Analysis Of Aristotle s The Golden Mean - 820 Words

Final Exam- The Golden Mean In the philosophical book Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle introduces the means to reach the ultimate good of happiness. A guide called the Golden Mean is provided to therefore reach eudemonia. This concept encourages a balance in life in order to remain virtuous. There is, however, social movements such as feminism and the black activists that shows exceptions to this principle. This mean is also inexact, as it is relative to each, and is thus subjective to its level of virtuosity regarding someone’s actions, giving no ultimate guide for human’s to follow. In this essay, I will be articulating a definition and a critical analysis of Aristotle’s concept of the Golden Mean. Aristotle observed that happiness can be attained through the possession of virtues, such as, courage, temperance, patience, modesty, and more. True virtue can withstand any misfortunes in life, and thus be key to attaining happiness. He also observes that every virtue is between two vices. The Golden Mean is the desirable middle of virtue between two extreme, such as excess and deficiency. The same actions that produce virtue can be the cause of its destruction. Excess and deficiency is detrimental to virtue. For instance, a man who fears too much is cowardly and a man who fears too little is reckless. Its desirable virtue would thus be courage. Another example could be the mean of proper desire, or pride, which in deficiency would be laziness, and in excess, zealous. Moreover,Show MoreRelatedAnalysis Of Aristotle s The Golden Mean 1109 Words   |  5 PagesPart 3 - Aristotle - The Golden Mean Aristotle was a greek philosopher that taught and stressed many important and revolutionary ideas/philosophies. He was born in 384 BC, and was a student of Plato, as well as founded/ taught at several academies. He wrote on diverse subjects, including physics, metaphysics, poetry, logic, politics, government, and ethics. He contributed to almost every field of human knowledge in existence during his time, and he was the founder of many new fields. Aristotle was oneRead MoreTaming Of The Shrew By William Shakespeare1671 Words   |  7 Pagesbut given the opportunity to fulfill this task; Katherina from Shakespeare’s Taming of the Shrew displays the distinct characteristics which allow her to be placed among the sinners in the Inferno. Kate’s tragic flaw of being the shrew in the play means she personifies anger. Her anger is clearly seen at the beginning of the play, but appears to lessen during the remaining acts. On the surface it can be easy to conclude that Kate is a shrew no more and her marriage has tamed her. Shakespeare’s TamingRead MoreQuestions On A Ethical Dilemma1482 Words   |  6 Pagesbreach of policy or personal values, break the golden rule, the action is not publicly acceptable, or would harm others - then the action is a ethical dilemma. The first criteria examines the illegality of action. The second criteria asks if the action is a violate of one’s professional or corporate ethic. The third criteria examines the if the dilemma’s relation to individuals’ consciences and personal values. The fourth criteria posits the golden rule as an ethical barometer. â€Å"Would you likeRead MoreExecutive Compensation2864 Words   |  12 PagesCase Summary In 1993, Michael D. Eisner of Walt Disney fame received $203 million as executive compensation. Although this award was inflated by Eisner s exercise of stock options, many examples of compensation in millions and tens of millions raise questions on how CEOs should be paid. Critics dispute that CEOs are deserving of their pay. CEOs downsize companies or perform badly, yet continue to draw a substantial salary. Unlike low level managers, it seems there is no formula for executiveRead MoreThe Future Of Rhetoric Is Not Changed Much Since The Years Of Aristotle3176 Words   |  13 PagesTHE FUTURE OF RHETORIC IN OUR ELECTRONIC AGE Name: Institution: Course: Professor: Date: Abstract Rhetoric has not changed much since the years of Aristotle. However, the application of concept of rhetoric appears to have undergone dynamic transformations as new technologies come into the market. Rhetoric is employed in all spheres and levels of life in conveying information especially in the world of business and politics. For many years, rhetoric has been used to convince and persuadeRead MoreAristotle And Plato s Influence On Western Philosophical Tradition2851 Words   |  12 Pagesthere were the medieval times, which are traditionally divided into two main periods: the period within the Latin West which was then followed by the Early Middle Ages until the 12th century. At this time, Aristotle and Plato’s works were conserved and cultivated. And the second period was the golden age of the 12th, 13th and 14th centuries in the Latin West, which witnessed the pinnacle of the recovery of ancient philosophy, along with a reception of the Arabic commentators, and immense d evelopmentsRead More Principles for Cognizing the Sacred Essay4240 Words   |  17 Pagesscientific analysis of basic world views which expresses genuine understanding of the sacred. Such world views hold the main principles for cognizing reality. A ‘substratum’ understanding of the Sacred is characteristic of mythology and magic, wherein all spiritual phenomena are closely connected with a material or corporeal bearer. Functional understanding of the Sacred is developed by the earliest civilizations in which the spiritual is separated from the material. For example, Plato, Aristotle, andRead MoreParmenides and Heraclitus5510 Words   |  23 Pagesof Heraclitus writing was Word. Heraclitus felt strongly that our ability to use and understand language is the same ability that allows us to understand and describe the world. So logos is both the actual order of the universe as well as the means of our ability to understand it.    Abstract Socrates views are analyzed by studying a conversation between Socrates, Cephalus, his son Polemarchus and his followers. The author explains how Socrates enters into a philosophical dialogue with severalRead MoreBusiness Ethics: Miriam vs. Jenny Case Study2804 Words   |  11 Pagesdevelopment beyond the stage of a spiritual amoeba, relentlessly devouring every particle that floats within range of its tentacle. There are as many rules as there are problems around us, many of these rules conflict, and so moral thinking often requires analysis of the underlying assumptions that determine when various rules apply or not. Hence metaethics provides guidance after normative and applied ethics fall short or contradict each other, as they do here for Miriam. Stakeholders have shared and conflictingRead MoreWhat Constitute Happiness to Man6479 Words   |  26 Pages In what does happiness consist? Is it the same for all men, or do different men seek different things in the name of happiness? Can happiness be achieved on earth, or only hereafter? And if the pursuit of happiness is not a futile quest, by what means or steps should it be undertaken? On all these questions, the great books set forth the fundamental inquiries and speculations, as well as the controversies to which they have given rise, in the tradition of western thought. There seems to be no question

American Culture and Politics Free Essays

