Prompt: “Men and women, because of their inherent physical differences, are not equally suited for many tasks.”
While the physical differences inherent in men and women do not play a role in accomplishing most tasks, it is fair to say that many tasks are suited to particular sexes owing to the physical requirements of the task.
Firstly it is important to say that most tasks are suited equally for either sexes when the physical differences do not interfere with the ability to perform the task. It was true in the past in the west and even now true in many other countries, that most tasks were in the male domain and others in the female domain. However inherent physical differences played less of a role then. More of it could be attributed to religious, social or cultural mindsets, most of which have been chipped at over the last century. These days, it is not uncommon to find women performing complex physical tasks in the military and men taking on care and nurturing roles as nurses in hospitals.
Having said this, it is true that even in the current equal opportunity environment, many tasks are not equally suited for men and women owing to their inherent physical differences.
While the roles of child rearing can be shared between the sexes, biologically, women are the child bearers and are the only sex that can give birth to and breast-feed a child. This makes men fundamentally ill-equipped to take on roles such as being surrogate mothers for couples that cannot conceive or for breast feeding.
Testesterone in men is tightly linked to muscle growth. This makes men more dominant in tasks that involve using of strength. Although women's body building and weight lifting is a competitive sport, the fundamental need for the male hormone gives most women a disadvantage when compared sex to sex. The preponderance of men as stevedores in the ship building industry or as workers in the construction industry indicates this tilt.
Then there are fundamental roles that men and women are inherently suited for just based on their appearance as men and women. Women models dominate the marketing landscape much more than male models. Advertising for women cosmetics requires women to model for them. On the other hand, it would require a male model to model for a shaving cream ad. While one can find cultural traditions where male actors impersonate women roles, such as in Kabuki, a male dominante theater form of Japan, in the western context, it usually requires a woman to the play the role of a woman and a man to play the role of a man. A man portraying Evita would not have had as much an effect and similarly a woman portraying a Gandhi or a Mohammad Ali would not have the same effect. Similarly a woman's high pitched voice is different in effect from a deep male voice and produces an entirely different effect.
In summary, most tasks are equally suited for men and women primarily because the physical differences in men and women do not play a role in accomplishing them. Many tasks however are the exclusive domain of one of the sexes owing to the physical differences that are either inherent in them or are required to perform them.
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
CAT 4: AWA Argument
Prompt: "The editor of a local newspaper sent the following memo to the managing editor of the paper. “Three years ago when we surveyed our subscribers, they complained about the quality of the reporting and writing in the paper. Since that time, we have made a concerted effort to hire older, more experienced journalists. According to our most recent survey, these changes have made a vast improvement. Not only has our subscriber base grown by 13%, but they also rated us higher on both reporting and writing. Therefore, it is evident that to continue to increase our readership, we should hire the most experienced journalists we can find, and gradually fire our younger, less experienced reporters."""
The editor of the newspaper makes a series of assumptions in arriving at the conclusions that the paper had improved in quality and readership. He or she owes the improvement directly to the hiring of older and more experienced journalists without adequately justifying it. The editor also goes on to conclude without further substantiation that the less experienced reporters did not contribute to the improvement and that they would not also do so in the future.
The first assumption the editor makes is in the metrics used to judge the paper. It is not clear that the survey of the subscribers three years ago was a statistically accurate one. Did it chose the right sampling of people? Did it use the right geographical locations? These are important to answer so as to attribute importance to the results of the survey. Further the complains of the quality of the reporting and writing could have been specific to a few people, did the survey ask everyone specifically about the quality or were they comments by a few? The editor uses a subsequent rating on reporting and writing and the growth in subscriber base as evidence that the quality has improved. Again elaborating on the statistical method used to obtain these ratings would convince the managing editor that the metrics are to begin with reliable.
Secondly the editor goes on to assume that the older and more experienced journalists were the direct cause for the higher ratings. If for example the ratings had improved even without hiring of older and more experienced journalists, it would indicate that most of the improvement could have been as a result of the existing younger reporters improving speedily on their reporting skills and trying harder. Providing more evidence of this direct correlation between the hiring of more experienced people and objectively comparing the quality of their writing and reporting those of the younger people after the three years would have helped concretize the assumption.
Thirdly, the editor assumes that the subscriber base growth of 13% was directly attributable to quality. Had the subscriber base grown even without improvement in quality, it could have indicated a growth in the local population for example. It may have indicated movement of subscribers from a competing newspaper or an improvement in the marketing of the paper. Hence it is important that the editor isolate the specific reasons for the growth in order to convince the managing editor that the growth was directly correlated to the improvement in quality.
