In case the body have to stay in lower temperature for extended time period (more than 1 hour), how does the body regulate its response?

In case the body have to stay in lower temperature for extended time period (more than 1 hour), how does the body regulate its response?

Arterioles transporting blood to external capillaries beneath the surface of … Read More...
The extinction of the dinosaurs has been associated with Select one: a virus leading to disease and massive loss of life. dinosaurs preying upon each other until they became extinct. a meteor impact at the end of the Cretaceous Era that caused major cooling. new chemicals and ions in the environment which caused dinosaurs to become sterile. mammals who were more adapted and more able to acquire similar resources.

The extinction of the dinosaurs has been associated with Select one: a virus leading to disease and massive loss of life. dinosaurs preying upon each other until they became extinct. a meteor impact at the end of the Cretaceous Era that caused major cooling. new chemicals and ions in the environment which caused dinosaurs to become sterile. mammals who were more adapted and more able to acquire similar resources.

The extinction of the dinosaurs has been associated with Select … Read More...
How do differences of culture between countries or within a country affect the operations of your chosen organization or of firms in your chosen industry sector? (10 marks) UNIT 5.The Socio-Cultural Environment Elements of culture: language, religion, values, customs, education, diversity.cultural changesBusiness ethics and the concept of corporate social responsibility.Aging or age distribution, population size changes, demographic changes, ethical argument in favour of CSR

How do differences of culture between countries or within a country affect the operations of your chosen organization or of firms in your chosen industry sector? (10 marks) UNIT 5.The Socio-Cultural Environment Elements of culture: language, religion, values, customs, education, diversity.cultural changesBusiness ethics and the concept of corporate social responsibility.Aging or age distribution, population size changes, demographic changes, ethical argument in favour of CSR

The number of companies functioning globally is mounting continually. The … Read More...
The unique mandate of personality psychologists is to attempt to ________. identify and measure individual differences in ability and behavior determine the effect of the social environment on behavior explain whole, functioning persons and real life concerns prevent or treat psychological personality disorders

The unique mandate of personality psychologists is to attempt to ________. identify and measure individual differences in ability and behavior determine the effect of the social environment on behavior explain whole, functioning persons and real life concerns prevent or treat psychological personality disorders

The unique mandate of personality psychologists is to attempt to … Read More...
This assignment provides you the opportunity to reflect on the topics ethics and how one might experience ethical challenges early in one’s career. The attached scenario is based on actual events and used with permission of ASCE. Using the attached scenario and American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) code of ethics, develop a response to the questions that are included within the scenario. Your deliverable must be in the form of a memorandum, which could be used as a reference or guideline when discussing the importance of ethics colleagues. When answering the questions you should be specific in identifying the components of the code of ethics you use to reflect on the questions posed and how they would be used to assist someone facing the same scenario. Ethics Scenario and Questions: Last month, Sara was reported to her State’s Engineer’s Board for a possible ethics violation. Tomorrow morning she would meet with the Board and though she felt she had done nothing unethical, Sara’s eyes had been opened to the complexity and gravity of ethical dilemmas in engineering practice. She wished she had sought and/or received better guidance regarding ethical issues earlier in her career. Sara reflected on how she got to this point in her career. When Sara had been a senior Civil Engineering student in an ABET-accredited program at the State University, she immersed herself in her course work. Graduating at the top of her class assured Sara that she would have some choice in her career direction. Knowing that she wanted to become a licensed engineer, Sara took and passed the Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) exam during her senior year and after graduation, went to work as an Engineer Intern (EI) for a company that would allow her to achieve that goal. Sara was excited about her new job — she worked diligently for four years under licensed engineers and was assigned increasing responsibilities. She was now ready to take the Professional Engineer (PE) exam and become licensed. Just before taking the PE licensing exam, Sara’s firm was retained to investigate the structural integrity of an apartment complex that the firm’s client planned to sell. Sara’s supervisor informed her in no uncertain terms that the client required that the structural report remain confidential. Later, the client informed Sara that he planned to sell the occupied property “as is.” During Sara’s investigation she found no significant structural problems with the apartment complex. However, she did observe some electrical deficiencies that she believed violated city codes and could pose a safety hazard to the occupants. Realizing that electrical matters were, in a manner of speaking, not her direct area of expertise, Sara discussed possible approaches with her colleague and friend, Tom. Also an Engineer Intern, Tom had been an officer in the student chapter of ASCE during their college years. During their conversation, Tom commented that based on the ASCE Code of Ethics, he believed Sara had an ethical obligation to disclose this health-safety problem. Sara felt Tom did not appreciate the fact that she had been clearly instructed to keep such information confidential, and she certainly did not want to damage the client relationship. Nevertheless, with reluctance, Sara verbally informed the client about the problem and made an oblique reference to the electrical deficiencies in her report, which her supervisor signed and sealed. Several weeks later, Sara learned that her client did not inform either the residents of the apartment complex or the prospective buyer about her concerns. Although Sara felt confident and pleased with her work on the project, the situation about the electrical deficiencies continued to bother her. She wondered if she had an ethical obligation to do more than just tell the client and state her concerns in her report. The thought of informing the proper authorities occurred to her, especially since the client was not disclosing the potential safety concerns to either the occupants or the buyer. She toyed with the idea of discussing the situation with her immediate supervisor but since everyone seemed satisfied, Sara moved onto other projects and eventually put it out of her mind. Questions to consider (What were the main issues Sara was wrestling with in this situation? ; Do you think Sara had a “right” or an “obligation” to report the deficiency to the proper authorities? ;Who might Sara have spoken with about the dilemma? ; Who should be responsible for what happened – Sara, Sara’s employer, the client, or someone else? ; How does this situation conflict with Sara’s obligation to be faithful to her client? ; Is it wise practice to ignore “gut feelings” that arise? These and other questions will surface again later and most will be considered at that point, but let’s continue for now with Sara’s story. During her first few years with the company, and under the supervision of several managers, Sara was encouraged to become active in technical and professional societies (which was the policy of the company). But then she found her involvement with those groups diminishing as her current supervisor opposed Sara’s participation in meetings and conferences unless she used vacation time. Sara was very frustrated but did not really know how to rectify the situation. In the course of time, Sara attended a meeting with the CEO on a different matter and she took the opportunity to inquire about attending technical and professional society meetings. The CEO reaffirmed that the company thought it important and that he wanted Sara to participate in such meetings. Sara informed her supervisor and though he did begin approving Sara’s requests for leave to participate in society meetings, their relationship was strained. Questions to consider: What might Sara have done differently to seek a remedy and yet preserve her relationship with her supervisor? ; Where could Sara have found guidance in the ASCE Code of Ethics, appropriate to this situation? The story continues….. As Christmas approached the following year, Sara discovered a gift bag on her desk. Inside the gift bag was an expensive honey-glazed spiral cut ham and a Christmas greeting card from a vendor who called on Sara from time to time. This concerned Sara as she felt it might cast doubt on the integrity of their business relationship. She asked around and found that several others received gifts from the vendor as well. After sleeping on it, Sara sent a polite note to the vendor returning the ham. Questions to consider: Was Sara really obligated to return the ham? Or was this taking ethics too far? ; On the other hand, could Sara be obligated to pursue the matter further than just returning the gift she had received? A few years later, friends and colleagues urged Sara, now a highly successful principal in a respected engineering firm, to run for public office. Sara carefully considered this step, realizing it would be a challenge to juggle work, family, and such intense community involvement. Ultimately, she agreed to run and soon found herself immersed in the campaign. A draft political advertisement was prepared that included her photograph, her engineering seal, and the following text: “Vote for Sara! We need an engineer on the City Council. That is simple common sense, isn’t it? Sara is an experienced licensed engineer with years of rich accomplishments, who disdains delays and takes action now!” Questions to consider: Should Sara’s engineering seal be included in the advertisement? ; Should she ask someone in ASCE his or her opinion before deciding? As fate would have it, a few days later, just after announcing her candidacy for City Council, the matter of Sara’s investigation of the apartment complex so many years ago resurfaced. Sara learned that the apartment complex caught on fire, and people had been seriously injured. During the investigation of the cause of the fire, Sara’s report was reviewed, and somehow the cause of the fire was traced to the electrical deficiencies, which she had briefly mentioned. Immediately this hit the local newspapers, attorneys became involved, and subsequently the Licensing Board was asked to look into the ethical responsibilities related to the report. Now, sitting alone by the shore of the lake, Sara pondered her situation. Legally, she felt she might claim some immunity since she was not a licensed engineer at the time of her work on the apartment complex. But professionally, she keenly felt she had let the public down, and she could not get this, or those who had been hurt in the fire, out of her mind. Question to consider: Occasionally, are some elements of the code in conflict with other elements In the backseat of the taxi on the way to the airport, Sara thumbed through her hometown newspaper that she had purchased at a newsstand. She stopped when she saw an editorial about her City Council campaign. The article claimed that, as a result of the allegations against her, she was no longer fit for public office. Could this be true? Question to consider: How should she respond to such claims?

