Technologies for Treating Hazardous Waste Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Technologies for Treating Hazardous Waste - Essay Example Sanitary landfill is the used of an area as an isolation place of the solid waste until the danger of the waste is reduced. This kind of treating solid waste can be successful if the area is large and the isolation is good (â€Å"Solid Waste,† n.d.). Gasification on the other hand is the exposure to high temperature/extreme heat with the use of oxygen to decompose the waste. It has the advantages of lessening the size of waste and makes the transportation of waste easier. This is a type of incineration that has no contribution to air pollution. Composting is one of the oldest ways to treat solid waste. It is used specifically to solid wastes that decompose. It makes the area of decomposition very appropriate to the waste, so that decomposition occurs faster (â€Å"Solid Waste Management† n.d.). From the said technologies, gasification is the best. It can be observed that it has more advantages. It lessens the volume of waste in a shorter time because it reduces the waste on the spot. It also does not contribute pollution to nature especially to air unlike other thermal treatment. It brings back energy. And lastly it demands less space compared to sanitary

Sexual Abuse of Children Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Sexual Abuse of Children - Research Paper Example In the US only, the prevalence rate is at 10.1% and the figure has remained relatively constant since the early 1990s. On the older population, over 20% of females and 10% of males in America have suffered child abuse at their young age (Marchand Wolfe 133). These statistics indicate that the problem of child sexual abuse is an issue that requires more focus and a multi-dimensional approach to resolve. The reason why I chose this topic is to develop a better understanding of the reasons behind the prevalence of the problem of child sexual abuse. Statistics provide figures that suggest that the people who are close to the children form the largest portion of the perpetrators. Statistics reveal that 90% of the perpetrators of child sexual abuse are those close to the children, 30% comprising of family members and 60% comprising of other acquaintances such as friends. In choosing this topic, I seek to unveil the myth behind the statistical figures that show that close member of the community perpetrates this crime (Marie 1-11). In my research, I also intend to find out why most parents end up abusing their loved one instead of assuming the role of care providers. In doing so, I intend to provide a grounded platform from where the war against child sex abuse can be launched. This way, it is possible to provide a solution to a problem that has persisted long enough in the society and e fforts to resolve the problem have become unsuccessful. Before my research, I expected that majority of the perpetrators of child sexual abuses are strangers who are unknown to the victims. With this note, I felt that one way to solve the problem would be to increase family protection and to enhance better parental care. Surprisingly, statistics show that the people close to the children are likely to inflict this crime on the young ones.

Own-race bias Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Own-race bias - Research Paper Example In this time, black slaves were considered so different and removed from the aristocratic, land owning class of their owners that their enslavement and torture for centuries was written off as being part of the system. Furthermore, during the Jim Crow era and throughout the passing of the separate but equal legislation, African-Americans in this country were viewed as a concrete, separate racial category not only by many whites, but also by the law itself. In many ways, the separate but equal Brown v. Board of Education hearing reflects the rigid, concrete, categorical race structures that were prevalent in this country during that time. Legal terms like separate but equal give an indication of the way people viewed each other at this time. Obviously, strong categorical race structures dominated the way peers viewed peers. Race would have been at the forefront of the way most people viewed each other initially. Before peers could say hello, there would have been a quick, unconscious categorization of the person they were approaching based on their race and the race of the peer. This initial judgment is no different today, but the recent trends in the multicultural population of the United States have given way to blurred categorical race structures. As a system of rigid, concrete race categories is faced with individuals whose backgrounds are composed of two or even many of these categories, the way individuals perceive each other is forced to change. When individuals comprise several racial categories, peers cannot make such easy judgments as were made during previous eras. If a peer appears to be from a racial category one considers his or her own, and this same peer also appears to be from a racial category one does not consider his or her own, initial separation judgments are confused. This recent breaking down of categorical race structures has obvious implications on the way humans perceive one another, but how does this change affect human facial memory? The body of literature has shown that social categorization occurs within the early stages of perception, but lasts only briefly (Brewer, 1988) making it