What are two important classes of regular-expression-based applications: lexical analyzers and text search.

What are two important classes of regular-expression-based applications: lexical analyzers and text search.

  Lexical analyzers : It is a component of complier … Read More...
Q3a. Describe into details two principles of access control.

Q3a. Describe into details two principles of access control.

ITU-T suggested standard X.800 defines access control as follows: “The … Read More...
Why is it important to study and understand Nature, according to Epicurus and Lucretius?

Why is it important to study and understand Nature, according to Epicurus and Lucretius?

Based on Lucretius what is the initial principle associated with … 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...
Project management restructuring may be beneficial in that it permits companies to: a. Accomplish tasks that could not be handled effectively by the traditional structure b. Eliminate executive involvement in projects c. Accomplish one-time activities with minimal organizational disruption d. All of the above e. A and C only

Project management restructuring may be beneficial in that it permits companies to: a. Accomplish tasks that could not be handled effectively by the traditional structure b. Eliminate executive involvement in projects c. Accomplish one-time activities with minimal organizational disruption d. All of the above e. A and C only

Project management restructuring may be beneficial in that it permits … Read More...
Assignment One Suggested Due Date: July 17th In this assignment you will read three articles You will answer questions about Hayek, Lucas, and Mankiw et. al. which consider just those particular articles. Then at the end of the assignment there is a cluster of questions that deal with both Lucas and Mankiw et al where you will have an opportunity to compare and contrast those two articles. When you have completed the assignment, place it in the appropriate drop box in WTClass. Hayek: The Use of Knowledge in Society http://www.econlib.org/library/Essays/hykKnw1.html Adapted from Michael K. Salemi “The Use of Knowledge in Society” F. A. Hayek Discussion Questions 1.1. “The peculiar character of the problem of a rational economic order is determined precisely by the fact that the knowledge of the circumstances of which we must make use never exists in concentrated or integrated form, but solely as the dispersed bits of incomplete and frequently contradictory knowledge which all the separate individuals possess (H.3)” a. What does Hayek mean by a “rational economic order”? b. What does Hayek mean by “dispersed bits of incomplete and frequently contradictory knowledge”? c. Why is Hayek critical of the common assumptions in economic analysis that buyers, sellers, producers and the economist all know every relevant thing about the economy? d. What, in summary, does Hayek mean by the quoted statement? 1.2. What, according to Hayek, is the information needed to operate effectively in a complex market economy? a. What does Hayek mean by “planning”? b. What is the minimum information needed by economic planners and individuals? c. Does the minimum differ for planners and for individuals? How? Why? d. What happens when some individuals possess more information than other individuals? e. What does Hayek mean when he says (H.16) “…the sort of knowledge with which I have been concerned is knowledge of the kind which by its nature cannot enter into statistics and therefore cannot be conveyed to any central authority in statistical form”? f. Why, according to Hayek, can the “information problem” be solved by “the price system”? 1.3. Why, according to Hayek, is the true function of the price system the communication of information? a. Why does Hayek use the term ‘marvel’ in his discussion of the economy of knowledge? b. What does Hayek mean when he says (H.26) “…man has been able to develop that division of labor on which our civilization is based because he happened to stumble upon a method which made it possible”? Read Robert Lucas’ “Some Macroeconomics for the 21st Century” in the Journal of Economic Perspectives. (Skip the appendix.) All four of these links go to the same article. Some of the links might not be accessible to you, but I think that at least one of them should work for all of you. https://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/jep.14.1.159 http://www.jstor.org/stable/2647059 http://www.econ.psu.edu/~aur10/Econ%20570%20Fall%202009/Lucas%20JEP%202000.pdf http://faculty.georgetown.edu/mh5/class/econ102/readings/Macro_21st_Century.pdf 1. According to Lucas, why has the world’s economy grown so much since 1960? 