Canada :: essays research papers

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Canada Hi my name is insert your name and I’ll be writing about Canada. Canada is the greatest country in the world and it has been voted the best country in the world to live in for the past 3 years in a row by the United Nations. Canada consists of ten provinces and three territories, the newest territories is Nunavut. Nunavut is the land of the Indians (Natives). The capital of Nunavut is Iqaluit and it is located on Baffin Island.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Canada has many professional sports teams in all the major sports except football. Some people say that the CFL is a professional football league but the players are mostly NFL rejects. Our sports teams for the NHL include the Vancouver Canucks, Edmonton Oilers, Calgary Flames, Toronto Maple leafs, Ottawa Senators, and the Montreal Canadians. Canada’s most successful NHL team has been the Montreal Canadians, they have won an astonishing 23 Stanley Cups. Two NHL teams have left Canada because they were located in small markets, Canada has lost the Winnipeg Jets to Phoenix and we have also lost the Quebec Nordiqs to Colorado. Losing NHL teams to the U.S is a growing epidemic because players are demanding more and more money and the ticket prices are going up to accommodate the players demands. Another reason that we are going to lose more NHL teams is that the Government taxation on the Canadian teams, the Montreal Canadians alone have paid more taxes in a ye ar than all the American teams combined, the Government has to let NHL teams pay less taxes then they are right now if anyone ever wants to see hockey in the small markets in Canada. The last reason hockey teams are being lost to the U.S is the declining Canadian dollar and the players wanting their money in U.S funds. I think that Canada is going to lose the Senators, the Oilers, and the Flames in the next ten years.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Canada also has two NBA teams and they are the Vancouver Grizzlies and the Toronto Raptors. They are both relatively new teams, thee Grizzlies are going to build their team around Shareef Abdur-Rahim a young small forward and the Raptors are going to build their team around Vince Carter a young power forward.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Finally, Canada has two MLB (Major League Baseball) teams, the teams are the Toronto Blue Jays and the Montreal Expos.

Kant on Suicide Essay

4. Explain and critically assess Kant’s argument that one has a duty to preserve one’s own life. As rational beings Kant believes we have a categorical duty of self-preservation to not wilfully take our own lives. Kant talks in depth about duty and believes we should act out of respect for the moral law. The will is the only inherent good, as we are only motivated by duty and nothing else. We should act only out of demands of the law, not from inclination, desires or to achieve a particular goal. Duty dictates we should never act or will something if we do not want it to become a universal law. Kant was against any form of suicide. He strongly believed that: in taking a life you treat humanity merely as a means to an end. Kant wouldn’t be interested in the suffering or pain caused to even a person who was terminally ill and wanted to end their life, nor would he take into consideration the family/friends suffering. In this essay I will be arguing that if we follow the categorical imperative it is immoral to sacrifice a life because it involves treating humanity merely as a means to an end. I will examine John Hardwig’s counter argument that we should end our own lives if more pain and suffering is caused by prolonging it/living it even if we are no longer a rational being. We must understand that Kant is saying; if I make a maxium e. g. – ‘if I am in unbearable suffering, I should take my own life’ – it must meet the universal law and be applied to everyone. Kant believes we ought to preserve our own lives because it is our moral duty (it is necessary and universal). John Hardwig however, would argue we also have the right to end our lives. Kant would dismiss this because ultimately humans are the bearers of rational life (e. g. it is too sacred to sacrifice). Suicide fails Kant’s Categorical Imperative on the following grounds: It seeks to shorten a life that promises more troubles than please, this would be killing yourself out of self-love; when in fact the real aim would be to live a life worth living, with more pleasure than difficulties. Kant isn’t claiming that it’s impossible for everyone to commit suicide or for everyone to will it (and therefore it becoming a universal law). He believes ‘it would not exist as nature; hence the maxim cannot obtain as a law of nature’. (Immanuel Kant, The Groundwork of the methaphysics of morals, Mary Gregor and Jens Timmermann, Cambridge University 2012, p45 emphasis added). Here Kant seems to be suggesting that suicide isn’t a natural path of life; that it goes against our purpose and that it’s a contradiction to end your life when your goal would be to have an enjoyable life. The idea that the destruction of life is incompatible with improvement suggests that nature couldn’t/wouldn’t allow self-love to be used in a way that is contrary to its purpose. There is surely an obviously contradiction here; in ending one’s life to prevent suffering, one is using one’s life mere means to an end, which