he now perceives all androids as murderous and unhelpful to society. Furthermore, even some of the androids could be seen as contributors to society. Rick points this out when he states â€Å"She was a wonderful singer. The planet could have used her. This is insane. † Rick brings an understanding that many of us may not have seen. Yes, some androids have done unforgivable acts towards humans. But, should the androids that have done nothing wrong be treated the same? Must they all face the same fate? Rick says it perfectly when he says, â€Å"The planet could have used her. † Rick has a much more balanced outlook of everyone. He does not instantly assume that an android cannot contribute to society simply because, it is an android. Instead, Rick has based his judgments off of his analysis of each and every person’s character. I believe that character is the key to making good judgments of people. When Rick analyzes Luba Luft he doesn’t see her as just another mindless killing machine. Rather, Rick looks at Luba Luft’s life and comes to find that â€Å"She was a wonderful singer. The planet could have used her. This is insane. † He appreciates the contributions that Luba has made and identifies Luba’s contributions to society. He does not simply see that she is an android that must be exterminated. Instead, he states â€Å"This is insane. † He understands how androids can contribute to society and believes that this extermination is truly unnecessary. I believe this is his way of saying that there must be outright evidence that termination is necessary. There must be a true threat within each and every android that he gets rid of. Otherwise, these androids can be a key contribution, a necessity to society. Based on these ideas I still ask the question, should we be so quick to judge people?

How Self Evaluation is implemented for school improvement

How Self Evaluation is implemented for school improvement The aim of the study is to investigate how School Self-Evaluation (SSE) is implemented for school improvement. There is an increasing international trend of democratisation and decentralisation of education, from the bureaucratic national to an autonomous school based education, in terms of financial management, human resource management and curriculum management. The Department of education observes that with the democratisation of education and associated decentralisation of authority, schools are increasingly being held accountable for their performance (DoE, 2004). School Self-Evaluation is defined as a procedure involving systematic information gathering which is initiated by the school itself and aims to assess the functioning of the school and the attainment of its education goals for the purpose of supporting decision-making and learning for fostering school improvement as a whole (Schildkamp, 2007). Paradoxically, the quality of education that is offered, especially in rural schools of South Africa, is decreasing dramatically. This is confirmed by national and international assessment bodies like the Systemic Evaluation (SE), the Trends in Mathematics and Science Studies (TIMSS), the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS), and the Southern and Eastern Africa Consortium for Monitoring Educational Quality (SACMEQ). The Department of Basic Education, (2010) contends that both the Systemic Evaluation in 2004 and SACMEQ in 2000 indicated that less than one in four Grade 6 learners passed minimum standards in mathematics (DBE, 2010). It further stipulates that the international tests that South Africa participates in show that the top 10% of learners in South Africa do worse than the top 10% of learners in other developing countries such as Kenya, Indonesia and Chile (DBE, 2010). School improvement is defined as a systematic, sustained effort in changing learning conditions and other related internal conditions in one or more schools with the ultimate of accomplishing educational goals more effectively (Van Veltzen, Miles, Ekholm, Hamemyer, and Robin, 1985). The above observations do not presume that the decline in the quality of education in South Africa is due to the democratisation and decentralisation of education, but rather depicts an inevitable demand for a more relevant mechanism, at school level, to be put in place to ensure high quality education and continuous school improvement. This condition imposes that an effective implementation and monitoring of School Self-Evaluation (SSE) is indispensable. Vanhoof, Maeyer and Petegem (2011) confirm that schools are increasingly required to assume a greater share of the responsibility for developing and guaranteeing educational quality (Vanhoof, Maeyer and Petegem, 2011). SSE is a school-based evaluation that is supposed to be implemented by principals, School Management Teams (SMTs), School Governing Bodies (SGBs) and the community, on an annual basis, to ensure continuous improvement and high quality education in all schools. problem statement and rationale for the study School self-evaluation was introduces by the former Minister of education, Professor Kader Asmal in 2001. It is the initial phase of Whole School Evaluation (WSE), preceding external evaluation. In his foreword, the minister states that the National Policy on Whole School Evaluation introduces an effective monitoring and evaluation process that is vital to the improvement of quality