Tips For Writing a Student Biography Essay

Tips For Writing a Student Biography EssayIf you want to create a masterpiece out of your student autobiography essay, just follow these tips. This should help you with your inspiration and your own writing. One of the best ways to illustrate your personality to your readers is by having an original and well-written narrative.Your first point of focus should be the most basic. This is, how much knowledge do you have about your subject? This is the main objective of the student autobiographical essay. Be sure to remember that you are writing about your knowledge in your subject area; it should be in the way that you describe yourself as a person.Your last point of focus should be to describe your personality and what makes you different from other people. A lot of students choose to think of themselves as a 'double act' because they just don't know much about themselves and don't know what makes them unique. If you have a unique personality and you have interesting and relevant experi ences, this can make your story more interesting. Therefore, don't forget to write about your life and interests. You should also give your audience something they can relate to.The next thing to think about when writing a student biography essay is how your life is different from other students. If you have seen similar experiences in other students, your writing will seem more interesting. Another way to enhance the story you want to tell is to include the latest stories of other students.The last point to remember is to find an authority. Whenever you want to add information or an authority to your story, you should remember that you will be writing a reference for the reader to keep track of who said what and when. You should ask yourself, who is the person that your readers will relate to the most?Of course, the ideal definition of an expert is one that will not only help you write your student autobiography essay, but one that will also allow you to do research to validate you r findings. Just by adding the word 'authority'authority' in your assignment, you can bring any information to life. If you are just writing for yourself, then you can follow an authority on an issue or you can identify your own position. After all, who is an 'authority' anyway?Writing your student biography essay will take a lot of time and effort on your part. If you are a first-time author, just remember that you have the opportunity to be the author of your own story.

CaseStudy 1 Dumping 2 Essay examples

CaseStudy 1 Dumping 2 Essay examples CaseStudy 1 Dumping 2 Essay examples The Case of ‘Made in The U.S.A.- Dumped in Brazil, Africa, Iraq†¦Ã¢â‚¬â„¢ brings up the controversial issues of dumping, a term that refers to the practice of exporting to other countries products that have been banded or declared hazardous in the United States.1 Is it moral to dump U.S. banned products overseas? Both the manufactures and the consumers have valid arguments. As a consumer of these dangerous products being dumped on overseas markets one could argue the manufacturers lack of respect for life. It should be in the company’s best interest to take in consideration the health and safety of people and animals. These manufactures are knowingly making dangerous and even deadly products available to communities in third world countries. DowElanco sold its weed killer Galant in Costa Rica, although the Environmental Protection Agency forbade its sale to U.S. farmers because Galant may cause cancer.2 These companies need to take in consideration the burden/ benef it factor; the safety of others should be more important than the profit losses. It is clear that these manufacturers are not interested in the sustainability of our own bioregion. While dangerous pesticides are banned from the U.S. for containing deadly poison dioxin, the active ingredient in Agent Orange, these pesticides are routinely used in agriculture overseas.3 These toxic products are making their way back into the U.S. market trough the exporting of produce from Mexico to the United States. Most of the time the countries accepting U.S. banned products are unaware of their harmfulness. Manufacturers that dump products abroad are motivated by profit, and the hope of avoiding financial losses resulting from having to withdraw a product from the U.S. market.4 Some companies see dumping as a last resort in order to ensure sustainability and avoid millions of dollars in losses. Dumping is an issue of equity/ justice; individual governments are free to establish their own standard s of public health and safety. In some cases, having risky products is still better than nothing at all. It is not our government’s responsibility to weigh out the burdens and benefits for other countries. Foreign countries

Shirley Chisholm, First Black Woman in Congress

Shirley Chisholm, First Black Woman in Congress Shirley Chisholm  (born Shirley Anita St. Hill, November 30, 1924–January 1, 2005) was the first African-American woman ever elected to the U.S. Congress. She represented the 12th Congressional District of New York for seven terms (1968–1982) and quickly became known for her work on minority, womens, and peace issues. Fast Facts: Shirley Chisholm Known For: First African-American woman to serve in the U.S. Congress, from 1968–1982Born: November 30, 1924 in Bedford-Stuyvesant, Brooklyn, New YorkParents: Charles and Ruby Seale St. HillEducation: Brooklyn College (B.A., sociology, cum laude); Columbia University (M.A., elementary education)Died: January 1, 2005 in Ormond Beach, FloridaPublished Works: Unbought and Unbossed and The Good FightSpouse(s): Conrad O. Chisholm (1959–1977), Arthur Hardwicke, Jr. (1977–1986)Notable Quote: That I am a national figure because I was the first person in 192 years to be at once a congressman, black and a woman proves, I think, that our society is not yet either just or free. Early Life Shirley Chisholm was born in the Bedford-Stuyvesant neighborhood of Brooklyn, New York on November 30, 1924. She was the eldest of four daughters of her immigrant parents, Charles St. Hill, a factory worker from British Guiana, and Ruby Seale St. Hill, a seamstress from Barbados. In 1928, because of financial hardship, Shirley and two of her sisters were sent to Barbados to be raised by her grandmother, where they were educated in the islands British-style school system. They returned to New York in 1934, even though the financial situation had not been resolved. Shirley attended Brooklyn College for a degree in sociology, where she won prizes in debating but found she was barred from the social club, as all blacks were, so she organized a rival club. She graduated with honors in 1946 and found work at two daycare centers in New York. She became an authority on early education