This research looks at American Culture and Politics since there is so much in American history and culture. The proposal paper contains some of the findings about the American politics and culture. This paper can help scholars who want to have a wide knowledge about American politics and culture and how they influence each other. We will write a custom essay sample on American Culture and Politics or any similar topic only for you Order Now The primary research sources that will be used include: Questionnaire and Interview. Secondary sources include: published textbooks, and published statistics. INTRODUCTION To begin with, American conservatives claim that the Left, from its parapets of power in Hollywood, the universities, the national media, the federal courts, and the National Endowment for the Arts, has waged, for decades, a â€Å"culture war† upon the American people — a war that the people have been losing. The conservatives’ complaint is commonly put this way: the Left has set out to â€Å"politicize† American culture, to force it to conform to a new orthodoxy of political correctness in everything from homosexual marriage to pronoun usage (Kesler, 1998). The conservatives’ point is that culture should be above, or at least separated from, the political order; that civil society — the realm of art, religion, family, and private property — should be protected, for the sake of liberty as well as culture, against political encroachments. Instead of politics trying tyrannically or arbitrarily to create culture, politics should devote itself to conserving culture (Combs, 1991). According to Goodnow politics had to do with the policies or expressions of the state will (Parashar, 1997). Thus in the conservative view, politics should grow out of culture and serve culture, not the other way around. Scholars and activist on the left should take warning: What once political movements have become translated into personal quests for fulfillment (Cloud, 1998). But at this point one sees that there are actually two conservative views of culture. They differ on the question of what it means to â€Å"conserve† culture: Does it mean to keep government’s hands off it, to be neutral towards culture and allow it to develop however artists and citizens choose? Or does it mean a hands-on approach, an active promotion of â€Å"traditional American values† against their would-be subverters in and out of government? Hands-off is the preference both of libertarians, who tend to take a democratic and laissez faire attitude towards culture, and of those neo-conservatives who defend high culture against the public’s attempts to influence it (Josephson, 2007). The hands-on approach is preferred by the so-called Religious Right, by most who refer to themselves as â€Å"cultural conservatives† or traditionalists, and by many neo-conservatives who are repelled by the prospect of American society’s utter de-moralization. Even conservatives who are prepared to use government to shore up American culture, however, typically reject the notion that they are â€Å"politicizing† the culture (Whitfield, 1996). They argue that they are only using politics to get beyond politics — that is, to overcome the culture’s artificial or forced politicization. White Southerners, used to a friendly custodial environment, were confronting a more diverse and secular American culture (Marsden, 2006). Seizing upon this contradiction or ambiguity, the Left today charges that conservatives are prepared, when they are prepared, to take a laissez faire attitude towards culture only because theirs — the white male bourgeois culture — is the dominant one. When its hegemony is challenged, liberal critics note, as it is being challenged currently, then conservatives cease to be defenders of a hands-off cultural policy and quickly become advocates of cultural protectionism (Wald, Calhoun-brown, 2006). Yet in challenging the supposed hegemony of patriarchal or conservative culture, most liberal intellectuals do not imagine themselves to be calling for the hegemony of their own culture. Today’s liberals stand for â€Å"multiculturalism,† for the replacement of ruling-class culture by the multiplicity of cultures belonging to oppressed, or formerly oppressed, classes and groups. In the past, white males had used their culture to justify and reinforce their rule over the rest of society; it was white males who â€Å"politicized† culture, according to the multiculturalists (Sturm, 2002). Now, the rest of society — indeed, the world — can bring previously excluded cultures to bear in order to delegitimize the old â€Å"racist, sexist, homophobic† order and ordain a new, more inclusive one (Roper, 2002). From the standpoint of traditionalist conservatism, every society or people are defined by its culture, and therefore every culture is more or less an exclusive one (Neve, 1992). In John O’Sullivan’s words, â€Å"A multicultural society is a contradiction in terms and cannot survive indefinitely. It either becomes monocultural or runs into trouble. â€Å"1 At this juncture, we urgently need some clarity on the meaning of â€Å"culture. † Becoming American was initially a political and constitutional choice, but finally it necessitated a series of profound transformations in business, speech, dress, religion, literature, education, heroes, holidays, civic ceremonies — in character (Bergmann Seminar on Feminism and Culture in Latin America, 1990). The public schools movement was one of the most important, as well as one of the most obvious, of these subsequent efforts to conform the American people to their new republican institutions. It is an old political observation, echoed in Montesquieu and countless other writers, that in the beginning men make the institutions, and after that the institutions make the men. The American founders had this maxim very much in mind as they built the institutions that would guide the nation’s destiny, and today it is worth pondering anew. Perhaps it is time to build some new institutions, if we are to have a real chance to rehabilitate American culture. During a relatively brief period of time the first food industry has helped to transform not only the American diet, but also our landscape, economy, workforce, and popular culture (Schlosser, 2001) as a kind of growth: a culture is a living social organism that has particular ethnic â€Å"roots† and develops from those roots, often flowering into unique, that is, characteristic achievements of high art. To understand a culture means therefore to appreciate it in its particularity, to see it as a unique historical growth — not as a mere exemplum of a common and unchanging human nature, much less as an imperfect embodiment of the best political or social order. Reason has little to do with culture in this sense, therefore, because the modern concept of culture emphasizes the ethnic, the particular, the authentic at the expense of the universal; whereas reason strives, even in practical affairs, to see particulars in the light of universals. An authentic culture is natural in the sense of being an uncoerced growth, not in the sense of containing universal principles that can be grasped and perhaps manipulated by reason (Tomsich, 1971). Accordingly, an authentic culture cannot be designed or planned because it cannot be thought through; it is always in the process of slow change or adaptation. Ever since Edmund Burke, whose defense of the British Constitution became the model for the Right’s thinking on the cultural roots of politics in general, conservatives have argued that culture is neither a goal that politicians can seek to achieve nor a product that they can make — let alone export. SUMMARY Oddly enough, the multiculturalists agree with the traditionalists on the primacy of culture over politics, and to some extent even on the definition of culture. What the multiculturalists insist on, however, is that culture does not have to be exclusive, or more precisely, that Americans can participate in many cultures without succumbing to any one of them and without ceasing to be American. But this is to pile absurdity upon absurdity. References Bergmann, E. L. Seminar on Feminism and Culture in Latin America. (1990). Women, culture, and politics in Latin America. California: University of California Press. Cloud, D. L. (1998). Control and consolation in American culture and politics: rhetoric of therapy. New Delhi: SAGE. Combs, J. E. (1991). Polpop 2: politics and popular culture in America today?. New York: Popular Press. Eric Schlosser. (2001). Fast food nation: the dark side of the all-American meal, Volume 1000. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Josephson, M. (2007). The President Makers – the Culture of Politics and Leadership in an Age of Enlightenment 1896-1919. New York: READ BOOKS. Kesler, C. R. (1998, May 15). Culture, Politics, and the American Founding. Retrieved June 13, 2010, from www. claremont. org: http://www. claremont. org/publications/pubid. 