automatically fails the categorical imperative. Take the case of Maria Von Herbert- she is clearly appealing to Kant, if under any circumstances; suicide is morally acceptable? He isn’t as blatant with her as in his writings, but let us not forget, Kant doesn’t see woman as rational beings. I agree with Rae Langton that Kant totally bypasses the reason Herbert is writing to him. He doesn’t confront her on suicide but instead reduces her problem to a moral dilemma (regrets lying or telling the truth ), which as an intelligent woman whom has read all his writings; she could work out for herself. Could this have made Kant certain that she did lie and therefore fail the kingdom of ends? Perhaps Kant is being hypocritical; he doesn’t tell Maria the whole truth of suicide merely reducing her to ‘a thing’. He tells Maria she should be ‘ashamed’ for not telling the truth to her former friend but, doesn’t this apply for himself too? Is he just avoiding the truth (states this is just as bad a lying) by not confronting her about suicide? Most likely he wants her to be autonomous and get to the reason herself. Hardwig disagrees with Kant. Take a different situation; Is a terminally ill person-needing 24/7 care, who is entirely financially reliant- only using their family as a means to an end? You can see this as a ‘two way street’ situation. Kant doesn’t look to consequences of an action; it wouldn’t matter to his philosophy that the ill person’s family suffers because they are preserving their life. But is there a flaw? (1) I ought to do my duty as long as I am alive; and (2) It is my duty to go on living as long as possible. Kant strongly believes that you can’t affirm life by taking your own. There is only one exception. Kant claims those who die in battle are ‘victims of fate’ (not simply suicide because they chose to fight). He holds the view that it is better to die in battle than to die of a wound in hospital. Kant believes it’s noble to risk our lives for others- nobody uses us as mere means and we follow our own maxium. We are no longer forced into serving for our country or deceived into joining (if this did happen it would fail the CI because we wouldn’t be treated as rational beings and would be used as mere means and not as ends in ourselves). John Hardwig strongly believes that life should be treated no differently from death. We are free to live in the way we want, so why aren’t we free to die in the way we want (when and how)? He also switches the question but Kant would simply say we have a duty to live. Hardwig has also argued that medical advances eliminate the threats of many terminal illnesses. He then concludes, if our continued existence creates signi? cant hardship for our loved ones, we have a duty to die. By continuing a live of suffering the burden that this person imposes on others is often great. One may have the duty to die in order to relieve them of these burdens. This argument seems to be based on fairness. Kant would refute this; suffering is a tool of reasoning and it ensures the development of mankind. Kant strongly believes that we should preserve our own lives. The argument though strong is flawed. 1- All duties are absolute- Kant doesn’t advise us on how to resolve conflicting duty (for example: help others vs. never kill). 2- He discounts moral emotions like compassion, sympathy, desire and remorse as appropriate and ethical motives for action. 3- Kant completely ignores the consequences of an action and is purposefully blind to following circumstances. He states that human life is valuable because humans are the bearers of rational life. We have the great capacity to think, organize, plan etc. and Kant holds this as being valuable. Therefore we should not sacrifice this for anything (as previously discussed autonomous creatures should not be treated merely as a means or for the happiness of another). There are also great issues with Hardwigs counter argument; if we agree that we have the duty to die; who has the duty to die? When do they have they duty to die? Although this argument is strong is some areas (greater burden), it is greatly flawed. It would be extremely difficult to universalize a maxium for everyone to follow so they could decide if at that moment they had the duty to die. A problem would also occur if the family disagreed with the ill person’s decision, which could cause great problems within society (though Kant would not look to consequences but they are greatly important to Hardwigs argument). I believe –and agree with Kant- that if we follow the categorical imperative it is immoral to sacrifice anyone at all (including yourself) because it involves treating the humanity in that person as merely a means to an end. I also accept and agree with his point that it seems to go against our purpose and is an unnatural path for us to take a life. I find it interesting that Kant believes suffering is a tool of development and therefore essential to us. Though John Hardwigs argument is partly convincing, if we were all given the choice of when we should die, would we find the right time? This would be very hard to govern, as people would of course take advantage of this right. I’ve found it hard to find a counter argument to Kant’s stance -without suffering there wouldn’t be cures and perhaps less happiness. Therefore I have to agree with Kant that it only allows us to grow and develop. Thus we do have the duty to preserve our own lives even if it is riddled with suffering.

