How Self Evaluation is implemented for school improvement

How Self Evaluation is implemented for school improvement The aim of the study is to investigate how School Self-Evaluation (SSE) is implemented for school improvement. There is an increasing international trend of democratisation and decentralisation of education, from the bureaucratic national to an autonomous school based education, in terms of financial management, human resource management and curriculum management. The Department of education observes that with the democratisation of education and associated decentralisation of authority, schools are increasingly being held accountable for their performance (DoE, 2004). School Self-Evaluation is defined as a procedure involving systematic information gathering which is initiated by the school itself and aims to assess the functioning of the school and the attainment of its education goals for the purpose of supporting decision-making and learning for fostering school improvement as a whole (Schildkamp, 2007). Paradoxically, the quality of education that is offered, especially in rural schools of South Africa, is decreasing dramatically. This is confirmed by national and international assessment bodies like the Systemic Evaluation (SE), the Trends in Mathematics and Science Studies (TIMSS), the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS), and the Southern and Eastern Africa Consortium for Monitoring Educational Quality (SACMEQ). The Department of Basic Education, (2010) contends that both the Systemic Evaluation in 2004 and SACMEQ in 2000 indicated that less than one in four Grade 6 learners passed minimum standards in mathematics (DBE, 2010). It further stipulates that the international tests that South Africa participates in show that the top 10% of learners in South Africa do worse than the top 10% of learners in other developing countries such as Kenya, Indonesia and Chile (DBE, 2010). School improvement is defined as a systematic, sustained effort in changing learning conditions and other related internal conditions in one or more schools with the ultimate of accomplishing educational goals more effectively (Van Veltzen, Miles, Ekholm, Hamemyer, and Robin, 1985). The above observations do not presume that the decline in the quality of education in South Africa is due to the democratisation and decentralisation of education, but rather depicts an inevitable demand for a more relevant mechanism, at school level, to be put in place to ensure high quality education and continuous school improvement. This condition imposes that an effective implementation and monitoring of School Self-Evaluation (SSE) is indispensable. Vanhoof, Maeyer and Petegem (2011) confirm that schools are increasingly required to assume a greater share of the responsibility for developing and guaranteeing educational quality (Vanhoof, Maeyer and Petegem, 2011). SSE is a school-based evaluation that is supposed to be implemented by principals, School Management Teams (SMTs), School Governing Bodies (SGBs) and the community, on an annual basis, to ensure continuous improvement and high quality education in all schools. problem statement and rationale for the study School self-evaluation was introduces by the former Minister of education, Professor Kader Asmal in 2001. It is the initial phase of Whole School Evaluation (WSE), preceding external evaluation. In his foreword, the minister states that the National Policy on Whole School Evaluation introduces an effective monitoring and evaluation process that is vital to the improvement of quality and standards of performance in schools (DBE, 2002). This policy aims at improving the overall quality of education in South African schools, and its purpose is to facilitate improvement of school performance through approaches characterised by partnership, collaboration, mentoring and guidance (DBE, 2002). According to the National Education Policy Act (No.27 of 1996), the Minister is mandated to direct that standards of education provision, delivery and performance are monitored though out the country. It remains a worrying factor that rural schools seem not to be considered as part of South African sch ools by these education policies. This view is confirmed by the New Vision for Rural Schooling, (2005) which states that the states commitment to social justice in all matters and especially to universal access to education, written into the Constitution, remains unfulfilled for a large number of children, youths and adults living in rural areas (DoE, 2005). A plethora of education policies have been developed in the new political dispensation, but the serious challenge is that they do not translate into school improvement. Schildkamp and Visscher (2010) argue that enormous resources are invested to develop and implement school self-evaluation instruments, but how schools actually use the instrument has never been thoroughly evaluated longitudinally (Schildkamp and Visscher, 2010). Furthermore, they contend that several studies report a lack of effect of school self-evaluation feedback, but this lack of effect may be caused by a lack of use of school self-evaluation feedback (Schildkamp and Visscher, 2010). McNamara and OHara (2008) note that there has been a remarkable rise in the regulation of public services and servants, especially in education, in an attempt to counterbalance the autonomy of schools. Furthermore, external evaluation and inspection has been an important element of this trend, however as their limitations become more apparent, the concept of internal or self evaluation has grown in importance (McNamara and OHara, 2008). These authors proceed to warn that the greater emphasis an evaluation system places on teacher appraisal and accountability, the less useful that system is likely to be for school improvement and professional development (McNamara and OHara, 2008). The European Parliament and Council on European Cooperation in Quality Evaluation in school education, in McNamara and OHara (2008), argue that improvements in European schools evaluation provisions are dependant on the enhancement of schools abilities to evaluate themselves and call for all member states of the European Union (EU) to encourage school self-evaluation as a method of creating learning and improving schools (McNamara and OHara, 2008). This analysis is echoed by the OECD report which views development of school evaluation skills within the education system as being a critical component of the drive to improving educational provision in OECD member states (McNamara and OHara, 2008) During the apartheid era, prior 1994, traditional quality assurance approaches like school inspection were vehemently opposed by teacher unions who felt that their members were intimidated. When