And finally, the editor makes the assumption that the younger, less experienced reporters did not contribute and more importantly will not contribute in future to the quality and growth of the paper. For all we know, they could be learning rapidly on their own or from their more experienced colleagues and could be extremely capable contributors in the future of the paper. An objective evaluation of the work of the young reporters and comparison of the same to their work three years prior would have helped lend support to the conclusion that they needed to be fired.
As can be seen, the editor of the local newspaper could have provided more information and rationalization for relying on the metrics, and to coming to the rather drastic conclusion that the less experienced reporters needed to be fired and that the more experienced journalists were the direct reason for the improvement in readership and quality.
The editor of the newspaper makes a series of assumptions in arriving at the conclusions that the paper had improved in quality and readership. He or she owes the improvement directly to the hiring of older and more experienced journalists without adequately justifying it. The editor also goes on to conclude without further substantiation that the less experienced reporters did not contribute to the improvement and that they would not also do so in the future.
The first assumption the editor makes is in the metrics used to judge the paper. It is not clear that the survey of the subscribers three years ago was a statistically accurate one. Did it chose the right sampling of people? Did it use the right geographical locations? These are important to answer so as to attribute importance to the results of the survey. Further the complains of the quality of the reporting and writing could have been specific to a few people, did the survey ask everyone specifically about the quality or were they comments by a few? The editor uses a subsequent rating on reporting and writing and the growth in subscriber base as evidence that the quality has improved. Again elaborating on the statistical method used to obtain these ratings would convince the managing editor that the metrics are to begin with reliable.
Secondly the editor goes on to assume that the older and more experienced journalists were the direct cause for the higher ratings. If for example the ratings had improved even without hiring of older and more experienced journalists, it would indicate that most of the improvement could have been as a result of the existing younger reporters improving speedily on their reporting skills and trying harder. Providing more evidence of this direct correlation between the hiring of more experienced people and objectively comparing the quality of their writing and reporting those of the younger people after the three years would have helped concretize the assumption.
Thirdly, the editor assumes that the subscriber base growth of 13% was directly attributable to quality. Had the subscriber base grown even without improvement in quality, it could have indicated a growth in the local population for example. It may have indicated movement of subscribers from a competing newspaper or an improvement in the marketing of the paper. Hence it is important that the editor isolate the specific reasons for the growth in order to convince the managing editor that the growth was directly correlated to the improvement in quality.
And finally, the editor makes the assumption that the younger, less experienced reporters did not contribute and more importantly will not contribute in future to the quality and growth of the paper. For all we know, they could be learning rapidly on their own or from their more experienced colleagues and could be extremely capable contributors in the future of the paper. An objective evaluation of the work of the young reporters and comparison of the same to their work three years prior would have helped lend support to the conclusion that they needed to be fired.
As can be seen, the editor of the local newspaper could have provided more information and rationalization for relying on the metrics, and to coming to the rather drastic conclusion that the less experienced reporters needed to be fired and that the more experienced journalists were the direct reason for the improvement in readership and quality.
Monday, August 13, 2007
CAT 3: AWA Issue
Prompt: “The way a message is delivered is often more important than the message itself.”
While the message itself is clearly very important, it is also very important for the person delivering the message to deliver in effectively in order to have the desired effect.
Message delivery in turn involves the choice of the targeted audience, the way it is communicated, and the period in time during which it is delivered. The deliverer has to get all these three aspects right in order to have the desired effect. Like an arrow that is meant for a target, it is not only important to have the right intentions to shoot, but to pick the relevant target, to use the right kind of arrowhead, have the right kind of skills, and to shoot at the right time so as to effectively hit the target intended.
It is important for the message deliverer to pick the right target audience. Preaching to the choir is often useless and may not be effective use of the message. For example, scientists may be better off targeting policy makers instead of fellow scientists if they are trying to influence policy using science. Even here it might be very important to pick the correct policy makers as well who have the most influence. Similarly, targeting messages of not drinking and driving, at elder people who don't drink and drive might be useless.
