Que 1: studies have shown that healthy menstruating women : a) Should not participate in sports b) often feel ill or weak when exercising c) are able to safely engage in athletic activities d) can contaminate others and should not engage in contact sports

Que 1: studies have shown that healthy menstruating women : a) Should not participate in sports b) often feel ill or weak when exercising c) are able to safely engage in athletic activities d) can contaminate others and should not engage in contact sports

Que 1: studies have shown that healthy menstruating women : … Read More...
8. Describe the general purposes of giving a presentation that were discussed in class. What determines which approach to use? 9. What things should you look for when assessing the facility in terms of the environment to the actual presentation? 10. You have been called upon to present “Working well with others” to 4 different audiences. Identify the changes you would need to make to prepare it for each of these groups: 1) a group of managers, 2) a group of technicians 3) a group of community members, and 4) a group of high school students. 11. Analyze your strengths and weaknesses as a presenter. Describe for me those things you feel comfortable with and those things that you feel you need to improve upon.

8. Describe the general purposes of giving a presentation that were discussed in class. What determines which approach to use? 9. What things should you look for when assessing the facility in terms of the environment to the actual presentation? 10. You have been called upon to present “Working well with others” to 4 different audiences. Identify the changes you would need to make to prepare it for each of these groups: 1) a group of managers, 2) a group of technicians 3) a group of community members, and 4) a group of high school students. 11. Analyze your strengths and weaknesses as a presenter. Describe for me those things you feel comfortable with and those things that you feel you need to improve upon.