Kant on Suicide Essay

4. Explain and critically assess Kant’s argument that one has a duty to preserve one’s own life. As rational beings Kant believes we have a categorical duty of self-preservation to not wilfully take our own lives. Kant talks in depth about duty and believes we should act out of respect for the moral law. The will is the only inherent good, as we are only motivated by duty and nothing else. We should act only out of demands of the law, not from inclination, desires or to achieve a particular goal. Duty dictates we should never act or will something if we do not want it to become a universal law. Kant was against any form of suicide. He strongly believed that: in taking a life you treat humanity merely as a means to an end. Kant wouldn’t be interested in the suffering or pain caused to even a person who was terminally ill and wanted to end their life, nor would he take into consideration the family/friends suffering. In this essay I will be arguing that if we follow the categorical imperative it is immoral to sacrifice a life because it involves treating humanity merely as a means to an end. I will examine John Hardwig’s counter argument that we should end our own lives if more pain and suffering is caused by prolonging it/living it even if we are no longer a rational being. We must understand that Kant is saying; if I make a maxium e. g. – ‘if I am in unbearable suffering, I should take my own life’ – it must meet the universal law and be applied to everyone. Kant believes we ought to preserve our own lives because it is our moral duty (it is necessary and universal). John Hardwig however, would argue we also have the right to end our lives. Kant would dismiss this because ultimately humans are the bearers of rational life (e. g. it is too sacred to sacrifice). Suicide fails Kant’s Categorical Imperative on the following grounds: It seeks to shorten a life that promises more troubles than please, this would be killing yourself out of self-love; when in fact the real aim would be to live a life worth living, with more pleasure than difficulties. Kant isn’t claiming that it’s impossible for everyone to commit suicide or for everyone to will it (and therefore it becoming a universal law). He believes ‘it would not exist as nature; hence the maxim cannot obtain as a law of nature’. (Immanuel Kant, The Groundwork of the methaphysics of morals, Mary Gregor and Jens Timmermann, Cambridge University 2012, p45 emphasis added). Here Kant seems to be suggesting that suicide isn’t a natural path of life; that it goes against our purpose and that it’s a contradiction to end your life when your goal would be to have an enjoyable life. The idea that the destruction of life is incompatible with improvement suggests that nature couldn’t/wouldn’t allow self-love to be used in a way that is contrary to its purpose. There is surely an obviously contradiction here; in ending one’s life to prevent suffering, one is using one’s life mere means to an end, which automatically fails the categorical imperative. Take the case of Maria Von Herbert- she is clearly appealing to Kant, if under any circumstances; suicide is morally acceptable? He isn’t as blatant with her as in his writings, but let us not forget, Kant doesn’t see woman as rational beings. I agree with Rae Langton that Kant totally bypasses the reason Herbert is writing to him. He doesn’t confront her on suicide but instead reduces her problem to a moral dilemma (regrets lying or telling the truth ), which as an intelligent woman whom has read all his writings; she could work out for herself. Could this have made Kant certain that she did lie and therefore fail the kingdom of ends? Perhaps Kant is being hypocritical; he doesn’t tell Maria the whole truth of suicide merely reducing her to ‘a thing’. He tells Maria she should be ‘ashamed’ for not telling the truth to her former friend but, doesn’t this apply for himself too? Is he just avoiding the truth (states this is just as bad a lying) by not confronting her about suicide? Most likely he wants her to be autonomous and get to the reason herself. Hardwig disagrees with Kant. Take a different situation; Is a terminally ill person-needing 24/7 care, who is entirely financially reliant- only using their family as a means to an end? You can see this as a ‘two way street’ situation. Kant doesn’t look to consequences of an action; it wouldn’t matter to his philosophy that the ill person’s family suffers because they are preserving their life. But is there a flaw? (1) I ought to do my duty as long as I am alive; and (2) It is my duty to go on living as long as possible. Kant strongly believes that you can’t affirm life by taking your own. There is only one exception. Kant claims those who die in battle are ‘victims of fate’ (not simply suicide because they chose to fight). He holds the view that it is better to die in battle than to die of a wound in hospital. Kant believes it’s noble to risk our lives for others- nobody uses us as mere means and we follow our own maxium. We are no longer forced into serving for our country or deceived into joining (if this did happen it would fail the CI because we wouldn’t be treated as rational beings and would be used as mere means and not as ends in ourselves). John Hardwig strongly believes that life should be treated no differently from death. We are free to live in the way we want, so why aren’t we free to die in the way we want (when and how)? He also switches the question but Kant would simply say we have a duty to live. Hardwig has also argued that medical advances eliminate the threats of many terminal illnesses. He then concludes, if our continued existence creates signi? cant hardship for our loved ones, we have a duty to die. By continuing a live of suffering the burden that this person imposes on others is often great. One may have the duty to die in order to relieve them of these burdens. This argument seems to be based on fairness. Kant would refute this; suffering is a tool of reasoning and it ensures the development of mankind. Kant strongly believes that we should preserve our own lives. The argument though strong is flawed. 