and child welfare, and an educational consultant for Brooklyns Bureau of Child Welfare. At the same time, she worked as a volunteer with the local political leagues and the League of Women Voters. Deeper Involvement in Politics In 1949, Shirley married Conrad O. Chisholm, a private investigator and graduate student from Jamaica. Together they became increasingly involved in New York municipal political issues, establishing a number of local organizations to bring blacks and Hispanics into politics. Shirley Chisholm returned to school and obtained a masters degree in elementary education from Columbia University in 1956 and became involved in grassroots community organizing and the Democratic Party, helping form the Unity Democratic Club in 1960. Her community base helped make possible a win when she ran for the New York State Assembly in 1964. Congress In 1968, Shirley Chisholm ran for Congress from Brooklyn, winning that seat while running against James Farmer, an African-American veteran of the 1960s Freedom Rides in the south and the former national chairman of the Congress of Racial Equality. With her win, she became the first black woman elected to Congress. Her first congressional battle- she fought many- was with the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, Wilbur Mills, who was responsible for assigning committee appointments. Chisholm was from the urban 12th district in New York; Mills assigned her to the agricultural committee. Apparently, she said, all they know here in Washington about Brooklyn is that a tree grew there.  The speaker of the House told her to be a good soldier and accept the assignment, but she persisted and eventually Mills assigned her to the Education and Labor Committees. She hired only women for her staff and was known for taking positions against the Vietnam War, for minority and womens issues, and for challenging the Congressional seniority system. She was outspoken and uninterested in conforming: in 1971, Chisholm was a founding member of the National Womens Political Caucus and in 1972, she visited the voluble segregationist Alabama governor George Wallace in the hospital when he was recovering from an assassination attempt. He was astonished to see her and she was criticized for visiting him, but the act opened doors. In 1974, Wallace provided his support for her bill to extend federal minimum wage provisions to domestic workers. Running for President and Leaving Congress Chisholm ran for the Democratic nomination for president in 1972. She knew she could not win the nomination, which eventually went to George McGovern, but she nevertheless wanted to raise issues she felt were important. She was the first black person and the first black woman to run for president on a major party ticket and was the first woman to win delegates for a presidential nomination by a major party. In 1977, she divorced her first husband and married businessman Arthur Hardwicke, Jr. Chisholm served in Congress for seven terms. She retired in 1982 because, as she put it, moderate and liberal lawmakers were running for cover from the new right. She also wanted to take care of her husband, who had been injured in an automobile accident; he died in 1986. In 1984, she helped form the National Political Congress of Black Women (NPCBW). From 1983 to 1987, she taught politics and womens studies as the Purington Professor at Mount Holyoke College and spoke widely. She moved to Florida in 1991 and briefly served as the ambassador to Jamaica during President Bill Clintons first term. Death and Legacy Shirley Chisholm died at her home in Ormond Beach, Florida on January 1, 2005, after suffering a series of strokes. Chisholms legacy of grit and persistence is apparent in all of her writings, speeches, and actions in and out of government. She was involved in the founding or administration or strong support of numerous organizations, including the National Organization of Women, the League of Women Voters, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the Americans for Democratic Action (ADA), and the National Womens Political Caucus. She said in 2004, I want history to remember me not just as the first black woman to be elected to Congress, not as the first black woman to have made a bid for the presidency of the United States, but as a black woman who lived in the 20th century and dared to be herself. Sources Barron, James. Shirley Chisholm, Unbossed pioneer in Congress, Is Dead at 80. The New York Times, 3 January 2005.Chisholm, Shirley. The Good Fight. New York: Harper Row, 1973. Print.Unbought and Unbossed. Washington, DC: Take Root Media, 1970 (2009).Jackson, Harold. Shirley Chisholm: The First Black Woman Elected to Congress, She Was an Outspoken Advocate against Discrimination. The Guardian, 3 January 2005.Thurber, Jon. Shirley Chisholm, 80; Ran for President, Served 13 Years in Congress. Los Angeles Times, 4 January 2005.

COCA-COLA's CSR (Corporative Social Responsibility) Coursework

COCA-COLA's CSR (Corporative Social Responsibility) - Coursework Example This particular Coca Cola plant in North India also did not care to solicit formal permission documents from the appropriate ground water management authorities. It was also found that Coca Cola illegally built this plant on the land owned by Mehdiganj village council (The Guardian, 18 June 2014). This does show that at this particular plant, Coca Cola not only violated fundamental norms underlying a sustainable harvesting of natural resources, but also showed a gross disregard for the interconnections existing between business, community and environment in this particular village (Wheeler 2004, p. 199). This too when the 2011/2012 Sustainability Report released by Coca Cola evinced the company’s commitment to conserve water resources in the communities it operates in and to be sensitive towards the concerns of local communities (Coca Cola 2012). Not only this, but by releasing harmful pollutants and by encroaching over the village council land, Coca Cola also breached the law of the land. It is but evident that such actions of Coca Cola are not only unethical, but also violated the dictates of law. It is strongly recommended that Coca Cola take immediate steps to procure all the necessary documents, certificates and licenses required to operate this plant. The company should also take steps to follow the guidelines issued by the local pollution control authority and make amends for depleting the local water resources. The company should also urgently install all the necessary equipment and technology required to restrain pollutant levels in the effluents released by this plant. Besides, immediate talks need to be initiated with Mehdiganj village council to convey concern for and sensitivity towards the community issues. Steps should be taken to appropriately compensate the village council for its land illegally appropriated by Coca