and standards of performance in schools (DBE, 2002). This policy aims at improving the overall quality of education in South African schools, and its purpose is to facilitate improvement of school performance through approaches characterised by partnership, collaboration, mentoring and guidance (DBE, 2002). According to the National Education Policy Act (No.27 of 1996), the Minister is mandated to direct that standards of education provision, delivery and performance are monitored though out the country. It remains a worrying factor that rural schools seem not to be considered as part of South African sch ools by these education policies. This view is confirmed by the New Vision for Rural Schooling, (2005) which states that the states commitment to social justice in all matters and especially to universal access to education, written into the Constitution, remains unfulfilled for a large number of children, youths and adults living in rural areas (DoE, 2005). A plethora of education policies have been developed in the new political dispensation, but the serious challenge is that they do not translate into school improvement. Schildkamp and Visscher (2010) argue that enormous resources are invested to develop and implement school self-evaluation instruments, but how schools actually use the instrument has never been thoroughly evaluated longitudinally (Schildkamp and Visscher, 2010). Furthermore, they contend that several studies report a lack of effect of school self-evaluation feedback, but this lack of effect may be caused by a lack of use of school self-evaluation feedback (Schildkamp and Visscher, 2010). McNamara and OHara (2008) note that there has been a remarkable rise in the regulation of public services and servants, especially in education, in an attempt to counterbalance the autonomy of schools. Furthermore, external evaluation and inspection has been an important element of this trend, however as their limitations become more apparent, the concept of internal or self evaluation has grown in importance (McNamara and OHara, 2008). These authors proceed to warn that the greater emphasis an evaluation system places on teacher appraisal and accountability, the less useful that system is likely to be for school improvement and professional development (McNamara and OHara, 2008). The European Parliament and Council on European Cooperation in Quality Evaluation in school education, in McNamara and OHara (2008), argue that improvements in European schools evaluation provisions are dependant on the enhancement of schools abilities to evaluate themselves and call for all member states of the European Union (EU) to encourage school self-evaluation as a method of creating learning and improving schools (McNamara and OHara, 2008). This analysis is echoed by the OECD report which views development of school evaluation skills within the education system as being a critical component of the drive to improving educational provision in OECD member states (McNamara and OHara, 2008) During the apartheid era, prior 1994, traditional quality assurance approaches like school inspection were vehemently opposed by teacher unions who felt that their members were intimidated. When WSE was introduced, there was hope that this democratic process would bring satisfaction to educators and yield better learner attainment results, particularly in previously disadvantaged areas, but that positive change is still being awaited. Despite the surfeit of education policies, South Africa is facing a serious challenge of a growing trend of dysfunctional and underperforming schools, especially in previously disadvantaged areas. Efforts by the government to swivel this proclivity have been in vane. This is confirmed by the fact that the government has made some strides to develop education policies that should have culminated in school improvement, but that outcome has not yet been realised. The Whole School Evaluation policy was introduced in 2001 to improve school performance, but c onversely, schools are performing worse as time goes by, as revealed by national and international studies like Systemic Evaluation, TIMSS, SACMEQ and PIRLS. It should be a worrying factor to every educationist as to why this education policy is not yielding the expected outcomes. It is a cause for concern to find out if this policy is being implemented as prescribed by the relevant policy document. Even though the Mpumalanga province of South Africa has reported an 8,9 % improvement in grade 12 results in 2010, it is still the lowest province in terms of learner attainment in the country, sitting at 56,8 % (MDoE, 2011). Poor performance is shoddier in rural schools where socio-economic challenges and challenges of providing qualified teachers, adequate physical and financial resources are still overwhelming. This situation is exacerbated by the fact that a good number of these rural primary schools are multi-graded farm schools. As a principal of one of the rural primary schools in the neighbourhood of one of the worse performing secondary schools in the sub-region, I have an obligation to find out the root course of underperformance in rural school. It has also come to my realisation that during school visitations by the circuit management, district office or provincial external evaluation team, the school self evaluation instrument is neither enquired about nor