1- All duties are absolute- Kant doesn’t advise us on how to resolve conflicting duty (for example: help others vs. never kill). 2- He discounts moral emotions like compassion, sympathy, desire and remorse as appropriate and ethical motives for action. 3- Kant completely ignores the consequences of an action and is purposefully blind to following circumstances. He states that human life is valuable because humans are the bearers of rational life. We have the great capacity to think, organize, plan etc. and Kant holds this as being valuable. Therefore we should not sacrifice this for anything (as previously discussed autonomous creatures should not be treated merely as a means or for the happiness of another). There are also great issues with Hardwigs counter argument; if we agree that we have the duty to die; who has the duty to die? When do they have they duty to die? Although this argument is strong is some areas (greater burden), it is greatly flawed. It would be extremely difficult to universalize a maxium for everyone to follow so they could decide if at that moment they had the duty to die. A problem would also occur if the family disagreed with the ill person’s decision, which could cause great problems within society (though Kant would not look to consequences but they are greatly important to Hardwigs argument). I believe –and agree with Kant- that if we follow the categorical imperative it is immoral to sacrifice anyone at all (including yourself) because it involves treating the humanity in that person as merely a means to an end. I also accept and agree with his point that it seems to go against our purpose and is an unnatural path for us to take a life. I find it interesting that Kant believes suffering is a tool of development and therefore essential to us. Though John Hardwigs argument is partly convincing, if we were all given the choice of when we should die, would we find the right time? This would be very hard to govern, as people would of course take advantage of this right. I’ve found it hard to find a counter argument to Kant’s stance -without suffering there wouldn’t be cures and perhaps less happiness. Therefore I have to agree with Kant that it only allows us to grow and develop. Thus we do have the duty to preserve our own lives even if it is riddled with suffering.

Kant on Suicide Essay

4. Explain and critically assess Kant’s argument that one has a duty to preserve one’s own life. As rational beings Kant believes we have a categorical duty of self-preservation to not wilfully take our own lives. Kant talks in depth about duty and believes we should act out of respect for the moral law. The will is the only inherent good, as we are only motivated by duty and nothing else. We should act only out of demands of the law, not from inclination, desires or to achieve a particular goal. Duty dictates we should never act or will something if we do not want it to become a universal law. Kant was against any form of suicide. He strongly believed that: in taking a life you treat humanity merely as a means to an end. Kant wouldn’t be interested in the suffering or pain caused to even a person who was terminally ill and wanted to end their life, nor would he take into consideration the family/friends suffering. In this essay I will be arguing that if we follow the categorical imperative it is immoral to sacrifice a life because it involves treating humanity merely as a means to an end. I will examine John Hardwig’s counter argument that we should end our own lives if more pain and suffering is caused by prolonging it/living it even if we are no longer a rational being. We must understand that Kant is saying; if I make a maxium e. g. – ‘if I am in unbearable suffering, I should take my own life’ – it must meet the universal law and be applied to everyone. Kant believes we ought to preserve our own lives because it is our moral duty (it is necessary and universal). John Hardwig however, would argue we also have the right to end our lives. Kant would dismiss this because ultimately humans are the bearers of rational life (e. g. it is too sacred to sacrifice). Suicide fails Kant’s Categorical Imperative on the following grounds: It seeks to shorten a life that promises more troubles than please, this would be killing yourself out of self-love; when in fact the real aim would be to live a life worth living, with more pleasure than difficulties. Kant isn’t claiming that it’s impossible for everyone to commit suicide or for everyone to will it (and therefore it becoming a universal law). He believes ‘it would not exist as nature; hence the maxim cannot obtain as a law of nature’. (Immanuel Kant, The Groundwork of the methaphysics of morals, Mary Gregor and Jens Timmermann, Cambridge University 2012, p45 emphasis added). Here Kant seems to be suggesting that suicide isn’t a natural path of life; that it goes against our purpose and that it’s a contradiction to end your life when your goal would be to have an enjoyable life. The idea that the destruction of life is incompatible with improvement suggests that nature couldn’t/wouldn’t allow self-love to be used in a way that