University of California Personal Statement Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

University of California - Personal Statement Example niversity’s mission of building both the characters and careers of the students through focusing on academic achievement, excellence of the institution and service for the community encourage me to join and obtain my studies from the University of California. I am applying for a transfer to the program of Global Studies major with particular interests in Public relations and international relations. I have developed interest in the program because of my experience of different countries through travel and study during my early studies. In the year 2007 for instance, I travelled to Australia on an academic trip which took a full month and I had firsthand experience with cultural diversity. The experience was so strong and exciting that it in part encouraged my desire to travel and study in the United States. In the year 2010 I came to America as an international exchange student from China. I had to overcome the challenges of language barrier and cultural shock, an experience that very enlighten to me as a student & person. Previously I have studied at the Suzhou foreign language school, Nathan Hale-Ray High School in Connecticut and the Justin Siena Catholic High school in Napa Valley Elac. My experience in America as an international student has tremendously influenced my person and future career choices especially due to the cultural exchanges. I had the unique opportunity of studying with other students from different parts of the world such as German, Poland Hong Kong and others which allowed a lot of meaningful exchanged and propelled my desire to further my studies in Global Studies. I applied and was accepted by a number of universities but chose to pursue my studies at ELAC College with the sole intention of transferring to the UC whose system I believe is the best. Having such a diverse background in terms of academics I have come to learn that people’s orientation and background play a significant role in influencing their communication and

Hedgerow Management in Pastoral Landscapes

Hedgerow Management in Pastoral Landscapes Abstract Hedgerows are an important part of the British landscape, providing both food and shelter for a number of taxa. As part of the UK government’s Environmental Stewardship (ES) Scheme, farmers are granted subsidies for, amongst other things, ‘enhanced hedgerow management’. Although hedgerow management under ES is expected to have beneficial effects for taxa such as invertebrates and birds, less is known about the effects ES management will have on small mammal communities. The aim of this study was to investigate whether this ‘enhanced hedgerow management’ is affecting hedgerow characteristics in pastoral landscapes and whether small mammal abundances are increased under ES managed hedgerows. ‘Conservation buffer strips’ (2m+ unimproved grassy margins) were investigated as a possible improvement to ES hedgerow management. Using live trapping methods, I investigated small mammal abundances in ES managed hedgerows compared with non-ES managed hedgerows. Wood mice Apodemus sylvaticus and bank voles Clethrionomys glareolus were the most abundant species, with some captures of field voles Microtus agrestis and common shrews Sorex araneus. Small mammal abundances were increased in ES managed hedgerows, however, the presence of a ‘conservation buffer strip’ was more significant in increasing small mammal densities. ES management showed no definite effect on the hedgerows’ characteristics. Introduction Agricultural intensification since the 1940s has led to widespread and significant reductions in the biodiversity of many agricultural areas. This drive for greater yields has been linked with the population decreases seen in many species of farmland specialists and non-specialists who often inhabit farmland (Robinson and Sutherland, 2002). Farmland habitats can be categorised into non-linear habitats such as set-aside, cropped fields and woodland areas, and linear habitats, generally field boundaries, such as ditches, banks, streams and hedgerows. These field boundaries remain relatively undisturbed areas and are therefore significant wildlife corridors within otherwise inhospitable agricultural landscapes (Tew, 1994). Although there continued to be a reduction in total area of hedgerows within the UK during the 80s and early 90s, the last decade has seen small increases in the area of hedgerow as their conservation significance became more documented (Barr and Gillespie, 2000). This increase in the number of hedgerows has been driven by government backed grants. Countryside Steward (CS), set up in 1991 encouraged selected farmers to enhance and conserve the wildlife within their farms, a large part of this involved the laying of new hedgerows. The CS schemes have now been superseded by the Environmental Stewardship Schemes. More recently, hedgerow grant pilot schemes have been set up in a number of regions to encourage landowners, both farmers and non-farmers to manage their hedgerows more effectively; these grants are available to pay for gapping up, hedge laying or coppicing. Small mammals in pastoral land are largely confined to hedgerows or other non-crop features and are therefore particularly vulnerable to intensification (Bates and Harris, 2009). Small mammal species constitute the main prey biomass for a number of species of mammals and birds, and therefore small mammal abundance directly influences the abundance and diversity of predator species contributing to the complexity of local food webs (Korpimaki and Norrdahl, 1991). There remains some debate on the importance of linear habitats for small mammals, with some suggesting that they cannot support viable populations, that those found in hedgerows are ‘sink’ populations (Tattersall et al. 2004). However, there is evidence that small mammal abundance and diversity does not depend on the linear or non-linear character of the habitat and that linear habitats can support viable populations (Gelling et al. 2007). Thus, in large expanses of uninhabitable grassland, field boundary hedgerows are of great importance for maintaining small mammal populations in an agricultural landscape, but differing farming practices can lead to a huge variety in the quality of these habitats As the emphasis of farming has shifted there have been a number of agri-environment schemes introduced across Europe with the aim of reversing the effects of previous intensification and enhancing agricultural land for wildlife (Kleijn and Sutherland, 2003). The UK introduced a new set of farming standards in 2005 with farmers now