Tax avoidance and evasion schemes Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Tax avoidance and evasion schemes - Assignment Example The government has made tax evasion and avoidance one of its key priorities so as to reduce the deficit and boost the exchequer (Alan 2011). Tax evasion is illegal way of minimizing taxes thus stiff penalties are involved on individual or corporate bodies who evade taxes. Unintentional mathematical errors in tax returns are not considered to be tax evasion (McGee 2012). Tax avoidance is a legal way of minimizing tax liability, and it involves planning in advance an intended transaction so as to get a specific tax treatment. Individuals can minimize taxes through tax planning for example through schemes. Avoidance also involves disclosure. Tax avoidance and evasion schemes a) Defined contribution retirement plan Contributing money to a qualified employer sponsored retirement plan helps in reducing tax liability. A defined contribution retirement plan is an IRS approved retirement plan sponsored by an employer. Contributions made by the employees to these schemes are tax deductible, an d as a result, the tax payable is reduced. For example, if an employee who is in a tax bracket of 25% contributes 2000, he will save 500 (McGee 2012). Another benefit with defined contribution retirement plan is that the contributions made by the employee to the scheme are invested to a mutual fund. ... Such expenses include qualified parking, transit passes and van pool commuting. These savings made from the payroll are deductible for tax purposes thus tax payable is minimized (Alan 2011). c) Flexible spending account This account is also referred to as an expense reimbursement account designed for employees who pay for the child or parent care. FSA helps employees fund medical and dental expenses through salary deduction to out of pocket unreimbursed health care expenses limited by law to $2,500 annually and depended care up to a maximum of $5,000 annually (McGee 2012). Example includes prescriptions, over-the-counter drugs and annual deductibles. d) High income child benefit charge According to the Finance Act 2012 section 681B, a person is only legible to claim the high income child benefit charge if personal income for the year exceeds ?50,000 (Great Britain 2011). Also, when either a person or his partner are entitled to receive child benefit, or get contributions from someone else who claims Child Benefit for a child who lives with you..If you are liable to the tax charge and your income increases or drops, this can affect whether you continue to be liable or how much tax charge you have to pay. If your individual income drops to ?50,000 or less for a tax year you will not have to pay the tax charge (Karayan and Swenson 2007). e) Offshore business structures Investors make investments through non-resident companies especially ones with lower tax jurisdictions. Tax charged on rental receipts for overseas investments is 20% unlike 26% charged to residents. The tax is withheld by tenants or appointed agents from their rent. Alternatively, an approval from HMRC can be obtains for rents to be received at

Sample Persuasive Message Essay Example for Free

Sample Persuasive Message Essay Most people have ventured onto the world wide web. Some enter the online world to check email from family members far away. Other people enjoy the web to watch videos on YouTube of babies doing the weirdest thing. Some log online for social media websites that let them know what their friends, family and celebrities are doing that day. Most people who have ventured online have shopped on electronic retail sites like Amazon or Overstock. Electronic retailing has become a big part of who we are today. There are many sites that allow you to shop for everyday items, groceries, or furniture like Amazon, Overstock, Alice, or Newegg. You also have big box stores that have followed suit with e-commerce as they allow customers to purchase products online that can be shipped to their home or a local store. As new and existing retailers grow retailers are forced to stay competitive, retain current customers, find new customers, and keep fighting to be the best e-commerce retailer out there. According to Turban, King, McKay, Marshall, Lee and Viehland (2008) â€Å"one of the keys to building effective customer relationships is an understanding of customer behavior online† (p. 157). So for businesses to be active and competitive online they need to understand the general online behaviors of the customer to stay in business. In this paper I will be discussing three behaviors natural to e-tailing that assist e-commerce companies understand customer behaviors online. I will be discussing the type of communication used when each behavior occurs and explain how each type of communication enables e-commerce. Analyzing each behavior using the communication process will also be discussed ensuring to include descriptions of the purpose, sender, receiver, message, environment, technology, noise, and feedback in the communication process. Lastly, I will explore a sample persuasive message designed for a virtual audience. Behaviors in E-tailing I see myself as a savvy online customer. I have shopped for products for my home, family, and friends. I