For any additional help, please contact: info@checkyourstudy.com Call and Whatsapp … Read More...
Design of Electrical Systems Name: ______________________________ Note: All problems weighted equally. Show your work on all problems to receive partial credit. Resources: a) The Fundamental Logic Gate Family, Author Unknown b) Electric Devices and Circuit Theory 7th Edition, Boylestad c) Introductory Circuit Analysis 10th Edition, Boylestad d) Power Supplies (Voltage Regulators) Chapter 19, Boylestad e) Electronic Devices and Circuit Theory Chapter 5, Boylestad f) Operational Amplifiers Handout, Self g) Switch Mode Power Supplies, Philips Semiconductor h) NI Tutorial 13714-en October 6, 2013 i) NI Tutorial 13714-en V2.0 October 6, 2013 j) National Instruments Circuit Design Applications http://www.ni.com/multisim/applications/pro/ k) ENERGY STAR https://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=most_efficient.me_comp_monitor_under_23_inches l) Manufactures Device Data Sheets 1) For the VDB shown below, please find the following quantities and plot the load line (Saturation / Cutoff), Q pt (Quiescent Point) and sketch input waveform and output wave form. Remember to test for Exact vs. Approximate Method. Given Bdc = hfe = 150 and RL of 10KΩ. Efficiency _ Class _____ Degrees ___ VR2_______ VE_______ VC _______ VCE ______ IC _______ IE _______ IB _______ PD _______ re’ _______ Av _______ mpp ______ Vout______ What is the effect of reducing RL to 500Ω ________________________________ What is the effect of reducing the Source Frequency to 50 Hz ________________ | | | | | | |____________________________________________ 2) For the following Networks, please complete the Truth Tables, Logic Gate Type, provide the Boolean Logic Expression. A | Vout 0 | 1 | Logic Gate Type _______ Boolean Logic Expression _________ A B| Vout 0 0| 0 1| 1 0| 1 1| Logic Gate Type _______ Boolean Logic Expression _________ A B C| Vout 0 0 0| 0 0 1| 0 1 0| 0 1 1| 1 0 0| 1 0 1| 1 1 0| 1 1 1| Logic Gate Type _______ Boolean Logic Expression _________ Operation of Transistors ____________ 3) For the Network shown below, please refer to Electronic Devices and Circuit Theory Chapter 5, Boylestad to solve for the following values: Given: Bdc1 = hfe1 = 55 Bdc2 = hfe2 = 70 Bdc Total ______ IB1 _________ IB2 _________ VC1 __________ VC2 __________ VE1 __________ VE2 __________ What is this Transistor Configuration? _______________________ What are the advantages of this Transistor Configuration? _________________________________________ _________________________________________ _________________________________________ _________________________________________ 4) Design a Four (4) output Power Supply with the following Specifications, Provide a clean schematic sketch of circuit (Please provide the schematic sketch on a separate piece of graph paper). Use a straight edge and label everything. Refer to Data Sheets as necessary. Specifications: 120 VAC rms 60 Hz Source Positive + 15 VDC Driving a 15Ω 20 Watt Resistive Load Positive +8 VDC Driving a 10Ω 2 Watt Resistive Load Negative – 12 VDC Driving a 10Ω 2 Watt Resistive Load Negative – 5 VDC Driving a 4Ω 2 Watt Resistive Load Parts available (Must use parts): 1x 120 VAC 40 Volt 3.5 Amp Center Tap Transformer 1x Fuse 1x Bridge Rectifier 12 Amp 1x LM7808 1x LM7815 1x LM7905 1x LM7912 Psource _____________ Fuse size with 25% Service Factor, 1-10 Amps increments of 1A, 10 – 50 Amps increments of 5 Amps ______ Are we exceeding Power Dissipation of any components? If so please identify and provide a brief explanation: _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ 5) For the circuit shown below please calculate the following quantities, and Plot the Trans-Conductance Curve (Transfer Curve), (Please provide the plot on a separate piece of graph paper): You will need to refer to the 2N3819 N-Channel JFET ON Semiconductor Data Sheet Posted on Bb. VDS _________ VP ___________ VGS(off) ______ VS __________ VD __________ VG __________ PDD _________ PSource ______ VGSQ ________ IDQ __________ 6) Determine both the Upper and Lower Cutoff frequencies. Sketch Bode plot and label everything including dB Role-Off. Construct Network in Multisim and perform AC Analysis verifying frequency response and Upper and Lower Cutoff Frequencies in support of your calculations. Attach Screen shot of your Multisim Model and AC Analysis. Repeat the above for a 2nd Order Active BP Filter. You will need to research this configuration. Make sure that you use the same values for R and C. Upper and Lower Cutoff Frequencies are determined by for the 2nd Order Active BP Filter fc = 1/(2(3.14)SQRT(R1R2C1C2)). Demonstrate a change in Roll-Off from 1st Order to 2nd Order. First Order: Lower Cutoff Frequency ________ Upper Cutoff Frequency ________ Roll-Off ______________________ | | | | | | | |_____________________________________________________________ Second Order: Lower Cutoff Frequency ________ Upper Cutoff Frequency ________ Roll-Off ______________________ | | | | | | |_____________________________________________________________ 7) The following questions relate to LED Backlight LCD Monitors. (Please feel free to use more paper if need be). See Resources. Please explain the differences between LED Backlight LCD Monitor, LCD and CCFL Monitors (Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp) Monitors. What are some advantages of LED Backlight LCD Monitors when compared with LCD and CCFL Monitors? What color LEDs are used in the creation of an LED Backlight LCD Monitor? Does a Black Background use less energy than a White Background? If you can believe the hype, how and why are LED Backlight LCD Monitors among the most energy efficient, higher than heirs apparent? 8) In this problem the goal is to verify the Transfer Characteristics of the 2N7000G Enhancement Mode N-Channel MOSFET against the manufactures Data Sheets. Please create in Multisim a Model as exampled below. First Plot by hand on Graph Paper various VGS Voltages vs ID. Second simulate using the DC Sweep Analysis. From these results verify against the 2N7000G ON Semiconductor Data Sheet Posted on Bb, remembering that the 2N7000G ON Semiconductor Data Sheet includes both Tabulated Data and Figure 2. Transfer Characteristics. Attach all results, screen shots and write a brief description of your work. • I estimate that my mark for this exam will be: ________ % • Time spent on this exam: __________ Hours • Average of time spent per week on work for EGR-330 (outside class sessions): ______________ Hours