guaranteed subsidy payments, known as ‘cross-compliance’, as long as they follow a set of prescribed conditions aimed at improving the environmental value of their farms. A compulsory code of good practice will preclude farming land within 2 m of the centre of a hedge (DEFRA, 2005a). Beyond cross-compliance subsidies, farmers can also apply to put their farmland into Environmental Stewardship (ES). ES is a tiered system, with Entry-Level ES designed to allow most farmers access to the payments by compiling a farm management plan that aims to improve the features of their farm for wildlife and to maintain/improve the scenic value of the British countryside. The enhanced hedgerow management option within ES requires that the farmer cut the hedge no more than once every 2 years, that hedgerows are cut during the winter and that cutting be staggered across the farm. The combined aim of these prescriptions is to ensure that at least some of the hedgerow is allowed to flower every summer (Defra, 2005b). Properly managed hedgerows are valuable features, playing a key role in enhancing the wildlife value of farmland. Flowering hedgerows are an important source of food and shelter for a number of birds (Hinsley and Bellamy, 2000). Studies suggest that the ES schemes will have a beneficial effect, mainly for taxa such as invertebrates and birds (Kleijn and Sutherland 2003), Whittingham (2007) emphasizes the importance of monitoring the effects of ES to ensure that the scheme’s prescriptions meet the needs of a greater range of species. It is much less well understood how the changes to hedgerow management will effect small mammal abundance, and it is important that there is greater understanding of the factors that influence small mammal populations since small mammals provide the major source of prey biomass for many larger predators (Love et al., 2000). Small mammals also play a role in a range of important ecosystem processes (Hayward and Phillipson, 1979). Previous studies have established the main effects of varying hedgerow management within arable landscapes (Shore et al. 2005). Arable environments provide cover for small mammals due to the height and density of the crop. Small mammals have been shown to make substantial use of the field at certain times of the year (Tattersall et al. 2001; Tew et al. 2000; Todd et al. 2000). However, no small mammal species have been shown to make use of agriculturally improved pastoral fields at any time of year (Montgomery and Dowie 1993). Grazed pastoral land provides very little cover, restricting the movements of resident small mammal communities. Therefore, hedgerow management in predominantly dairy and cattle areas will likely have a large influence on the success of small mammal populations (Gelling et al. 2007). In particular, the level of ground cover vegetation along the hedgerow and the presence of some form of non-farmed margin can significantly affect the small mammal abundance (Bates and Harris 2009, Gelling et al. 2007). The 2m margin prescribed by ‘cross compliance’ is irrelevant in terms of providing cover within pastoral landscapes. Although the 2m margin remains uncut and clear of interference from the farmer (no fertilisers), year round grazing will mean that little cover is offered right up to the base of the hedgerow. Therefore, whereas ES management may boost small mammal numbers within arable areas (Shore et al. 2005), the value of ES hedgerow management within pastoral landscapes is less well understood. I utilised a number of hedgerow sites to compare hedgerow structure and small mammal communities on ES farms versus non-ES farms. For each farm, one site was selected to be representative and one to include a significant (2m plus) conservation buffer strip of unimproved, non-grazed grass/shrubland. I aimed to investigate (i) how ES management effects the hedgerow characteristics, in particular the level of ground cover for small mammals (ii) whether these ES prescriptions are providing any significant benefit for small mammal densities and (iii) as the movements of small mammals within pastoral landscapes are so restricted, could small mammal assemblages in hedgerows be significantly improved by including an unimproved, non-grazed, grassy margin or ‘conservation buffer strip’ (2+m from the edge of the hedgerow). Methods Sites The study was conducted over 20 different farms spread across County Durham and Northumberland. The farms were selected due to their suitability for this study, each farm containing both a hedgerow site with a conservation buffer strip and at least one without. All farms selected were representative in terms of habitat of those within the local area. A hedgerow was defined as a continuous line of woody vegetation no more than 3m tall. Hedgerow Survey The farms were paired, with one ES farm neighbouring a non-ES farm, making 10 farm pairs and 20 farms in total. Hedgerow surveys were carried out throughout June 2009. 10 hedgerows were randomly selected on each farm. All hedgerows on each farm were surveyed using an edited version of the Defra Hedgerow Survey Form and handbook (DEFRA, 2007). Each hedgerow was measured to determine its cross-sectional area. The character of the hedgerow was scored by reference to a series of standard diagrams, noting the level of available ground level cover for small mammals (1=little or no vegetation cover at ground level, 2=gappy cover at ground level, 3=constant vegetation cover from hedgerows at ground level). Additional variables were recorded, including whether the hedge had been flailed (mechanically cut) recently, i.e. during the previous winter, the number of standard and veteran trees and the number of woody species within the hedgerow. The data sets for cross-sectional area, level of grou nd vegetation cover and the number of woody species were averaged to produce an overall mean value for each farm. The number of flailed hedgerows was summed to give an overall percentage of hedgerows flailed on each farm. Trapping Procedure Previous trapping studies have shown that, unlike in arable land, small mammals within pastoral land stay almost entirely within the hedgerows and therefore hedgerows can be treated as linear habitats (Gelling et al. 2007). Trapping was carried out in two major trapping sessions, mid-April to June and mid-July to August, 2009. Within each of the 20 farm sites I selected a representative hedgerow and a hedgerow flanked by an unimproved 2m+ grassy margin, designated a conservation buffer strip, making a total of 40 trapping sites. Where possible the hedgerow sites were selected randomly, however, each ES site was required to have been managed according to the prescriptions of Stewardship farming, i.e. the hedgerows were cut not more than once every two years and the farmers adhered to