This assignment provides you the opportunity to reflect on the topics ethics and how one might experience ethical challenges early in one’s career. The attached scenario is based on actual events and used with permission of ASCE. Using the attached scenario and American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) code of ethics, develop a response to the questions that are included within the scenario. Your deliverable must be in the form of a memorandum, which could be used as a reference or guideline when discussing the importance of ethics colleagues. When answering the questions you should be specific in identifying the components of the code of ethics you use to reflect on the questions posed and how they would be used to assist someone facing the same scenario. Ethics Scenario and Questions: Last month, Sara was reported to her State’s Engineer’s Board for a possible ethics violation. Tomorrow morning she would meet with the Board and though she felt she had done nothing unethical, Sara’s eyes had been opened to the complexity and gravity of ethical dilemmas in engineering practice. She wished she had sought and/or received better guidance regarding ethical issues earlier in her career. Sara reflected on how she got to this point in her career. When Sara had been a senior Civil Engineering student in an ABET-accredited program at the State University, she immersed herself in her course work. Graduating at the top of her class assured Sara that she would have some choice in her career direction. Knowing that she wanted to become a licensed engineer, Sara took and passed the Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) exam during her senior year and after graduation, went to work as an Engineer Intern (EI) for a company that would allow her to achieve that goal. Sara was excited about her new job — she worked diligently for four years under licensed engineers and was assigned increasing responsibilities. She was now ready to take the Professional Engineer (PE) exam and become licensed. Just before taking the PE licensing exam, Sara’s firm was retained to investigate the structural integrity of an apartment complex that the firm’s client planned to sell. Sara’s supervisor informed her in no uncertain terms that the client required that the structural report remain confidential. Later, the client informed Sara that he planned to sell the occupied property “as is.” During Sara’s investigation she found no significant structural problems with the apartment complex. However, she did observe some electrical deficiencies that she believed violated city codes and could pose a safety hazard to the occupants. Realizing that electrical matters were, in a manner of speaking, not her direct area of expertise, Sara discussed possible approaches with her colleague and friend, Tom. Also an Engineer Intern, Tom had been an officer in the student chapter of ASCE during their college years. During their conversation, Tom commented that based on the ASCE Code of Ethics, he believed Sara had an ethical obligation to disclose this health-safety problem. Sara felt Tom did not appreciate the fact that she had been clearly instructed to keep such information confidential, and she certainly did not want to damage the client relationship. Nevertheless, with reluctance, Sara verbally informed the client about the problem and made an oblique reference to the electrical deficiencies in her report, which her supervisor signed and sealed. Several weeks later, Sara learned that her client did not inform either the residents of the apartment complex or the prospective buyer about her concerns. Although Sara felt confident and pleased with her work on the project, the situation about the electrical deficiencies continued to bother her. She wondered if she had an ethical obligation to do more than just tell the client and state her concerns in her report. The thought of informing the proper authorities occurred to her, especially since the client was not disclosing the potential safety concerns to either the occupants or the buyer. She toyed with the idea of discussing the situation with her immediate supervisor but since everyone seemed satisfied, Sara moved onto other projects and eventually put it out of her mind. Questions to consider (What were the main issues Sara was wrestling with in this situation? ; Do you think Sara had a “right” or an “obligation” to report the deficiency to the proper authorities? ;Who might Sara have spoken with about the dilemma? ; Who should be responsible for what happened – Sara, Sara’s employer, the client, or someone else? ; How does this situation conflict with Sara’s obligation to be faithful to her client? ; Is it wise practice to ignore “gut feelings” that arise? These and other questions will surface again later and most will be considered at that point, but let’s continue for now with Sara’s story. During her first few years with the company, and under the supervision of several managers, Sara was encouraged to become active in technical and professional societies (which was the policy of the company). But then she found her involvement with those groups diminishing as her current supervisor opposed Sara’s participation in meetings and conferences unless she used vacation time. Sara was very frustrated but did not really know how to rectify the situation. In the course of time, Sara attended a meeting with the CEO on a different matter and she took the opportunity to inquire about attending technical and professional society meetings. The CEO reaffirmed that the company thought it important and that he wanted Sara to participate in such meetings. Sara informed her supervisor and though he did begin approving Sara’s requests for leave to participate in society meetings, their relationship was strained. Questions to consider: What might Sara have done differently to seek a remedy and yet preserve her relationship with her supervisor? ; Where could Sara have found guidance in the ASCE Code of Ethics, appropriate to this situation? The story continues….. As Christmas approached the following year, Sara discovered a gift bag on her desk. Inside the gift bag was an expensive honey-glazed spiral cut ham and a Christmas greeting card from a vendor who called on Sara from time to time. This concerned Sara as she felt it might cast doubt on the integrity of their business relationship. She asked around and found that several others received gifts from the vendor as well. After sleeping on it, Sara sent a polite note to the vendor returning the ham. Questions to consider: Was Sara really obligated to return the ham? Or was this taking ethics too far? ; On the other hand, could Sara be obligated to pursue the matter further than just returning the gift she had received? A few years later, friends and colleagues urged Sara, now a highly successful principal in a respected engineering firm, to run for public office. Sara carefully considered this step, realizing it would be a challenge to juggle work, family, and such intense community involvement. Ultimately, she agreed to run and soon found herself immersed in the campaign. A draft political advertisement was prepared that included her photograph, her engineering seal, and the following text: “Vote for Sara! We need an engineer on the City Council. That is simple common sense, isn’t it? Sara is an experienced licensed engineer with years of rich accomplishments, who disdains delays and takes action now!” Questions to consider: Should Sara’s engineering seal be included in the advertisement? ; Should she ask someone in ASCE his or her opinion before deciding? As fate would have it, a few days later, just after announcing her candidacy for City Council, the matter of Sara’s investigation of the apartment complex so many years ago resurfaced. Sara learned that the apartment complex caught on fire, and people had been seriously injured. During the investigation of the cause of the fire, Sara’s report was reviewed, and somehow the cause of the fire was traced to the electrical deficiencies, which she had briefly mentioned. Immediately this hit the local newspapers, attorneys became involved, and subsequently the Licensing Board was asked to look into the ethical responsibilities related to the report. Now, sitting alone by the shore of the lake, Sara pondered her situation. Legally, she felt she might claim some immunity since she was not a licensed engineer at the time of her work on the apartment complex. But professionally, she keenly felt she had let the public down, and she could not get this, or those who had been hurt in the fire, out of her mind. Question to consider: Occasionally, are some elements of the code in conflict with other elements In the backseat of the taxi on the way to the airport, Sara thumbed through her hometown newspaper that she had purchased at a newsstand. She stopped when she saw an editorial about her City Council campaign. The article claimed that, as a result of the allegations against her, she was no longer fit for public office. Could this be true? Question to consider: How should she respond to such claims?