Design of Electrical Systems Name: ______________________________ Note: All problems weighted equally. Show your work on all problems to receive partial credit. Resources: a) The Fundamental Logic Gate Family, Author Unknown b) Electric Devices and Circuit Theory 7th Edition, Boylestad c) Introductory Circuit Analysis 10th Edition, Boylestad d) Power Supplies (Voltage Regulators) Chapter 19, Boylestad e) Electronic Devices and Circuit Theory Chapter 5, Boylestad f) Operational Amplifiers Handout, Self g) Switch Mode Power Supplies, Philips Semiconductor h) NI Tutorial 13714-en October 6, 2013 i) NI Tutorial 13714-en V2.0 October 6, 2013 j) National Instruments Circuit Design Applications http://www.ni.com/multisim/applications/pro/ k) ENERGY STAR https://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=most_efficient.me_comp_monitor_under_23_inches l) Manufactures Device Data Sheets 1) For the VDB shown below, please find the following quantities and plot the load line (Saturation / Cutoff), Q pt (Quiescent Point) and sketch input waveform and output wave form. Remember to test for Exact vs. Approximate Method. Given Bdc = hfe = 150 and RL of 10KΩ. Efficiency _ Class _____ Degrees ___ VR2_______ VE_______ VC _______ VCE ______ IC _______ IE _______ IB _______ PD _______ re’ _______ Av _______ mpp ______ Vout______ What is the effect of reducing RL to 500Ω ________________________________ What is the effect of reducing the Source Frequency to 50 Hz ________________ | | | | | | |____________________________________________ 2) For the following Networks, please complete the Truth Tables, Logic Gate Type, provide the Boolean Logic Expression. A | Vout 0 | 1 | Logic Gate Type _______ Boolean Logic Expression _________ A B| Vout 0 0| 0 1| 1 0| 1 1| Logic Gate Type _______ Boolean Logic Expression _________ A B C| Vout 0 0 0| 0 0 1| 0 1 0| 0 1 1| 1 0 0| 1 0 1| 1 1 0| 1 1 1| Logic Gate Type _______ Boolean Logic Expression _________ Operation of Transistors ____________ 3) For the Network shown below, please refer to Electronic Devices and Circuit Theory Chapter 5, Boylestad to solve for the following values: Given: Bdc1 = hfe1 = 55 Bdc2 = hfe2 = 70 Bdc Total ______ IB1 _________ IB2 _________ VC1 __________ VC2 __________ VE1 __________ VE2 __________ What is this Transistor Configuration? _______________________ What are the advantages of this Transistor Configuration? _________________________________________ _________________________________________ _________________________________________ _________________________________________ 4) Design a Four (4) output Power Supply with the following Specifications, Provide a clean schematic sketch of circuit (Please provide the schematic sketch on a separate piece of graph paper). Use a straight edge and label everything. Refer to Data Sheets as necessary. Specifications: 120 VAC rms 60 Hz Source Positive + 15 VDC Driving a 15Ω 20 Watt Resistive Load Positive +8 VDC Driving a 10Ω 2 Watt Resistive Load Negative – 12 VDC Driving a 10Ω 2 Watt Resistive Load Negative – 5 VDC Driving a 4Ω 2 Watt Resistive Load Parts available (Must use parts): 1x 120 VAC 40 Volt 3.5 Amp Center Tap Transformer 1x Fuse 1x Bridge Rectifier 12 Amp 1x LM7808 1x LM7815 1x LM7905 1x LM7912 Psource _____________ Fuse size with 25% Service Factor, 1-10 Amps increments of 1A, 10 – 50 Amps increments of 5 Amps ______ Are we exceeding Power Dissipation of any components? If so please identify and provide a brief explanation: _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ 5) For the circuit shown below please calculate the following quantities, and Plot the Trans-Conductance Curve (Transfer Curve), (Please provide the plot on a separate piece of graph paper): You will need to refer to the 2N3819 N-Channel JFET ON Semiconductor Data Sheet Posted on Bb. VDS _________ VP ___________ VGS(off) ______ VS __________ VD __________ VG __________ PDD _________ PSource ______ VGSQ ________ IDQ __________ 6) Determine both the Upper and Lower Cutoff frequencies. Sketch Bode plot and label everything including dB Role-Off. Construct Network in Multisim and perform AC Analysis verifying frequency response and Upper and Lower Cutoff Frequencies in support of your calculations. Attach Screen shot of your Multisim Model and AC Analysis. Repeat the above for a 2nd Order Active BP Filter. You will need to research this configuration. Make sure that you use the same values for R and C. Upper and Lower Cutoff Frequencies are determined by for the 2nd Order Active BP Filter fc = 1/(2(3.14)SQRT(R1R2C1C2)). Demonstrate a change in Roll-Off from 1st Order to 2nd Order. First Order: Lower Cutoff Frequency ________ Upper Cutoff Frequency ________ Roll-Off ______________________ | | | | | | | |_____________________________________________________________ Second Order: Lower Cutoff Frequency ________ Upper Cutoff Frequency ________ Roll-Off ______________________ | | | | | | |_____________________________________________________________ 7) The following questions relate to LED Backlight LCD Monitors. (Please feel free to use more paper if need be). See Resources. Please explain the differences between LED Backlight LCD Monitor, LCD and CCFL Monitors (Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp) Monitors. What are some advantages of LED Backlight LCD Monitors when compared with LCD and CCFL Monitors? What color LEDs are used in the creation of an LED Backlight LCD Monitor? Does a Black Background use less energy than a White Background? If you can believe the hype, how and why are LED Backlight LCD Monitors among the most energy efficient, higher than heirs apparent? 8) In this problem the goal is to verify the Transfer Characteristics of the 2N7000G Enhancement Mode N-Channel MOSFET against the manufactures Data Sheets. Please create in Multisim a Model as exampled below. First Plot by hand on Graph Paper various VGS Voltages vs ID. Second simulate using the DC Sweep Analysis. From these results verify against the 2N7000G ON Semiconductor Data Sheet Posted on Bb, remembering that the 2N7000G ON Semiconductor Data Sheet includes both Tabulated Data and Figure 2. Transfer Characteristics. Attach all results, screen shots and write a brief description of your work. • I estimate that my mark for this exam will be: ________ % • Time spent on this exam: __________ Hours • Average of time spent per week on work for EGR-330 (outside class sessions): ______________ Hours