the prescribed 2m margin of non-interference (2m from the centre of the hedge) (DEFRA 2005a, DEFRA 2005b). Every hedgerow selected was flanked by improved or semi-improved grassland for the grazing of dai ry cattle and/or the production of silage. At each site, a 104m section of isolated hedgerow (not directly connected to woodland) was selected.13 Longworth traps were placed at ground level within the hedgerow, at 8m intervals. Traps were provisioned with hay, apple, oat grains and dried mealworm. The traps were set at dusk and checked at dawn and dusk for three days. All targeted animals that were captured were fur-clipped to help identify re-captures. Species, sex and weight were recorded for each animal before release at the point of capture. Analysis Hedgerow characteristics were recorded and analysed using a paired measures multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) (SPSS 17.0.2). I had multiple dependent variables that I wished to analyse, however, using multiple one-way ANOVAs to try to do this would have raised the probability of a Type I error (Gibson et al. 2007). Therefore the data was investigated using a MANOVA which controls the experiment-wide error rate. Multiple dependent variables that were related (e.g. Cross sectional area of hedge and amount of ground cover, etc.) were analysed in one test, with the hedgerow management (ES managed or non-ES managed) being treated as the two levels of the treatment factor (Gibson et al. 2007). There was a total of 4 dependent variables; the mean cross-sectional area, the percentage of flailed hedgerows, the average number of woody species and the mean level of ground cover. For each trapping session the relative density was estimated as the minimum number alive (MNA), or the total number of individuals caught over the three days. Species richness was calculated as the number of different species caught. Using General Linear Modelling (GLM; Minitab 15), I examined the relationships between small mammal densities and a number of predictor variables. The dependent variables I investigated were the overall total small mammal density (MNA) and the total biomass of all small mammals caught within 104m. I also investigated the density of each individual species, constructing similar models for the number of captures and biomass for each individual species. I focused on wood mice Apodemus sylvaticus and bank voles Clethrionomys glareolus. There were also some captures of field voles Microtus agrestis and common shrew Sorex araneus, these data were not investigated individually but were included in the total density of small mammals and the total biomass. The pr edictor variables considered were the presence/absence of ES management, the presence/absence of a conservation buffer strip and the number of standard and veteran trees within the hedgerow. The relationships were analysed using a backward stepwise GLM, with all main predictors and their first order interactions initially included within the model. The insignificant interactions were then removed. Each trapping session was carried out over 3 days on 4 sites on neighbouring farms, the variation between trapping locations and times was taken into account by including the variable ‘block’ within the initial model, however, it was found to have no significance and was therefore removed from the final model. There are well documented seasonal variations in small mammal abundance (Alibhai and Gipps 1985; Flowerdew 1985; Butet et al. 2006), therefore, as there were two major trapping seasons (mid-April to May and Mid-June to July) I included the variable ‘season’ in all models. The number of captures of field voles and common shrew were too low to allow thorough analysis; however, the number of captures for each species was investigated using a Kruskal-Wallis test (Minitab 15) to determine the relationship between the presence of a buffer strip and their individual abundance. Results The total number of catches was 276 individual small mammals of four different species, during 240 trap sessions (dusk till dawn and dawn till dusk). The most abundant species were wood mice, making up 45% of the captures, 11% of which were juveniles, with a total capture of 122 individuals (61 in the first season of trapping and 61 in the second season). 32% (89 individuals) of captures were bank voles, none of which were juveniles, with 26 captures in season 1 and 53 captures in season 2. 17% of captures (48 individuals) were common shrews and 6% (17 individuals) were field voles. Table 1. Summary of the number of captures for each species Total Wood mice Captured – Season 1 (juveniles) / Season 2 (juveniles) Bank vole – Season 1 / Season 2 Field vole – Season 1 / Season 2 Common shrew – Season 1 / Season 2 Total – Season 1 / Season 2 Total N trapped throughout study 122 – 61 (2) / 61 (11) 89 – 36 / 53 17 – 4 / 13 48 – 28 / 20 276 – 129 / 147 Percentage of total 44 33 6 17 100 Percentage of hedgerows present 93 46 23 45 Effect of ES Management and Buffer strips A total of 40 hedgerows were surveyed with 20 hedgerows under ES hedgerow management and 20 hedgerows under non-ES management. ES sites had been under ES hedgerow management for 2 years or more. The measured dimensions of the hedgerow were used to estimate the hedgerow cross sectional area. Analysis using a paired measures MANOVA found no significant difference in the size of ES managed hedgerows to the size of non-ES managed hedgerows (F(1,9)=0.847, P=0.381). ES management also had no significant effect on the percentage of flailed hedgerows within the farm (F(1,9)=0.019, P=0.889). The woody species diversity within hedgerows was not significantly different between ES managed hedgerows and non-ES managed hedgerows (F(1,9)=3.047, P=0.115). There was a significant positive association of the presence of ES hedgerow management with the level of woody vegetation cover at ground level (F(1,9)=10.613, P=0.010). Table 2. Comparisons of hedgerow characteristics on ES managed farms versus non-ES managed farms. Data were analysed using a paired MANOVA. Mean (SE) Hedgerow characteristic Description of measurement ES Non-ES F(1,9) P Area Average cross sectional area/m2 2.99 (0.12) 2.83 (0.14) 0.847 0.381 Flailed Percentage of hedgerows that had been recently flailed (flailed during previous Winter) 26.00 (2.21) 25.00 (6.54) 0.019 0.893 Species diversity Number of woody species 3.16 (0.24) 2.73 (0.27) 3.047 0.115 Small mammal cover Average Area of small Mammal cover (1=little or no vegetation cover at ground level, 2=gappy cover at ground level, 3=constant vegetation cover from hedgerows at ground level) 2.63 (0.87) 2.13 (0.11) 10.613 0.010 Small Mammal Assemblages Backward stepwise general linear modelling was used to analyse the data. The results showed that buffer strips have a significant