2. According to Lucas, why do some nations grow faster than others? 3. According to Lucas, why will growth and inequality decrease in the next 100 years? 4. Is Lucas’ model in this paper “economics?” Read Greg Mankiw, Romer and Wiel’s article in The Quarterly Journal of Economics. http://www.econ.nyu.edu/user/debraj/Courses/Readings/MankiwRomerWeil.pdf 1. Many economists think the Solow Growth Model is of limited use. (One of my professors at OU stated that it took economists 50 years to figure out that their growth model has nothing to do with growth.) But does the Solow model give “…the right answer to the questions it is designed to address?” 2. Why is human capital important when testing the Solow model against the data? 3. Explain how the authors conclude that the incomes of the world’s nations are converging? Now that you’ve answered questions about Lucas and Mankiw et al separately, consider this question: Both of these papers develop the notion that the economies of the world’s nations will tend to “converge” over time. Compare and contrast the way(s) in which the papers advance the idea of convergence. Assignment Two Due Date July 24th This assignment is very straight forward. You’ll read two papers and answer questions about each of them. Read Krugman’s paper on unemployment http://www.kc.frb.org/PUBLICAT/ECONREV/EconRevArchive/1994/4Q94KRUG.pdf 1. What is the difference between structural and cyclical unemployment? In this context, what is the difference between Europe and the US? What is the evidence that Krugman uses to back his opinion? 2. What is the natural rate of unemployment? Why is it higher/rising in Europe? Again, what is the evidence? 3. What is the relationship between the rising unemployment in Europe and the rise in inequality in the US. (What does Krugman mean by inequality?) 4. What is NOT to blame for either the rise in unemployment or inequality? 5. What policies, if any, can be put into place to combat rising inequality/unemployment? 6. Are you convinced by Krugman’s argument which rules out globalization as the likely cause for high European unemployment and high US wage inequality? 7. Consider Table 2 in Krugman. Why does Krugman include Table 2 in his paper? In other words, what point is strengthened by the data in Table 2 and why is it crucial to Krugman’s larger thesis? NOW, recreate the data for Table 2 for either the UK or US for the latest year possible. Has anything changed as a result of the Great Recession? Read Thomas Sargent’s paper about the credibility of “Reaganonomics.” http://minneapolisfed.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15334coll1/id/366 http://minneapolisfed.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/singleitem/collection/p15334coll1/id/366/rec/1 You might like this: http://www.ispot.tv/ad/7Lj9/ally-bank-predictions-featuring-thomas-sargent 1. What is a dynamic game? 2. Why should we think of monetary and fiscal policy as dynamic game? Who are the players and what are the strategies? 3. When are government budgets inflationary? (Again, think in terms of a game.) 4. What are the consequences if the monetary authority does not coordinate with fiscal policy agents? 5. Has Sargent done of good job characterizing the interplay between policymakers in the government, the central bank, and the public? 6. What is the connection between policy coordination and credibility? 7. Why, according to Sargent, were Reagan’s fiscal and monetary policy regimes “incredible?” Explain carefully. Assignment Three Due Date July 31 Read Taylor, Miskin, Obstfeld and Rogoff. Answer the questions for each article, then answer the final cluster that requires you to consider Miskin, Obstfeld and Rogoff. Suggested due date: January 2nd. Read John Taylor’s article about monetary transmission mechanisms. http://web.econ.unito.it/bagliano/ecmon_readings/taylor_jep95.pdf Also, to understand traditional monetary policy, listen to this: http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2008/08/john_taylor_on.html These questions refer to the article, not the podcast. 