MEMO       To: Ms. Sara From: Ethics Monitoring … Read More...
Which of the following is not a characteristic of all living organisms? they adapt to their environment they reproduce respond to stimuli they are multicellular they perform some type of movement

Which of the following is not a characteristic of all living organisms? they adapt to their environment they reproduce respond to stimuli they are multicellular they perform some type of movement

Which of the following is not a characteristic of all … Read More...
According to Lamarck which variable would have the greatest influence on the evolution of an organism? Select one: the environment the genetics of the individual both the environment and genetics are equally responsible for the evolution of an organism neither the environment nor the genetics of an organism play a role in its evolution a creator would determine the evolution of an organism

According to Lamarck which variable would have the greatest influence on the evolution of an organism? Select one: the environment the genetics of the individual both the environment and genetics are equally responsible for the evolution of an organism neither the environment nor the genetics of an organism play a role in its evolution a creator would determine the evolution of an organism

According to Lamarck which variable would have the greatest influence … Read More...
Which of the following statements about the properties of life is false? All organisms have the ability to maintain a constant internal temperature. All organisms have the ability to reproduce. All organisms have the ability to take in energy and use it. All organisms have the ability to respond to stimuli from the environment.

Which of the following statements about the properties of life is false? All organisms have the ability to maintain a constant internal temperature. All organisms have the ability to reproduce. All organisms have the ability to take in energy and use it. All organisms have the ability to respond to stimuli from the environment.

All organisms have the ability to maintain a constant internal … Read More...
• What happens in the business environment when some people function according to those rules, and others do not?

• What happens in the business environment when some people function according to those rules, and others do not?