WSE was introduced, there was hope that this democratic process would bring satisfaction to educators and yield better learner attainment results, particularly in previously disadvantaged areas, but that positive change is still being awaited. Despite the surfeit of education policies, South Africa is facing a serious challenge of a growing trend of dysfunctional and underperforming schools, especially in previously disadvantaged areas. Efforts by the government to swivel this proclivity have been in vane. This is confirmed by the fact that the government has made some strides to develop education policies that should have culminated in school improvement, but that outcome has not yet been realised. The Whole School Evaluation policy was introduced in 2001 to improve school performance, but c onversely, schools are performing worse as time goes by, as revealed by national and international studies like Systemic Evaluation, TIMSS, SACMEQ and PIRLS. It should be a worrying factor to every educationist as to why this education policy is not yielding the expected outcomes. It is a cause for concern to find out if this policy is being implemented as prescribed by the relevant policy document. Even though the Mpumalanga province of South Africa has reported an 8,9 % improvement in grade 12 results in 2010, it is still the lowest province in terms of learner attainment in the country, sitting at 56,8 % (MDoE, 2011). Poor performance is shoddier in rural schools where socio-economic challenges and challenges of providing qualified teachers, adequate physical and financial resources are still overwhelming. This situation is exacerbated by the fact that a good number of these rural primary schools are multi-graded farm schools. As a principal of one of the rural primary schools in the neighbourhood of one of the worse performing secondary schools in the sub-region, I have an obligation to find out the root course of underperformance in rural school. It has also come to my realisation that during school visitations by the circuit management, district office or provincial external evaluation team, the school self evaluation instrument is neither enquired about nor monitored. There is no link or correlation between inspection and school-based evaluation. According to the WSE policy, schools must complete and submit self evaluation forms A and B before the end of March on an annual basis (DoE, 2004). On the contrary not even a single school submits such a document to the regional office. I have also noted that in my three years of experience as a principal, not even a single official from any of the structures of the education department has ever enquired about the self evaluation instrument. One then tends to wonder what purpose is this education policy serving. Whether they are meant to improve the quality of education or they were just developed for symbolism still remains mysterious. I am therefore determined to come out with a turn around strategy to ensure effective implementation of the self-evaluation instrument of the WSE policy so as to ensure accountability and improvement in the education quality of rural schools. This study will investigate how and to what extent the school self-evaluation instrument is utilised in rural schools. It will further explore the perceptions of school principals towards school self-evaluation. Lastly, it will determine how school self-evaluation could be better utilised to ensure school improvement and quality education. It is my conviction that if school self-evaluation can be efficiently implemented, school improvement and quality education can be achieved. Moreover, the school self-evaluation findings must easily accessible to all stakeholders, analysed, and its recommendations must be implemented so as to realise the desired outcomes of school improvement. This study will advocate for keeping all stakeholders informed about the performance of their school, and encourage them to positively contribution to the improvement of their school. It will also assist different officers in all structures of education, from the school principal to the provincial Superintend ent Generals, to perform their designated duties diligently. Finally policy makers will get feedback of implementation of the policy such that they can evaluate its impact and make possible amendments if necessary. main research question In order to address the problem statement, this study must give an explicit answer to the following question:- How and to what extent is school self-evaluation implemented for school improvement in rural schools? structure of the proposal Section 1 of the proposal is the introduction of school self-evaluation, enunciation of the problem statement and rational, and elocution of the main research question. Section 2 portrays the context of the study and section 3 presents the literature that has been reviewed. Section 4 will demonstrate the research design and methods that will be implemented and section 5 will illustrate the timeline for the whole research process. Section 6 will give the outline of chapters and section 7 will be the list references. Context for the study The study will take place in the rural schools of Mpumalanga province. Mpumalanga is one of the provinces that have the lowest socio-economic status. Consequently, most schools are in quintiles one and two, indicating that the learners in these schools are from destitute families. Learners have to travel for over five Kilometres every single day, to get to school, posing absenteeism problems to educators. Some of these schools have no electricity and sanitation, such that introduction of the new forms of technologically advanced equipment is implausible. Mpumalanga has the least percentage decrease in the number of learners at farm schools. The new vision for rural schooling states that between 1996 and 2000, it decreased by -65% (DoE, 2005). This figure shows that there is a steady increase in the number of learners at farm schools. The Ermelo sub-district has three circuits with ninety seven schools, out of which only eight are in town. The rest of them are located in very remote farms such that access to such schools for the support teams in a daunting task. There are no secondary farm school, but combined schools. This is because the enrolment of these schools does not allow them to be fully fledged secondary schools. A good number of primary schools have multi-graded classes, combining learners from different grades into one class. This situation does not only present management problems but pedagogical challenges as well. It is unbearable for educators to manage curriculum delivery under such adverse conditions. Even though conditions seem to be unfavourable for provision of quality education, rural