1. How does monetary policy (or changes in monetary policy) affect output and inflation? In other words, what is the monetary policy transmission mechanism? 2. What is the importance of financial market prices in Taylor’s view? 3. What is the importance of rational expectations and rigidities in the prices of labor and goods? 4. What is a reaction function? Why is a reaction function important? 5. What is an “optimal monetary policy rule?” 6. Has the monetary transmission mechanism changed? How? 7. What are the criticisms of Taylor’s views? How does he respond? What do you think? Read Mishkin’s article about global financial instability. http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/jep.13.4.3 1. What is a financial crisis? 2. How did adverse selection and moral hazard contribute to the financial crisis in Mexico and East Asia in the 1990s? What are adverse selection and moral hazard? 3. Did irresponsible monetary and fiscal policy contribute to the crisis in the 90s? Why or why not? 4. How is it possible for the IMF to help in a crisis when a domestic central bank might not be able to help. 5. What should the US learn (or have learned??) from the crisis in the 90s? Read Rogoff’s article about global financial instability. http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/jep.13.4.21 http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/jep.13.4.21 Answer the questions and place the answers in the appropriate drop box in WTClass. 1. According to Rogoff, is the status quo in international lending viable or not? Explain. 2. Can the IMF handle international financial crises? Why or why not? 3. Rogoff gives six solutions to save the global financial system (deep pockets lender of last resort, an international financial crisis manager, an international bankruptcy court, an international regulator, international deposit insurance corporation, and a world monetary authority.) What is wrong with all of these? 4. Can developing economies cope with speculative capital flows without help? Explain. 5. What will be (should be) the role that equity financing play in developing country projects? Read Obstfeld on Global Capital Markets: http://www.nber.org/papers/w6559.pdf 1. Look at table 1 and figure 1. How does Obstfeld use the data in that table to suggest that 1) markets became less open then more open in the 20th century. 2. What is the “openness trilemma?” What are the economic and/or policy trade-offs with having a global, open and integrated financial system? 3. How does economic integration impact a nation’s ability to tax capital? Can you think of some high profile cases in the news lately that illustrate this fact? (Hint: you should be able to.) 4. What is the international diversification puzzle? What market failures have arisen (if any) have arisen due to more integration and openness? Comparing Obstfeld, Miskin, and Rogoff 1. Would the authors’ advice about policies to reduce the costs of financial integration be the same? Why or why not? 2. Would the authors’ agree that we need an international regulatory body to stave off international financial crises? Why or why not? 3. What is your opinion? Is it good to have a global financial market? Why or why not? Assignment Four Due Date August 7 Straight forward assignment: Read and answer the questions. Read Arnold Kling’s history of the policies that created the great recession http://mercatus.org/publication/not-what-they-had-mind-history-policies-produced-financial-crisis-2008 1. Using only the executive summary, what does Kling think caused the Financial Crisis of 2008? (Use only one sentence.) 2. One page 5, what is “the fact?” and what does this “fact” mean to you? 3. Briefly summarize the four components of the Financial Crisis? 4. On page 10, Kling states, “These property bubbles (in the U.K. and Spain) cannot be blamed on U.S. policy.” How confident are you on that point? Is Kling wrong? 5. Kling’s matrix of causes, gives almost all weight to what two factors? What three factors are almost completely not responsible? 6. Many have blamed designer financial (my term) like CDS and CDO and the shadow banking system for the collapse. How do these fit into Kling’s narrative? 