is contrary to its purpose. There is surely an obviously contradiction here; in ending one’s life to prevent suffering, one is using one’s life mere means to an end, which automatically fails the categorical imperative. Take the case of Maria Von Herbert- she is clearly appealing to Kant, if under any circumstances; suicide is morally acceptable? He isn’t as blatant with her as in his writings, but let us not forget, Kant doesn’t see woman as rational beings. I agree with Rae Langton that Kant totally bypasses the reason Herbert is writing to him. He doesn’t confront her on suicide but instead reduces her problem to a moral dilemma (regrets lying or telling the truth ), which as an intelligent woman whom has read all his writings; she could work out for herself. Could this have made Kant certain that she did lie and therefore fail the kingdom of ends? Perhaps Kant is being hypocritical; he doesn’t tell Maria the whole truth of suicide merely reducing her to ‘a thing’. He tells Maria she should be ‘ashamed’ for not telling the truth to her former friend but, doesn’t this apply for himself too? Is he just avoiding the truth (states this is just as bad a lying) by not confronting her about suicide? Most likely he wants her to be autonomous and get to the reason herself. Hardwig disagrees with Kant. Take a different situation; Is a terminally ill person-needing 24/7 care, who is entirely financially reliant- only using their family as a means to an end? You can see this as a ‘two way street’ situation. Kant doesn’t look to consequences of an action; it wouldn’t matter to his philosophy that the ill person’s family suffers because they are preserving their life. But is there a flaw? (1) I ought to do my duty as long as I am alive; and (2) It is my duty to go on living as long as possible. Kant strongly believes that you can’t affirm life by taking your own. There is only one exception. Kant claims those who die in battle are ‘victims of fate’ (not simply suicide because they chose to fight). He holds the view that it is better to die in battle than to die of a wound in hospital. Kant believes it’s noble to risk our lives for others- nobody uses us as mere means and we follow our own maxium. We are no longer forced into serving for our country or deceived into joining (if this did happen it would fail the CI because we wouldn’t be treated as rational beings and would be used as mere means and not as ends in ourselves). John Hardwig strongly believes that life should be treated no differently from death. We are free to live in the way we want, so why aren’t we free to die in the way we want (when and how)? He also switches the question but Kant would simply say we have a duty to live. Hardwig has also argued that medical advances eliminate the threats of many terminal illnesses. He then concludes, if our continued existence creates signi? cant hardship for our loved ones, we have a duty to die. By continuing a live of suffering the burden that this person imposes on others is often great. One may have the duty to die in order to relieve them of these burdens. This argument seems to be based on fairness. Kant would refute this; suffering is a tool of reasoning and it ensures the development of mankind. Kant strongly believes that we should preserve our own lives. The argument though strong is flawed. 1- All duties are absolute- Kant doesn’t advise us on how to resolve conflicting duty (for example: help others vs. never kill). 2- He discounts moral emotions like compassion, sympathy, desire and remorse as appropriate and ethical motives for action. 3- Kant completely ignores the consequences of an action and is purposefully blind to following circumstances. He states that human life is valuable because humans are the bearers of rational life. We have the great capacity to think, organize, plan etc. and Kant holds this as being valuable. Therefore we should not sacrifice this for anything (as previously discussed autonomous creatures should not be treated merely as a means or for the happiness of another). There are also great issues with Hardwigs counter argument; if we agree that we have the duty to die; who has the duty to die? When do they have they duty to die? Although this argument is strong is some areas (greater burden), it is greatly flawed. It would be extremely difficult to universalize a maxium for everyone to follow so they could decide if at that moment they had the duty to die. A problem would also occur if the family disagreed with the ill person’s decision, which could cause great problems within society (though Kant would not look to consequences but they are greatly important to Hardwigs argument). I believe –and agree with Kant- that if we follow the categorical imperative it is immoral to sacrifice anyone at all (including yourself) because it involves treating the humanity in that person as merely a means to an end. I also accept and agree with his point that it seems to go against our purpose and is an unnatural path for us to take a life. I find it interesting that Kant believes suffering is a tool of development and therefore essential to us. Though John Hardwigs argument is partly convincing, if we were all given the choice of when we should die, would we find the right time? This would be very hard to govern, as people would of course take advantage of this right. I’ve found it hard to find a counter argument to Kant’s stance -without suffering there wouldn’t be cures and perhaps less happiness. Therefore I have to agree with Kant that it only allows us to grow and develop. Thus we do have the duty to preserve our own lives even if it is riddled with suffering.