496/pub_detail. asp Lipartito, K. Sicilia, D. B. (2004). Constructing corporate America: history, politics, culture. New York: Oxford University Press. Marsden, G. M. (2006). Fundamentalism and American culture. New York: Oxford University Press US. Neve, B. (1992). Film and politics in America: a social tradition. New York: Rout ledge. Parashar, P. (1997). Public Administration in the Developed World. New Delhi: Sarup Sons. Roper, J. (2002). The contours of American politics: an introduction. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Sturm, C. (2002). Blood politics: race, culture, and identity in the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma. California: University of California Press. Tomsich, J. (1971). A genteel endeavor: American culture and politics in the gilded age. California: Stanford University Press. Whitfield, S. J. (1996). American space, Jewish time: essays in modern culture and politics. New York: M. E. Sharpe. Wald, K. d. Calhoun-brown, A. (2006). Religion and politics in the United States. Oxford: Rowman Littlefield. How to cite American Culture and Politics, Papers

Right to Life and Human Dignity

Question: Explain the core principles of that theory.? Demonstrate how the principles of the theory support a certain position on that question.? Articulate a relevant objection to the theory on the basis of that argument.? Answer: Introduction- "End of life medical care- Euthanasia" The word Euthanasia has been derived from Greek words " Eu " and " Thanatos ". The word 'eu' means good and the word 'Thanatos' means death. Thus the meaning of the Euthanasia is a beautiful death. There are two theories of this Euthanasia. One is utilitarian theory and other is a Deontologiacl ethical theory (Collins, F. 2008). The former one stresses on the right or wrong consequences which determines morality while the latter focuses on the intent of the action such as duties, principles and respect for rights. The report would focus on the Utilitarian theory with respect to Euthanasia. The report would look at various aspects of what are the principles of this Utilitarian theory. The Utilitarian theory which is applied to "End of life medical care- Euthanasia" According to the utilitarian theory the actions which are performed for promoting the happiness of an individual is right.The actions or the activities which leads to give pain to an individual is not considered as a right. According to the Utilitarian theory the consequences should be given due importance (Stumpf, S. 1970). It is the consequence which decides that a particular act at a particular time is appropriate or not. According to this theory, if a law is broken for the happiness of the majority of people, then it is considered as a right. On the other hand Rule utilitarianism said that an individual must obey to the rule, irrespective whether it gives the greatest pleasure to him or not (Hoxhaj, O. 2014) . The idea of this rule utilitarianism is that one must follow rules that may at the end gives happiness to the community. It does not mean that a person should be allowed for euthanasia. Thus, currently there is no practical way by which what is good or bad can be measured a ccording to utilitarian theory. Principles of the Utilitarian theory and its importance. The main principle of this theory is the happiness principle. The core of this theory is that anything which is done can be justified as right if it gives maximum happiness to everyone involved. Happiness can be defined as pleasure and no pain or very minimum pain. Pleasure should be qualitative as per the theory and not just quantitative.There are other factors defining pleasure and in turn happiness, these are for how long it would be there, whether it is permanent or temporary happiness (Stuart mill, J. 2010).The principle says that we need to calculate and evaluate benefits of all the options which are available. A decision should be taken based on the best option of these benefits, As some of the options would destroy the happiness, whereas the other option might increase the happiness. While selecting the option to opt for, it is very important to identify what is the total happiness quotient involved. The Utilitarian theory and its support to Euthanasia. For Euthanasia which is the end of life, the above theory of Utilitarianism related to happiness is quite relevant. As for a human being, happiness is the most important thing in life. If a person or people close to him are not happy then there is no point of that life (Collins, F. 2008). So whenever a person has decided for Euthanasia it means that he have given a great deal of thought about how this is the best option and would reduce the suffering for everyone involved with him in this pain (Snyder, C. 2006).If the happiness quotient is higher for this option then there is no harm in going with this option, as this would reduce the stress level which is on all the people involved. From a long term prospective Euthanasia might not be a bad thing for the person as compare to whatever the person has been through entire life or even might have to undergo in the future.All the factors should be considered before deciding on Euthanasia. Relevant objections to the Utilitarian theory. Euthanasia is the end of life of a person by his own wish or it can be said that the wishful death of a person. It is very easy to say that a person will get happiness by accepting death or for the relatives attached to the person, but actually it is not that easy to decide (Varelius, J. 2013). When a person suffers from the pain of the life and the medical science has no treatment left for the disease that he has and even with the passage of time his condition becomes worse than it is actually a good decision to end such a painful life but practically it is very difficult to decide that it is the appropriate time to end the life (Stumpf, S. 1970). To give happiness to another by ending ones own life is not that easy. But it is difficult to understand how a person can get happiness by ending his own life or how the person attached to him can get happiness by his death. It is quite difficult to justify that death would give happiness to the people surrounding that person. Conclusion Euthanasia means the peaceful death that one wants when he has no option left in medical treatment. Now when it relates to Utilitarian theory, means what is right and what is wrong will be determined by the consequences that determines the morality. This report has provided details that the happiness can be given to a person who is severely ill and has no medical treatment left with which his condition can be improved. Even with the passage of time his condition becomes even worse. So in such kind of situation the wish to die is appropriate or not should be determined based on the happiness the option would provide. Also the ultimate principle of utilitarian theory which is happiness to the majority should be given due consideration before finalizing on any decision for the person.7.0 References References Collins, F. (2008). Retrieved 11 May 2015, fromhttps://www.baruch.cuny.edu/facultyhandbook/documents/FrankCollinsentryUndergraduatewinner.pdf EUTHANASIAA MEDICOLEGAL STUDY. (2001).JAMA,285(2), 144. Hoxhaj, O. (2014). Euthanasia - The Choice between the Right to Life and Human Dignity.Academic Journal Of Interdisciplinary Studies. Snyder, C. (2006).Euthanasia. Detroit: Greenhaven Press. Stuart mill, J. (2010).Siue.edu. Retrieved 11 May 2015, fromhttps://www.siue.edu/~evailat/i-mill.html Stumpf, S. (1970). Euthanasia and the Right to Death: The Case for Voluntary Euthanasia.JAMA: The Journal Of The American Medical Association,214(8), 1567. The Lancet Neurology,. (2003). Right to dieright or wrong?.The Lancet Neurology,2(10), 583. Varelius, J. (2013). Voluntary Euthanasia, Physician-Assisted Suicide, and the Right to do Wrong.HEC Forum,25(3), 229-243.