have shopped for services like insurance, dog sitting, or home maintenance. The internet has a vast number of websites that help me pick and choose the products and services that work best for me and the general population. When shopping online customers are looking at the type of product or service (is it safe, recommended, green, easy to use, etc. ), how can they go about purchasing the product or service, and the reason customers choose one company over the other. Finding the Right Product or Service If you are shopping online you probably have a clear idea of what kind of product or service you are looking for. If a customer is looking for a camera that is user friendly, can take pictures during important moments in their life, can take pictures in a flash, and is pocket sized they can essentially look on numerous websites. Best Buy, Target, Amazon, Newegg, the options are endless. With all the options finding the right camera could be difficult. Turban et al. (2008) explains that the product search is influenced by independent variables (p. 158-159). Independent variables include personal characteristics and environmental variables. When searching for the right camera your personal characteristics – age, gender, education, lifestyle, values, personality, etc. – weigh in on finding the right camera. Environmental variables like a customer’s social influence and culture help to narrow down which camera the customer would likely purchase (Turban et al. , 2008, p. 158-159). Who a customer is and who they socialize with is not the only thing that influences them in purchasing a camera. In order for customers to know a little about a camera the manufacturer or retailer needs to be able to get the camera out there and communicate to the customers of the perks of the camera. Like regular retailers, e-tailers use internet based advertisements on their website as well as sponsorship websites (i. e. Yahoo, Google, Bing) to advertise the product. When using sponsorship websites e-tailers are driving sales by driving customers toward that specific camera. As e-tailers advertise the camera they are using the communication process. The customer – or the sender – initiates the start of the communication process as he or she searches online for right camera. The customer finds an ad online (message) that matches their WINs (Wants, Interests, and Needs) of the product. The advertisement helps to â€Å"comprises the target audience of a message transmitted by the sender† (p. 10) which according to Roebuck (2006) stands as the receiver in the communication process. The advertisement links the customer with the e-tailer which allows the e-tailer to provider further information and reviews for the camera. Purchasing product or service Once you find the right camera you go into the purchasing behavior. Turban et al. (2008) states â€Å"the two most-cited reasons for not making purchases are shipping charges (51 percent) and the difficulty in judging the quality of the product (44 percent) (p. 59). If the customer finds the perfect camera and it is available at Sony. com for $299 with a $19. 95 shipping charge and BestBuy. com for $307 with free shipping the customer would most times go through BestBuy. com because of the cost savings. Quality of a product is important. E-tailers who offer a â€Å"chat now† option that allows customers to ask experts questions on the quality and durability is a positive step towards purchase. E-tailers who have reviews of the product also assist customers in understanding the general consensus of the product. Customers also weigh in on how secure the online payment is prior to purchasing a product. Customers are weary about unsecure online payments due to the coming age of hacking and identity theft. Having a certificate of security online gives the customer added security to make the purchase. The â€Å"Chat Now† option and a valid certificate showing a secure site for payment are forms of communication in the purchasing process. During this e-tailing behavior the e-tailer becomes the sender as it provides the customer (receiver) with how to purchase the product and general customer service. By providing superior medium in customer service the e-tailer and customer build a relationship that heads toward loyalty. Company â€Å"The internet customer is very hard to predict and is different from the normal customer† (Prasad amp; Aryasri, 2009, p. 73) because of this the e-tailer’s online store must appeal to the buyer and find ways to encourage the customer to purchase the product with them instead of a similar product elsewhere. When the e-tailer paved the path towards customer loyalty during the purchase process they opened the door to complete e-loyalty. Turban et al. 2008) advised that â€Å"customer acquisition and retention is a critical success factor in e-tailing† (p. 167). Providing a customer with loyalty programs, promotional emails, and discounts allows the customer to feel valued. Retaining customer information (name, address, credit card information) also assists in building customer loyalty as it makes for easier check out. Using the communication process, the sender is the e-tailer. The e-tailer can email or mail information regarding loyalty programs, promotional emails, and discounts to the customer