7. Outline the progression of policy that caused/responded to economic conditions in the 30s, 70s and 80s and 00s. 8. What role did the mortgage interest deduction have on housing market? 9. What institution invented and allowed the expansion of mortgage-backed securities? 10. What is regulatory arbitrage? 11. Why did the Basel agreement create an advantage for mortgage securitization? 12. Did the Federal Reserve (and presumably other regulatory agencies know and even encourage regulatory capital arbitrage? What author does Kling cite to establish this? 13. What did the 2002 modification of the Basel Rules do to capital requirements? (See figure 4) 14. Summarize the Shadow Regulatory Committee’s statement 160. 15. Did non market institutions, such as the IMF and Bernanke, think, in 2006, that financial innovation had make the banking sector more or less fragile? 16. What is time inconsistency? (You can look this up elsewhere.) 17. How might “barriers to entry” by related to “safety and soundness?” 18. A Curmudgeon is an old man who is easily annoyed and angered. He also complains a lot. (I had to look it up.) I think I’ll change my xbox gamertag to this word, but I’ll bet it is taken. 19. How did credit scoring and credit default swaps enlarge the mortgage securities market? 20. Why, up until 2007, did we think that monetary expansion was all that was needed to mitigate the impact of financial crises? 21. Suppose that financial markets are inherently unstable. What does this mean are two goals of regulation and regulators? 22. Why are type two errors so problematic? (Two reasons.) 23. How could we make the banking sector easy to fix? Assignment Five Due August 13 Read the linked lectures and answer the questions. Lecture 1 http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/11/lectures_in_mac.html 1.1 Why do you think macroeconomic realities must be reconciled with microeconomic analysis? (This is not a rhetorical question, but it will be hard for you to answer. There is no “wrong” answer you could give. Just think about it for a few minutes.) Lecture 2 http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/11/lectures_in_mac_1.html 2.1 Consider this article after you have read Hayek. How do prices and wages perform the function of “central planning?” 2.2 Kling makes that claim that, because most workers do not do manual labor anymore, the economy is different that it was in 1930. Assuming he is correct, do you think central planning would be harder today or easier? Why? Lecture 3 http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/11/lectures_on_mac.html 3.1 Give a one sentence definition of structural unemployment, of frictional unemployment and of cyclical unemployment. Lecture 4 http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/11/lectures_on_mac_1.html 4.1 So, why does the economy adjust employment rather than wages? Lecture 5 http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/11/lectures_on_mac_2.html 5.1 Kling gives 5 reasons the DotCom recession was worse than the previous two recessions (at least in duration). Which reason do you think is the most compelling? Lecture 6 http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/11/lectures_on_mac_3.html 6.1 Why are Keynesian remedies (blunt fiscal and monetary policy measures) less appropriate in a post industrial economy, according to Kling? Lecture 7 http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/11/lectures_on_mac_4.html 7.1 Why is it so hard to separate finance and government, according to Kling? Lecture 8 http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/11/lectures_on_mac_5.html 8.1 Why is American Express Travelers Checks so interesting? Do credit cards work in a similar way? (I really don’t know the answer to this one. I just know that credit cards have made travelers checks obsolete.) Lecture 9. http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/12/lectures_on_mac_6.html 9.1 According to this article, why do we have banks (financial sector or financial intermediation?) Lecture 10 http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/12/lectures_on_mac_7.html 10.1 Why are banks better than barter, according to this leture? 10.2 Politics tends to favor bailouts of failed firms. Why is this exactly wrong?