Having picked the targeted audience, it is very important for the message deliverer to also pick the right means of delivering the message. A message intended for the elderly, but delivered through a relatively young medium such as the internet might be quite ineffective in reaching the elder age group. Just as chosing the right medium is important, so too is the right kind of language used. An obvious form of this is picking the right linguistic language. Speaking in french to people speaking mandarin might not have the intended effect. Similarly, speaking in highly technical or scientific jargon to people in the art or music community might be ineffective and could among other things leave the audience bored or overwhelmed.
The last but certainly not the least important aspect to consider is the period in time at which the message is delivered. It is probably useless for a grandfather to try and teach Sheakespeare or calculus to a toddler. All he has to do is wait until the toddler becomes a teenager and both Shakespeare and calculus might be actively imbued by the grandchild. Similarly, certain ideas and thoughts by great thinkers are usually ahead of the time. While Galileo may have been persecuted for his thoughts owing to the period and society in which he lived, he is highly regarded in the current century. Even in the case where the message might appear to be more important than the delivery such as in ancient literature or treatises by thinkers, sometimes it might not really be the case. The messages although historically important, might lose their relevance in the period of time they are discovered.
Having said that the delivery of the message is very important, it is also important to consider bad messages delivered effectively. While it might appear that most bad messages cannot be effective, marketing companies often by sheer delivery are able to deliver bad messages. The marketing campaigns that sold cigarettes are a powerful case in point. Even though cigarettes are bad for ones health and for people around, it managed to sell many millions of them.
Thus one can see from the various aspects involved in the delivery of the message that they are more important than the message that is being delivered. As seen in numerous instances, a message might lose its meaning if its delivery is not paid attention to. As in the case of tobacco advertising, even a bad message can be effective. In summary, an effective message is one that is not only great in content, but also delivered to the right audience, in the right language and the right time.
While the message itself is clearly very important, it is also very important for the person delivering the message to deliver in effectively in order to have the desired effect.
Message delivery in turn involves the choice of the targeted audience, the way it is communicated, and the period in time during which it is delivered. The deliverer has to get all these three aspects right in order to have the desired effect. Like an arrow that is meant for a target, it is not only important to have the right intentions to shoot, but to pick the relevant target, to use the right kind of arrowhead, have the right kind of skills, and to shoot at the right time so as to effectively hit the target intended.
It is important for the message deliverer to pick the right target audience. Preaching to the choir is often useless and may not be effective use of the message. For example, scientists may be better off targeting policy makers instead of fellow scientists if they are trying to influence policy using science. Even here it might be very important to pick the correct policy makers as well who have the most influence. Similarly, targeting messages of not drinking and driving, at elder people who don't drink and drive might be useless.
Having picked the targeted audience, it is very important for the message deliverer to also pick the right means of delivering the message. A message intended for the elderly, but delivered through a relatively young medium such as the internet might be quite ineffective in reaching the elder age group. Just as chosing the right medium is important, so too is the right kind of language used. An obvious form of this is picking the right linguistic language. Speaking in french to people speaking mandarin might not have the intended effect. Similarly, speaking in highly technical or scientific jargon to people in the art or music community might be ineffective and could among other things leave the audience bored or overwhelmed.
The last but certainly not the least important aspect to consider is the period in time at which the message is delivered. It is probably useless for a grandfather to try and teach Sheakespeare or calculus to a toddler. All he has to do is wait until the toddler becomes a teenager and both Shakespeare and calculus might be actively imbued by the grandchild. Similarly, certain ideas and thoughts by great thinkers are usually ahead of the time. While Galileo may have been persecuted for his thoughts owing to the period and society in which he lived, he is highly regarded in the current century. Even in the case where the message might appear to be more important than the delivery such as in ancient literature or treatises by thinkers, sometimes it might not really be the case. The messages although historically important, might lose their relevance in the period of time they are discovered.
Having said that the delivery of the message is very important, it is also important to consider bad messages delivered effectively. While it might appear that most bad messages cannot be effective, marketing companies often by sheer delivery are able to deliver bad messages. The marketing campaigns that sold cigarettes are a powerful case in point. Even though cigarettes are bad for ones health and for people around, it managed to sell many millions of them.
Thus one can see from the various aspects involved in the delivery of the message that they are more important than the message that is being delivered. As seen in numerous instances, a message might lose its meaning if its delivery is not paid attention to. As in the case of tobacco advertising, even a bad message can be effective. In summary, an effective message is one that is not only great in content, but also delivered to the right audience, in the right language and the right time.