difficult to study. One model that helps explain the way humans remember faces is the In-Group and Out-Group Memory model (Pauker, Weisbuch, Ambady, Sommers, Adams, & Ivcevic, 2009). This model explains human facial perception as a categorization based on whether the perceived individual is of the same group as the perceiver. For example, an Asian person may perceive another Asian face as being â€Å"in-group†. Furthermore, Malpass & Kravitz (1969) showed that people have a tendency to have better facial memory of faces they classify as in-group, and lower facial memory of faces they classify as out-group (Malpass & Kravitz, 1969); a finding that Pauker and colleagues have shown to be repeated by over 100 studies (Pauker, Weisbuch, Ambady, Sommers, Adams, & Ivcevic, 2009). The own race bias links individuals’ in- or out-group categorization of others to individuals’ facial memories of these others by explaining that people remember faces they categorize as in-group better than faces they catego

House of the Spirits Essay Example for Free

House of the Spirits Essay In Isabel Allende’s novel The House of the Spirits, there are two definitive classes of people that are present throughout the novel. The poor class, including the peasants of Tres Marias and the socialist party members, has continual resentment towards the other class, which is the wealthy aristocratic class. The wealthy division of the novel shows little humanity towards the poor, treats the poor as servants, and control all politics involved in the country. The wealthy’s treatment of the lower class shattered the peace experienced by Chile because the poor and the wealthy maintained a struggle to co-exist with such division between their classes. The struggles between the two classes was first established early on in the novel at Tres Marias where Estreban Trueba makes it clear that he is the leader of the land and the rest of the tenants were much less important than him. Trueba was a part of the wealthy class and he takes the peasants that are housed on his land and he takes complete advantage of the people there. Word of his cruelty spread throughout the region, provoking jealous admiration among the men of his class. The peasants hid their daughters and clenched their fists helplessly because they could not confront him. Esteban Trueba was stronger, and he had impunity† (Allende 63). There was nothing that the peasants could do to a man of a higher class and Trueba takes full advantage of this. He acts as though he is untouchable throughout the novel and that the wealthy class can do whatever they please. Esteban Trueba speaks of how he believes that since he is in a higher and wealthier class, he is free to do anything that he wishes, including raping the women of Tres Marias. Esteban sees the people that live on his land as lesser human beings and Esteban believes that poor people are completely ignorant and uneducated. Theyre like children, they cant handle responsibility. How could they know whats best for them? Without [Trueba] theyd be lost (64). This attitude that the wealthy class has for those in the book ignites the resentment felt by the poor class that resounds in the rest of the story. The inequality that is present between these two classes is unbelievable throughout the book that even parts of the wealthy class begin to realize the damage that their right wing government has caused to the lower division of Chile. Even Esteban Trueba’s immediate family senses the problems that the poor face. â€Å"[Clara] now took Blanca with her on her visits to the poor, weighed down with gifts and comfort. ‘This is to assuage our conscience, darling,’ she would explain to Blanca. ‘But it doesnt help the poor. They dont need charity, they need justice’† (136). Because of this unequal treatment of the classes and the resentment that the poor held for the wealthy, the two classes could not continue to co-exist. The incessant struggle that the lower class faced when the wealthy controlled everything forced them to begin a revolution so that they can finally take control of their own lives instead of living to please the wealthy. Throughout the novel, the wealthy controlled every part of the country’s government and therefore, they controlled the country as a whole until the day that Esteban Trueba lost the election and the socialist party came to power. This is when the poor finally ceased to be dominated by the wealthy. â€Å"They lit torches, and the jumble of voices and dancing in the streets became a disciplined, jubilant procession that advanced toward the well-tended avenues of the bourgeoisie, creating the unaccustomed spectacle of ordinary citizens – factory workers in their heavy work shoes, women with babies in their arms, students in shirt-sleeves – calmly marching through the private, expensive neighborhood where they had rarely ventured before, and in which they were complete foreigners† (340). After the socialist victory there was room for a class that was previously completely blocked from the wealthy areas of living as well as in the government. The poor and the wealthy became much more even in terms of rights which, in turn, made the two classes much less divided. With such deplorable treatment of the lower class, the two classes could never co-exist peacefully unless there was a dramatic change in Chile. With a socialist victory over the conservatives, there was room for the differences between the poor and the wealthy to be diminished and for the country to be diplomatic.