Assignment One Suggested Due Date: July 17th In this assignment you will read three articles You will answer questions about Hayek, Lucas, and Mankiw et. al. which consider just those particular articles. Then at the end of the assignment there is a cluster of questions that deal with both Lucas and Mankiw et al where you will have an opportunity to compare and contrast those two articles. When you have completed the assignment, place it in the appropriate drop box in WTClass. Hayek: The Use of Knowledge in Society http://www.econlib.org/library/Essays/hykKnw1.html Adapted from Michael K. Salemi “The Use of Knowledge in Society” F. A. Hayek Discussion Questions 1.1. “The peculiar character of the problem of a rational economic order is determined precisely by the fact that the knowledge of the circumstances of which we must make use never exists in concentrated or integrated form, but solely as the dispersed bits of incomplete and frequently contradictory knowledge which all the separate individuals possess (H.3)” a. What does Hayek mean by a “rational economic order”? b. What does Hayek mean by “dispersed bits of incomplete and frequently contradictory knowledge”? c. Why is Hayek critical of the common assumptions in economic analysis that buyers, sellers, producers and the economist all know every relevant thing about the economy? d. What, in summary, does Hayek mean by the quoted statement? 1.2. What, according to Hayek, is the information needed to operate effectively in a complex market economy? a. What does Hayek mean by “planning”? b. What is the minimum information needed by economic planners and individuals? c. Does the minimum differ for planners and for individuals? How? Why? d. What happens when some individuals possess more information than other individuals? e. What does Hayek mean when he says (H.16) “…the sort of knowledge with which I have been concerned is knowledge of the kind which by its nature cannot enter into statistics and therefore cannot be conveyed to any central authority in statistical form”? f. Why, according to Hayek, can the “information problem” be solved by “the price system”? 1.3. Why, according to Hayek, is the true function of the price system the communication of information? a. Why does Hayek use the term ‘marvel’ in his discussion of the economy of knowledge? b. What does Hayek mean when he says (H.26) “…man has been able to develop that division of labor on which our civilization is based because he happened to stumble upon a method which made it possible”? Read Robert Lucas’ “Some Macroeconomics for the 21st Century” in the Journal of Economic Perspectives. (Skip the appendix.) All four of these links go to the same article. Some of the links might not be accessible to you, but I think that at least one of them should work for all of you. https://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/jep.14.1.159 http://www.jstor.org/stable/2647059 http://www.econ.psu.edu/~aur10/Econ%20570%20Fall%202009/Lucas%20JEP%202000.pdf http://faculty.georgetown.edu/mh5/class/econ102/readings/Macro_21st_Century.pdf 1. According to Lucas, why has the world’s economy grown so much since 1960? 2. According to Lucas, why do some nations grow faster than others? 3. According to Lucas, why will growth and inequality decrease in the next 100 years? 4. Is Lucas’ model in this paper “economics?” Read Greg Mankiw, Romer and Wiel’s article in The Quarterly Journal of Economics. http://www.econ.nyu.edu/user/debraj/Courses/Readings/MankiwRomerWeil.pdf 1. Many economists think the Solow Growth Model is of limited use. (One of my professors at OU stated that it took economists 50 years to figure out that their growth model has nothing to do with growth.) But does the Solow model give “…the right answer to the questions it is designed to address?” 2. Why is human capital important when testing the Solow model against the data? 3. Explain how the authors conclude that the incomes of the world’s nations are converging? Now that you’ve answered questions about Lucas and Mankiw et al separately, consider this question: Both of these papers develop the notion that the economies of the world’s nations will tend to “converge” over time. Compare and contrast the way(s) in which the papers advance the idea of convergence. Assignment Two Due Date July 24th This assignment is very straight forward. You’ll read two papers and answer questions about each of them. Read Krugman’s paper on unemployment http://www.kc.frb.org/PUBLICAT/ECONREV/EconRevArchive/1994/4Q94KRUG.pdf 1. What is the difference between structural and cyclical unemployment? In this context, what is the difference between Europe and the US? What is the evidence that Krugman uses to back his opinion? 2. What is the natural rate of unemployment? Why is it higher/rising in Europe? Again, what is the evidence? 3. What is the relationship between the rising unemployment in Europe and the rise in inequality in the US. (What does Krugman mean by inequality?) 4. What is NOT to blame for either the rise in unemployment or inequality? 5. What policies, if any, can be put into place to combat rising inequality/unemployment? 6. Are you convinced by Krugman’s argument which rules out globalization as the likely cause for high European unemployment and high US wage inequality? 