monitored. There is no link or correlation between inspection and school-based evaluation. According to the WSE policy, schools must complete and submit self evaluation forms A and B before the end of March on an annual basis (DoE, 2004). On the contrary not even a single school submits such a document to the regional office. I have also noted that in my three years of experience as a principal, not even a single official from any of the structures of the education department has ever enquired about the self evaluation instrument. One then tends to wonder what purpose is this education policy serving. Whether they are meant to improve the quality of education or they were just developed for symbolism still remains mysterious. I am therefore determined to come out with a turn around strategy to ensure effective implementation of the self-evaluation instrument of the WSE policy so as to ensure accountability and improvement in the education quality of rural schools. This study will investigate how and to what extent the school self-evaluation instrument is utilised in rural schools. It will further explore the perceptions of school principals towards school self-evaluation. Lastly, it will determine how school self-evaluation could be better utilised to ensure school improvement and quality education. It is my conviction that if school self-evaluation can be efficiently implemented, school improvement and quality education can be achieved. Moreover, the school self-evaluation findings must easily accessible to all stakeholders, analysed, and its recommendations must be implemented so as to realise the desired outcomes of school improvement. This study will advocate for keeping all stakeholders informed about the performance of their school, and encourage them to positively contribution to the improvement of their school. It will also assist different officers in all structures of education, from the school principal to the provincial Superintend ent Generals, to perform their designated duties diligently. Finally policy makers will get feedback of implementation of the policy such that they can evaluate its impact and make possible amendments if necessary. main research question In order to address the problem statement, this study must give an explicit answer to the following question:- How and to what extent is school self-evaluation implemented for school improvement in rural schools? structure of the proposal Section 1 of the proposal is the introduction of school self-evaluation, enunciation of the problem statement and rational, and elocution of the main research question. Section 2 portrays the context of the study and section 3 presents the literature that has been reviewed. Section 4 will demonstrate the research design and methods that will be implemented and section 5 will illustrate the timeline for the whole research process. Section 6 will give the outline of chapters and section 7 will be the list references. Context for the study The study will take place in the rural schools of Mpumalanga province. Mpumalanga is one of the provinces that have the lowest socio-economic status. Consequently, most schools are in quintiles one and two, indicating that the learners in these schools are from destitute families. Learners have to travel for over five Kilometres every single day, to get to school, posing absenteeism problems to educators. Some of these schools have no electricity and sanitation, such that introduction of the new forms of technologically advanced equipment is implausible. Mpumalanga has the least percentage decrease in the number of learners at farm schools. The new vision for rural schooling states that between 1996 and 2000, it decreased by -65% (DoE, 2005). This figure shows that there is a steady increase in the number of learners at farm schools. The Ermelo sub-district has three circuits with ninety seven schools, out of which only eight are in town. The rest of them are located in very remote farms such that access to such schools for the support teams in a daunting task. There are no secondary farm school, but combined schools. This is because the enrolment of these schools does not allow them to be fully fledged secondary schools. A good number of primary schools have multi-graded classes, combining learners from different grades into one class. This situation does not only present management problems but pedagogical challenges as well. It is unbearable for educators to manage curriculum delivery under such adverse conditions. Even though conditions seem to be unfavourable for provision of quality education, rural schools are also expected to improve their performance. School self-evaluation must be implemented just in the same way or better than it should be implemented in urban schools. The WSE policy however recognises that the inauspicious conditions may retard the pace of school improvement. A provision was made in the policy, to evaluate each school based on its contextual factors. One of the principles of the WSE policy is seek to understand why schools are where they are and to use the particular circumstances to the school as the main starting point of evaluation (DoE, 2001). literature review introduction This section reviews researches that were conducted in Ireland, Netherlands, England and South Africa, based on School Self-Evaluation (SSE). A comparison is made to