A standard cannot basically be recognized with a recurrent, combined … Read More...
Read this article and answer this question in 2 pages : Answers should be from the below article only. What is the difference between “standards-based” and “standards-embedded” curriculum? what are the curricular implications of this difference? Article: In 2007, at the dawn of 21st century in education, it is impossible to talk about teaching, curriculum, schools, or education without discussing standards . standards-based v. standards-embedded curriculum We are in an age of accountability where our success as educators is determined by individual and group mastery of specific standards dem- onstrated by standardized test per- formance. Even before No Child Left Behind (NCLB), standards and measures were used to determine if schools and students were success- ful (McClure, 2005). But, NCLB has increased the pace, intensity, and high stakes of this trend. Gifted and talented students and their teach- ers are significantly impacted by these local or state proficiency stan- dards and grade-level assessments (VanTassel-Baska & Stambaugh, 2006). This article explores how to use these standards in the develop- ment of high-quality curriculum for gifted students. NCLB, High-Stakes State Testing, and Standards- Based Instruction There are a few potentially positive outcomes of this evolution to public accountability. All stakeholders have had to ask themselves, “Are students learning? If so, what are they learning and how do we know?” In cases where we have been allowed to thoughtfully evaluate curriculum and instruction, we have also asked, “What’s worth learning?” “When’s the best time to learn it?” and “Who needs to learn it?” Even though state achievement tests are only a single measure, citizens are now offered a yardstick, albeit a nar- row one, for comparing communities, schools, and in some cases, teachers. Some testing reports allow teachers to identify for parents what their chil- dren can do and what they can not do. Testing also has focused attention on the not-so-new observations that pov- erty, discrimination and prejudices, and language proficiency impacts learning. With enough ceiling (e.g., above-grade-level assessments), even gifted students’ actual achievement and readiness levels can be identi- fied and provide a starting point for appropriately differentiated instruc- tion (Tomlinson, 2001). Unfortunately, as a veteran teacher for more than three decades and as a teacher-educator, my recent observa- tions of and conversations with class- room and gifted teachers have usually revealed negative outcomes. For gifted children, their actual achievement level is often unrecognized by teachers because both the tests and the reporting of the results rarely reach above the student’s grade-level placement. Assessments also focus on a huge number of state stan- dards for a given school year that cre- ate “overload” (Tomlinson & McTighe, 2006) and have a devastating impact on the development and implementation of rich and relevant curriculum and instruction. In too many scenarios, I see teachers teach- ing directly to the test. And, in the worst cases, some teachers actually teach The Test. In those cases, The Test itself becomes the curriculum. Consistently I hear, “Oh, I used to teach a great unit on ________ but I can’t do it any- more because I have to teach the standards.” Or, “I have to teach my favorite units in April and May after testing.” If the outcomes can’t be boiled down to simple “I can . . .” state- ments that can be posted on a school’s walls, then teachers seem to omit poten- tially meaningful learning opportunities from the school year. In many cases, real education and learning are being trivial- ized. We seem to have lost sight of the more significant purpose of teaching and learning: individual growth and develop- ment. We also have surrendered much of the joy of learning, as the incidentals, the tangents, the “bird walks” are cut short or elimi- nated because teachers hear the con- stant ticking clock of the countdown to the state test and feel the pressure of the way-too-many standards that have to be covered in a mere 180 school days. The accountability movement has pushed us away from seeing the whole child: “Students are not machines, as the standards movement suggests; they are volatile, complicated, and paradoxical” (Cookson, 2001, p. 42). How does this impact gifted chil- dren? In many heterogeneous class- rooms, teachers have retreated to traditional subject delineations and traditional instruction in an effort to ensure direct standards-based instruc- tion even though “no solid basis exists in the research literature for the ways we currently develop, place, and align educational standards in school cur- ricula” (Zenger & Zenger, 2002, p. 212). Grade-level standards are often particularly inappropriate for the gifted and talented whose pace of learning, achievement levels, and depth of knowledge are significantly beyond their chronological peers. A broad-based, thematically rich, and challenging curriculum is the heart of education for the gifted. Virgil Ward, one of the earliest voices for a differen- tial education for the gifted, said, “It is insufficient to consider the curriculum for the gifted in terms of traditional subjects and instructional processes” (Ward, 1980, p. 5). VanTassel-Baska Standards-Based v. Standards-Embedded Curriculum gifted child today 45 Standards-Based v. Standards-Embedded Curriculum and Stambaugh (2006) described three dimensions of successful curriculum for gifted students: content mastery, pro- cess and product, and epistemological concept, “understanding and appre- ciating systems of knowledge rather than individual elements of those systems” (p. 9). Overemphasis on testing and grade-level standards limits all three and therefore limits learning for gifted students. Hirsch (2001) concluded that “broad gen- eral knowledge is the best entrée to deep knowledge” (p. 23) and that it is highly correlated with general ability to learn. He continued, “the best way to learn a subject is to learn its gen- eral principles and to study an ample number of diverse examples that illustrate those principles” (Hirsch, 2001, p. 23). Principle-based learn- ing applies to both gifted and general education children. In order to meet the needs of gifted and general education students, cur- riculum should be differentiated in ways that are relevant and engaging. Curriculum content, processes, and products should provide challenge, depth, and complexity, offering multiple opportunities for problem solving, creativity, and exploration. In specific content areas, the cur- riculum should reflect the elegance and sophistication unique to the discipline. Even with this expanded view of curriculum in mind, we still must find ways to address the current reality of state standards and assess- ments. Standards-Embedded Curriculum How can educators address this chal- lenge? As in most things, a change of perspective can be helpful. Standards- based curriculum as described above should be replaced with standards- embedded curriculum. Standards- embedded curriculum begins with broad questions and topics, either discipline specific or interdisciplinary. Once teachers have given thoughtful consideration to relevant, engaging, and important content and the con- nections that support meaning-making (Jensen, 1998), they next select stan- dards that are relevant to this content and to summative assessments. This process is supported by the backward planning advocated in Understanding by Design by Wiggins and McTighe (2005) and its predecessors, as well as current thinkers in other fields, such as Covey (Tomlinson & McTighe, 2006). It is a critical component of differenti- ating instruction for advanced learners (Tomlinson, 2001) and a significant factor in the Core Parallel in the Parallel Curriculum Model (Tomlinson et al., 2002). Teachers choose from standards in multiple disciplines at both above and below grade level depending on the needs of the students and the classroom or program structure. Preassessment data and the results of prior instruc- tion also inform this process of embed- ding appropriate standards. For gifted students, this formative assessment will result in “more advanced curricula available at younger ages, ensuring that all levels of the standards are traversed in the process” (VanTassel-Baska & Little, 2003, p. 3). Once the essential questions, key content, and relevant standards are selected and sequenced, they are embedded into a coherent unit design and instructional decisions (grouping, pacing, instructional methodology) can be made. For gifted students, this includes the identification of appropri- ate resources, often including advanced texts, mentors, and independent research, as appropriate to the child’s developmental level and interest. Applying Standards- Embedded Curriculum What does this look like in practice? In reading the possible class- room applications below, consider these three Ohio Academic Content Standards for third grade: 1. Math: “Read thermometers in both Fahrenheit and Celsius scales” (“Academic Content Standards: K–12 Mathematics,” n.d., p. 71). 2. Social Studies: “Compare some of the cultural practices and products of various groups of people who have lived in the local community including artistic expression, religion, language, and food. Compare the cultural practices and products of the local community with those of other communities in Ohio, the United States, and countries of the world” (Academic Content Standards: K–12 Social Studies, n.d., p. 122). 