7. Consider Table 2 in Krugman. Why does Krugman include Table 2 in his paper? In other words, what point is strengthened by the data in Table 2 and why is it crucial to Krugman’s larger thesis? NOW, recreate the data for Table 2 for either the UK or US for the latest year possible. Has anything changed as a result of the Great Recession? Read Thomas Sargent’s paper about the credibility of “Reaganonomics.” http://minneapolisfed.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15334coll1/id/366 http://minneapolisfed.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/singleitem/collection/p15334coll1/id/366/rec/1 You might like this: http://www.ispot.tv/ad/7Lj9/ally-bank-predictions-featuring-thomas-sargent 1. What is a dynamic game? 2. Why should we think of monetary and fiscal policy as dynamic game? Who are the players and what are the strategies? 3. When are government budgets inflationary? (Again, think in terms of a game.) 4. What are the consequences if the monetary authority does not coordinate with fiscal policy agents? 5. Has Sargent done of good job characterizing the interplay between policymakers in the government, the central bank, and the public? 6. What is the connection between policy coordination and credibility? 7. Why, according to Sargent, were Reagan’s fiscal and monetary policy regimes “incredible?” Explain carefully. Assignment Three Due Date July 31 Read Taylor, Miskin, Obstfeld and Rogoff. Answer the questions for each article, then answer the final cluster that requires you to consider Miskin, Obstfeld and Rogoff. Suggested due date: January 2nd. Read John Taylor’s article about monetary transmission mechanisms. http://web.econ.unito.it/bagliano/ecmon_readings/taylor_jep95.pdf Also, to understand traditional monetary policy, listen to this: http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2008/08/john_taylor_on.html These questions refer to the article, not the podcast. 1. How does monetary policy (or changes in monetary policy) affect output and inflation? In other words, what is the monetary policy transmission mechanism? 2. What is the importance of financial market prices in Taylor’s view? 3. What is the importance of rational expectations and rigidities in the prices of labor and goods? 4. What is a reaction function? Why is a reaction function important? 5. What is an “optimal monetary policy rule?” 6. Has the monetary transmission mechanism changed? How? 7. What are the criticisms of Taylor’s views? How does he respond? What do you think? Read Mishkin’s article about global financial instability. http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/jep.13.4.3 1. What is a financial crisis? 2. How did adverse selection and moral hazard contribute to the financial crisis in Mexico and East Asia in the 1990s? What are adverse selection and moral hazard? 3. Did irresponsible monetary and fiscal policy contribute to the crisis in the 90s? Why or why not? 4. How is it possible for the IMF to help in a crisis when a domestic central bank might not be able to help. 5. What should the US learn (or have learned??) from the crisis in the 90s? Read Rogoff’s article about global financial instability. http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/jep.13.4.21 http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/jep.13.4.21 Answer the questions and place the answers in the appropriate drop box in WTClass. 1. According to Rogoff, is the status quo in international lending viable or not? Explain. 2. Can the IMF handle international financial crises? Why or why not? 3. Rogoff gives six solutions to save the global financial system (deep pockets lender of last resort, an international financial crisis manager, an international bankruptcy court, an international regulator, international deposit insurance corporation, and a world monetary authority.) What is wrong with all of these? 4. Can developing economies cope with speculative capital flows without help? Explain. 5. What will be (should be) the role that equity financing play in developing country projects? Read Obstfeld on Global Capital Markets: http://www.nber.org/papers/w6559.pdf 1. Look at table 1 and figure 1. How does Obstfeld use the data in that table to suggest that 1) markets became less open then more open in the 20th century. 2. What is the “openness trilemma?” What are the economic and/or policy trade-offs with having a global, open and integrated financial system? 3. How does economic integration impact a nation’s ability to tax capital? Can you think of some high profile cases in the news lately that illustrate this fact? (Hint: you should be able to.) 4. What is the international diversification puzzle? What market failures have arisen (if any) have arisen due to more integration and openness? Comparing Obstfeld, Miskin, and Rogoff 1. Would the authors’ advice about policies to reduce the costs of financial integration be the same? Why or why not? 2. Would the authors’ agree that we need an international regulatory body to stave off international financial crises? Why or why not? 3. What is your opinion? Is it good to have a global financial market? Why or why not? Assignment Four Due Date August 7 Straight forward assignment: Read and answer the questions. Read Arnold Kling’s history of the policies that created the great recession http://mercatus.org/publication/not-what-they-had-mind-history-policies-produced-financial-crisis-2008 1. Using only the executive summary, what does Kling think caused the Financial Crisis of 2008? (Use only one sentence.) 