schools are also expected to improve their performance. School self-evaluation must be implemented just in the same way or better than it should be implemented in urban schools. The WSE policy however recognises that the inauspicious conditions may retard the pace of school improvement. A provision was made in the policy, to evaluate each school based on its contextual factors. One of the principles of the WSE policy is seek to understand why schools are where they are and to use the particular circumstances to the school as the main starting point of evaluation (DoE, 2001). literature review introduction This section reviews researches that were conducted in Ireland, Netherlands, England and South Africa, based on School Self-Evaluation (SSE). A comparison is made to identify and best international practices and set them as a benchmark for implementation of School Self-Evaluation for school improvement in South Africa. A DISCUSSION OF research conducted internationally AS WELL AS studies in south africa SCHOOL SELF-EVALUATION IN IRELAND In Ireland, the first system of evaluation that was piloted between 1990 and 1999 is the Whole School Evaluation (WSE). This system culminated in a series of rancorous industrial disputes that lasted until 2003. The reason for these quarrels was that educators viewed evaluation as reductionist and managerialist interference in their profession while stakeholders such as parents, learners and business community demanded hard data from a transparent school evaluation process (McNamara and OHara, 2006). In 2004, a new framework for school evaluation, Looking At Our School (LAOS), was implemented (McNamara and OHara, 2006). McNamara and OHara explain that the School Self-Evaluation (SSE) is based on a broad framework for inspection and evaluation of schools that includes five areas of evaluation that are subdivided into 143 themes for self-evaluation, which are used to prepare for external evaluation by the inspectorate (McNamara and OHara, 2006). In short, SSE precedes external evaluati on and it is conducted by each schools stakeholders, unlike external evaluation which is conducted by external officials called inspectorates. McNamara and OHara (2006) also contend that Ireland is adopting a model of quality assurance that emphasizes school development planning through internal school-review and self-evaluation, with the support of external evaluation carried out by the Inspectorate (McNamara and OHara, 2006). This model concurs with MacBeaths idea which argues that the role of external evaluation and inspection is merely to ensure that internal systems of evaluation and self-review are implemented effectively (McNamara and OHara, 2006). In their study, McNamara and OHara (2006) reveal that principals expressed their view that any form of external evaluation was by its nature superficial, underestimated the non-academic achievements of schools and raised deep concerns among teachers, yet to the contrary, self-evaluation with no external mandate or monitoring was perceived as a major success (McNamara and OHara, 2006). According to McNamara and OHara, self-evaluation in Ireland had its negatives. Firstly, LAOS documents lack suggestions as to how schools should collect the data on which the effectiveness and credibility of the whole system must rest (McNamara and OHara, 2006). Secondly, the judgments in the areas, aspects and components requires data that in the present system does not exist- there is, for instance, no data regarding the ability and general expectations of pupils (McNamara and OHara, 2006). McNamara and OHara argue that evaluation, whether external or internal, mandated or self-driven, requires at a minimum the collection and analysis of real data on which firm conclusions can be based (McNamara and OHara, 2006). Thirdly, the Chief Inspector shifted the responsibility of addressing weaknesses identified during inspection to self-governing and self-evaluating institutions. McNamara and OHara argue that the weaknesses identified during inspection should not be a responsibility of sch ools to address them since they do not have the capacity to control over resources, teacher tenure and conditions of employment, and issue. Moreover, schools cannot solve all problems themselves in-house-that is a fiction (McNamara and OHara, 2006). After the court judgment, the honours of whether to release none, some or all of the Inspection Report lies solely on schools management team. Fourthly, LAOS is silent about the appropriate role of parents, teachers and learners in the school evaluation process. One other worrying factor is that the concept of an ongoing self-evaluation was said to be puzzling to most schools (McNamara and OHara, 2006). Lastly, McNamara and OHara (2008) lament that the lack of any guidelines in LAOS as to criteria or research methods that might inform judgments has led to what amounts to data-free evaluation in practice, and moreover, it is clear that without such guidelines and the provision of training and research support for schools, the situation is not likely to change (McNamara and OHara, 2008). The study by McNamara and OHara reveal acceptance of the new themes of self-evaluation to give a comprehensive picture of all schools activities and not just their academic outcomes (McNamara and OHara, 2006). According to McNamara and OHara (2006), the above point was particularly stressed by respondents from the two primary schools designated disadvantaged, which felt very strongly that the affirmation of good practice provided by the inspectors was of extraordinary importance to teachers in disadvantaged school who rarely feel valued or supported. This was perceived as a considerable achievement in an education community deeply suspicious of evaluation, inspection and appraisal (McNamara and OHara, 2006). SCHOOL SELF-EVALUATION IN SCOTLAND Croxford, Grek and Shaik (2009) state that despite the change from Conservative to Labour government in 1997, education policy in Scotland and elsewhere in the United Kingdom (UK) continued to reflect an emphasis on quality assurance and a belief that competition and setting standards would enhance quality and ensure accountability (Croxford et al., 2009). They further stipulate that Scotlands approach to Quality Assurance and Evaluation (QAE) has a greater emphasis on self-evaluation by schools, whereas England had a stronger focus on hard performance indicators (Croxford et al., 2009). The Inspectorate is a major influence on the formulation of education policies. In 1980, the Inspectorates set up a Management of Education Resource Unit (MERU) that later became the Audit Unit, to promote good management achieve value for money in education. It started publishing papers that identified characteristics