3. Life Science: “Observe and explore how fossils provide evidence about animals that lived long ago and the nature of the environment at that time” (Academic Content Standards: K–12 Science, n.d., p. 57). When students are fortunate to have a teacher who is dedicated to helping all of them make good use of their time, the gifted may have a preassessment opportunity where they can demonstrate their familiarity with the content and potential mastery of a standard at their grade level. Students who pass may get to read by them- selves for the brief period while the rest of the class works on the single outcome. Sometimes more experienced teachers will create opportunities for gifted and advanced students Standards-Based v. Standards-Embedded Curriculum to work on a standard in the same domain or strand at the next higher grade level (i.e., accelerate through the standards). For example, a stu- dent might be able to work on a Life Science standard for fourth grade that progresses to other communities such as ecosystems. These above-grade-level standards can provide rich material for differentiation, advanced problem solving, and more in-depth curriculum integration. In another classroom scenario, a teacher may focus on the math stan- dard above, identifying the standard number on his lesson plan. He creates or collects paper thermometers, some showing measurement in Celsius and some in Fahrenheit. He also has some real thermometers. He demonstrates thermometer use with boiling water and with freezing water and reads the different temperatures. Students complete a worksheet that has them read thermometers in Celsius and Fahrenheit. The more advanced students may learn how to convert between the two scales. Students then practice with several questions on the topic that are similar in structure and content to those that have been on past proficiency tests. They are coached in how to answer them so that the stan- dard, instruction, formative assess- ment, and summative assessment are all aligned. Then, each student writes a statement that says, “I can read a thermometer using either Celsius or Fahrenheit scales.” Both of these examples describe a standards-based environment, where the starting point is the standard. Direct instruction to that standard is followed by an observable student behavior that demonstrates specific mastery of that single standard. The standard becomes both the start- ing point and the ending point of the curriculum. Education, rather than opening up a student’s mind, becomes a series of closed links in a chain. Whereas the above lessons may be differentiated to some extent, they have no context; they may relate only to the next standard on the list, such as, “Telling time to the nearest minute and finding elapsed time using a cal- endar or a clock.” How would a “standards-embed- ded” model of curriculum design be different? It would begin with the development of an essential ques- tion such as, “Who or what lived here before me? How were they different from me? How were they the same? How do we know?” These questions might be more relevant to our con- temporary highly mobile students. It would involve place and time. Using this intriguing line of inquiry, students might work on the social studies stan- dard as part of the study of their home- town, their school, or even their house or apartment. Because where people live and what they do is influenced by the weather, students could look into weather patterns of their area and learn how to measure temperature using a Fahrenheit scale so they could see if it is similar now to what it was a century ago. Skipping ahead to consideration of the social studies standard, students could then choose another country, preferably one that uses Celsius, and do the same investigation of fossils, communities, and the like. Students could complete a weather comparison, looking at the temperature in Celsius as people in other parts of the world, such as those in Canada, do. Thus, learning is contextualized and connected, dem- onstrating both depth and complexity. This approach takes a lot more work and time. It is a sophisticated integrated view of curriculum devel- opment and involves in-depth knowl- edge of the content areas, as well as an understanding of the scope and sequence of the standards in each dis- cipline. Teachers who develop vital single-discipline units, as well as inter- disciplinary teaching units, begin with a central topic surrounded by subtopics and connections to other areas. Then they connect important terms, facts, or concepts to the subtopics. Next, the skilled teacher/curriculum devel- oper embeds relevant, multileveled standards and objectives appropriate to a given student or group of stu- dents into the unit. Finally, teachers select the instructional strategies and develop student assessments. These assessments include, but are not lim- ited to, the types of questions asked on standardized and state assessments. Comparing Standards- Based and Standards- Embedded Curriculum Design Following is an articulation of the differences between standards-based and standards-embedded curriculum design. (See Figure 1.) 1. The starting point. Standards- based curriculum begins with the grade-level standard and the underlying assumption that every student needs to master that stan- dard at that moment in time. In standards-embedded curriculum, the multifaceted essential ques- tion and students’ needs are the starting points. 2. Preassessment. In standards- based curriculum and teaching, if a preassessment is provided, it cov- ers a single standard or two. In a standards-embedded curriculum, preassessment includes a broader range of grade-level and advanced standards, as well as students’ knowledge of surrounding content such as background experiences with the subject, relevant skills (such as reading and writing), and continued on page ?? even learning style or interests. gifted child today 47 Standards-Based v. Standards-Embedded Curriculum Standards Based Standards Embedded Starting Points The grade-level standard. Whole class’ general skill level Essential questions and content relevant to individual students and groups. Preassessment Targeted to a single grade-level standard. Short-cycle assessments. Background knowledge. Multiple grade-level standards from multiple areas connected by the theme of the unit. Includes annual learning style and interest inventories. Acceleration/ Enrichment To next grade-level standard in the same strand. To above-grade-level standards, as well as into broader thematically connected content. Language Arts Divided into individual skills. Reading and writing skills often separated from real-world relevant contexts. The language arts are embedded in all units and themes and connected to differentiated processes and products across all content areas. Instruction Lesson planning begins with the standard as the objective. Sequential direct instruction progresses through the standards in each content area separately. Strategies are selected to introduce, practice, and demonstrate mastery of all grade-level standards in all content areas in one school year. Lesson planning begins with essential questions, topics, and significant themes. Integrated instruction is designed around connections among content areas and embeds all relevant standards. Assessment Format modeled after the state test. Variety of assessments including questions similar to the state test format. Teacher Role Monitor of standards mastery. Time manager. Facilitator of instructional design and student engagement with learning, as well as assessor of achievement. Student Self- Esteem “I can . . .” statements. Star Charts. Passing “the test.” Completed projects/products. Making personal connections to learning and the theme/topic. Figure 1. Standards based v. standards-embedded instruction and gifted students. and the potential political outcry of “stepping on the toes” of the next grade’s teacher. Few classroom teachers have been provided with the in-depth professional develop- ment and understanding of curric- ulum compacting that would allow them to implement this effectively. In standards-embedded curricu- lum, enrichment and extensions of learning are more possible and more interesting because ideas, top- ics, and questions lend themselves more easily to depth and complex- ity than isolated skills. 4. Language arts. In standards- based classrooms, the language arts have been redivided into sepa- rate skills, with reading separated from writing, and writing sepa- rated from grammar. To many concrete thinkers, whole-language approaches seem antithetical to teaching “to the standards.” In a standards-embedded classroom, integrated language arts skills (reading, writing, listening, speak- ing, presenting, and even pho- nics) are embedded into the study of every unit. Especially for the gifted, the communication and language arts are essential, regard- less of domain-specific talents (Ward, 1980) and should be com- ponents of all curriculum because they are the underpinnings of scholarship in all areas. 5. Instruction. A standards-based classroom lends itself to direct instruction and sequential pro- gression from one standard to the next. A standards-embedded class- room requires a variety of more open-ended instructional strate- gies and materials that extend and diversify learning rather than focus it narrowly. Creativity and differ- entiation in instruction and stu- dent performance are supported more effectively in a standards- embedded approach. 6. Assessment. A standards-based classroom uses targeted assess- ments focused on the structure and content of questions on the externally imposed standardized test (i.e., proficiency tests). A stan- dards-embedded classroom lends itself to greater use of authentic assessment and differentiated 3. Acceleration/Enrichment. In a standards-based curriculum, the narrow definition of the learning outcome (a test item) often makes acceleration or curriculum compact- ing the only path for differentiating instruction for gifted, talented, and/ or advanced learners. This rarely happens, however, because of lack of materials, knowledge, o