CAT 3: AWA Argument
Prompt: "The regional brand manager sent the following memo to the national brand manager for Sun-Beem Facial Cleanser. “We need to institute a huge publicity campaign for the launch of Sun-Beem’s improved formula. Without an enormous media blitz, including television, radio, internet, and magazine ads, potential new customers will not be aware of our product. And previous customers will not be aware that Sun-Beem’s new, non-carcinogenic formula is on the shelves. The best way to combat the negative publicity Sun-Beem’s old formula received is to fight fire with fire, by using the media’s insatiable interest in any new news about Sun-Beem to sell the new formula. This will erase the negative connotations in the minds of former customers, and will ensure that Sun-Beem is once again the best-selling facial cleanser on the market.”"
The regional brand manager tries to make the case that a large amount of money needs to be spent on advertising the new product and that this will make new customers aware of the product and dispel the negative image of the earlier product in the eyes of the old customers, by bringing the new product to the fore. This appears a convincing argument, but it is one that is riddled with a few assumptions that the regional manager would have done well to explain and expand upon.
The assumption that a huge media blitz was the only way to generate awareness of the product is not fully substantiated, given that the product was already enjoying enormous media attention. Even if the publicity was negative, for example, Sun-Beem makers could have used the media opportunity to introduce the new product in their interviews with the press. Explaining why the existing media attention was not sufficient to put the message of the new product out there would have been useful.
In the extreme case, due to the enormous media attention the company is already presumably recieving, the new product may enjoy popularity even without the blitz. Release of the product and a look at the initial sales numbers would have given better information as to whether an enormous media blitz was required in the first place. Customers may actually take well to a new non-carcinogenic product especially if there are none other in the market.
Even if a media blitz was justified, it is not clear that the timing of it would have been appropriate. Given the negative publicity of the prior product, presumably because of its carcinogenic nature, customers may not take it well that the company is trying to exploit the opportunity to make more mony by selling more products, even if they solved the prior defect, after having produced a flawed carcinogenic product in the first place. If lawsuits are in place, the best strategy might be to douse by a recall, rather than trying to fight fire with fire. An explanation of the 'fire' the company is involved in and why that would not be further fuelled would be useful.
Thus, the memo would have been more convincing had the regional manager substantiated the assumptions made in various pieces.
The regional brand manager tries to make the case that a large amount of money needs to be spent on advertising the new product and that this will make new customers aware of the product and dispel the negative image of the earlier product in the eyes of the old customers, by bringing the new product to the fore. This appears a convincing argument, but it is one that is riddled with a few assumptions that the regional manager would have done well to explain and expand upon.
The assumption that a huge media blitz was the only way to generate awareness of the product is not fully substantiated, given that the product was already enjoying enormous media attention. Even if the publicity was negative, for example, Sun-Beem makers could have used the media opportunity to introduce the new product in their interviews with the press. Explaining why the existing media attention was not sufficient to put the message of the new product out there would have been useful.
In the extreme case, due to the enormous media attention the company is already presumably recieving, the new product may enjoy popularity even without the blitz. Release of the product and a look at the initial sales numbers would have given better information as to whether an enormous media blitz was required in the first place. Customers may actually take well to a new non-carcinogenic product especially if there are none other in the market.
Even if a media blitz was justified, it is not clear that the timing of it would have been appropriate. Given the negative publicity of the prior product, presumably because of its carcinogenic nature, customers may not take it well that the company is trying to exploit the opportunity to make more mony by selling more products, even if they solved the prior defect, after having produced a flawed carcinogenic product in the first place. If lawsuits are in place, the best strategy might be to douse by a recall, rather than trying to fight fire with fire. An explanation of the 'fire' the company is involved in and why that would not be further fuelled would be useful.
Thus, the memo would have been more convincing had the regional manager substantiated the assumptions made in various pieces.
CAT 2: AWA Issue
“The true test of the greatness of a work of art is its ability to be understood by the masses.”
The subject of 'greatness' of a work of art is a subject with many aspects to it. For the most part, however, it is true that the true test of the greatness of a work of art is its ability to be understood by the masses.
The greatness of art itself is a subjective matter and what constitutes greatness depends on who you ask. To the high-brow editorial critic for example, it may mean more things than to the regular readers of a novel. One person may view a Beatles tune less favorably than say a Beethoven symphony. Another person may have the exact opposive view and may view the symphony more favorably. Greatness of a piece of art reflects the value each individual places of the various aspects of the artform and hence is a very subjective matter.