of effective schools in an attempt to encourage secondary schools to evaluate thei r own practice and performance (MacBeath and Mortimore, 2001). In 1990/91 it began publishing annually information for parents series-reports giving the details of schools attainment data; school costs; attendance and absence rates and school leaver destination for secondary schools. In 1991, it published the role of school development plans in managing schools effectiveness as well as statistical information about examination performance per school, which was used for school self-evaluation. Standards Tables were used each year to compare the performance by subject departments within each school and nationally, the Relative Ratings and National Comparison Factors, respectively (Croxford et al. 2009). The Scottish Office Education Industry Department (SOEID) in Croxford et al. ( 2009) state that the process of self-evaluation and development planning were set out more explicitly by the Audit Unit publication How good is our school? (HGIOS?), which provided a set of performance indic ators of what a good school should look like (Croxford et al. 2009). Schools were encouraged to use the same performance indicators as those used by the HMI in school inspection to identify, report and take action where required on strengths and weaknesses (Croxford et al., 2009). In 1997, HMI set out its vision of working in partnership with local authorities and schools through the quality initiative in Scotland schools. This was endorsed in the standards in Scotlands schools Act 2000. According to Cowie and Croxford, in Croxford et al. (2009), this act places local authorities under great pressure to implement the required quality assurance procedures by the threat of adverse inspection by HMI of education (HMIE) (Croxford et al., 2009). A new professional group of Quality Improvement Officers (QIO) has been established to challenge and support schools. They scrutinise statistics on school performance, seek to ensure a robust self-evaluation structure within schools and identify areas that need to be addressed (Croxford et al., 2009). They carry out a regular cycle of visits to schools to: assess the schools progress with its school development plan; discuss improvement issues with management and staff; and support the schools management in making improvements (Croxford et al., 2009). The local authorities themselves are inspected by HMIE, with special regard to their own self-evaluation and the extent to which they support and challenge their schools (Croxford et al., 2009). In Scotland, schools are required to evaluate their own performance each year using the 30 quality Indicators from HGIOS and their performance on the indicators is extremely judged on a regular basis through inspection of schools carried out by HMIE. The indicators are based on key performance outcomes, delivery of education, policy development and planning, management and support staff, partnership and resources, leadership capacity for improvement (Croxford et al., 2009). Self-evalua tion procedure requires schools to look at each aspect of provision and ask: How are we doing? How do we know? What are we going to do now? For each indicator, schools must gather evidence in order to evaluate their performance, on a six-point scale from 1 [unsatisfactory], to 6 [excellent] (Croxford et al. 2009). SCHOOL SELF-EVALUATION IN ENGLAND Prior 1990, the government of England implemented a top down strategy to school monitor performance of schools. A change was seen in 1997 when the government showed some commitment to support and promote school self-evaluation (Turnbull, 2007). The Department for Education and Skills (DfES), 2004 notes that in 1999, a revised framework was of inspecting schools that included guidance for schools on using it for school self-evaluation, and not just inspection was introduced (DfES, 2004). Local authorities had been providing support for head teachers as they increase their efforts to manage and lead the self-evaluation process and procedures now expected in their schools (Plowright, 2008). The Office for standards in education (Ofsted), in Plowright (2008) contends that the school that knows and understands itself is on the way to solving any problem it hasà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ self-evaluation provides the key to improvement (Plowright, 2008). In his empirical research, Plowright discovered that head teachers held a positive view of the use of self-evaluation in contributing to school improvement (Plowright, 2008). The introduction of the new inspection framework in September 2005 in England culminated in an obligation that every school had to maintain and submit an online Self-Evaluation Form (SEF) that records the judgments of its current performance and its priorities for improvement (Bubb, Early, Ahtaridou, Jones and Taylor, 2007). According to Ofsted in Bubb, et al. (2007), intelligent accountability is based on a schools own views of how well it serves its learners and suggests that all schools need to be able to answer two key questions: How well are we doing? And how can we do better? Bubb, et al. (2007) further argue that even though the SEF is not statutory but all schools seem to use it, which is unsurprising as their inspection is largely based around the SEF which includes the performance data (Bubb, et al., 2007). The areas of evaluation are: the characteristics of the school; views of learners, parents/carers and other stakeholders; leadership and management; overall effectivenes s and efficiency (Bubb, et al., 2007). Leung, 2005 emphasises that unless teachers beliefs are changed, and shared meaning is achieved, for example believing in the importance of evidence-based evaluation methods for self-evaluation and the importance of continuous self-improvement, there will not be commitment towards the reform initiatives and success cannot be guaranteed (Leung, 2005). She further warns that restructuring, changing only procedures, designing performance indicators and mandating the public announcement of evaluation results cannot help us but providing assistance to schools, supporting professionals networks and providing school-based on-going school development is vital (Leung, 2005). Scholars like Hargreaves and Fullan ascertain only that recruiting can facilitate educational professionals to transform their old beliefs and practices (Leung, 2005). In their research on 38 schools across England, where they were investigating self-evaluation and school improvement progress, Bubb, et al. (2007) discovered that SEF are completed in many different ways, ranging from individual efforts by head teachers to involvement of external consultants to collective efforts by all staff members (Bubb, et al., 