Read this article and answer this question in 2 pages : Answers should be from the below article only. What is the difference between “standards-based” and “standards-embedded” curriculum? what are the curricular implications of this difference? Article: In 2007, at the dawn of 21st century in education, it is impossible to talk about teaching, curriculum, schools, or education without discussing standards . standards-based v. standards-embedded curriculum We are in an age of accountability where our success as educators is determined by individual and group mastery of specific standards dem- onstrated by standardized test per- formance. Even before No Child Left Behind (NCLB), standards and measures were used to determine if schools and students were success- ful (McClure, 2005). But, NCLB has increased the pace, intensity, and high stakes of this trend. Gifted and talented students and their teach- ers are significantly impacted by these local or state proficiency stan- dards and grade-level assessments (VanTassel-Baska & Stambaugh, 2006). This article explores how to use these standards in the develop- ment of high-quality curriculum for gifted students. NCLB, High-Stakes State Testing, and Standards- Based Instruction There are a few potentially positive outcomes of this evolution to public accountability. All stakeholders have had to ask themselves, “Are students learning? If so, what are they learning and how do we know?” In cases where we have been allowed to thoughtfully evaluate curriculum and instruction, we have also asked, “What’s worth learning?” “When’s the best time to learn it?” and “Who needs to learn it?” Even though state achievement tests are only a single measure, citizens are now offered a yardstick, albeit a nar- row one, for comparing communities, schools, and in some cases, teachers. Some testing reports allow teachers to identify for parents what their chil- dren can do and what they can not do. Testing also has focused attention on the not-so-new observations that pov- erty, discrimination and prejudices, and language proficiency impacts learning. With enough ceiling (e.g., above-grade-level assessments), even gifted students’ actual achievement and readiness levels can be identi- fied and provide a starting point for appropriately differentiated instruc- tion (Tomlinson, 2001). Unfortunately, as a veteran teacher for more than three decades and as a teacher-educator, my recent observa- tions of and conversations with class- room and gifted teachers have usually revealed negative outcomes. For gifted children, their actual achievement level is often unrecognized by teachers because both the tests and the reporting of the results rarely reach above the student’s grade-level placement. Assessments also focus on a huge number of state stan- dards for a given school year that cre- ate “overload” (Tomlinson & McTighe, 2006) and have a devastating impact on the development and implementation of rich and relevant curriculum and instruction. In too many scenarios, I see teachers teach- ing directly to the test. And, in the worst cases, some teachers actually teach The Test. In those cases, The Test itself becomes the curriculum. Consistently I hear, “Oh, I used to teach a great unit on ________ but I can’t do it any- more because I have to teach the standards.” Or, “I have to teach my favorite units in April and May after testing.” If the outcomes can’t be boiled down to simple “I can . . .” state- ments that can be posted on a school’s walls, then teachers seem to omit poten- tially meaningful learning opportunities from the school year. In many cases, real education and learning are being trivial- ized. We seem to have lost sight of the more significant purpose of teaching and learning: individual growth and develop- ment. We also have surrendered much of the joy of learning, as the incidentals, the tangents, the “bird walks” are cut short or elimi- nated because teachers hear the con- stant ticking clock of the countdown to the state test and feel the pressure of the way-too-many standards that have to be covered in a mere 180 school days. The accountability movement has pushed us away from seeing the whole child: “Students are not machines, as the standards movement suggests; they are volatile, complicated, and paradoxical” (Cookson, 2001, p. 42). How does this impact gifted chil- dren? In many heterogeneous class- rooms, teachers have retreated to traditional subject delineations and traditional instruction in an effort to ensure direct standards-based instruc- tion even though “no solid basis exists in the research literature for the ways we currently develop, place, and align educational standards in school cur- ricula” (Zenger & Zenger, 2002, p. 212). Grade-level standards are often particularly inappropriate for the gifted and talented whose pace of learning, achievement levels, and depth of knowledge are significantly beyond their chronological peers. A broad-based, thematically rich, and challenging curriculum is the heart of education for the gifted. Virgil Ward, one of the earliest voices for a differen- tial education for the gifted, said, “It is insufficient to consider the curriculum for the gifted in terms of traditional subjects and instructional processes” (Ward, 1980, p. 5). VanTassel-Baska Standards-Based v. Standards-Embedded Curriculum gifted child today 45 Standards-Based v. Standards-Embedded Curriculum and Stambaugh (2006) described three dimensions of successful curriculum for gifted students: content mastery, pro- cess and product, and epistemological concept, “understanding and appre- ciating systems of knowledge rather than individual elements of those systems” (p. 9). Overemphasis on testing and grade-level standards limits all three and therefore limits learning for gifted students. Hirsch (2001) concluded that “broad gen- eral knowledge is the best entrée to deep knowledge” (p. 23) and that it is highly correlated with general ability to learn. He continued, “the best way to learn a subject is to learn its gen- eral principles and to study an ample number of diverse examples that illustrate those principles” (Hirsch, 2001, p. 23). Principle-based learn- ing applies to both gifted and general education children. In order to meet the needs of gifted and general education students, cur- riculum should be differentiated in ways that are relevant and engaging. Curriculum content, processes, and products should provide challenge, depth, and complexity, offering multiple opportunities for problem solving, creativity, and exploration. In specific content areas, the cur- riculum