Lewis model as a model for structural change

Lewis model as a model for structural change Describe the Lewis model as a model for structural change. How does the Harris-Todaro model of rural-urban migration differ from the assumptions and outcomes of the Lewis model? The Lewis model is an early traditional model which seeks to explain how labour movement from one sector to another leads to economic development in a country, particularly developing countries. Whereas the Harris-Todaro model is a model used to address issues concerning rural-urban migration by analysing income differentials. These models are similar but are based on different assumptions which shape their outcomes. I will be analysing these assumptions outcomes and making comparisons between the two models. The Lewis model seeks to explain the growth of a developing country in terms of labour transition from a traditional agricultural sector to a modern industrial sector. This model (sometimes known as the Dual Sector Model) was initially developed by Sir Arthur Lewis in his article, Economic Development with Unlimited Supplies of Labour. This article was published in 1954. This article and model are instrumental in laying the foundation in this area of Economics. The Lewis Model is about how surplus labour  [1]  from the traditional agricultural sector is transferred to the modern industrial sector, whose growth over time absorbs the surplus labour. This is promotes industrialisation as well as encourage sustainable development  [2]  . In this model, the traditional agricultural sector is usually characterised by low wages, an abundance of labour and low productivity through a labour intensive production process. Whereas, the modern industrial sector or manufacturing sector is defined by higher wages, higher marginal productivity  [3]  , and initially a demand for more workers, compared to the agricultural sector. The manufacturing sector is also assumed to use a production process which is capital intensive, therefore, investment and capital restructuring in the manufacturing sector is possible over time as capitalists profits are reinvested in the capital stock  [4]  . The assumption is that there is low marginal productivity in the agricultural sector because it is believed to be low priority as the hypothetical developing nations investment is going towards the physical capital stock in the manufacturing sector. The agricultural sector has a limited amount of land to cultivate, so this means that the marginal product of an additional farmer is assumed to be zero as the law of diminishing marginal returns  [5]  takes place as a result of the fixed input, land. This means that the agricultural sector has a quantity of farm workers that are not contributing to output in agriculture because their marginal productivities are zero. These farmers that are not producing any output are termed as surplus labour as they can move to another with no impact on the agricultural sector. Due to the wage differential between the agricultural sector and the manufacturing sector, workers tend to leave agriculture to work in manufacturing sector over time to reap the reward of higher wages. The idea is that if the quantity of workers moves from the agricultural sector to the manufacturing sector equal to the surplus labour from the agricultural sector, regardless of who actually transfers, general welfare and productivity will improve. Total agricultural product will remain unchanged while total industrial product increases because of the additional labour; however, this additional labour drives down marginal productivity and wages in the manufacturing sector. Over time, as this transition continues and investment results increase in the capital stock, the marginal productivity of workers in manufacturing will be driven down by additional workers entering this sector. Eventually, the wage rates of the agricultural and manufacturing sectors will equalise as workers leave the agricultural sector for the manufacturing sector, which increases marginal productivity and wages in the agricultural sector whilst driving down productivity and wages in manufacturing. The end result of this transition process is that the agricultural wage equals the manufacturing wage; the agricultural marginal product of labour equals the manufacturing marginal product of labour, and no further enlargements in the manufacturing sector takes place as workers no longer have a monetary incentive to move. The Lewis Model of Modern-Sector Growth in a Two-Sector Surplus Labour Economy (Diagram 1) The Harris-Todaro Model is an economic model used in developmental economics and welfare economics. This model is used to explain some issues surrounding rural-urban migration. The main result of the model is that the migration decision is based on the income differentials between rural and urban areas, not wage differentials. Therefore, this implies that rural-urban migration, in the context of high urban unemployment, can be economically rational if it is expected that urban income exceeds rural