identify and best international practices and set them as a benchmark for implementation of School Self-Evaluation for school improvement in South Africa. A DISCUSSION OF research conducted internationally AS WELL AS studies in south africa SCHOOL SELF-EVALUATION IN IRELAND In Ireland, the first system of evaluation that was piloted between 1990 and 1999 is the Whole School Evaluation (WSE). This system culminated in a series of rancorous industrial disputes that lasted until 2003. The reason for these quarrels was that educators viewed evaluation as reductionist and managerialist interference in their profession while stakeholders such as parents, learners and business community demanded hard data from a transparent school evaluation process (McNamara and OHara, 2006). In 2004, a new framework for school evaluation, Looking At Our School (LAOS), was implemented (McNamara and OHara, 2006). McNamara and OHara explain that the School Self-Evaluation (SSE) is based on a broad framework for inspection and evaluation of schools that includes five areas of evaluation that are subdivided into 143 themes for self-evaluation, which are used to prepare for external evaluation by the inspectorate (McNamara and OHara, 2006). In short, SSE precedes external evaluati on and it is conducted by each schools stakeholders, unlike external evaluation which is conducted by external officials called inspectorates. McNamara and OHara (2006) also contend that Ireland is adopting a model of quality assurance that emphasizes school development planning through internal school-review and self-evaluation, with the support of external evaluation carried out by the Inspectorate (McNamara and OHara, 2006). This model concurs with MacBeaths idea which argues that the role of external evaluation and inspection is merely to ensure that internal systems of evaluation and self-review are implemented effectively (McNamara and OHara, 2006). In their study, McNamara and OHara (2006) reveal that principals expressed their view that any form of external evaluation was by its nature superficial, underestimated the non-academic achievements of schools and raised deep concerns among teachers, yet to the contrary, self-evaluation with no external mandate or monitoring was perceived as a major success (McNamara and OHara, 2006). According to McNamara and OHara, self-evaluation in Ireland had its negatives. Firstly, LAOS documents lack suggestions as to how schools should collect the data on which the effectiveness and credibility of the whole system must rest (McNamara and OHara, 2006). Secondly, the judgments in the areas, aspects and components requires data that in the present system does not exist- there is, for instance, no data regarding the ability and general expectations of pupils (McNamara and OHara, 2006). McNamara and OHara argue that evaluation, whether external or internal, mandated or self-driven, requires at a minimum the collection and analysis of real data on which firm conclusions can be based (McNamara and OHara, 2006). Thirdly, the Chief Inspector shifted the responsibility of addressing weaknesses identified during inspection to self-governing and self-evaluating institutions. McNamara and OHara argue that the weaknesses identified during inspection should not be a responsibility of sch ools to address them since they do not have the capacity to control over resources, teacher tenure and conditions of employment, and issue. Moreover, schools cannot solve all problems themselves in-house-that is a fiction (McNamara and OHara, 2006). After the court judgment, the honours of whether to release none, some or all of the Inspection Report lies solely on schools management team. Fourthly, LAOS is silent about the appropriate role of parents, teachers and learners in the school evaluation process. One other worrying factor is that the concept of an ongoing self-evaluation was said to be puzzling to most schools (McNamara and OHara, 2006). Lastly, McNamara and OHara (2008) lament that the lack of any guidelines in LAOS as to criteria or research methods that might inform judgments has led to what amounts to data-free evaluation in practice, and moreover, it is clear that without such guidelines and the provision of training and research support for schools, the situation is not likely to change (McNamara and OHara, 2008). The study by McNamara and OHara reveal acceptance of the new themes of self-evaluation to give a comprehensive picture of all schools activities and not just their academic outcomes (McNamara and OHara, 2006). According to McNamara and OHara (2006), the above point was particularly stressed by respondents from the two primary schools designated disadvantaged, which felt very strongly that the affirmation of good practice provided by the inspectors was of extraordinary importance to teachers in disadvantaged school who rarely feel valued or supported. This was perceived as a considerable achievement in an education community deeply suspicious of evaluation, inspection and appraisal (McNamara and OHara, 2006). SCHOOL SELF-EVALUATION IN SCOTLAND Croxford, Grek and Shaik (2009) state that despite the change from Conservative to Labour government in 1997, education policy in Scotland and elsewhere in the United Kingdom (UK) continued to reflect an emphasis on quality assurance and a belief that competition and setting standards would