effect on the total number caught within the hedgerow (F(1,35)= 16.29, P A GLM for total biomass showed similar results with Season (F(1,34)=0.83, P=0.369) and the number of standard trees (F(1,34)=1.12, P=0.298) both having no significant effect on the total biomass. ES management had a positive association with total biomass (F(1,34)=4.92, P=0.033), as did the presence of a buffer strip (F(1,34)=27.62, P Wood mice were the most common species trapped, contributing 45% of the captures. The factors affecting wood mice captures were analysed using a backward stepwise GLM. Season had no significant effect (F(1,34)=2.36, P=0.134). Unlike the model involving ‘total captures’, ES management (F(1,34)=0.07, P=0.798) and Buffer Strip (F(1,34) A backward stepwise GLM was constructed for both ‘bank vole captures’ and ‘the total bank vole mass’, both models produced similar results. Season had no effect on bank vole captures (F(1,35)=2.06, P=0.160) and total bank vole mass (F(1,35)=1.66, P=0.206). The presence of ES management on the hedgerow had a significant positive effect on the number of bank vole captures (F(1,35)=7.15, P=0.011) and on the total bank vole mass (F(1,35)=5.91, P=0.020). The presence of a buffer also had a significant effect, increasing the number of bank vole captures (F(1,35)=34.90, P Table 3. Summary statistics from general linear models Model Variables F P Adj. R2 Total Captures Season F(1,35)=1.09 0.305 53.79% ES Managed F(1,35)=5.23 0.028a Buffer Strip F(1,35)=16.29 Standard Trees F(1,35)=0.91 0.346 Total Biomassc Season F(1,34)=0.83 0.369 65.32% ES Managed F(1,34)=4.92 0.033a Buffer Strip F(1,34)=27.62 Standard Trees F(1,34)=1.12 0.298 Season*Buffer Strip F(1,34)=3.18 0.083b Wood Mice Captures Season F(1,34)=2.36 0.134 79.72% ES Managed F(1,34)=0.07 0.798 Buffer Strip F(1,34) Standard Trees F(1,34)=79.65 Season*Standard Trees F(1,34)=4.81 0.035a Total Wood Mice Massd Season F(1,35)=1.36 0.252 69.06% ES Managed F(1,35)=0.26 0.616 Buffer Strip F(1,35)=0.05 0.831 Standard Trees F(1,35)=49.03 0.003a Bank Vole Captures Season F(1,35)=2.06 0.160 54.76% ES Managed F(1,35)=7.15 0.011a Buffer Strip F(1,35)=34.90 Standard Trees F(1,35)=4.41 0.043a Total Bank Vole Masse Season F(1,35)=1.66 0.206 50.74% ES Managed F(1,35)=5.91 0.020a Buffer Strip F(1,35)=28.11 Standard Trees F(1,35)=2.32 0.137 a – Significant to the 95% confidence level b – Significant to the 90% confidence level c Total Biomass was square root transformed before analysis. d Wood Mice Mass was square root transformed before analysis. e Bank Vole Mass was square root transformed before analysis. A total of 17 field voles were captured, with all 17 trapped in hedgerows flanked by a conservation buffer strip. A total of 48 Common shrews were trapped, 81% of which were caught in hedgerows not flanked by a buffer strip Table 4. Non-target species captures. Effect of buffer strip, analysed using Kruskal-Wallis test. Total Captures Species Buffer Strip Present No Buffer Strip H P (adjusted for ties) Field vole 17 0 8.30 0.004 Common shrew 9 38 12.73 Discussion Hedgerow characteristics are known to affect small mammal numbers. Hedgerows with many gaps and a lack of ground cover support significantly lower small mammal populations (Gelling et al. 2007). Small mammals will select against hedgerows with a lack of vegetative cover due to the increased risk of predation (Orrock et al. 2004). Our results suggest that ES farms produce denser hedgerows with more cover at the ground level than non-ES farms. This is reflected in the small mammal survey which shows a somewhat strong association between small mammal numbers and ES hedgerows. However, having surveyed the farms and the farmers, I acknowledge that a wide number of variables affect the characteristics of the hedgerow. I suggest that the state of the hedgerows for small mammals is more significantly affected by the mindset of the farmer. Those farmers who have moved onto the Entry level ES scheme are generally those who most actively manage their farm. One supporting piece of data for this theory, is the number of flailed hedgerows on ES farms compared to non-ES farms. The hedgerow survey found that there were no differences in the number of recently flailed hedgerows within ES farms compared to non-ES farms, therefore, even though the cutting of hedgerows on ES farms is restricted, it still occurs as often on the ES farms within this survey than on the non-ES farms. The suggestion is that those farmers who are on the ES scheme are more actively involved in managing their farm, including their hedgerows, therefore hedgerows on ES farms commonly provide denser vegetation, less gaps and more cover at ground level. The typical ES farmer is more actively managing the hedge as a boundary or barrier to cattle than the typical non-ES farmer. The author suggests this conclusion having discussed hedgerow management with the farmers as part of the hedgerow survey and having a background in agriculture, however, it is also recognised that this topic goes beyond the scope and ava ilable data of this investigation. Hedgerows can be thought of as corridors linking woodland habitat, allowing small mammal migration (Soule and Terbough 1999), however, within the British pastoral landscape, hedgerows are often acting as the sole habitat for small mammals (Fitzgibbon 1997). My investigation found that the ratio of juvenile to adult wood mice increased during the season, with greater numbers present later in the summer, this is consistent with the observations of others (Alibhai and Gipps 1991, Flowerdew 1991). The breeding season for most small mammals begins in spring and ends in late summer, therefore it is natural that more juveniles are present in hedgerows as the summer progresses and they travel outward to establish their own home ranges. The presence of fully grown, breeding adults in both seasons of trapping indicates that animals are resident within the hedgerows, providing support for the argument that linear habitats can provide suitable habitat to support viable populations of small mamma ls. My results show that the total small mammal abundance and therefore the availability of prey biomass for predators is increased in hedgerows under ES management. The results of the hedgerow survey suggest that there is greater ground level vegetation cover in ES hedgerows. An increase in the amount of physical habitat creates greater foraging opportunities and can increase small mammal abundance (Gelling et al. 2007). Small mammals prefer hedgerows with greater ground level cover as they provide better refuge from predators (Orrock et al. 2004). Whereas the benefits of ES management for small mammal abundance remain unclear, this investigation highlights the importance of buffer strips. The value of unimproved grassy margins, in