info@checkyourstudy.com Operations Team Whatsapp( +91 9911743277)
My Success Assignment ‘where you want to be in ten years’ Objective Make a plan and try to see all the details. Does some research, ask questions, and consider what it’s going to take to get where you want to be.

My Success Assignment ‘where you want to be in ten years’ Objective Make a plan and try to see all the details. Does some research, ask questions, and consider what it’s going to take to get where you want to be.

  My Road map for career planning is based on … 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...
– 1 – Laboratory 1 Introduction: In this lab you will look at two problems that are at the heart of calculus. Each of these experiments illustrates a core calculus concept. You should perform each experiment taking notes and pictures. You will use these to write up your results. You are expected to use a word processor to produce the laboratory. Graphing software should be used to draw your graphs and illustrations. You can also include pictures you have taken. Equations should be written using “equation editor” software. In short, the laboratory should have a professional look and feel to it. It should be of publishable quality. You report should be printed on 8.5 x 11 inch paper and include a title page (format will be discussed in class). Each page should be numbered. You can work in groups of 3 on this laboratory. If you do this, you must include a page right after the title page and before the report that includes a list of the contributions of each member of the group has made. Question 1 Suppose you start 10 feet away from a wall and walk 5 feet toward the wall and stop. Now walk 2.5 feet toward the wall and stop. Keep going each time walking half the distance of your previous walk toward the wall. 1. Where are you after three walks? 2. Where are you after 2, 3, 4, 5, 10 walks? 3. Create a function where n is the number of the walk and f(n) is the distance from the wall. 4. Graph this function. 5. Using your modeling skills find a model for this function. 6. If you walk forever, were will you end up? For this one write a paragraph defending your location. 7. If instead of walking one half as far as the previous walk, walk one third. That is start 9 feet away from the wall and walk 3 feet, then 1 foot, then 1/3 of a foot, etc. Where do you end up this time? Again write a paragraph. 8. Discuss you experiment in relation Zeno’s Paradox called Achilles and Tortoise. – 2 – Question 2 Here you are going to find the circumference and area of a circle by approximating it with polygons. 1. Start by drawing a circle with radius 3” on a sheet of paper. (You should include your drawings in laboratory report. You should be able to get two per page.) 2. Divide the circle into 3 equal parts. 3. Now connect adjacent points on the circumference to form 3 triangles as shown below. You need to find the area of these isosceles triangles and the length of the bases (red lines). 4. In a table keep track of the following: a. The number of triangles. b. The sum of the lengths of the bases. This is your approximation for the circumference. Label this column, C. c. The sum of the areas of the triangles. This is your approximation for the area of the circle. Label this column , A. d. In a column divide your approximation for the circumference by 2*r. This value should be 6 since r is the radius of your circle is 3. Label this column P1 e. In a column divide your approximation for the area by r2 or 9. Label this column P2. – 3 – 5. Repeat this process for n = 4 … 15 recording your results in the correct columns. 6. Create the two functions described below. You should the graph for each of these functions separately. a. C(n) which associates n to the corresponding approximation of the circumference. b. A(n) which associates n to the corresponding approximation of the area. 7. For the two functions created in step 6 find a model for each function. 8. If we were to continue this experiment — let n grow larger without bound then what values do C and A will approach. Write a paragraph for each variable explaining your reasoning. 9. Then examine the P1 and P2 columns of your table. Write a paragraph on what you if n is allowed to grow larger without bound.