enhance quality and ensure accountability (Croxford et al., 2009). They further stipulate that Scotlands approach to Quality Assurance and Evaluation (QAE) has a greater emphasis on self-evaluation by schools, whereas England had a stronger focus on hard performance indicators (Croxford et al., 2009). The Inspectorate is a major influence on the formulation of education policies. In 1980, the Inspectorates set up a Management of Education Resource Unit (MERU) that later became the Audit Unit, to promote good management achieve value for money in education. It started publishing papers that identified characteristics of effective schools in an attempt to encourage secondary schools to evaluate thei r own practice and performance (MacBeath and Mortimore, 2001). In 1990/91 it began publishing annually information for parents series-reports giving the details of schools attainment data; school costs; attendance and absence rates and school leaver destination for secondary schools. In 1991, it published the role of school development plans in managing schools effectiveness as well as statistical information about examination performance per school, which was used for school self-evaluation. Standards Tables were used each year to compare the performance by subject departments within each school and nationally, the Relative Ratings and National Comparison Factors, respectively (Croxford et al. 2009). The Scottish Office Education Industry Department (SOEID) in Croxford et al. ( 2009) state that the process of self-evaluation and development planning were set out more explicitly by the Audit Unit publication How good is our school? (HGIOS?), which provided a set of performance indic ators of what a good school should look like (Croxford et al. 2009). Schools were encouraged to use the same performance indicators as those used by the HMI in school inspection to identify, report and take action where required on strengths and weaknesses (Croxford et al., 2009). In 1997, HMI set out its vision of working in partnership with local authorities and schools through the quality initiative in Scotland schools. This was endorsed in the standards in Scotlands schools Act 2000. According to Cowie and Croxford, in Croxford et al. (2009), this act places local authorities under great pressure to implement the required quality assurance procedures by the threat of adverse inspection by HMI of education (HMIE) (Croxford et al., 2009). A new professional group of Quality Improvement Officers (QIO) has been established to challenge and support schools. They scrutinise statistics on school performance, seek to ensure a robust self-evaluation structure within schools and identify areas that need to be addressed (Croxford et al., 2009). They carry out a regular cycle of visits to schools to: assess the schools progress with its school development plan; discuss improvement issues with management and staff; and support the schools management in making improvements (Croxford et al., 2009). The local authorities themselves are inspected by HMIE, with special regard to their own self-evaluation and the extent to which they support and challenge their schools (Croxford et al., 2009). In Scotland, schools are required to evaluate their own performance each year using the 30 quality Indicators from HGIOS and their performance on the indicators is extremely judged on a regular basis through inspection of schools carried out by HMIE. The indicators are based on key performance outcomes, delivery of education, policy development and planning, management and support staff, partnership and resources, leadership capacity for improvement (Croxford et al., 2009). Self-evalua tion procedure requires schools to look at each aspect of provision and ask: How are we doing? How do we know? What are we going to do now? For each indicator, schools must gather evidence in order to evaluate their performance, on a six-point scale from 1 [unsatisfactory], to 6 [excellent] (Croxford et al. 2009). SCHOOL SELF-EVALUATION IN ENGLAND Prior 1990, the government of England implemented a top down strategy to school monitor performance of schools. A change was seen in 1997 when the government showed some commitment to support and promote school self-evaluation (Turnbull, 2007). The Department for Education and Skills (DfES), 2004 notes that in 1999, a revised framework was of inspecting schools that included guidance for schools on using it for school self-evaluation, and not just inspection was introduced (DfES, 2004). Local authorities had been providing support for head teachers as they increase their efforts to manage and lead the self-evaluation process and procedures now expected in their schools (Plowright, 2008). The Office for standards in education (Ofsted), in Plowright (2008) contends that the school that knows and understands itself is on the way to solving any problem it hasà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ self-evaluation provides the key to improvement (Plowright, 2008). In his empirical research, Plowright discovered that head teachers held a positive view of the use of self-evaluation in contributing to school improvement (Plowright, 2008). The introduction of the new inspection framework in September 2005 in England culminated in an obligation that every school had to maintain and submit an online Self-Evaluation Form (SEF) that records the