should reflect the elegance and sophistication unique to the discipline. Even with this expanded view of curriculum in mind, we still must find ways to address the current reality of state standards and assess- ments. Standards-Embedded Curriculum How can educators address this chal- lenge? As in most things, a change of perspective can be helpful. Standards- based curriculum as described above should be replaced with standards- embedded curriculum. Standards- embedded curriculum begins with broad questions and topics, either discipline specific or interdisciplinary. Once teachers have given thoughtful consideration to relevant, engaging, and important content and the con- nections that support meaning-making (Jensen, 1998), they next select stan- dards that are relevant to this content and to summative assessments. This process is supported by the backward planning advocated in Understanding by Design by Wiggins and McTighe (2005) and its predecessors, as well as current thinkers in other fields, such as Covey (Tomlinson & McTighe, 2006). It is a critical component of differenti- ating instruction for advanced learners (Tomlinson, 2001) and a significant factor in the Core Parallel in the Parallel Curriculum Model (Tomlinson et al., 2002). Teachers choose from standards in multiple disciplines at both above and below grade level depending on the needs of the students and the classroom or program structure. Preassessment data and the results of prior instruc- tion also inform this process of embed- ding appropriate standards. For gifted students, this formative assessment will result in “more advanced curricula available at younger ages, ensuring that all levels of the standards are traversed in the process” (VanTassel-Baska & Little, 2003, p. 3). Once the essential questions, key content, and relevant standards are selected and sequenced, they are embedded into a coherent unit design and instructional decisions (grouping, pacing, instructional methodology) can be made. For gifted students, this includes the identification of appropri- ate resources, often including advanced texts, mentors, and independent research, as appropriate to the child’s developmental level and interest. Applying Standards- Embedded Curriculum What does this look like in practice? In reading the possible class- room applications below, consider these three Ohio Academic Content Standards for third grade: 1. Math: “Read thermometers in both Fahrenheit and Celsius scales” (“Academic Content Standards: K–12 Mathematics,” n.d., p. 71). 2. Social Studies: “Compare some of the cultural practices and products of various groups of people who have lived in the local community including artistic expression, religion, language, and food. Compare the cultural practices and products of the local community with those of other communities in Ohio, the United States, and countries of the world” (Academic Content Standards: K–12 Social Studies, n.d., p. 122). 3. Life Science: “Observe and explore how fossils provide evidence about animals that lived long ago and the nature of the environment at that time” (Academic Content Standards: K–12 Science, n.d., p. 57). When students are fortunate to have a teacher who is dedicated to helping all of them make good use of their time, the gifted may have a preassessment opportunity where they can demonstrate their familiarity with the content and potential mastery of a standard at their grade level. Students who pass may get to read by them- selves for the brief period while the rest of the class works on the single outcome. Sometimes more experienced teachers will create opportunities for gifted and advanced students Standards-Based v. Standards-Embedded Curriculum to work on a standard in the same domain or strand at the next higher grade level (i.e., accelerate through the standards). For example, a stu- dent might be able to work on a Life Science standard for fourth grade that progresses to other communities such as ecosystems. These above-grade-level standards can provide rich material for differentiation, advanced problem solving, and more in-depth curriculum integration. In another classroom scenario, a teacher may focus on the math stan- dard above, identifying the standard number on his lesson plan. He creates or collects paper thermometers, some showing measurement in Celsius and some in Fahrenheit. He also has some real thermometers. He demonstrates thermometer use with boiling water and with freezing water and reads the different temperatures. Students complete a worksheet that has them read thermometers in Celsius and Fahrenheit. The more advanced students may learn how to convert between the two scales. Students then practice with several questions on the topic that are similar in structure and content to those that have been on past proficiency tests. They are coached in how to answer them so that the stan- dard, instruction, formative assess- ment, and summative assessment are all aligned. Then, each student writes a statement that says, “I can read a thermometer using either Celsius or Fahrenheit scales.” Both of these examples describe a standards-based environment, where the starting point is the standard. Direct instruction to that standard is followed by an observable student behavior that demonstrates specific mastery of that single standard. The standard becomes both the start- ing point and the ending point of the curriculum. Education, rather than opening up a student’s mind, becomes a series of closed links in a chain. Whereas the above lessons may be differentiated to some extent, they have no context; they may relate only to the next standard on the list, such as, “Telling time to the nearest minute and finding elapsed time using a cal- endar or a clock.” How would a “standards-embed- ded” model of curriculum design be different? It would begin with the development of an essential ques- tion such as, “Who or what lived here before me? How were they different from me? How were they the same? How do we know?” These questions might be more relevant to our con- temporary highly mobile students. It would involve place and time. Using this intriguing line of inquiry, students might work on the social studies stan- dard as part of the study of their home- town, their school, or even their house or apartment. Because where people live and what they do is influenced by the weather, students could look into weather patterns of their area and learn how to measure temperature using a Fahrenheit scale so they could see if it is similar now to what it was a century ago. Skipping ahead to consideration of the