2007). They also found out that some dissatisfaction demonstrated by support staff who felt left out and expressed that they could have made crucial contributions if they were not excluded. The process started with training the whole staff so as to raise awareness of the process and its requirements. Each staff member, including heads of departments, would the complete his/her form under supervision of their Senior Leadership Group (SLG) (Bubb, et al., 2007). In her study, Turnbull, (2007) discovered that head teachers in England saw that self-evaluation in some form became a reality of practice through the intervention of Local Education Authorities (LEAs), reflecting the growing impact of globalisation and accountability of schools (Turnbull, 2007). SCHOOL SELF-EVALUATION IN SOUTH AFRICA Prior 1994, schools performance was monitored through inspection, but there was no requirement or expectation of schools to undertake self-evaluation in South Africa (Turnbull, 2007). Some form of self-evaluation was introduced in 1998 through the Developmental Appraisal System (DAS), and Whole School Evaluation (WSE) in 2001 for full implementation in 2003 (Turnbull, 2007). These systems aimed at involving all educators in evaluating their practice, enabling self-evaluation of the WSE and impact of management, and they were to be monitored by the external supervisors from the provincial office of the Department of Education (DoE) (Turnbull, 2007). Both systems failed to realize their objective and a new Integrated Quality Management System (IQMS) was introduced in 2003, combining DAS, WSE and Performance Measurement (PM). School Self-Evaluation (SSE) is the initial phase of the two-phased WSE. The second phase is external evaluation conducted by provincial supervisors in a three year cycle. Both phases utilise the same instrument for evaluation. There are 9 key areas of evaluation namely: basic functionality of the school; leadership, management and communication, governance and relationships; quality teaching and learning and educator development; curriculum provision and resources; learner achievement; school safety, security and discipline; school infrastructure and parent and community (DoE, 2001). The process of evaluation cycle includes pre-evaluation; school self-evaluation; detailed on-site evaluation, post-evaluation reporting and post evaluation support. Each supervisory team will have a team leader who has the responsibility to build a brief profile about the general level of functionality of the school and to share with the school the procedures that will be followed by the evaluation team. The team leader also has overall responsibility for the evaluation process and the conduct of the supervisors. Supervisory teams will comprise accredited supervisors capable of evaluating the nine areas for evaluation. Members should have the experience to evaluate at least one subject/learning area and have an awareness of the key elements of good provision for Learners with Special Education Needs (LSEN). The number of supervisors will normally be within the range of four to six, depending on the school size and resources available. Evaluations will normally be conducted between th ree to four days of the week, depending on the size of the school. A school will be helped by district support services to formulate and implement an improvement plan based on the recommendations in the report and provide the school with support as it seeks to implement the plan (DoE, 2001) The findings in Turnbulls research disclose that all educators interviewed identified that the various attempts to introduce self-evaluation had failed, though all saw that the concept was one that should be in place, but attempts to use self-evaluation to improve the quality of teaching and learning in individual schools were taking place, with individual teachers working together on classroom practice and in some schools using IQMS, with senior team ensuring that every member of staff was observed at least once a year, met with the observer, and those seen to have issues being visited (Turnbull, 2007). The failure of introduction of self-evaluation is attributed to two groups of factors. The first issues are managerial and they include: the linking of the use of self-evaluation to the annual pay increments making it impossible to award someone less than satisfactory even though he/she deserves it, especially in township schools; the unwieldy nature of the system needed to implement policy; and the lack of capacity of the local DoE to either monitor the process, or provide support for schools where a need was identified. The second issues are cultural/historical and they include: the limited experience of educators of any form of self-evaluation and limited training provided; the limited practical training of the majority of township teachers and principals; the impact of the previous political system leading to a resistance to change; and in township schools the real danger o

Advantages and Disadvantages of Single Parent Homes

The purpose of this paper is to express the advantages and disadvantages of single parent homes. As compared to over forty to fifty years ago, single-parent families are common in today’s world. A single parent is a parent with one or more children, who is not living with any of the children’s other parents. The percentage of children who live with two parents has been declining among all racial and ethnic groups throughout the years. It has been found that children in single-parent homes generally fare worse than those in homes with two parents. In today’s single parent households there are many advantages and disadvantages. Even after you weigh the single parenting pros and cons you will see that the disadvantages of single parenting usually outweigh the advantages. The biggest concerns about single parenting are the children. Single parenting is not an easy thing to do. You must be both mother and father to a child or children. Youth from single mother homes, especially those living in poor communities, are at higher risk for adjustment difficulties (Shook et la, 2010). National estimates from the United States have found that the poverty rate of single parent homes was 43. 5% as compared to 21. % of cohabitating families and 7. 