– 1 – Laboratory 1 Introduction: In this lab you will look at two problems that are at the heart of calculus. Each of these experiments illustrates a core calculus concept. You should perform each experiment taking notes and pictures. You will use these to write up your results. You are expected to use a word processor to produce the laboratory. Graphing software should be used to draw your graphs and illustrations. You can also include pictures you have taken. Equations should be written using “equation editor” software. In short, the laboratory should have a professional look and feel to it. It should be of publishable quality. You report should be printed on 8.5 x 11 inch paper and include a title page (format will be discussed in class). Each page should be numbered. You can work in groups of 3 on this laboratory. If you do this, you must include a page right after the title page and before the report that includes a list of the contributions of each member of the group has made. Question 1 Suppose you start 10 feet away from a wall and walk 5 feet toward the wall and stop. Now walk 2.5 feet toward the wall and stop. Keep going each time walking half the distance of your previous walk toward the wall. 1. Where are you after three walks? 2. Where are you after 2, 3, 4, 5, 10 walks? 3. Create a function where n is the number of the walk and f(n) is the distance from the wall. 4. Graph this function. 5. Using your modeling skills find a model for this function. 6. If you walk forever, were will you end up? For this one write a paragraph defending your location. 7. If instead of walking one half as far as the previous walk, walk one third. That is start 9 feet away from the wall and walk 3 feet, then 1 foot, then 1/3 of a foot, etc. Where do you end up this time? Again write a paragraph. 8. Discuss you experiment in relation Zeno’s Paradox called Achilles and Tortoise. – 2 – Question 2 Here you are going to find the circumference and area of a circle by approximating it with polygons. 1. Start by drawing a circle with radius 3” on a sheet of paper. (You should include your drawings in laboratory report. You should be able to get two per page.) 2. Divide the circle into 3 equal parts. 3. Now connect adjacent points on the circumference to form 3 triangles as shown below. You need to find the area of these isosceles triangles and the length of the bases (red lines). 4. In a table keep track of the following: a. The number of triangles. b. The sum of the lengths of the bases. This is your approximation for the circumference. Label this column, C. c. The sum of the areas of the triangles. This is your approximation for the area of the circle. Label this column , A. d. In a column divide your approximation for the circumference by 2*r. This value should be 6 since r is the radius of your circle is 3. Label this column P1 e. In a column divide your approximation for the area by r2 or 9. Label this column P2. – 3 – 5. Repeat this process for n = 4 … 15 recording your results in the correct columns. 6. Create the two functions described below. You should the graph for each of these functions separately. a. C(n) which associates n to the corresponding approximation of the circumference. b. A(n) which associates n to the corresponding approximation of the area. 7. For the two functions created in step 6 find a model for each function. 8. If we were to continue this experiment — let n grow larger without bound then what values do C and A will approach. Write a paragraph for each variable explaining your reasoning. 9. Then examine the P1 and P2 columns of your table. Write a paragraph on what you if n is allowed to grow larger without bound.

info@checkyourstudy.com
Question 4: Do you think these uses are acceptable? Are there any ethical or privacy issues involved? How do you personally feel about this type of information about yourself being accessible to others?

Question 4: Do you think these uses are acceptable? Are there any ethical or privacy issues involved? How do you personally feel about this type of information about yourself being accessible to others?

Bar codes on licenses commonly make lifetime calmer for law … Read More...
The statement “Most business-to-consumer sites offer consumers incentives to buy and return, such as coupons, discounts, special offers, and vouchers for other Web services” reflects the _______________ success factor for retailing on the Web. Answers: performance and service efficiency selection and value advertising and incentives look and feel

The statement “Most business-to-consumer sites offer consumers incentives to buy and return, such as coupons, discounts, special offers, and vouchers for other Web services” reflects the _______________ success factor for retailing on the Web. Answers: performance and service efficiency selection and value advertising and incentives look and feel

The statement “Most business-to-consumer sites offer consumers incentives to buy … Read More...