income. The Harris-Todaro Model (Diagram 2) The model asserts that equilibrium will be reached when the expected wage in urban areas, adjusted for the unemployment rate  [6]  , is equal to the marginal product of an agricultural worker. The model assumes that unemployment is non-existent in the rural agricultural sector and that rural agricultural production and the subsequent labour market is perfectly competitive  [7]  . This means that the agricultural rural wage is equal to agricultural marginal productivity. In equilibrium, the rural-urban migration will be zero because the expected rural income equals the expected urban income. The formal statement of the equilibrium condition of the Harris-Todaro model is as follows: Wa = Lm (Wm) Lus In this formula, Wa stands for agricultural income, Lm stands for employment in the manufacturing sector, Lus stands for the total urban labour pool and Wm stands for the urban minimum wage. The equations illustrates that the expected agricultural wage rate equals the expected urban wage rate, which is the urban wage rate multiplied by the total number of jobs available in manufacturing divided by the total number of the urban labour pool. Rural-urban migration will take place if: Wa Ls On the other hand, urban-rural migration will take place if: Wa > Lm (Wm) Ls This suggests that migration from rural areas to urban areas will increase if urban wages (Wm) increase in the manufacturing sector (Lm), increasing the expected urban income. If agricultural productivity decreases, which lowers marginal productivity and wages in the agricultural sector (Wa), there will be a decrease in the expected rural income. This also leads to a rise in migration from rural to urban areas. Mega-cities: Cities with Ten Million or more inhabitants (Figure 1) Source: Data from United Nations Population Division, March 2002 Migration rates exceed urban job creation rates, this is because rural-urban migration causes overcrowding and unemployment in cities. This leads to many people ending up in unproductive or underproductive employment in the informal sector  [8]  . However, even though this migration causes such problems as in inducing informal sector growth and unemployment, this behaviour is economically rational and utility maximising in the context of this model. As long as the migrating economic agents have complete and accurate information concerning rural urban wage rates and the probability of obtaining employment, they will make an expected income-maximising decision. Estimated and Projected Urban and Rural Population of the More and Less Developed Regions, 1950-2030 (Figure 2) To summarise, the assumptions of the Lewis Model include the idea capitalists reinvest profits which leads to fast growth expansion in the modern sector. The level of wages in the modern industrial sector is assumed to be constant and determined as a given premium over a fixed average continuation level of wages in the traditional agricultural sector. The assumption that there is surplus labour in the sense that marginal product of labour is very important. It is partially because of this that workers will move as they are believed have no impact on the agricultural sector. Another assumption is all rural workers share equally in the output so that the rural real wage is determined by the average and not the marginal product of labour. Moreover, under the assumption of perfectly competitive labour markets in the modern sector, the marginal labour curves (Diagram 1) are actually demand curves for labour. Lewis also assumes that modern sector employers can hire as many surplus rural wo rkers as they like with out the fear of rising wages because urban wage is above rural income. Finally, it is assumed to employment expansion continue until all surplus labour is absorbed by the industrial sector. These assumptions shape the conclusion that labour transitions take place for workers who leave the traditional agricultural sector for the modern sector in search for a better wage. However, some of these assumptions do not hold in reality and changes the shape of the model. This model is complicated because of the fact that surplus labour is both generated by the introduction of new productivity enhancing technologies in the agricultural sector and intensification of work. Also, the migration of workers from the countryside to the cities is an incentive towards those two phenomena as the relative bargaining power of workers and employers varies and with this so does the cost of labour. The wage differential needs to be sufficient between industry and agriculture to incentivise movement between the sectors but the model assumes that any differential will result in a transfer. The assumption that surplus labour in rural areas and there is full employment in urban areas has been proved wrong by contemporary research indicators. These show that there is little general surplus labour in rural locations. The model also assumes diminishing returns in the modern sector, but there is much evidence that increasing returns exist in this