judgments of its current performance and its priorities for improvement (Bubb, Early, Ahtaridou, Jones and Taylor, 2007). According to Ofsted in Bubb, et al. (2007), intelligent accountability is based on a schools own views of how well it serves its learners and suggests that all schools need to be able to answer two key questions: How well are we doing? And how can we do better? Bubb, et al. (2007) further argue that even though the SEF is not statutory but all schools seem to use it, which is unsurprising as their inspection is largely based around the SEF which includes the performance data (Bubb, et al., 2007). The areas of evaluation are: the characteristics of the school; views of learners, parents/carers and other stakeholders; leadership and management; overall effectivenes s and efficiency (Bubb, et al., 2007). Leung, 2005 emphasises that unless teachers beliefs are changed, and shared meaning is achieved, for example believing in the importance of evidence-based evaluation methods for self-evaluation and the importance of continuous self-improvement, there will not be commitment towards the reform initiatives and success cannot be guaranteed (Leung, 2005). She further warns that restructuring, changing only procedures, designing performance indicators and mandating the public announcement of evaluation results cannot help us but providing assistance to schools, supporting professionals networks and providing school-based on-going school development is vital (Leung, 2005). Scholars like Hargreaves and Fullan ascertain only that recruiting can facilitate educational professionals to transform their old beliefs and practices (Leung, 2005). In their research on 38 schools across England, where they were investigating self-evaluation and school improvement progress, Bubb, et al. (2007) discovered that SEF are completed in many different ways, ranging from individual efforts by head teachers to involvement of external consultants to collective efforts by all staff members (Bubb, et al., 2007). They also found out that some dissatisfaction demonstrated by support staff who felt left out and expressed that they could have made crucial contributions if they were not excluded. The process started with training the whole staff so as to raise awareness of the process and its requirements. Each staff member, including heads of departments, would the complete his/her form under supervision of their Senior Leadership Group (SLG) (Bubb, et al., 2007). In her study, Turnbull, (2007) discovered that head teachers in England saw that self-evaluation in some form became a reality of practice through the intervention of Local Education Authorities (LEAs), reflecting the growing impact of globalisation and accountability of schools (Turnbull, 2007). SCHOOL SELF-EVALUATION IN SOUTH AFRICA Prior 1994, schools performance was monitored through inspection, but there was no requirement or expectation of schools to undertake self-evaluation in South Africa (Turnbull, 2007). Some form of self-evaluation was introduced in 1998 through the Developmental Appraisal System (DAS), and Whole School Evaluation (WSE) in 2001 for full implementation in 2003 (Turnbull, 2007). These systems aimed at involving all educators in evaluating their practice, enabling self-evaluation of the WSE and impact of management, and they were to be monitored by the external supervisors from the provincial office of the Department of Education (DoE) (Turnbull, 2007). Both systems failed to realize their objective and a new Integrated Quality Management System (IQMS) was introduced in 2003, combining DAS, WSE and Performance Measurement (PM). School Self-Evaluation (SSE) is the initial phase of the two-phased WSE. The second phase is external evaluation conducted by provincial supervisors in a three year cycle. Both phases utilise the same instrument for evaluation. There are 9 key areas of evaluation namely: basic functionality of the school; leadership, management and communication, governance and relationships; quality teaching and learning and educator development; curriculum provision and resources; learner achievement; school safety, security and discipline; school infrastructure and parent and community (DoE, 2001). The process of evaluation cycle includes pre-evaluation; school self-evaluation; detailed on-site evaluation, post-evaluation reporting and post evaluation support. Each supervisory team will have a team leader who has the responsibility to build a brief profile about the general level of functionality of the school and to share with the school the procedures that will be followed by the evaluation team. The team leader also has overall responsibility for the evaluation process and the conduct of the supervisors. Supervisory teams will comprise accredited supervisors capable of evaluating the nine areas for evaluation. Members should have the experience to evaluate at least one subject/learning area and have an awareness of the key elements of good provision for Learners with Special Education Needs (LSEN). The number of supervisors will normally be within the range of four to six, depending on the school size and resources available. Evaluations will normally be conducted between th ree to four days of the week, depending on the size of the school. A school will be helped by district support services to formulate and implement an improvement