6% for married families. Single and cohabitating parents also had fewer assets, less stable employment and higher levels of material hardships. Among single parents and never married mothers, they may be even worse off than divorced mothers, because they had lower levels of human capital or family support and were less likely to receive child support (Gibson-Davis and Gassman-Pines, 2010). Research has shown that low income parents were more likely to use harsh discipline, engage in erratic and inconsistent parenting practices, and provide less cognitive stimulation. Economic well-being has also been directly linked to parental psychological health, because financial strain increases stress, anxiety and depression, further compromising parenting ( Gibson-Davis and Gassman-Pines, 2010). Growing up in a low socioeconomic household increases vulnerability to a wide array of risk factors that can have long-term developmental effects among children (Taylor et la, 2010). Stress and psychological vulnerabilities negatively influence parenting quality through behaviours such as ineffective monitoring of children, harsh or hostile parenting, and inconsistent parenting. Distressed parents are typically less affectionate and report feeling less capable in disciplinary interactions with their children. These types of poor parenting behaviours predict lower levels of children’s positive social behaviour and higher ratio of behaviour problems. Children from single mother families are at increased risk of maladjustment as a result of exposure to adverse environments resulting from poverty, parental internalizing symptoms and ineffective parenting (Taylor et la, 2010). Children from single parent families have very poor and behavioural outcomes. The transition to adolescence is a particularly vulnerable time as youth begin to exhibit lower social competence, declines in academic performance and increased levels of delinquency do to the lack of monitoring from their parent. It is proven that children living in single parent homes, in poverty ridden neighbourhoods are more likely to drop out of school, both so they could go and work to help with the household income or do to the lack of interest in academics. Pregnancy rates also increase for children between the ages of 15 to 17 years of age who live in single parent homes. There are also signs that children who have gone through a divorce may have problems with depression, and emotional stress. It has been found that adolescents from single parent families were found to be three times more likely to be depressed than those living in two parent households. Single-parent homes are also associated with criminal activity, such as murder, rape and other violent crimes. And they are also more likely to use drugs. Problems found in the single parent household may not be because of the parent who raised the child, but can be linked to other things that are also related to single parenting. The effects of coming from a low income family can include things like lower education levels, lower economic achievement and can result in leaving the child feeling isolated and lonely. It would appear that being a part of a single-parent household indicates a negative family environment. It should be said however that many single parent families find a balance and successfully thrive in today’s world. Single parents often worry that their children will somehow be damaged from living in a single parent family. While a single parent family may not be the ideal situation for raising children, many two parent families are also less than desirable. Kids can actually benefit from living in a single parent family. A home filled with conflict is the least desirable home environment for children. When the child’s prior two parent household included frequent fighting between the adults the child can benefit from living in one parent home provided that the conflict is stopped. Children observe adult relationships and usually apply what they have learned to their own relationships as adults. By residing with only one parent, the child may actually have a chance to observe healthier adult relationships. Children learn valuable lessons from dealing with hard times and having a difficult lifestyle from many of their peers. A single parent may actually have more time for the kids that a married parent would have. Since there is no longer a spouse around at mealtime, meals don’t have to be as substantial and can be structural around kid-friendly ingredients. The opportunity to spend time in two separate homes can be a good experience for your children. They will see different approaches to life and hopefully, take the best of both homes to use in establishing their own households as adults. Kids who live with one parent tend to develop independence faster than their peers. Since the parent will probably have a job and other many other duties, the kids may have to learn to do things for themselves such as preparing a single meal or participating in household chores. The kids also learn that they need to be ready to take care of themselves, since they, too, could end up on their own or in a single parent situation someday. Another benefit of a single parent household is the child may become extremely close with the parent they live with. Because in some circumstances children only have one parent so the child will want to form a strong bond with the only parent they have. Your kids will have more opportunities to develop responsibility. Although no one wants their kids to grow up before it is time, as part of a single parent family it will be easier for your kids to feel like partners in the family as opposed to â€Å"just the kids†. They will have more opportunities to contribute and grow into responsible adults. The single-parent and the children will learn resiliency. Resiliency, the ability to â€Å"bounce back† when negative things happen, is one of the most valuable skills one needs to survive in this world. Facing some of the difficulties of a single parent household, the parent and child will have numerous opportunities to practice resiliency. Face difficult situations with a positive attitude and hope, and learn to look outside the box when seeking solutions. They will develop a skill that can get them through the toughest of times together. Even though woman face greater financial problems, they tend to be more nurturing to their children by telling them they love them, hugging them, and showing affection towards them. In conclusion it is apparent that single parent households, whether headed by a mother or father, have more to deal with than two parent households. Single-parent households will continue to exist in society. It is also evident that children in two-parent households generally fare better than children who are raised by only one parent. With single parenthood being such a commonality in today’s world, it is important to take a close look at the research out there regarding this type of family unit and the effects it can have on children. With this knowledge, individuals are better able to address the many challenges accompanying single parenthood. Parenthood is challenging. Single-parenthood is excruciatingly challenging, I know because I am a single parent myself.