sector. The Harris Todaro model is based on different assumptions compared to the Lewis model even though their models lead to similar conclusions. The Harris-Todaro model assumes that it is the difference in expected income earnings rather than actual wage differentials that causes workers to switch from rural areas to urban areas if expected income is higher. The model assumes potential migrants are risk neutral. This means they are indifferent between a certain expected rural income and an uncertain expected urban income of the same magnitude. This assumptions indication of economic realities is debatable. This is because poor migrants will more likely to be risk adverse and require a significantly larger expected urban income to migrate. However, the Harris-Todaro model can be adjusted to reflect risk aversion through alteration of the expected urban income calculation. Although, when the model assumes risk aversion instead of risk neutrality, the results are practically indistinguishabl e. The Lewis model uses a competitive model whereas the Harris-Model does not do this. This is seen because rural-urban migration acts as an equilibrating force that equates rural and urban expected incomes. (Figure 3) To conclude, the Lewis model and Harris-Todaro model have similar outcomes in the sense of labour moving from rural agricultural areas into urban areas in search of modern industrial work as an approach to earn more money and leave poverty. However, the assumptions of the two models are very different and maybe this is why each model has had different impacts in terms of economic development history. The Lewis model is an early traditional model. which in practical situations does not work properly because of the assumptions. Therefore, the extent of the model is rarely realised. Although, this model does provide a good general theory on labour transiting in developing economies. The Harris-Todaro model, on the other hand, even with its problems with the assumptions, has lead to policy implications such as ways to reduce inequalities and bias between rural areas and urban cities as an attempt to reduce this migration problem. Overall, both models have increased awareness of the growing issues surrounding rural-urban migration. As many countries like India, Singapore and China act as success stories of this type of migration and economic transition as a catalyst towards leaving poverty, there are many developing nations who have not had the same success, but have suffered from a rise in urban poverty, unemployment and fall in living standards (figure 3) and (figure 4). (Figure 4) References https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLp0ksuutmp4l0khR_-dSctQT1m3ZRa-hRN006Q6_DPEBG-yhQx6EmK6lnxdXgpMnXJ46mkZTF8VDlfwXGOJqr_CH_j5DCH2ps2csk2vghA9vnQaRQGp_2Jbb3jmx37zu3n48HCCD981Q3/s400/WorstSlumPopulationsinSubSaharanAfrica-Graph.gif http://econ.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTDEC/EXTRESEARCH/EXTWDRS/EXTWDR2009/0,,contentMDK:21961509~pagePK:64167689~piPK:64167673~theSitePK:4231059,00.html http://econ.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTDEC/EXTRESEARCH/EXTWDRS/EXTWDR2009/0,,contentMDK:21963658~pagePK:64167689~piPK:64167673~theSitePK:4231059,00.html http://www.facsnet.org/index.php?option=com_contentview=articleid=190:journalists-guide-to-economic-terms-04-02catid=75:archives Harris J. and M. Todaro, Migration, Unemployment Development: A Two-Sector Analysis (American Economic Review, March 1970); 60(1):126-42 Todaro and Smith, Economic Development (Addison Wesley; 9th edition, July 2005) pg. 108-113, 339-343

Importance of Outdoor Recreation in Education

Importance of Outdoor Recreation in Education This essay is designed to have you explore the research around the goals and purposes of different approaches to outdoor learning. There is a significant body of learning theory that informs how people interpret and understand natural environments and it is essential that you familiarise yourself with this work. Some of the key approaches you should consider in your work include: adventure education, outdoor recreation, outdoor education, outdoor environmental education, environmental education, outdoor environmental studies, adventure therapy, and bush adventure therapy. My name is Steele Millroy and I am currently studying a Bachelor in Secondary Education at the University of the Sunshine Coast, majoring in Health and Physical Education (HPE), or as it may also be known, outdoor studies. HPE is an umbrella term for many varieties of outdoor educational teaching practices. These include outdoor recreation, outdoor education, adventure therapy and outdoor environmental education. The two that I would like to focus on for this essay are outdoor recreation and outdoor education. I believe these two have the biggest impact on my career area, while still being effective even within the limitations the classroom provides. Today, when we hear outdoor recreation, it is often associated with the term leisure or leisure activities (Martin, Cashell, Wagstaff, Breunig, 2006). Outdoor