plan based on the recommendations in the report and provide the school with support as it seeks to implement the plan (DoE, 2001) The findings in Turnbulls research disclose that all educators interviewed identified that the various attempts to introduce self-evaluation had failed, though all saw that the concept was one that should be in place, but attempts to use self-evaluation to improve the quality of teaching and learning in individual schools were taking place, with individual teachers working together on classroom practice and in some schools using IQMS, with senior team ensuring that every member of staff was observed at least once a year, met with the observer, and those seen to have issues being visited (Turnbull, 2007). The failure of introduction of self-evaluation is attributed to two groups of factors. The first issues are managerial and they include: the linking of the use of self-evaluation to the annual pay increments making it impossible to award someone less than satisfactory even though he/she deserves it, especially in township schools; the unwieldy nature of the system needed to implement policy; and the lack of capacity of the local DoE to either monitor the process, or provide support for schools where a need was identified. The second issues are cultural/historical and they include: the limited experience of educators of any form of self-evaluation and limited training provided; the limited practical training of the majority of township teachers and principals; the impact of the previous political system leading to a resistance to change; and in township schools the real danger o

Sole Proprietorship vs. General Partnership vs. Corporation :: essays research papers

A sole proprietorship is a type of business that is owned and operated by one person who is responsible for all the debts. Forming the business is really easy to start off with. Also the owner receives all the profit from the business and is his or her own boss. The down side to owning a sole proprietor business of your own is it is really hard to find sources for funding the business for it to grow and expand. An example of a local proprietor business is Martha’s Kitchen. Martha’s kitchen is a really small restaurant on the outskirts of town. Martha chose to open a diner at her location because it is joined with a gas station and it is in a remarkable location for a restaurant business. Martha’s kitchen is open from 5:30 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. She serves the best peach cobbler around. A general partnership is when two or more persons decide to share the responsibility of operating a business together. The partners are also equally responsible for all the company debts incurred by each partner. The combined partners in the business allow the business to grow very easy because it is very easy to find sources for funding and investors. The biggest disadvantage that a general partnership has is the difficulty of transferring ownership or selling out because of having the consent of the other partners. An example of a local general partnership is Rest My Friend Lawn Care. The lawn care business originated as a sole proprietor but now it is a family business with several partners. Blake, Larry, and Tracy chose this type of business because they were able to invest in the business and to this day they are making a great profit out of the business. Corporations are the biggest type of business out of all three. Corporations are considered to be separate from the owners and they are liable for their own debts. When investors invest in a business they are held liable for only what they invest in the company in event of failure.

My Experiences in a Nursing Career Essay -- Personal Essays Career

Nursing   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã¢â‚¬Å"Nursing is an art: and if it is to be made an art, It requires an exclusive devotion as hard a preparation, as any painter ´s or sculptor ´s work; for what is the having to do with dead canvas or dead marble, compared with having to do with the living body, the temple of God ´s spirit? It is one of the Fine Arts: I had almost said, the finest of Fine Arts.† Spoken by a true nurse, Florence Nightingale; a pioneer of nursing and a reformer of hospital sanitation methods.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  I have many goals in life such as to have a good strong career and family. What is important to me is graduating Central high school and go on to UND. While at UND I plan to get my nursing degree and specialize in pediatrics and truama. I have already started to make short term goals that will lead me in to the life of nursing.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  I have volunteered at Altru hospital since I was in the eight grade. I have been on most of the floors from surgery to pediatrics, terminally ill to yearly check ups. This has influenced me greatly, encouraging me to go in to nursing and also to go in to a more specialized area. Volunteering helped me search my future my career until I was old enough to get my CNA and go in to the health careers class. A CNA is a certified nursing assistant. When I turned sixteen i applied for the CNA class. Three months later I became a CNA. As a junior I also took a health careers class. This class gave me a more indepth look at the choices that I could make a...