How to Find Greatest Common Factors

Factors are numbers that divide evenly in a number. The greatest common factor of two or more numbers is the largest number that can divide evenly into each of the numbers. Here, you will learn how to find factors and greatest common factors. You will want to know how to factor numbers when you are trying to simplify fractions. What You Need Manipulatives: Coins, buttons, hard beansPencils and paperCalculator Steps Factors of the number 12: You can evenly divide 12 by 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 12.Therefore, we can say that 1,2,3,4,6 and 12 are factors of 12.We can also say that the greatest or largest factor of 12 is 12.Factors of 12 and 6: You can evenly divide 12 by 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 12. You can evenly divide 6 by 1, 2, 3 and 6. Now, look at both sets of numbers. What is the largest factor of both numbers? 6 is the largest or greatest factor for 12 and 6.Factors of 8 and 32: You can evenly divide 8 by 1, 2, 4 and 8. You can evenly divide 32 by 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 and 32. Therefore the largest common factor of both numbers is 8.Multiplying Common Prime Factors: This is another method to find the greatest common factor. Lets take 8 and 32. The prime factors of 8 are 1 x 2 x 2 x 2. Notice that the prime factors of 32 are 1 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2. If we multiply the common prime factors of 8 and 32, we get 1 x 2 x 2 x 2 8, which becomes the greatest common factor.Both methods will help you determine the greates t common factors (GFCs), but you will need to decide which method you prefer to work with.Manipulatives: Use coins or buttons for this concept. Lets say youre trying to find factors of 24. Ask the child to divide the 24 buttons/coins into 2 piles. The child will discover that 12 is a factor. Ask the child how many ways they can evenly divide the coins. Soon they will discover that they can stack the coins into groups of 2, 4, 6, 8, and 12. Always use manipulatives to prove the concept. Tips Be sure to use coins, buttons, cubes, etc. to prove how finding factors works. Its much easier to learn concretely than abstractly. Once the concept is grasped in a concrete format, it will be much more easily understood abstractly.This concept requires some ongoing practice. Provide a few sessions with it.

Physical Education And Sports Programs - 1628 Words

Introduction The PE programme aims to develop physical flexibility and an understanding of teamwork. A modular system is introduced at our school where students go through a 4-6 weeks course of a particular sport, after which they are assessed on their knowledge and skills at the end of the term. Aims The aim of organized physical education and sport programs is to create an environment that stimulates selected movement experiences resulting in desirable responses that contribute to the optimal development of the individual s potentialities in all phases of life. (Shepphard and Willoughby). The objective of the Schools Physical Education and Sports Policy is to provide guidelines to schools for development of the following: To help students achieve a health-enhancing life of physical activity To help understand and respect individual differences among people in physical settings Integrate Physical Education and Sports into the Curriculum To provide for a safe physical environment To provide students with a variety of activities that will enhance life-long learning and participation Promote physical excellence To provide high quality opportunities for pupils to be creative, competitive and to face up to different challenges as individuals, in groups, and in teams. To develop pupils’ physical competence and confidence in a range of activities, enabling them to become skilful and intelligent performers. To promote physical development and co-ordination, and a knowledgeShow MoreRelated Adventure Education and Wilderness Sports1275 Words   |  6 Pageswhen you do something and do not receive the results you want? I know you are not and nobody is. Everyone wants improvement in the world and people are happy and satisfied when everything is right. This concept can be applied to the world of physical education in today’s society. Obesity has slowly become one of the most problematic diseases that exist in the United States and the world today. The U.S. has been greatly impacted by this disease and more and more people in today’s society are overweightRead MoreDefinition Curriculum : A Curriculum1042 Words   |  5 Pagesthough physical education classes and school sports both utilize athletics, there is a vast difference between how they are taught. The curriculum for physical education and school sports is very different as well. Implied Curriculum of Physical Education Physical education classes are meant to teach