The Great Bridge the Construction of the Brooklyn Bridge Essay Example

The Great Bridge: the Construction of the Brooklyn Bridge Paper THE GREAT BRIDGE: THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BROOKLYN BRIDGE AN NTCP ANALYSIS OF THE BROOKLYN BRIDGE PROJECT EM – 612 B Group D Luigi Ballarinni David DeBorja Matthew Gelmetti Jonathon Lum? TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Executive Summary3 2. Background4 3. Statement of Problem5 4. Project NTCP Analysis7 5. Project Approach11 6. Conclusion16 7. References19 ? EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The goal of the Brooklyn Bridge was to allow people to cross the East River without waiting for a ferry, which at the time was the only way to travel to from Brooklyn to Manhattan. The new bridge would allow people to walk, ride a carriage, and even ride the rail, so people and goods could easily travel from one side to the other. This project made groundbreaking revelations; this included using engineering techniques which had not been used in the type of scale to their extent. Two types of engineering practices were the use of caissons for the foundation and a suspension bridge system, both of which had been limited in use before the Brooklyn Bridge. The way in which Roebling approached the Brooklyn Bridge was a critical component of the management project; he had a vision in mind before being granted the project and executed the project according to his elaborate plan. Although the construction of the Brooklyn Bridge was incredibly successful, the approach taken had left the very little room for error for the designers. Much of the success lies in the fact that the Roeblings had gotten most of the characterization correct. However, without any contingencies, the plan lacked much flexibility to adjust to any major setbacks to the project. We will write a custom essay sample on The Great Bridge: the Construction of the Brooklyn Bridge specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on The Great Bridge: the Construction of the Brooklyn Bridge specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on The Great Bridge: the Construction of the Brooklyn Bridge specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer The Brooklyn Bridge has progressed history in more ways than just one: even though it was one of the greatest marvels of the 19th century, it seems to have driven us to now always push the limits of engineering to its physical bounds and even past them. The following NTCP chart displays the categorization of the project, and the approach that the Roeblings had taken (shown in red): ? BACKGROUND In the early 1800’s, Brooklyn and New York (Manhattan) were considered two separate cities. Even though they were just separated by a mile of water, the amount of trade which could be done between the two cities was severely limited. Their location along the eastern seaboard and the accessibility of their ports through the East River, made these two cities among the most prosperous in the United States. The East River prevented the two cities from utilizing the advantage of their proximity to each other. This was mostly due to the fact that the most common route from Brooklyn to New York was to take a ferry across the East River. Many problems were arising from the situation of only having ferries to get across the East River. This was resulting in long queues, overcrowded waterways, and dangerous conditions among others. In particular, the long queues seemed to be the largest problem; just one mile of water was stopping people from transporting anything whether it be their car or their time perishable cargo across to New York or Brooklyn. To have another way across, would allow for people to cross the East River without waiting as long. Business for these merchants would be easier with a method to cross the East River that did not involve ferries. It was often said that taking a train to Albany was faster and easier than trying to cross the river. The detrimental effects of not having any way across the East River except for the ferry climaxed in the winter of 1866-1867. Being that this was an extremely cold winter, much of the East River had frozen over leaving most traffic between New York and Brooklyn at a standstill because the ferries were not able to get across. This prompted the New York Bridge company to charter a project which would allow people to get from one city to the other in a time effective method that was not by ferry. They eventually decided to pick a chief engineer, John A. Roebling, who was famous for his wire rope suspension bridges.? STATEMENT OF PROBLEM The impending plans for the Brooklyn Bridge were seemingly daunting for its day and age. For one, it stood to become the longest bridge in the world, reaching over 50% longer than any bridge before it. The Brooklyn Bridge was also set to be built on the East River, one of the busiest waterways in the world. These were just some of the many issues that lay ahead of the construction of the Brooklyn Bridge. The first problem that was to be encountered by the designers of the bridge was the East River itself. The East River, unlike the name suggests is not so much a river, but more like a salt water estuary. This meant that unlike a river, the East River faced tidal conditions similar to most bodies of water connected to the ocean; these tidal conditions also contributed to the high levels of turbulence that existed in the waters. The East River also had not been fully explored to its depths. The sandy bottom prevented the designers from knowing how deep they would need to dig to reach ground solid enough to build a foundation to hold up the massive structures required for the bridge. The East River was also one of the busiest waterways in the world. This was the waterway that provided the lifeblood of two the busiest commercial ports in the world. Because of the traffic that would flow through the East River, any bridge that would span it, would need to ensure that the span reached high enough to avoid even the tallest sails of the largest ships. In fact, the legislation that authorized the construction of the bridge stipulated that the bridge must not â€Å"obstruct, impair, or injuriously modify† the navigation of the river. Finally, we have to consider the bridge itself. The impending Brooklyn Bridge would easily surpass all existing bridges in terms of length. With the requirement of the bridge not impairing water traffic, the bridge span must be much higher than many other bridges. Building a bridge of this length and height would require the use of a suspension bridge architecture. However, at the time, the suspension bridge concept was a relatively new architecture and had never been tested on a large scale. This architecture also would require two towers to support the structure and would require the construction of a foundation deep beneath the East River, using caissons. Caissons have been used to build structures underwater, however many of the uses were on a much smaller scale, and in much shallower waters. The design and construction of the Brooklyn Bridge obviously faced enormous hurdles and public skepticism before it was to be completed, therefore the proper design and approach must be taken in order to ensure the bridge is constructed successfully. PROJECT NTCP ANALYSIS In order to understand how the Roeblings’ approach fit the project, we must first analyze the project on its own merit. Because of the enormously complex task at hand, it would help to have an organized method to analyze the project, therefore an NTCP analysis was performed on the project. An NTCP analysis is a technique used to characterize projects. This characterization is formed from a basis of 4 key criteria, which form the anagram that the analysis is named after. While many projects may have inherent differences depending on the objective of the task, the resources available, and the complexity of the project; by analyzing a project using the NTCP technique, a project manager may find that many similarities do exist between projects which are seemingly unrelated. By analyzing projects with similar NTCP profiles we can find that many of the projects encounter the same types of problems and require a similar managerial approach. The first component of the NTCP analysis is Novelty. Novelty is used to describe the relative familiarity of the product to the developers and customers. Novelty is broken into three main categories, labeled: Derivative, Platform, and Breakthrough. Derivative projects are defined by projects that extend or improve existing products, such as a next year iteration of an existing project. Platform projects create a new generation or significant improvement over existing products, such as the development of a new aircraft. Breakthrough projects introduce never before seen products or new to the world