who is the receiver. Providing such information makes the customer feel valued and willing to return to the e-tail website. Sample Persuasive Messages A persuasive message helps to influence people in making a certain decision or action. Using the same camera sample we used in e-tailing behaviors we could create a persuasive camera message that helps to influence people to want to purchase the camera. Finding the right persuasive message for a camera boils down to understanding a customer’s WINs. Wants. Interests. Needs. The customer wants to purchase a camera that is user friendly because they do not use the camera for anything but recreation. The customer is interested in a camera that can take pictures during important moments in their life like graduations, 1st birthdays, and family functions. The customer needs a camera that can take pictures in a flash and is pocket sized so they can take it out in a whim and put it back without fuss. Using this customer’s WINs a persuasive message aimed for the virtual audience can easily be made: Aim amp; snap precision for all of your unforgettable moments. A message does not have to be long with so much information. Instead, it can be short but still reach the audiences WINs. Using persuasive messages allows e-tailers to acquire new business and persuade current customers in upgrading their current equipment. Conclusion E-tailers have to understand each customer to ensure that traffic goes in and out of their virtual store. Understanding the product and service search of a consumer, understanding what affects the customer’s purchasing decision, and creating a loyal customer base helps strengthen those traffic numbers. Using the communication process I was able to define how each behavior occurs and what type of communication was used to address each behavior. Creating a persuasive message that was short but covered the customer’s WINs demonstrated how a simple message can generate e-commerce.

Play Preferences of Developing Children

Play Preferences of Developing Children This cross-sectional survey research investigated play preferences of children with and without developmental delays who were between 3 and 7 years old. Parents completed questionnaires regarding their childs play activity and context preferences. Valid results were obtained for 166 children, 83 of whom had developmental delays. Preference ratings were compared by gender, age, and delay status. Play preference did not differ by gender. Rough-and-tumble play and computer/video game play increased with age, whereas object exploration decreased. Children with developmental delays had higher preferences for rough-and-tumble play and object exploration and lower preferences for drawing and coloring, construction, and doll and action figurine play than typically developing children. This comparison of childrens play preferences across ages, gender, and developmental status enhances our understanding of how these variables influence childrens play. ABSTRACT This cross-sectional survey research investigated play preferences of children with and without developmental delays who were between 3 and 7 years old. Parents completed questionnaires regarding their childs play activity and context preferences. Valid results were obtained for 166 children, 83 of whom had developmental delays. Preference ratings were compared by gender, age, and delay status. Play preference did not differ by gender. Rough-and-tumble play and computer/video game play increased with age, whereas object exploration decreased. Children with developmental delays had higher preferences for rough-and-tumble play and object exploration and lower preferences for drawing and coloring, construction, and doll and action figurine play than typically developing children. This comparison of childrens play preferences across ages, gender, and developmental status enhances our understanding of how these variables influence childrens play. Play is a primary childhood occupation and as such deserves the utmost attention from the occupational therapy profession. In the past, many authors have written about play as a means to measure other skills (Bundy, 1993) or as a reflection of child development (Sparling, Walker, Singdahlsen, 1984). Play has been observed, categorized, labeled, and studied by researchers in many fields (Cole la Voie, 1985; Fein, 1981; Gesell, 1940; Parten, 1932; Saunders, Sayer, Goodale, 1999). Previous research has clearly demonstrated that children progress through stages and exhibit differing play preferences over time (Cole la Voie, 1985; Fein, 1981; Lowe, 1975). Recently, occupational therapy scholars have stressed the importance of examining play as an occupation rather than analyzing its component parts (Bundy, 1993; Couch, Deitz, Kanny, 1998, Knox, 1997; Parham Primeau, 1997). Influences on Play Preferences Many variables (e.g., gender, culture, environment, and age) influence a childs play occupations. This descriptive study explores young childrens play preferences and investigates how play choices vary according to the childs age, gender, and typical development versus developmental delay status. Gender Research has repeatedly demonstrated gender differences in the play of typical children (Caldera, Huston, OBrien, 1989; Connor