students the rules of certain games or sports. Rules are usually learned before the students actually get the opportunity to play the game. PE teachers will review the rules of the game or sport, forRead MoreImplied Curriculum: Physical Education for All Students935 Words   |  4 PagesPhysical education is a component of the American education system about which politicians, administrators, doctors, and others frequently debate. Some see it as an integral part of a student’s education - a part that is often underemphasized due to time and budget constraints. Others see it as a non-essential, indicating that a student’s academic day should not be interrupted with something as non-academic as sports (Pill, 2012). In fact, currently only 2.1 percent of high schools provide the nationallyRead MoreFunding for a Better Alternative: Well-ness Programs in College1353 Words   |  6 Pagesfunding sports? What if you believed that colleges are spending your money to boost public sporting events? Can we trust colleges and universities to make the right decision, and not spend your money on such events? The ordinary college student would say there ought to have be a change. The problem with college funding sports is that it costs absolutely a lot of money, and it has no impact on student education. In fact, colleges have spent over 90 million dollars’ worth of sports programs. Ever sinceRead MoreScheduling Classes, Athletic Events, and Extra Circular Activities1491 Words   |  6 Pagesthat has many activities occurring each day. These activities are physical education classes, practice schedules and locations, meeting special needs students, coordinating game schedules for each sport, and finding time to mentor those within the department. Each area presents its own challenge to synergistically work with the available facilities that are available. Therefore, to be effective in creating a phys ical education program and athletic department, it is imperative that the athletic directorRead MoreAthletics For A Majority Of The Student Population1616 Words   |  7 PagesAthletics in Education Athletics, for a majority of the student population, provides a very meaningful experience in education. People that participate in athletics will have better self-esteem, social confidence, and more academic achievement. Participating in an athletic program will help the student contribute to the school community, which will help them identify with school values. One factor that may be overlooked in the participation of sports is that it helps students have better physical healthRead MoreSports Physical Therapy Essay1241 Words   |  5 PagesWhat is a sports physical therapist? A sports physical therapist is a physical therapist who specializes in the field of sports medicine. This type of therapist is qualified to work with patients who have suffered debilitating injuries from sporting events (Thyberg). Sports physical therapists work with a number of patients with problems ranging from muscle pains to sports injuries. Their work doesn’t consist of only working with injured patients; sports physical therapists must come up with careRead MoreThe Effects Of Physical Education On Children1594 Words   |  7 Pages11th worst country for obesity rates out of 15 developed countries and the Program for International Student Assessment measurement found the U.S. ranked 31st in math literacy and 23rd in science (Klein). Since 1980, the obesity rate for children has been rising at a steady rate, while the education and cognitive ability of children has been falling at a steady rate. We can assume there is correlation between the physical fitness of children and their cognitive ability and come to the conclusionRead MoreThe Plight of Canada’s Fitness990 Words   |  4 Pagesprovince in Canada in which physical education credits between grades 9 to grade 12 are required for graduation, the program is facing several issues from the large class size, limited space, and specialist versus generalist teachers issue. Thus, physical education programs ne eds to be enforced and should be mandatory nationwide. Incontrovertible, physical education programs are getting more attention in the last few years. It is the key to increase teenager’s physical activity levels. MoreoverRead MoreThe Pros and Cons to Physical Education Essay1662 Words   |  7 PagesThe Pros and Cons of Physical Education Most of us remember gym class. For many of us, it was the most hated or the most anticipated class. Those that were a little bit heavier or not as athletically inclined may remember the class as a nightmare, while others may remember it as the most exciting time of the day. Either way, physical education was required. Today, however, the necessity of physical education classes is up for debate. Parents, faculty, council members, and even the

The Dreaming Is The Way The Aboriginal Understand About...