products, such as the creation of the computer. The Brooklyn Bridge project introduced a number of new breakthroughs in construction technology that influence the industry even to this day. Considered by many to be one of the greatest engineering feats of the 19th century and a marvel of construction, the Brooklyn Bridge ushered in the era of the modern-day suspension bridge. This bridge created a new concept that introduced the framework for building the modern-day suspension bridge, capable of crossing incredible distances. However, for all the incredible accomplishments and breakthroughs, it was still a bridge, and designers and builders have built bridges before, and therefore have some experience and familiarity with the project. Based on this, we can classify this project as a Platform project. Technology is the second component, which makes the T of the NTCP analysis. The four categories that make up the Technology component are: Low Tech, Medium Tech, High Tech, and Ultra-High Tech. Low Tech projects involve the use of existing, well established technologies. Medium Tech projects use many existing technologies with a few new developments. High Tech projects use many new or recently developed technologies, and possibly a few new technologies. Ultra-High Tech projects generally must develop new technologies as the basic technologies do not yet exist to accomplish the task. The Brooklyn Bridge project had accomplished a number of technological breakthroughs by the time of its completion. One such development was the use of caissons. This was not the first ever use of caissons, in fact caissons had been in use for at least a generation, originating in Europe. The most advanced use of caissons at the time had been the Royal Albert bridge, where Brunel had lowered a caisson over 70 feet to build the foundation for the railroad bridge. However, John Roebling’s plan for the caissons were much larger than anything previously done, and were going to be dropped at least 30 feet deeper than the caissons used in Brunel’s project. The use of steel as a construction material was also a major technological development, as projects mainly used Iron at the time. The suspension bridge itself was a technological achievement as the bridge pushed the limits of construction and architecture; at the time of completion, the towers that support the bridge were the tallest free-standing structure in North America. While there was a significant number of breakthroughs for the Brooklyn Bridge project, the project still relied on many tried and true techniques, which would make this project a High Tech project. Figure 1: The design plan for one of the supporting towers for the bridge Complexity makes up the C component of the NTCP analysis. Complexity is a difficult category to encapsulate, as scale alone cannot completely determine the complexity of a project. â€Å"A very large, and expensive project in one industry say construction might be less complex than a smaller project in another industry, such as biotechnology† (reinventing PM, p102). Therefore we have to base complexity on a number of factors such as cost, scale, number of functions and components, and complexity of the organization and relationships between components. Complexity can also be related to the complexity of both the product and the process used to develop the product. The three categories that compose the complexity of a project are: Assembly, System, and Array. Assembly projects are composed of a collection of components that combine to form a single unit with a single function of a limited scale. System projects are a complex collection of components and subsystems, which can perform multiple functions. Array products are comprised of a wide collection of systems or networks which work together to achieve a common objective. The Brooklyn Bridge project contained a number of components which in themselves can be considered systems or subsystems. The bridge required a foundation and tower component which were being built in an incredibly difficult terrain (over 100 feet underwater). The total length of the bridge was 3,460 feet, including 1,595 feet 6 inches between the two towers. The cable and anchoring system was to be much stronger than anything of its day, and were to be constructed using steel, the first time steel was to be used during a major construction project. After taking all factors into account, this project can be categorized as a System Project. Finally we reach the Pace of the project. The Pace of a project is fairly simple concept to determine, yet it may have far reaching consequence when it comes to execution of the project. The four categories the make up the Pace component are: Regular, Fast/Competitive, Time-Critical, and Blitz. For a Regular program, time is not an important factor in the success of a project. Fast/Competitive projects exist when the success of a project is not dependent on the project completing on time; however, timely completion of the project will have a significant impact to the organization’s competitive advantage and/or bottom line. Time-Critical projects are ones where the success of a project is dependent on completion of the project by a certain time; a delay in completion can mean project failure. Blitz projects are generally projects run during a crisis. Blitz projects often do not have a structured organization, rather decisions are made as quickly as possible to deal with the situation at hand. While the Brooklyn Bridge project was clearly not a Blitz or Time-Critical project, the fact that congress originally provided 3 years to build the bridge, showed a level of urgency desired by the legislating government. Add in the merchants and citizens who stood to benefit from a simple mode of transportation across the East River without having to wait for a ferry; and there was clearly a desire for the bridge to be worked on at a fast pace, resulting in a classification of Fast/Competitive. From the analysis given, the Brooklyn Bridge project could be classified with the following NTCP chart: Figure 2: NTCP diagram of Brooklyn Bridge project ? PROJECT APPROACH For John Roebling, the Brooklyn Bridge project did not begin with approval of the project. In fact, Roebling had been planning a crossing of the East River as early as 1857, when he began making drawings detailing the towers the bridge would require. By 1867, when the New York state legislature had chartered the New York Bridge company to proceed with the construction of the project, Roebling had already devised much of the plans for his bridge. To help in understanding the workings of using a caisson, Washington Roebling, had set out to study caissons being used in Europe for over a year, as well as to pay a visit to the ongoing Eads Bridge crossing the Mississippi, where James Eads was using caissons to build his bridge. Skeptics opposed the idea of the Brooklyn Bridge’s suspension design by linking it to the vibrational effects from wind that destroyed the deck of the Wheeling Bridge on the Ohio River (Great Bridge p33). However, Roebling was involved only in the repair by using auxiliary stay cables. Thus, this design feature was also incorporated into the future design of the Brooklyn Bridge. To help alleviate public skepticism and ensure the legitimacy of the design, John Roebling hired a panel of seven consultants to approve of the work he was set to perform. John Roebling stated: â€Å"In view of ‘the magnitude of the undertaking and the large interests connected therewith’, it was ‘only right’ that his plans be ‘subjected to the careful scrutiny’ of a board of experts† (GREAT BRIDGE, p25). However, it was never Roebling’s intention to listen to the advice of the experts he had chosen, rather, he had only intended to convince these men that his design would work. To do this, Roebling emphasized the suspension bridge would be built 6 times as strong as needed. Demonstrating his point, he claimed the design of the bridge would be of such that if the four main cables were to break, the bridge would sag, but not break. This way, the span of the bridge would be designed strong enough to hold its own weight without breaking, a very impressive feat for a suspension bridge. Thus John Roebling achieved the objective of his expert consultant group: to use their reputation and status to convince any remaining skeptics that his bridge was stable and proceed forward with the plan. Another characteristic of the approach taken by John Roebling, was that although he had his name attached to the project, he was hardly the face of the project. This task, he left to his eldest son, Washington, with whom he confided much of the plan, still kept secret from the rest of the world. Had it not been for Washington Roebling’s excellent education, and desire to follow in his father’s footsteps, the plans for the Brooklyn Bridge might have been