Having said that, most great art is also vastly popular and enjoyed by many. The greatness of Leonardo Da Vinci is both agreed upon by art critics and most regular people as well. The long lines in the Louvre bear testament to the fact that he is undoubtedly hugely popular and viewed by the many as so. The same is the case for works by Michaelangelo. One can experience the greatness of the Falling Waters by Frank Lloyd Wright through an immediate appreciation and understanding of the integration of the building with the environment it is built in. Little wonder that he is one the the greatest architects of all time.
By the same token some art forms maybe popular but may not necessarily be fully understood by the masses. Shakespeare for example is hugely popular by understanding him fully requires deep study as is attested by various courses that universities offer to study his works.
And finally, even if an art form is not understood fully understood by the masses at that moment in time, it can be great art as it is discovered over time. A Van Gogh may not have been recognized when he worked up his art, but over time people recognize and understand it and this is often the case with artists that are ahead of their times.
In summary, while 'greatness' of an artwork is a subjective matter, it is true that most artists considered 'great' are broadly accepted as so and are also widely understood, if not by the masses at that particular time in history, definitely so at some later period in time.
The subject of 'greatness' of a work of art is a subject with many aspects to it. For the most part, however, it is true that the true test of the greatness of a work of art is its ability to be understood by the masses.
The greatness of art itself is a subjective matter and what constitutes greatness depends on who you ask. To the high-brow editorial critic for example, it may mean more things than to the regular readers of a novel. One person may view a Beatles tune less favorably than say a Beethoven symphony. Another person may have the exact opposive view and may view the symphony more favorably. Greatness of a piece of art reflects the value each individual places of the various aspects of the artform and hence is a very subjective matter.
Having said that, most great art is also vastly popular and enjoyed by many. The greatness of Leonardo Da Vinci is both agreed upon by art critics and most regular people as well. The long lines in the Louvre bear testament to the fact that he is undoubtedly hugely popular and viewed by the many as so. The same is the case for works by Michaelangelo. One can experience the greatness of the Falling Waters by Frank Lloyd Wright through an immediate appreciation and understanding of the integration of the building with the environment it is built in. Little wonder that he is one the the greatest architects of all time.
By the same token some art forms maybe popular but may not necessarily be fully understood by the masses. Shakespeare for example is hugely popular by understanding him fully requires deep study as is attested by various courses that universities offer to study his works.
And finally, even if an art form is not understood fully understood by the masses at that moment in time, it can be great art as it is discovered over time. A Van Gogh may not have been recognized when he worked up his art, but over time people recognize and understand it and this is often the case with artists that are ahead of their times.
In summary, while 'greatness' of an artwork is a subjective matter, it is true that most artists considered 'great' are broadly accepted as so and are also widely understood, if not by the masses at that particular time in history, definitely so at some later period in time.
CAT 2: AWA Argument
Prompt: "A movie producer sent the following memo to the head of the movie studio. “We need to increase the funding for the movie Working Title by 10% in order to ensure a quality product. As you know, we are working with a first-time director, whose only previous experience has been shooting commercials for a shampoo company. Since the advertising business is notoriously wasteful, it stands to reason that our director will expect to be able to shoot take after take, without concern for how much time is being spent on any one scene. In addition, while we have saved money by hiring relatively inexperienced assistant producers and directors, this savings in salary will undoubtedly translate to greater expenditures in paying the actors and unionized crew overtime for the extra hours they will spend on the set waiting for the assistant directors and producers to arrange things. If we don’t get this extra money, the movie is virtually assured to be a failure.”"
The movie producer makes a case for requiring to increase the funding for the movie without convincingly justifying why it would in the end ensure a quality product. The reasons included in the memo are filled with series of assumptions that would have been better explained had they been followed up with reasons as to why the producer thinks they are valid.
Firstly, the producer assumes that increasing the funding would translate to a quality product. In the later part of the memo, it looks like he/she ends up attributing the increased cost to the overtime paid to the crew and actors. Even if these were to be a valid series of assumptions. It remains to be argued why the increased funding would translate to quality. An explanation by the producer as to why quality would be affected (either directly or indirectly) would have helped. In the absence of it however, one could even go as far as to argue that just working overtime may in fact hinder the quality of the movie itself due to associated fatigue and lack of creativity from the actors and crew involved. The producer even provides a 10% number, which is largely unsubstantiated or unaccounted for in the memo. An exact cost breakdown to which the increased funding would be put to use would have been useful in clarifying what the producer meant.