Describe the Role of Hr Professionals in Designing

Introduction This question asks to address how bullying policies and procedures are a task of HR to implement in the workplace therefore this answer will define exactly what bullying is, what policies should be in place and any recommendations for the occurrence of bullying in the workplace. Relevant case examples will be used to support the argument along with relevant referenced authors, on this topic. On concluding, how bullying can be prevented will be reflected on after stating what the future may hold for bullying in the workplace.What is bullying? Since the shift from Uni-cultural societies to multi-cultural societies in recent times, there has been a significant decrease in perceived inequalities in the workplace. However, the issue of bullying is still prominent in many organisations, (especially throughout Ireland today). Baillien et al. (2009) defines bullying as persistent negative behaviour at work in which the victim is subject to psychological, physical or sexual acts by the perpetrator and often find themselves in a position where they are unable to defend themselves.The analysis carried out found that bullying, or some form of harassment, was likely to occur out of one of three pathways: interpersonal frustrations, interpersonal conflict and intragroup level. The problem with the latter is that the culture of gossip within organisations has become a norm and hence the certain behaviours by perpetrators may often be overlooked. Although bullying is often associated with actions that people carry out, it also includes actions that individuals fail to do such as providing necessary training to a particular employee. For example, if new technology is introduced into the firm, extra training will be required. Hence, if bullying of a certain employee was occurring, this may lead to their deprivation of sufficient training which in turn will have a negative consequence for the entire firm. ) Within Maslow (1943) hierarchy of needs framework, safety ne eds are crucial to all employees and the victimisation due to bullying will prevent the fulfilment of this need in the workplace. As a result, low productivity and low morale may be present within the workforce.Policies/Procedures As the question states, it is the task of the HR department to ensure the design & implementation of policies and procedures to prevent or deal with the occurrence of workplace bullying. The event hierarchy of the bullying (reference) intervention process has three levels: the prevention zone which involves policy enquiries by the target, the intervention zone which begins with an informal complaint and may lead to a formal complaint, and the failure zone where legal action is taken.In order to prevent an employee reaching the highest level and engaging in legal action, it is the responsibility of HR to assist in dealing with the problem immediate to the first complaint. Bullying/Harassment must be occurring in the workplace as opposed to personal life con flicts between workers in order for HR to manage the situation but studies carried out in this area have shown that senior level management are often weak in dealing with issues of bullying or harassment. (Baillien et al. 009) Consequently, when HR is implementing practices, they need to ensure the co-operation and comprehension of senior level managers in this area. There are three main actions HR can take in order to reduce bullying situations. Firstly the implementation of clear, concise policies needs to be carried out which state unacceptable behaviours classed as bullying or harassment and the procedures an individual may take if found subjected to this behaviour. In addition to this, a Code of Conduct should be established in order to set out training procedures for employees and management as a means of preventing 7workplace bullying.Within management training, conflict resolution and mediation skills need to be provided in order to act effectively. During the recruitment of management in an organisation, it is vital to ensure they have people management skills along with task related competence. Finally, often the most important thing HR and senior managers can do is lead by example. If policies and procedures are implemented but managers are not behaving in a way that complies entirely with these, then this could lead to adverse effects by subordinates. ExampleOne primary example of where HR failed to act on behaviour of a new employee that initially was unacceptable by the firm but resulted in unacceptable behaviour to moral society was in relation to Rob Parsons within Morgan Stanley. (Burton, 1998) Parsons was hired to achieve a growth implementation strategy as Nasr believed he was the man to do it. However, a culture of strict policies and procedures within the organisation meant that Parsons Non-compliance immediately stood out. Initially, he was not involved with bullying but was seen as a ‘lone wolf’ within the firm, significantl y seen through his inability to perform within a team.As time lapsed, HR and Parsons Management failed to confront him on his behaviour and essentially allowed the collapse of their organisational policies for him due to the fear he may leave the firm. Eventually, he was fired as a result of a bullying case that occurred at a client meeting. He had been making unacceptable critical remarks to a fellow female employee of the firm, humiliating her in front of the client. Hence, the occurrence of Parson’s psychological bullying was finally evident and may have been prevented if HR followed through with their policies with all employees including Rob Parsons.Future of Workplace Bullying Due to the increase of technology, the working environment now often extends into the realm of personal life. In effect, this may cause the enabling of workplace bullying to stretch further than the perimeter of the four walls of the organisation and in particular, social networking sites are a pr imary target for the extension of this bullying. However, since present policies and procedures focus on ‘workplace bullying’, victims may be limited to the actions they can take.With the growth in the integration of personal and work life, HR may be unable to re-address their policies to include outer work boundaries due to legal constraints. Although, conversely it may be easier to identify and prosecute the perpetrators of bullying or harassment if the behaviour extends to personal life, such as through social networking sites. Conclusion Bullying and harassment is often a topic ignored within the workplace as victims sometimes feel ashamed and managers choose not to deal with the problem. However it is the responsibility of HR to ensure these practices are implemented and abided by all, including management.Failure to do this will undoubtedly lead to extensive consequences such as reputational damage to the firm, direct costs including replacement costs and indirect costs such as low productivity. Although not a continuing case of bullying, the Morgan Stanley case briefly highlights how the failures of HR and senior management to address his unacceptable behaviour from the outset led to undesired effects, including his removal from the firm and legal action by a fellow employee. All in all, the prevention of workplace bullying can be assisted by appropriate practices carried out by HR.