in trouble when in 1869, as the construction of the bridge was set to begin, John Roebling was involved in a freak accident, that crushed his toes at the pier he was surveying for the project. The toes were amputated but rather than seeking medical assistance, he refused to listen to his doctors’ advice, which some say may have prevented him from developing the fatal bout with tetanus. John Roebling’s death had left the stakeholders of the bridge in a quandary about how the bridge was going to proceed. However, John Roebling had long desired for his son Washington to take over the project at some point, and had discussed this issue with William Kingsley on a number of occasions. In fact, Roebling had initially suggested that Washington be in charge of the project from the start, but that was deemed unacceptable. Because the detailed designs were kept secret except for John and Washington Roebling, it was easier to pass along the lead of the project from father to son because Washington knew what ideas were going to be implemented in the project. This also prevented someone completely new who did not understand what John was doing and would want to change the ideas. With a clear line of succession, the choice was obvious: Washington Roebling would be allowed to continued the project after his father’s death, taking on the role of Chief Engineer. At this point, much of the project planning was done. This included how the design was going to be carried out for the caissons, towers, wires, and actual roadways. Also, requirements needed to be closely considered in order to make sure that stakeholders were satisfied. Construction started on land where the caissons were built. These large wooden boxes had to be the width and thickness the towers were going to be. They were then floated into position and weighted down until they reached the sandy river bottom. Compressed air was inserted into the caissons keeping the water out as they dug deeper. Figure 3: Cross-section of caisson containing muck holes, shafts for people, and pipes where air pressure was pumped in. Due to the compressed air within in the caisson, the workers were limited to 2 hour shifts before the effects of the â€Å"Caisson’s Disease† began appearing. Special chambers called airlocks were developed and helped prevent the negative effects from forming when the finished worker would ascend too rapidly. However, over the length of the project, about 27 workers died from working in the caissons. Digging deeper inside the caissons was extremely slow. The best performance was 6 inches a week (Sheong). Although the Brooklyn tower’s caisson eventually reached bedrock at 44 feet, the Manhattan tower’s caisson continued to go deeper. When the Manhattan tower caisson had reached a depth of 78 feet, and bedrock was still not found, Roebling recalculated whether the tower structure would be able to meet the strength requirements and made the decision to stop digging at this point. The increased weight of the tower was to hold the caisson in place. This delayed the project because there was no way of knowing how deep the bedrock on the Manhattan side was and if 78 feet was stable enough to hold the tower. The next part of the project which needed to be done once the caissons were in place was fill them in and complete the towers. Right before this, a fire broke out in one of the caissons Washington Roebling was inside of. From the rapid ascension, Washington suffered gravely from the â€Å"bends† and left him paralyzed for the rest of his life. From his apartment in Brooklyn Heights, Roebling oversaw construction through a telescope while his wife, Emily Roebling, coordinated the construction at the site under his direction. Once the caissons were filled with concrete, the towers started to be built. The entire project was supposed to only take 3 years, however once the towers were finished being constructed, it was already 1876, more than 6 years since Washington had sustained his injury. Initially, John Roebling had designed the bridge to be six times as strong as required. However, as the installation of the wire rope was in progress, it was discovered that some of the wire was a substituted material, not steel. This made it have an inferior quality and was discovered when one of the steel cables snapped. This was supplied by contractor J. Lloyd Haigh. As a result, the bridge was only 4 times as strong as required and was allowed to stand with additional 250 cables. In 1880, Haigh was convicted of fraud and jailed; however, his steel cables could not be replaced because it had already been placed in throughout the bridge which was standing. Figure 4: Wrapping cables in protection. The New York Polytechnic Society devoted several lectures at â€Å"Cooper Union devoted exclusively to the supposed engineering fallacies of the Roebling plan† (Great Bridge p28). To an even greater extent, concern arose that the bridge would interfere with traffic to and from the Navy yard. Thus, Chief of Army Engineers, A. A. Humphrey’s â€Å"decided to appoint his own review panel to give an opinion about it, irrespective of the conclusions reached by Roebling’s consultants† (Great Bridge, p28). â€Å"When it opened on May 24, 1883 the world took notice and the entire United States celebrated. And the bridge, with its majestic stone towers and graceful steel cables, isnt just a beautiful New York City landmark, its also a very dependable route for many thousands of daily commuters† (http://history1800s. bout. com/od/bridgebuilding/a/brooklynbrid01. htm). However, while there was much public celebration, there was also just much public skepticism. People were both afraid of whether the bridge would be stable enough for people to come across. Even a week after the opening on May 30th, 1883, a public stampede caused by a false panic that the bridge was collapsing caused the death of 12 people and injuries to many others. In order to put this stigma to rest, Roebling hired the â€Å"great showman Phineas T. Barnum to lead a parade of 21 elephants, including the famous Jumbo, across the bridge a year later, in May 1884† (1800s, strollers on bridge, pg11). This proved the stability of the Brooklyn bridge and was no longer feared that it was unstable. ? CONCLUSION Based on the tasks and design used by the Roeblings, we can attempt to classify an NTCP approach the Roeblings used to manage their project. The Roeblings performed an incredible amount of research on previous generations of the product, and John Roebling was considered by many to be one of the premier bridge engineers of the day. Washington Roebling spent a year abroad in Europe studying the use of caissons, and visited a recent project using caissons at depths similar to that planned for the bridge. John Roebling had also performed a fantastic job of marketing the product, proclaiming the bridge to be a transformative marvel for the world to see. By the time the bridge had opened, the entire world was watching, and there had been such a buildup, the President made it a point to be among the first travelers to cross the bridge. This incredible amount of research and marketing is key for a project introducing a novel concept. However, the Roeblings also had a strict design, which had been frozen at the beginning of the construction process. They had not communicated their plans with anyone besides themselves and therefore took serious risk in the case that both engineers had become disabled, as was the case. Luckily for Washington Roebling, while he suffered severe injuries, they had not been grave enough to prevent him from continuing the project with the help of his wife, Emily. John Roebling had also brought on a panel of technical experts to assess his project; however he never intended to listen to any consultation. Rather, than use their expertise to assess the practicality of his project, his only objective was convincing a skeptical public to allow the project to proceed. Although the Roeblings performed many of the requirements of managing a Platform project, they had also managed the project with many characteristics of a Derivative project, therefore it would be best to classify the Roeblings’ approach a Derivative-Platform approach. Ideally, in order to better fit with the project, the Roeblings should have been more flexible, ensuring that the level of project uncertainty was at a minimal level, before freezing the design plan. They also should have communicated their plans with a committee who could have provided additional perspective that might have noticed any possible flaws that may have existed in the plans. With most projects that contain the level of technological accomplishment of the Brooklyn Bridge project, it was imperative that the designers take the right approach to the match the technical uncertainty of project. The Brooklyn Bridge project required the use of a High Tech technological