2. One page 5, what is “the fact?” and what does this “fact” mean to you? 3. Briefly summarize the four components of the Financial Crisis? 4. On page 10, Kling states, “These property bubbles (in the U.K. and Spain) cannot be blamed on U.S. policy.” How confident are you on that point? Is Kling wrong? 5. Kling’s matrix of causes, gives almost all weight to what two factors? What three factors are almost completely not responsible? 6. Many have blamed designer financial (my term) like CDS and CDO and the shadow banking system for the collapse. How do these fit into Kling’s narrative? 7. Outline the progression of policy that caused/responded to economic conditions in the 30s, 70s and 80s and 00s. 8. What role did the mortgage interest deduction have on housing market? 9. What institution invented and allowed the expansion of mortgage-backed securities? 10. What is regulatory arbitrage? 11. Why did the Basel agreement create an advantage for mortgage securitization? 12. Did the Federal Reserve (and presumably other regulatory agencies know and even encourage regulatory capital arbitrage? What author does Kling cite to establish this? 13. What did the 2002 modification of the Basel Rules do to capital requirements? (See figure 4) 14. Summarize the Shadow Regulatory Committee’s statement 160. 15. Did non market institutions, such as the IMF and Bernanke, think, in 2006, that financial innovation had make the banking sector more or less fragile? 16. What is time inconsistency? (You can look this up elsewhere.) 17. How might “barriers to entry” by related to “safety and soundness?” 18. A Curmudgeon is an old man who is easily annoyed and angered. He also complains a lot. (I had to look it up.) I think I’ll change my xbox gamertag to this word, but I’ll bet it is taken. 19. How did credit scoring and credit default swaps enlarge the mortgage securities market? 20. Why, up until 2007, did we think that monetary expansion was all that was needed to mitigate the impact of financial crises? 21. Suppose that financial markets are inherently unstable. What does this mean are two goals of regulation and regulators? 22. Why are type two errors so problematic? (Two reasons.) 23. How could we make the banking sector easy to fix? Assignment Five Due August 13 Read the linked lectures and answer the questions. Lecture 1 http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/11/lectures_in_mac.html 1.1 Why do you think macroeconomic realities must be reconciled with microeconomic analysis? (This is not a rhetorical question, but it will be hard for you to answer. There is no “wrong” answer you could give. Just think about it for a few minutes.) Lecture 2 http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/11/lectures_in_mac_1.html 2.1 Consider this article after you have read Hayek. How do prices and wages perform the function of “central planning?” 2.2 Kling makes that claim that, because most workers do not do manual labor anymore, the economy is different that it was in 1930. Assuming he is correct, do you think central planning would be harder today or easier? Why? Lecture 3 http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/11/lectures_on_mac.html 3.1 Give a one sentence definition of structural unemployment, of frictional unemployment and of cyclical unemployment. Lecture 4 http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/11/lectures_on_mac_1.html 4.1 So, why does the economy adjust employment rather than wages? Lecture 5 http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/11/lectures_on_mac_2.html 5.1 Kling gives 5 reasons the DotCom recession was worse than the previous two recessions (at least in duration). Which reason do you think is the most compelling? Lecture 6 http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/11/lectures_on_mac_3.html 6.1 Why are Keynesian remedies (blunt fiscal and monetary policy measures) less appropriate in a post industrial economy, according to Kling? Lecture 7 http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/11/lectures_on_mac_4.html 7.1 Why is it so hard to separate finance and government, according to Kling? Lecture 8 http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/11/lectures_on_mac_5.html 8.1 Why is American Express Travelers Checks so interesting? Do credit cards work in a similar way? (I really don’t know the answer to this one. I just know that credit cards have made travelers checks obsolete.) Lecture 9. http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/12/lectures_on_mac_6.html 9.1 According to this article, why do we have banks (financial sector or financial intermediation?) Lecture 10 http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/12/lectures_on_mac_7.html 10.1 Why are banks better than barter, according to this leture? 10.2 Politics tends to favor bailouts of failed firms. Why is this exactly wrong?