Secondly, even if we were to take the producer's assertion that people in the advertising business are wasteful, it seems presumptuous to assume that all people coming from that industry would be insensitive to the tighter budgets and time that maybe available for a movie. If the producer had cited number of prior instances where hiring a director from that had indeed resulted in such a wasteful attitude, it would have been easier to see where he was coming from.
Thirdly, the producer assumes that the assistant directors and producers would take an inordinate amount of time arranging things. The movie itself may not have involve arranging of many things. If the producer had described the kind of sets involved, it may have been easy to see that this amount of arranging would in fact be involved and play an important role. Further it is not clear why even if the directors and producers were arranging things, why an efficient use of actors and the crew cannot be made to optimize use of their time or why a regular crew would not be sufficient for this time. Another major assumption in this minor series of assumptions is that the crew would be unionized. Reasons for this assumption would make this series or minor assumptions seem more rational.
And finally the producer makes the assumption that the extra money pumped in would be used to pay for overtime of actors and crew and that it would not instead be used for other expenses.
Thus a series of assumptions are made by the producer that go unsubstantiated. Each of which could have been better illustrated or rationalized with prior experiences that would have made for a more convincing read to the head of the movie studio.
The movie producer makes a case for requiring to increase the funding for the movie without convincingly justifying why it would in the end ensure a quality product. The reasons included in the memo are filled with series of assumptions that would have been better explained had they been followed up with reasons as to why the producer thinks they are valid.
Firstly, the producer assumes that increasing the funding would translate to a quality product. In the later part of the memo, it looks like he/she ends up attributing the increased cost to the overtime paid to the crew and actors. Even if these were to be a valid series of assumptions. It remains to be argued why the increased funding would translate to quality. An explanation by the producer as to why quality would be affected (either directly or indirectly) would have helped. In the absence of it however, one could even go as far as to argue that just working overtime may in fact hinder the quality of the movie itself due to associated fatigue and lack of creativity from the actors and crew involved. The producer even provides a 10% number, which is largely unsubstantiated or unaccounted for in the memo. An exact cost breakdown to which the increased funding would be put to use would have been useful in clarifying what the producer meant.
Secondly, even if we were to take the producer's assertion that people in the advertising business are wasteful, it seems presumptuous to assume that all people coming from that industry would be insensitive to the tighter budgets and time that maybe available for a movie. If the producer had cited number of prior instances where hiring a director from that had indeed resulted in such a wasteful attitude, it would have been easier to see where he was coming from.
Thirdly, the producer assumes that the assistant directors and producers would take an inordinate amount of time arranging things. The movie itself may not have involve arranging of many things. If the producer had described the kind of sets involved, it may have been easy to see that this amount of arranging would in fact be involved and play an important role. Further it is not clear why even if the directors and producers were arranging things, why an efficient use of actors and the crew cannot be made to optimize use of their time or why a regular crew would not be sufficient for this time. Another major assumption in this minor series of assumptions is that the crew would be unionized. Reasons for this assumption would make this series or minor assumptions seem more rational.
And finally the producer makes the assumption that the extra money pumped in would be used to pay for overtime of actors and crew and that it would not instead be used for other expenses.
Thus a series of assumptions are made by the producer that go unsubstantiated. Each of which could have been better illustrated or rationalized with prior experiences that would have made for a more convincing read to the head of the movie studio.
Sunday, August 12, 2007
CAT I: AWA Analysis
Prompt: The following is an excerpt from a letter sent by the principal of Greenwood School to the parents of all incoming kindergarteners. "We have decided to institute a policy of all-day kindergarten, instead of half-day kindergarten, for all students at Greenwood School. All-day kindergarten will help all our students achieve at their highest levels. The classes will be 'tracked'; so that average students are together, but high-achieving and low-achieving students will be put together in classes. In this way, the high-achieving students will be able to help pull the low-achieving students up to their level, so that no student falls behind. The all-day kindergarten classes will cover the same material previously covered in the half-day kindergarten classes, but will go at a slower speed to accommodate learning differences. In addition, the students will receive extra instruction in music, art, and physical education. One of the greatest benefits of the plan, however, is that students will be in a structured environment for longer hours, reducing the numbers of hours that otherwise would be wasted at home or in day care."
CAT 1: AWA Issue
Prompt: "A person who knowingly commits a crime has broken the social contract and should not retain any civil rights or the right to benefit from his or her own labor."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