approach, based on the level of technical achievement and technical uncertainty surrounding the task. A High Tech technical approach would have required flexibility in planning to deal with uncertainty, prototypes and considerable development and testing integrated into the project plans, and frequent communication to the project teams on multiple levels. However, the approach the Roeblings had taken was much different. Instead, the Roeblings had a very rigid design plan, feeling that adherence to the very intricate plan was essential to the success of the project. They had not developed any prototypes, although granted, budget limitations probably would have made a prototype an impossibility. The Roeblings also did not follow a very open communication plan, deciding instead to keep the engineering plan close to the vest. Much of this can be attributed to the engineering culture of the time, as many engineers were very competitive, and most engineers had the mentality of protecting the secrets of their process, rather than helping to promote the science and art of engineering. Because of these characteristics of their project, the Roebling’s approach would need to be classified as Medium Tech. Incredibly, the project encountered relatively few setbacks, none of which were significant enough to derail the project. However, if we were to improve this process, we would certainly have introduced contingencies to allow some flexibility in the design plan, as well as improve the level of communication from the design team to the construction team. The Brooklyn Bridge was an incredibly complex construction project for its time, and based on our NTCP analysis, given a rating of System-level complexity. A System project usually involves complex planning, with a contractor chosen to operate the project. Characteristics of these projects often include a tight level of control, and a significant level of documentation. The Roeblings had indeed operated the project as a complex project with a System level of complexity. They maintained tight control of the project, and created intricate plans for a complex building process. An organization, the New York Bridge Company, was created for the sole purpose of building the Brooklyn Bridge. This allowed for many of the less exciting, non-engineering related tasks to be delegated to someone other than the Roeblings, who surely would have bristled at the thought of worrying about obtaining funding, filing paperwork for the expenditures of the project, or any other tedious task not directly related to the building of the bridge. The pace of a project is an important determinant in the performance of a project plan. As a Fast/Competitive project, the plan is geared with a focus towards accomplishing the objective as soon as possible, as delays can cause a loss of competitive advantage or loss of revenue for the organization. Fast/Competitive projects are often run with a strong level of coordination with subcontractors, and clear, structured plans to ensure the tasks are organized and run efficiently. However, Fast/Competitive projects are not entirely dependent on meeting a deadline, and although great measures are performed to ensure the completion of a project as soon as possible, delays in the project schedule does not immediately cause project failure. Surely the Roeblings followed a structured plan to organize the tasks and ensured that the process stayed on track, yet were aware of the delays that might occur based on the nature of the task, therefore they followed a Fast/Competitive approach. Figure 5: NTCP diagram of project and the approach taken (shown in red) By analyzing the NTCP characterization of both the project and the approach taken by the Roeblings, we can see that there are some discrepancies between the two. While it seems the Roeblings had properly understood the Complexity and Pace of the project, it seems as though they had underestimated the Technology and Novelty of the project. Luckily enough for them the decisions they made and the project proceeded without any major setbacks, and they ended up with one of the engineering marvels of the 19th century. REFERENCES David G. McCullough, The great bridge: the epic story of the building of the Brooklyn Bridge, Simon and Schuster, 2001 http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Brooklyn_Bridge http://history1800s. bout. com/od/bridgebuilding/a/brooklynbrid01. htm http://history1800s. about. com/od/bridgebuilding/ig/Images-of-the-Brooklyn-Bridge/Brooklyn-Bridge-s-Caisson. htm http://www. endex. com/gf/buildings/bbridge/bbridgefacts. htm http://www. racontours. com/archive/caissons. php http://www. civilengineergroup. com/building-brooklyn-bridge. html http://www. eyewitnesstohistory. com/brooklynbridge. htm http://www. youtube. com/watch? v=VvG6DSTej4 U http://scheong. wordpress. com/2010/09/21/the-story-of-the-brooklyn-bridge-a-roebling-family-production/

Free Essays on Targeting Children

Innocent Victims America is being brainwashed. Corporate America is pulling the wool over America’s eyes and its children’s eyes with their clever propaganda tactics. I believe that advertisers are taking it too far when they push their products on our helpless children. They are the most susceptible because their minds are immature and are unable to distinguish good advertising versus bad advertising. Television commercials and the internet have a huge impact on children. The internet can brainwash a child with its tactics for advertising. This is legal, but they cannot solicit personal information from them until they turn thirteen years old. The advertisers are telling children what they want and what they need. They are filling the children’s heads with a false sense of reality. For that reason, there are laws and established organizations to protect children from advertising. These children are targeted by advertisers because they are too young to understand the advertiser’s deceptive propaganda. Advertisers spend millions each year on researching what children’s needs and wants are. The advertisers attack children with false statements and many propaganda tactics. Some of these tactics the advertisers use are severe, and could be compared to what Adolf Hitler did in Germany. Hitler was able to manipulate a whole nation to accept his beliefs and ideas using propaganda. Hitler used propaganda to convince his country that they were superior to all others. Some of Hitler’s tactics he used to control an entire nation are still being used today such as bandwagon, transfer, and testimonials. Advertisers use some of the same techniques that Hitler used to target children. Here are some examples of bandwagon techniques that advertisers use to grab the attention of children, â€Å"Everyone is drinking Coke, why aren’t you? Or for us older kids we remember this one, â€Å"What walks down stairs, alone or in pairs,... Free Essays on Targeting Children Free Essays on Targeting Children Innocent Victims America is being brainwashed. Corporate America is pulling the wool over America’s eyes and its children’s eyes with their clever propaganda tactics. I believe that advertisers are taking it too far when they push their products on our helpless children. They are the most susceptible because their minds are immature and are unable to distinguish good advertising versus bad advertising. Television commercials and the internet have a huge impact on children. The internet can brainwash a child with its tactics for advertising. This is legal, but they cannot solicit personal information from them until they turn thirteen years old. The advertisers are telling children what they want and what they need. They are filling the children’s heads with a false sense of reality. For that reason, there are laws and established organizations to protect children from advertising. These children are targeted by advertisers because they are too young to understand the advertiser’s deceptive propaganda. Advertisers spend millions each year on researching what children’s needs and wants are. The advertisers attack children with false statements and many propaganda tactics. Some of these tactics the advertisers use are severe, and could be compared to what Adolf Hitler did in Germany. Hitler was able to manipulate a whole nation to accept his beliefs and ideas using propaganda. Hitler used propaganda to convince his country that they were superior to all others. Some of Hitler’s tactics he used to control an entire nation are still being used today such as bandwagon, transfer, and testimonials. Advertisers use some of the same techniques that Hitler used to target children. Here are some examples of bandwagon techniques that advertisers use to grab the attention of children, â€Å"Everyone is drinking Coke, why aren’t you? Or for us older kids we remember this one, â€Å"What walks down stairs, alone or in pairs,...