arable landscapes, for small mammal numbers has already been shown (Shore et al. 2005). This study suggests that the presence of a buffer strip along a hedgerow can provide a much improved habitat to support larger small mammal numbers in hedgerows within pastoral landscapes. Grassy margins are a refuge for small mammals beyond the hedgerow; they allow increased safety for foraging and greater shelter (Orrock et al. 2004). To understand the variation in the numbers trapped of each species, we need to establish an understanding of the differing ecological requirements for each species. The two most abundant species were the wood mouse and the bank vole. The results show that wood mice are found in greater numbers in hedgerows containing standard/veteran trees. This conclusion is supported by previous studies which have shown that trees within hedgerows are beneficial for wood mice (Montgomerie and Dowie, 1993). Mice often take shelter in burrows formed beneath trees/within tree roots which may suggest why this species was found more commonly within hedgerows containing standard/veteran trees (Montgomerie and Dowie, 1993). Wood mice are a generalist species occupying a wide variety of habitat (Flowerdew 1993). They general occupy a relatively large home range and travel extensively, consuming a wide range of food sources depending upon season and availability (Flowerdew 1993). This is reflected in the re sults, with wood mice having been trapped in 93% of all the hedgerows. The results also show that wood mice abundance is not affected by ES management for hedgerows, nor is it significantly improved by the presence of a buffer strip. Wood mice have been shown to avoid hedgerows with major gaps, and wood mouse captures have been shown to increase with proximity to woodland (Gelling et al. 2007). Wood mice have relatively large home ranges and the suggestion is that individuals rarely stay long within any one hedgerow; rather they travel through, utilising hedgerows for foraging and shelter between woodland (Montgomery and Dowie 1993; Gelling et al 2007; Todd et al 2000; Tew et al. 2000). Therefore, ES management and the presence of buffer strips have little effect on the number of wood mouse captures; more important is the proximity to woodland or the presence of trees within a hedgerow which provide the preferred shelter for the wood mouse (Todd et al. 2000; Tew et al. 2000). Bank voles are a more specialist species, and generally occupy much smaller home ranges than do wood mice. They are burrowers, using ground vegetation to create runs and pathways in deciduous habitats (Morris 1982; Alibhai and Gipps 1985). Bank voles are a major prey resource for a number of raptors and bank vole abundance has been shown to significantly affect raptor populations (Korpimaki and Norrdahl, 1991). Other studies have found that bank vole numbers are positively associated with the size of hedgerows (Pollard Relton, 1970; Tew, 1994; Bellamy et al., 2000). Grassy margins of 2m plus have been shown to significantly increase bank vole numbers in arable fields (Shore et al. 2005), my results show that this conclusion extends to pastoral landscapes with bank vole numbers being significantly increased by the presence of an unimproved grassy margin or conservation buffer strip. The results also suggest that ES management improves hedgerows for bank voles, with bank vole abundanc e found to be significantly higher on ES hedgerow sites. Bank voles are found in much greater abundance in areas which provide thick ground vegetation and suffer little disturbance (Tew 1994), my results suggest that this is partially provided by ES management, however, the creation of grassy margins along hedgerows could significantly improve bank vole abundance in pastoral landscapes. The creation of margins could also be significant in the conservation of field voles. Field vole numbers in the UK are in decline believed to be due to the loss of rough grass habitat in intensively managed arable regions (Harris et al., 1995; Love et al., 2000). Field voles are specialists and depend upon rough, ungrazed grassland within woodland and hedgerows. Field voles are generally only found within areas of long grass (Alibhai and Gipps, 1991b). Very few captures of field voles were recorded within this experiment, however all field voles captures occurred within hedgerows flanked by conservation buffer strips. The presence of a buffer strip may provide the field voles’

Analyze Curriculum Foundations Essay

Choose one of the four foundations of curriculum (philosophical, historical, psychological, or social), and contrast its importance with the other three foundations. How does your selected foundation apply to your place of work/study? Charles Darwin; the father of speciation, stated in his book â€Å"On the Origin of Species† that the intelligence of mankind is merely the result of higher evolution. This theory is now being challenged by Marc Hauser, who is currently the director of cognitive evolution at Harvard University. In a recent article published in Scientific American, Hauser stated that humans possess four abilities that are not found in other species which are the essence of humaningueness. Those abilities are Generative Computation (the ability to generate limitless words and concepts), Promiscuous Combinations of ideas (the ability to merge different domains of knowledge), Mental Symbols (ways to encode sensory experiences), and Abstract Thought (the comprehension of things beyond what we can see). Each of these abilities are directly influenced by philosophical attributes, historical experiences, psychological behaviors, and social impacts (Wolchover). The purpose of this research is to examine and compare the importance of these influences in our educational system. Society has always been the driving force behind persuading Individuals behavior. When talking about curriculum it is the social factors of family, peers, idols, and teachers that possess the greatest ability of manipulating our young people today. The family will infuse its beliefs or morals onto its members. For example; if the parents of a family are uneducated and working low income jobs, education may not be their primary concern. Instead their interest may shift to basic needs, such as bringing more income into the house as soon as possible. That usually reflects a negative outlook on education. In turn the student will be unable to receive adequate help form their parents on school work. In hindsight; if both parents are highly educated, they will place greater infuses on academics. Their expectation in their children’s education becomes much higher. Peers and Idols have a hypnotic like hold on our young people and harness the power to undermine even the most stable of families. The desire to be