recreation is defined to be an active side of leisure that transpires in a natural setting such as a mountain, lake or field (Martin et al, 2006). Being actively immersed in these outdoor locations can have a profound effect on the way people view their environment. It can change a persons perspective of the way we use, understand and appreciate the natural environment (Martin et al, 2006). As a person begins to use their environment for recreation, it starts off as just another piece of equipment for them to use, but as they return to the same spots repeatedly, it can become like an old friend. A person will notice more and more detail about the environment as it will become more familiar to them. They develop a deeper appreciation for landscape and everything it has to offer. Outdoor Recreation now has become increasingly po pular since the 1950s due to the prosperity of western countries and their increase in leisure time (Martin et al, 2006). This also lead to areas that previously had been relatively unknown becoming popular activity spots and in doing so has had a detrimental effect in some natural areas (Martin et al, 2006). In America, this concern led to the first significant study done by the Outdoor Recreation Resource Review Commission (ORRRC), which was to assess the state of outdoor recreation in America and make suggestions on its future development (Martin et al, 2006). These suggestions by ORRRC have led to the Outdoor Recreation Act of 1963 and the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (Martin et al, 2006). These acts have helped reduce the impact humans have on natural recreation areas and help improve those areas for the future. Examples of the natural areas that we use for recreation are things like hiking trails, rivers or streams that we kayak on, mountains for climbing or ev en an open field for a game of football or cricket. In summation outdoor recreation is a great way for humans to become more involved in nature, but we must become educated in a way that ensures us we are not doing damage to the places we love. A way to keep humans educated with how our environment works and why we need it is through Outdoor Education. Outdoor Education is broadly defined as the philosophy of learning by doing (Priest Gass, 1997). The term Outdoor Education covers two main subjects of Environmental Education and Adventure Education (Martin et al, 2006). In Environmental Education the emphasis of learning is placed between people and their natural environment and natural resources (Priest Gass, 1997). Adventure Education focuses on interpersonal growth through the opportunities that adventure experiences can give to us (Martin et al, 2006). Adventure Education is often done with a group of people that will have to work together to complete a certain task. This provides them with a personal challenge while still have to use skills such as decision making, communication, cooperation and most of all they learn to trust each other (Priest Gass, 1997). The educator who is running the challenge structures it in such a way that the risk is perceived to be much higher than it truly is. This gives more opportunity for the participants to hit their peak adventure point while still being challenged to grow and change (Priest Gass, 1997). Examples of this type of education would be a rope course where your team must all pass together or a navigation exercise where your team is left some basic equipment and you are dropped off in an area you dont know. This navigation exercise can be very beneficial as it can seem like the risks are very high (when it is just your group and their survival skills), but in truth the guides who dropped you there would know the area extremely well and can remove you at any time if the situation calls for it. With this adventure education you must then become involved with environmental education for without knowing about the environment we could lose the nature and beauty that we all love about adventure education (Priest Gass, 1997). Environmental education can b e parted into two segments: ecosystemic relationships and ekistic relationships (Martin et al, 2006). Ecosystemic relationships refer to independent organisms living in the ecosystem, whereas ekistic relationships refer to the interactions between people and the environment, or how we treat our ecosystem, and in turn, how that will affect us (Martin et al, 2006). An example of this relationship would be humans polluting a river or lake, then in turn having no fresh water to drink. In this relationship, if we take care of that specific environment, it will in turn take care of us. Outdoor education is a very important tool for us to understand each other and our natural environment. Both outdoor recreation and outdoor education are important to me being a HPE teacher. Outdoor recreation is one of the big examples of being a HPE teacher. Since all schools will not have the same funding for their sporting programs, the ability to go outside and create a game or activity, that uses the natural landscapes around