People Are Just as Happy as They Make Up

â€Å"People are just as happy as they make up their minds to be. † (F) What is happiness and how is it achieved? Simple questions, with different complex answers, none of which can be proved to be right or wrong. Happiness is an individual state of being of each person, acquired by one’s perception in that special moment in time. It simply depends on the individual and how they try to obtain it. Thousands of people try different paths in order to successfully achieve happiness; some of them finding it, some of them never reaching the goal. There are thousands of different answers and meanings for happiness.In this paper, I will argue that the most necessary virtue an individual needs to be have to be happy, is the virtue of mind. Aristotle, one of the most important Greek philosophers in history, defined happiness as the activity of the mind in accordance with virtue. He did not think of happiness as just a state of being; he thought of happiness to be the highest form of good. Everything people do has a specific purpose in life; it aims at something, at a final good. Happiness is an end sufficient in itself, is the end at which all our actions aim.In order to reach this perfect state, he thought the individual should possess; external, mind and bodily virtues and living and acting in accordance to them. By doing so, achieving total happiness. Virtue is what aids proper functioning, since when possessed makes the possessor good. Virtue is a matter of having an apt attitude towards pleasure and pain; therefore it lies in a mean between two extremes. Aristotle implied the mean or balance to be between two vices, the excess which is the one that exceeds and defect the one that falls short, of what is right in our desires and actions.Whereas virtue, finds and chooses what is intermediate. The idea of the virtue then, is for the desires to set the situation and for the individual to be able to choose the intermediate and act like a virtuous person. Ex ternal pleasures; such as honor, wealth and power. Physical pleasures such as beauty, health, and fertility. And mental pleasures such as; patience, intelligence and honesty, are the virtues he believed lead to a good life. In order to achieve happiness, is necessary to be a virtuous person. If the individual does not have virtues, then it does not have anything to guide heir lives by. That being said, the most important virtue to possess is the virtue of the mind, which refers to peace of mind. After being able to attain peace of mind, accomplishing the other virtues and making good use of them is much easier, since mental pleasure is the basis of every other virtue. Positive thoughts, security, believing and accepting oneself, high self-esteem and more, is what makes one happy and leads the individual in the pursuit of more positive actions, therefore making the individual more likely to obtain the other virtues.The way one thinks of themselves and the attitude that one has about life tells a lot about a person. People who have virtue of the mind are going to be happy no matter what, because they know how to react towards life, even in the moments of misfortune or disgrace. For example, people who are going through hard times know how to handle the situation better because they have a positive outlook on life and are able to cope with those situations better. People who have virtue of the mind also know their various challenges and obstacles and are still able to overcome them.Having peace of mind, and knowing how to make good use of one’s internal virtues, is an effortless way to live one’s life and have a better future. By accepting oneself intellectually, physically and interiorly, as well as accepting the environment in which one lives, including the people, the traditions and society, to the point where one respects the other people, including their acts, their way of thinking and their way of living. Peace of mind is not worrying about th e future or for the things that happened in the past.But to live the present in an authentic and exceptional manner, to not worry some day about the things you should have done before but to be satisfied and happy of how has lived their lives. Virtue of the mind also means to love oneself more than anything and anyone, since to love and care for someone one must first learn how to know, care and love themselves. Someone might object that the virtue of the mind is not the most important virtue to have since nowadays to have positive thoughts and a peaceful mind it’s not enough to make someone happy, but wealth and influence.Being beautiful, honest, intelligent, and healthy is nothing if one does not have money. Most people are always in the persistent struggle to be prosperous, given that the people who do not have money are miserable because they do not have â€Å"anything. † Poor people for example, are not happy, even though they possess physical and mind virtues; th ey lack external ones, such as money and are unfortunate because without wealth you are nothing. In the society of nowadays, being wealthy is not an option, but a must to be happy. One might object to it, but how can one explain that some wealthy and influence people are unhappy.Wealth and influence does not give people happiness. Just a positive attitude towards life would give someone the final good. There are some famous people that despite great wealth seem miserable. Some of them don’t even have a stable partner, usually get in trouble with the law all the time, fall in the live drugs, and some of them even commit suicide. Heath Ledger, for example, known as one of the best actors in history for the leading role of the joker in â€Å"The Dark Night†, recognized as one of the best-selling movies of all time.Famous, with family, wealthy and in the media everywhere, but despite all that â€Å"happiness† he had, he still committed suicide, possibly caused by a depression of not fulfilling the expectations of the fans or even not knowing how to cope with the pressure of the role. For some people money can bring a lot of happiness in the sense of stability, freedom and independence. However, money with lack of peace of mind is nothing and would get the individual nowhere.A survey titled â€Å"Joys and Dilemma of Wealth† by Boston College revealed that the wealthiest people are unhappy because they are worried about seeming ungrateful, rearing spoiled children and failing to meet expectations. These people are in the mouth of everyone; their names appear in the media with false gossip, and their privacy is always intruded. This a mistake where the individuals centered their lives on the external, and are concerned too much about what other people think without believing in themselves, leading them not only to auto destructive acts but violent actions for them and their families.For some, money and