accepted can be overwhelming to most. Some teenagers turn to idolizing rappers, TV stars, or sport figures in hopes of being recognized. The artist that are choosing; usually defies the law and express little to no morals towards women, society, and puts no value on education. We can see this today in our young people, with the sagging paints, rebelling attitudes, belittling female, fathering multiple children from as many women as possible and leaving the mothers to take care of the children. This type of behavior has become very desirable. There is no doubt that society has a hold on forming the behavior of our young people, but it is the psychological need to bradding or concepts of life. This concept may go by many names such as self-actualization or individuation. No matter what you call it, it is a natural drive within the human psychic to behave in a manner that is coherent to one self. Educational Psychology focuses on how children learn. A lot of research has gone into this field of study. It tries to answer questions like how effective is intervention, how should a room be set up for opium learning, how should lessons be taught, and how students learn and develop overall. As you can see this this discipline is concerned with the mindset of the students; what they are feeling, how they see or perceive situations. This is an attempt to put the students at ease by feeling safe and understood. To succeed this field of study must incorporate the social factors of the students in that area. Without understanding their social needs or wants any efforts are predetermined to fail. Philosophy on the other hand applies the directions for teachers to follow. It tells parents and students how teacher or school intends to treat them. The schools philosophy might instruct teachers on how to give a lesson or what order to teach their subjects. An example of this might insist that each student must make a passing grade before the teacher is allowed to advance the class to another topic or tell a biology teacher that he or she will have to teach cell functions before teaching Mendel’s genetics. The Schools philosophy statement might read something like this; our school believes that all students are unique individuals that deserve a safe secure place that will nurture them emotionally as well as intellectually. Provide a place that would escalate their potential to new highs and promote respect towards family, school and society, but a teachers philosophy would be more geared for his or her room. Over all the philosophy in curriculum provides guidance, a way of doing things, and opinions on how students should be treated. This type of discipline requires the knowledge of the communities believes, economic status, and the desires of the parents for their children. Like psychological behaviors; it has to take in account the social attributes of its population. Around the nineteenth century public schools were set up to promote reading, writing, and arithmetic. These were the skills needed to hold a job. Subjects like biology, civics, world history or health were unimportant to the public schools and was reserved for private schools whose students were being groomed for universities. The welfare of the student’s character or moral values where of no concern to the schools at this time. Only recently have the schools shifted to developing the entire student’s well-being. Focusing more on what it takes to produce a well-round individual which has the ability to rationalize complex situations and develop into a productive member of society. This is achieved by teaching all core subjects not ju st a select few. To succeed the schools have to put real-world applications to old-world disciplines. Today all public schools would like to see every student attend some kind of institute for higher learning. Today’s institutes of learning will incorporate psychology (a natural drive within the human psychic to behave in a manner that is coherent to one self, set up parameters for teachers curriculum), Philosophy (tells parents and students how teacher or school intends to treat them and what they are willing to provide), historical ( brought about the intergrading of core classes, set a pace on when a student is ready to advance to more complex subjects), and they have to take into consideration the social influences of the families, peers, as well as the community if they are to form a working curriculum. The curriculum should be an organized process that promotes a more student centered approach to learning, by directing the course of study in such a manner that it challenges the student at a constant upgrade in levels of difficulty which allows the student to comprehend a nd utilize pass lessons or experiences and promote individualization within the society. I have been teaching middle school biology for eight years now and we have to follow certain guidelines that make up our curriculum. It all starts with the entrance of the room. It must be inviting and shouts out come see. Once in the room they have to feel safe and comfortable. This room has to become their safe haven, where all the pressures of home and peers become nonexistence. I have to develop all aspects of the student’s life. Not only does this involve the core classes, but it could involve maturity levels, self-confidence, behavior problems, and social interactions. The class subject has to be taught according to the State of Alabama’s Board of Education. I am given a set of standards each year and must cover each one to mastery. My lessons have to meet every students learning style, and treat every student as an individual with different needs and goals. Every lesson has to have three parts a beginning (this must capture the students interest and be a prelude to that days topic), during (this is the meat and potatoes of the lesson, this could range from reading text to given lectures and everything in between. In this section of the lesson the objectives for that day must be met), and finally the after part of the lesson ( this is where the students have to show me that they were able to comprehend that days objectives and it gives me a chance to analyze my delivery of the subject matter). Before the curriculum can have any effect on the students I have to get to know them. I need to understand how they live and what they want out of life. This will allow me to teach in a manner that relates to them. It will give my lessons value and a means to an end. As you can tell all the disciplines are incorporated into every lesson. For this system to work all teachers have to look beyond the course of study and take more interest into the stu dents. References Natalie Wolchover, Life’s Little Mysteries Staff Writer (What Distinguishes Humans from Other Animals?) 03 July 2011 Time: 09:21 AM ET