How to Deal With Discipline Problems in the Classroom

How to Deal With Discipline Problems in the Classroom Discipline problems challenge most new teachers and even some veteran educators. Good  classroom management combined with an effective discipline plan helps keep bad behavior to a minimum so the entire class can focus on learning. Classroom rules  must be easy to understand and manageable. Make sure that you dont have such a large number of rules that your students cant consistently follow them. Set an Example Discipline starts with you. Begin each class period with a positive attitude and high expectations. Itll help create a positive learning environment. If you expect your students to misbehave, they probably will. Come to class prepared with lessons for the day. Reduce downtime  for students to help maintain order. Work on making transitions between lessons smooth. For example, as you move from whole-group discussion to independent work, try to minimize the disruption to the class. Have your papers ready to go or your assignment was written on the board so you can move quickly through the process. Many disruptions occur in transitional times during lessons. Be Proactive With Discipline Problems Watch your students as they come into class and look for signs of discord. For example, if you notice a heated discussion before class starts, deal with it then. Give the students a few moments to work things out before you start your lesson. Separate them if necessary and try to gain agreement that during your class period at least, they will drop the issue. Post a discipline plan that you follow consistently to govern student conduct. Depending on the severity of an offense, this should provide a warning or two before formal punishment. Your plan should be easy to follow and cause minimal disruption to your class. For example, first offense: verbal warning; second offense: detention with the teacher; third offense: referral. Use humor when appropriate to diffuse touchy situations. For example, if you tell your students to open their books to page 51, but three students are so busy talking with each other that they do not hear you, resist the urge to yell. Smile, say their  names and ask them calmly to please wait until later to finish their conversation because you would really like to hear how it ends but you have to get this class finished. This should get a few laughs but also get your point across. Be Firm But Fair Consistency and  fairness  are essential for effective classroom management. If you ignore disruptions one day and come down hard on them the next, your students wont take you seriously. You will lose respect and disruptions will probably increase. If you appear unfair in how you enforce the rules, the students will resent you. Address disruptions with in-kind responses. In other words, dont elevate disruptions above their current significance. For example, if two students keep talking in class, dont disrupt your lesson to yell at them. Instead, simply say the students names and issue a verbal warning. You can also try asking one of them a question to bring their focus back to the lesson. If a student becomes verbally confrontational, remain calm and remove them from the situation as quickly as possible. Do not get into yelling matches with your students. And do not bring the rest of the class into the situation by involving them in the disciplinary process. Prioritize Safety When a student becomes visibly agitated, you must maintain a safe environment for the other students. Remain as calm as possible; your demeanor can sometimes diffuse the situation. You should have a plan for dealing with violence that you discussed with students early in the year. You should use the call button for assistance or have a designated student get help from another teacher. Send the other students from the room if it appears they could get hurt. If a fight breaks out in the classroom, follow your schools rules concerning teacher involvement as many administrators want teachers to stay out of fights until help arrives. Keep an anecdotal record of major issues that arise in your class. This might be necessary if you are asked for a history of classroom disruptions or other documentation. Most importantly, let it go at the end of the day. Classroom management and disruption issues should be left at school so you have time to recharge before coming back to another day of teaching.

How compelling do you find Ball,s argument in this 2011 article Essay

How compelling do you find Ball,s argument in this 2011 article - Essay Example In terms of the catalyst for the educational change, Ball indicates that the primary contributing factor is the new types of education sponsors and providers. In considering the text, one recognizes that while Ball provides a varying amount of supporting information, the article lacks grounded empirical support for many of its contentions. Additionally, there is the recognition that the researcher does not directly involve themselves in the research. Because of these aforementioned elements, there is the potential that Ball’s insights are ideologically motivated. Still, there are also a number supporting elements. Fletcher-Campbell & Brill (2008; Action 1.9) indicated that it is important to consider the changing nature of education in socio-historical contexts. The recent global recession, as well as the emergence of for-profit instructional institutions, have concomitantly presented necessity and motivation for the shifting structures Ball refers to. A further recognition is presented by Edwards, Sebba & Rickinson (2007; Action 1.4) who indicate the importance of a multiplicity of perspectives to expand the range of interpretations. Ball’s insights then operate within these frames of reference. As one considers the particular arguments of the text, it becomes clear that they include a variety of notable points. Ball begins in discussing leadership. One of the important distinctions in this section is his consideration of new leadership frameworks. Ball (2011, p. 50) states, â€Å"there is the rhetoric and sensibilities of business into state schooling and the production of various forms of ‘entrepreneurial headship.’’’ Ball seems to be indicating that the shifting sponsorship and control of schools has resulted in a new form of leadership influenced by entrepreneurial values. One recognizes that the very language Ball implements in this section, namely ‘entrepreneurialism’ of educational environments, is a mode of considering the subject from multi-disciplinary perspectives. This is an approach supported by Mary James (Action 1.5) in encouraging learning across professional communities. On a larger conceptual scale, one considers the linkage between the workplace and the educational environment. A thematic current throughout the article is that Ball is increasingly referring to the hybridization of the work and school environment. There is the recognition that a similar dichotomy is explored in Action 1.6. While Ball’s argument continues to be rooted in the context of the classroom, there is a clear parallel to Action 1.6’s expanded contextual investigation to the workplace. In both instances, there is an increasing exploration of learning as intrinsically linked with working. Even while Ball may be ideologically opposed to the intrusion business on education, it appears that this is an inevitable new direction in education reform. Ball’s own contention that the ownership of these institutions have increasingly refrained from sharing process information, while outwardly a detriment to progress, in actuality it may hold significant potential for educational research. Edwards, Sebba & Rickinson (2007; Action 1.4) indicate that a multitude of stakeholders is actually beneficial for refining ideas. While the lack of proprietary sharing may be a slight drawback, the diversity of stakeholders is