info@checkyourstudy.com
Duplication of effort, facilities, personnel, and equipment is characteristics of the ____________ organizational form. a. Expeditor b. Line-staff c. Pure product/project d. Matrix e. Traditional

Duplication of effort, facilities, personnel, and equipment is characteristics of the ____________ organizational form. a. Expeditor b. Line-staff c. Pure product/project d. Matrix e. Traditional

Duplication of effort, facilities, personnel, and equipment is characteristics of … Read More...
Traditional business improvement includes: Answers: Top-down participation Long time requirements Brand new business processes Incremental levels of change

Traditional business improvement includes: Answers: Top-down participation Long time requirements Brand new business processes Incremental levels of change

Traditional business improvement includes: Answers: Top-down participation Long time requirements … Read More...
art 1: Some of the more characteristic doctrines of the Enlightenment focused on the power and goodness of human rationality: 1) Reason is the most significant and positive capacity of the human; 2) reason enables one to break free from primitive, dogmatic, and superstitious beliefs holding one in the bonds of irrationality and ignorance; 3) in realizing the liberating potential of reason, one not only learns to think correctly, but to act correctly as well; 4) through philosophical and scientific progress, reason can lead humanity as a whole to a state of earthly perfection; 5) reason makes all humans equal and, therefore, deserving of equal liberty and treatment before the law; 6) beliefs of any sort should be accepted only on the basis of reason, and not on traditional or priestly authority; and 7) all human endeavors should seek to impart and develop knowledge, not feelings or character. (pbs.com) Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Paine, and Thomas Jefferson embodied the Age of Enlightenment. Use your choice of three of the seven doctrines to explain and prove these author’s philosophies. Make sure you draw on our readings to support your choices. Next, consider and discuss how these doctrines have been advanced, tested, and revised as the nation has grown and evolved. Part II: Briefly describe several, meaning more than two, of the conditions of the slave ship as experienced by Olaudah Equiano and related in his narrative. Compare his narrative to that of Phillis Wheatley’s experience. You must use selected quotes from each, but then interpret, in your own words, what the quotes mean and what their impact is on the reader.

art 1: Some of the more characteristic doctrines of the Enlightenment focused on the power and goodness of human rationality: 1) Reason is the most significant and positive capacity of the human; 2) reason enables one to break free from primitive, dogmatic, and superstitious beliefs holding one in the bonds of irrationality and ignorance; 3) in realizing the liberating potential of reason, one not only learns to think correctly, but to act correctly as well; 4) through philosophical and scientific progress, reason can lead humanity as a whole to a state of earthly perfection; 5) reason makes all humans equal and, therefore, deserving of equal liberty and treatment before the law; 6) beliefs of any sort should be accepted only on the basis of reason, and not on traditional or priestly authority; and 7) all human endeavors should seek to impart and develop knowledge, not feelings or character. (pbs.com) Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Paine, and Thomas Jefferson embodied the Age of Enlightenment. Use your choice of three of the seven doctrines to explain and prove these author’s philosophies. Make sure you draw on our readings to support your choices. Next, consider and discuss how these doctrines have been advanced, tested, and revised as the nation has grown and evolved. Part II: Briefly describe several, meaning more than two, of the conditions of the slave ship as experienced by Olaudah Equiano and related in his narrative. Compare his narrative to that of Phillis Wheatley’s experience. You must use selected quotes from each, but then interpret, in your own words, what the quotes mean and what their impact is on the reader.

info@checkyourstudy.com
Which one of the following statements would best describe expert systems software? Answers: Is normally developed using traditional languages like COBOL and Fortran Includes an inference engine program used to process the rules and facts related to a specific problem Uses a knowledge base containing only facts Uses a model base and makes decisions

Which one of the following statements would best describe expert systems software? Answers: Is normally developed using traditional languages like COBOL and Fortran Includes an inference engine program used to process the rules and facts related to a specific problem Uses a knowledge base containing only facts Uses a model base and makes decisions

Which one of the following statements would best describe expert … Read More...