us, are vitally important. Doing this will show the students how to use the land respectfully and in turn can be woven into a lesson of Environmental Education. The benefits of using outdoor recreation as a learning tool are that it can be very cost effective, the games can be played by the students at home without much equipment and the students begin to appreciate the natural environment and getting immersed within it. Outdoor education can work well alongside outdoor recreation. I believe that they complement each other well. In recreation, they can make relationships to a place while in outdoor education they learn why that relationship is so important. During my career as a HPE teacher I will also be endeavouring to use Adventure Education. I believe that using Adventure Education in a class setting as it can strengthen the class as a whole and make different friendship circles communicate with each other. A challenge for me will be providing such a challenge in a school setting that seems high risk even when it isnt. A possible way around this would be a day trip somewhere if the school budget allows it. When we are not doing practical classes and are in the classroom, that is when I will begin to teach the students about ecosystemic and ekistic relationships. These are both important pieces to the outdoor education puzzle as they teach the students how we can impact one little organism and then how that can impact the ecosystem as a whole. In that past there has been some debate on whether all this should be taught in a HPE classroom, but I agree with L. B. Sharp (cited in Ewert Sibthorp, 2014) when he said those things which c an best be taught outdoors should there be taught (p. 6). These disciplines of outdoor recreation and outdoor education will be a great tool and asset to the modern HPE classroom. Getting the students involved in the outdoors and playing games is a great way to keep their attention while we teach them how to respect it. When students form their own relationships with a place, that is when they truly start to understand the importance of nature. Doing this through outdoor recreation and outdoor education is an effective and affordable way to achieve this goal. References Ewert, A. W., Sibthorp, J. (2014). Outdoor adventure education: foundations, theory, and research. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Martin, B., Cashel, C., Wagstaff, M., Bruenig, M. (2006). Outdoor leadership: theory and practice. Journal of Education and Outdoor Learning, 8, 3-12. Priest, S., Gass, M. A. (1997). Effective leadership in adventure programming. Palaestra, 22, 17-26.

Ernest Hemingway :: essays research papers

"A Clean, Well-Lighted Place" was published by Scribner's Magazine in March of 1933, but it was not until 1956 that an apparent inconsistency in the waiters' dialogue was brought to Hemingway's attention. Hemingway's thirteen word reply to Judson Jerome, an Assistant Professor of English at Antioch College, said that he had read the story again and it still made perfect sense to him. Despite this letter, Scribner's republished "A Clean, Well-Lighted Place" in 1965 with a slight change in the waiters' dialogue that they argued would fix the apparent anomaly. Scribner's decision to alter the original text, the letter Hemingway wrote to Professor Jerome, and several papers on the subject all add up to a literary controversy that still churns among Hemingway scholars. I will argue that the original text is the correct text and Scribner's just failed to interpret it properly. They failed to notice nuances in Hemingway's writing that appear throughout many of his other works. They obviously thought Hemingway's reply to Professor Jerome was made without notice of the inconsistency. Most important, I believe they did not evaluate the character of the two waiters in "A Clean, Well-Lighted Place." A careful examination of the character of each waiter can make it apparent that the original text was correct and that there was no need for Scribner's to alter the text. The dialogue in question results from a conversation the two waiters have concerning the old man's attempted suicide. One waiter asks "Who cut him down?", to which the other waiter replies "His niece." Later in the story, the original text appears to confuse who possesses the knowledge about the suicide. The waiter who previously said "His niece", now says: "I Know. You said she cut him down." This seems to assume the knowledge about the attempted suicide has either passed from one waiter to another, or that we have incorrectly attributed the first exchange to the wrong waiters. So which waiter asked about cutting down the old man? When the disputed dialogue between the two waiters takes place, we do not know enough about them to develop an outline of character. As the story progresses, the character of the two waiters emerges through their dialogue and thoughts, as does many of Hemingway's characters. Once the character of each waiter is developed and understood, the dialogue makes more sense when the story is read again.