wealth gives happiness, but definitel y not the truly one. Only mental pleasure; believing in oneself, having a positive attitude, having high self-esteem and loving oneself like no other, would lead one to complete happiness. Material or external possessions are not essential, if the individual knows and recognizes what their goals in live are. To corroborate the importance of the virtues of mind to reach happiness, first of all the individual needs to realize and be aware that happiness is an internal state of being of each person.There are numerous amounts of people in the world who could serve as examples to support the importance of the virtue of mind in the path of achieving happiness. Nelson Mandela, for example, one of the most recognized, respected and admired political leaders of our time. In spite of the extremely poor conditions he had to live in during his early life and nearly three decades of imprisonment, he still struggle and did everything he could to fight for his believes against racial oppression.Hi s heroic acts made him win the Nobel Peace Prize and the presidency of his country. By this and many other important things that he has done, is when he saw his ideals and purpose in life, coming true. Most likely, giving him the complete happiness he has always fought for. Nick Vujicic is an admirable person, and another great example of the importance of just having a positive attitude towards life to be happy. Nick was born with no limbs, he is practically just torso, and has a small foot on his left hip which helps him with balance.Nick’s father taught him to swim at 18 months, to type with his little toe at just 6 years of age, and his mom invented a special plastic device for him to hold a pen or pencil with his mouth to be able to write. He plays golf, swims and surfs. Even though it was really difficult for him to adapt to his difference when little, he overcame every issue he had and nowadays is an admirable person, who has traveled to 24 countries of the world shari ng how this problem has become a blessing for him, and how just by changing your attitude towards life makes a great difference in every individual.Just like these examples, there are many more cases of people that just by having a positive attitude towards life have been able to succeed or overcome obstacles even though they have had a hard life. Supporting that if an individual has virtue of the mind, and has always a positive view, fights for their ideals and know what they want for their life they will achieve happiness. DO NOT USE â€Å"YOU†Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ Works Cited Little, Lyneka. Miseries of the Rich and Famous: The Concerns of the Super Rich: Wealth Does Not Bring Happiness-ABC.Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and Calibre Wealth Management, Boston College. 21 March. 2011. Web October 14. http://plato. stanford. edu/entries/aristotle/ http://answers. yahoo. com/question/index? qid=20080716235657AAyU5iY http://www. britannica. com/EBchecked/topic/34560/Aristotle/254722/Happine ss#ref923103 http://abcnews. go. com/Business/concerns-super-rich-wealth-bring-happiness/story? id=13167578#. UHsgpMVYuSo ——————————————– [ 1 ]. Abraham Lincoln

Statement of Purpose Masters Degree in Communication - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 2 Words: 560 Downloads: 5 Date added: 2019/10/10 Category Statistics Essay Level High school Did you like this example? The reason am interested in earning the MA in Communication at John Hopkins University Dc I decided to do communication because I have always liked writing about everything that looked fascinating and reading articles that I came across. During my childhood, I used to write imaginative stories which I would then read to my grandmother, the stories were so fascinating and she would encourage me to continue being creative in my writings. My grandmother ensured I was around books every time so that I would improve in my creativity. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Statement of Purpose Masters Degree in Communication" essay for you Create order I noticed my life would be more fun if I took a career that would go in line with my interests, and that is a career in communication. Pursuing an advanced degree in the field of public and media relations would be one big achievement of my life. My background and experience have prepared me for graduate study because I have worked as a journalist in a small film in my town. There, I used to write and compile articles concerning arising issues in the country and the world. This has enhanced my writing skills a little, undertaking MA will help improve my skills and maybe even make me a professional in that field. My main area of interest is journalism; I want to be writing articles that will be published to the people. I want to be writing things that are concerning g the general public so that people can know the things that are affecting them economically, socially, and politically. People who read articles gets insights of things that affect them both positively and negatively. Thus, my writing will help people know what to avoid and what not to avoid so that they can improve their way of life. The Masters of Arts in Communication offers both applied and practical knowledge; the course is offered in John Hopkins University Dc. In John Hopkins University Dc, the course is taught by social scientists who are experienced and study effective communication, apart from social scientists, the course is also taught by some practitioners who use it, thus delivering quality and competitive education to students. Students of this university turn out to be the best in the market because they are taught both in class and in a practical way. For instance, students are engaged by electives by having them tackle the real life issues in communication, develop communication skills that are usable, as well as building a portfolio that is strong. Unlike in other universities, where students rely only on their teachers, students of MA in Communication at John Hopkins University are more exposed since they are brought experts from the industry, these experts bring real-world lessons, best practi ce, and experience to the classroom. The reason why I want to pursue an advanced degree in the field of public and media relations is that I want to be provided with a thorough understanding of public relations practice and principles by examining the structure of the PR sector and also get insights of how the industry functions. Also, I will be able to examine emerging and classic PR strategies and the use of research to inform the campaigns of PR and also be able to measure their effectiveness and also their social impacts. Also, this degree will provide me with advanced skills and knowledge that I need to enhance my professional development.