social studies standard, students could then choose another country, preferably one that uses Celsius, and do the same investigation of fossils, communities, and the like. Students could complete a weather comparison, looking at the temperature in Celsius as people in other parts of the world, such as those in Canada, do. Thus, learning is contextualized and connected, dem- onstrating both depth and complexity. This approach takes a lot more work and time. It is a sophisticated integrated view of curriculum devel- opment and involves in-depth knowl- edge of the content areas, as well as an understanding of the scope and sequence of the standards in each dis- cipline. Teachers who develop vital single-discipline units, as well as inter- disciplinary teaching units, begin with a central topic surrounded by subtopics and connections to other areas. Then they connect important terms, facts, or concepts to the subtopics. Next, the skilled teacher/curriculum devel- oper embeds relevant, multileveled standards and objectives appropriate to a given student or group of stu- dents into the unit. Finally, teachers select the instructional strategies and develop student assessments. These assessments include, but are not lim- ited to, the types of questions asked on standardized and state assessments. Comparing Standards- Based and Standards- Embedded Curriculum Design Following is an articulation of the differences between standards-based and standards-embedded curriculum design. (See Figure 1.) 1. The starting point. Standards- based curriculum begins with the grade-level standard and the underlying assumption that every student needs to master that stan- dard at that moment in time. In standards-embedded curriculum, the multifaceted essential ques- tion and students’ needs are the starting points. 2. Preassessment. In standards- based curriculum and teaching, if a preassessment is provided, it cov- ers a single standard or two. In a standards-embedded curriculum, preassessment includes a broader range of grade-level and advanced standards, as well as students’ knowledge of surrounding content such as background experiences with the subject, relevant skills (such as reading and writing), and continued on page ?? even learning style or interests. gifted child today 47 Standards-Based v. Standards-Embedded Curriculum Standards Based Standards Embedded Starting Points The grade-level standard. Whole class’ general skill level Essential questions and content relevant to individual students and groups. Preassessment Targeted to a single grade-level standard. Short-cycle assessments. Background knowledge. Multiple grade-level standards from multiple areas connected by the theme of the unit. Includes annual learning style and interest inventories. Acceleration/ Enrichment To next grade-level standard in the same strand. To above-grade-level standards, as well as into broader thematically connected content. Language Arts Divided into individual skills. Reading and writing skills often separated from real-world relevant contexts. The language arts are embedded in all units and themes and connected to differentiated processes and products across all content areas. Instruction Lesson planning begins with the standard as the objective. Sequential direct instruction progresses through the standards in each content area separately. Strategies are selected to introduce, practice, and demonstrate mastery of all grade-level standards in all content areas in one school year. Lesson planning begins with essential questions, topics, and significant themes. Integrated instruction is designed around connections among content areas and embeds all relevant standards. Assessment Format modeled after the state test. Variety of assessments including questions similar to the state test format. Teacher Role Monitor of standards mastery. Time manager. Facilitator of instructional design and student engagement with learning, as well as assessor of achievement. Student Self- Esteem “I can . . .” statements. Star Charts. Passing “the test.” Completed projects/products. Making personal connections to learning and the theme/topic. Figure 1. Standards based v. standards-embedded instruction and gifted students. and the potential political outcry of “stepping on the toes” of the next grade’s teacher. Few classroom teachers have been provided with the in-depth professional develop- ment and understanding of curric- ulum compacting that would allow them to implement this effectively. In standards-embedded curricu- lum, enrichment and extensions of learning are more possible and more interesting because ideas, top- ics, and questions lend themselves more easily to depth and complex- ity than isolated skills. 4. Language arts. In standards- based classrooms, the language arts have been redivided into sepa- rate skills, with reading separated from writing, and writing sepa- rated from grammar. To many concrete thinkers, whole-language approaches seem antithetical to teaching “to the standards.” In a standards-embedded classroom, integrated language arts skills (reading, writing, listening, speak- ing, presenting, and even pho- nics) are embedded into the study of every unit. Especially for the gifted, the communication and language arts are essential, regard- less of domain-specific talents (Ward, 1980) and should be com- ponents of all curriculum because they are the underpinnings of scholarship in all areas. 5. Instruction. A standards-based classroom lends itself to direct instruction and sequential pro- gression from one standard to the next. A standards-embedded class- room requires a variety of more open-ended instructional strate- gies and materials that extend and diversify learning rather than focus it narrowly. Creativity and differ- entiation in instruction and stu- dent performance are supported more effectively in a standards- embedded approach. 6. Assessment. A standards-based classroom uses targeted assess- ments focused on the structure and content of questions on the externally imposed standardized test (i.e., proficiency tests). A stan- dards-embedded classroom lends itself to greater use of authentic assessment and differentiated 3. Acceleration/Enrichment. In a standards-based curriculum, the narrow definition of the learning outcome (a test item) often makes acceleration or curriculum compact- ing the only path for differentiating instruction for gifted, talented, and/ or advanced learners. This rarely happens, however, because of lack of materials, knowledge, o

Standard based Curriculum In standard based curriculum, the initial point … Read More...