Part A: Indigenous Perspectives The Dreaming is the way the Aboriginal understand about the world through the great creative stories. These stories are passed on lore, culture and belief system to the next generations. Aboriginal people believe that the Ancestors Spirits in human form created animals, plants, rocks and other forms of land. Then they changed into trees, starts, water holes and other subjects that are the sacred places of Aboriginal culture. (Australia.gov.au, 2017) Totem is a natural object or animals given to a child at birth that has a special connection to his family. Each person has an individual totem that this person has a responsibility to look after. Totems link people to the universe. It links to air, land, water†¦show more content†¦The standard reap of assets was, and is, the financial premise for much ILM hone and related learning and convictions. Nondomesticated buffalo are one of the numerous irritation plant and creature species that are a center for biological system benefit installments for the northern Aboriginal people group. Zander and Garnett have as of late evaluated that Australians could be willing to pay from $878 million to $2 billion every year for Indigenous individuals to give natural administrations; wild creature control, waterfront observation, weed control and fire administration pull in the most elevated amount of support. Different installment plans—including reconnaissance for mosquitoes, mari ne flotsam and jetsam and creature malady—have been supported by the Australian Quarantine what s more, Inspection Service. Weed and bug creature control and imperiled species administration projects are moreover bolstered through different government what are more, generous projects. (Agriculture.gov.au, 2017) Part B: Colonisation Banks established British settlements in New South Wales and colonies in Australia, as well as establishing that Botany is a place for the reception of prisoners, and advises the British government on all Australian matters. He was considered a proponent ofShow MoreRelatedExplain the Inextricable Connection of the Dreaming, the Land and Identity, Talking Into Account the Diversity of the Dreaming for Abriginal Peoples.1274 Words   |  6 PagesINEXTRICABLE CONNECTION OF THE DREAMING, THE LAND AND IDENTITY, TALKING INTO ACCOUNT THE DIVERSITY OF THE DREAMING FOR ABRIGINAL PEOPLES. The Aboriginal people’s inextricable connection to the Land and the natural world provides a link between the people and the Dreaming. This untieable connection dictates their way of life, their Laws, their beliefs, their values and the way in which they treat others individually. This connection has lived and grown within every Aboriginal of different tribes for 40Read MoreAboriginal Art And Its Impact On Aboriginal Society2348 Words   |  10 Pagesis the oldest ongoing tradition of art in the world. Initial forms of artistic Aboriginal expression were rock carvings, body painting and ground designs, which date back more than 30,000 years. The quality and variety of Australian Indigenous art produced today reflects the richness and diversity of Indifenous culture and distinct differences between tribes, languages, dialects and geographic landscapes. Art has always been an important of Aboriginal life, connection past and present, the peopleRead MoreThe Oldest Ongoing Tradit ion of Art in the World Essay2324 Words   |  10 Pagesis the oldest ongoing tradition of art in the world. Initial forms of artistic Aboriginal expression were rock carvings, body painting and ground designs, which date back more than 30,000 years. The quality and variety of Australian Indigenous art produced today reflects the richness and diversity of Indifenous culture and distinct differences between tribes, languages, dialects and geographic landscapes. Art has always been an important of Aboriginal life, connection past and present, the peopleRead MoreSocial Determinants of Health10939 Words   |  44 Pages3 The Social, Cultural and Historical Context of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians PatDudgeon,MichaelWright,YinParadies, DarrenGarveyandIainWalker OVERVIEW To understand the contemporary life of Indigenous Australians, a historical and cultural background is essential. This chapter sets the context for further discussions about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and issues related to their social and emotional wellbeing and mental health. The historyRead MoreEssay about Ecofeminism4924 Words   |  20 Pagesrecognizes the cultural and political links between ecology and feminism. Ecofeminism is a value system, a social movement, and a practice. It criticizes the mainstream green movement and challenges the fundamental ideas of the western patriarchy about women, nature science, and development. Ecofeminism is an admixture of ecology and feminism. A French feminist, Francoise dEaubonne, first used it in 1974 (Mellor, 1997 p. 44). Ecological feminism focuses on gender as a category of analysis andRead MoreWomen Entrepreneurs: a Critical Review of the Literature12149 Words   |  49 Pagesand conflicts encountered by women business owners. The article argues that further study and critical analysis is required, particularly examining relationships between changing economic contexts and cultural meanings of work, and women’s unique ways of crafting entrepreneurial leadership. Questions are suggested for future research continuing the inquiry into women’s leadership as small business owners. Women Leaders in Small Business: A Critical Review of Existing Literature and QuestionsRead MoreOne Significant Change That Has Occurred in the World Between 1900 and 2005. Explain the Impact This Change Has Made on Our Lives and Why It Is an Important Change.163893 Words   |  656 PagesRosenzweig Also in this series: Paula Hamilton and Linda Shopes, eds., Oral History and Public Memories Tiffany Ruby Patterson, Zora Neale Hurston and a History of Southern Life Lisa M. Fine, The Story of Reo Joe: Work, Kin, and Community in Autotown, U.S.A. Van Gosse and Richard Moser, eds., The World the Sixties Made: Politics and Culture in Recent America Joanne Meyerowitz, ed., History and September 11th John McMillian and Paul Buhle, eds., The New Left Revisited David M. Scobey, EmpireRead MoreLogical Reasoning189930 Words   |  760 PagesLogical Reasoning by Bradley H. Dowden is licensed under a Creative Commons AttributionNonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. That is, you are free to share, copy, distribute, store, and transmit all or any part of the work under the following conditions: (1) Attribution You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author, namely by citing his name, the book title, and the relevant page numbers (but not in any way that suggests that the book Logical Reasoning or its author