Serbin, 1977; Meyer-Bahlburg, Sandberg, Dolezal, Yager, 1994; Saracho, 1990). In early studies of preferences related to gender, researchers found that girls preferred dolls and house toys and boys preferred blocks and transportation toys (Fein, 1981). Recent research continues to find gender-related differences in many aspects of play beginning at early ages. For example, as early as 1 year of age, children make different toy choices based on their gender (Servin, Bohlin, Berlin, 1999). At 18 months of age, boys preferred to play with trucks and trailers, whereas girls preferred doll-related activities (Lyytinen, Laakso, Poikkeus, Rita, 1999). Gender differences are found in many aspects of play. Boys are more likely to choose physical and block play over dramatic and manipulative play, and girls are the reverse (Saracho, 1990). Although boys are more likely to enjoy vigorous or active play, girls are generally rated as more playful (Saunders et al., 1999) and more likely to enjoy both dyadic interaction (Benenson, 1993) and smaller play groups than boys. Within dramatic or fantasy play, the type of fantasy play performed differs by gender. For example, girls use more verbal pretending and choose different play themes (Wall, Pickert, Gibson, 1989) and demonstrate less aggressive content (von Klitzing, Kelsay, Emde, Robinson, Schmitz, 2000). Girls fantasy themes tend to be complex and abstract. In contrast, boys play is more physically vigorous and they tend to choose simpler fantasy themes, such as playing superheroes (Pellegrini Bjorklund, 2004). Boys and girls also differ in play with computers and video games. Boys generally play video games more frequently and for longer time periods (Kafai, 1998), and they tend to play games in which competition is important. Girls like games with in-depth social interactions and character development; they appear to enjoy participating in a story more than participating in a competitive game (Salonius-Pasternak, 2005). Age A childs age is related to both play skills and play preferences for the type and context of play. Developmental changes in play skill have been found in a variety of studies of childrens play. For example, pretend play first emerges between 1 and 2 years of age and increases in prevalence and frequency throughout the preschool and kindergarten years (Fein, 1981). Play preferences have been shown to begin early in life. Infant toy preferences are noted by mothers as early as 3 months of age, and by 1 year of age almost 90% of infants have a favorite object (Furby Wilke, 1982). Children have also demonstrated changes over time in their preference for specific forms of play, such as physical play. In one study of physical play, the authors found that preference for each of three types of physical play peaks at a different age (Pellegrini Smith, 1998). Rhythmic stereotypes dominate during infancy, exercise play peaks during the preschool years, and rough-and-tumble play is most common during middle childhood. Age also interacts with gender to affect the choices. For example, the preferences of young children for gender-segregated groups begin to change in pre-adolescence (Brown, 1990), as do the gender-specific preferences for indoor and outdoor play (Pellegrini, 1992). Age may be less of a factor in play development in children with disabilities (Sigafoos, Roberts-Pennell, Graves, 1999). Developmental Delay or Disability Multiple studies have demonstrated that children with physical disabilities play differently than children who are developing typically. Children with physical disabilities spend more time in passive activities (Brown Gordon, 1987) and may demonstrate less active involvement with objects (Gowen, Johnson-Martin, Goldman, Hussey, 1992). Children with physical disabilities spend more time with adults than with their peers and participate more in passive activities, such as television watching, than in active and varied play experiences (Howard, 1996). In addition, children with physical disabilities, cerebral palsy in particular, may be less playful than their typically developing peers (Okimoto, Bundy, Hanzlik, 2000). Based on previous research, it is unclear whether children with disabilities have different play preferences or merely have an inability to access various forms of play. One study demonstrated that children with mild motor disabilities held preferences similar to children without disabilities (Clifford Bundy, 1989). In a study investigating object play preferences in children with an autistic spectrum disorder, Desha, Ziviani, and Rodger (2003) found that the children (41 to 86 months old) engaged predominantly in functional play and preferred toys with salient sensorimotor properties (toys that produced sound or movement with minimal effort). Other research has suggested that children with autism prefer toys and play situations that are structured and predictable (Ferrara Hill, 1980). Contextual Variables Contextual factors may affect play occupations. Researchers have demonstrated that children have fairly stable preferences for play partners, including the gender of play partners (Hay, Payne, Chadwick, 2004; Martin Fabes, 2001), play settings, and play objects (Knox, 1997). Other studies suggest that the physical environment impacts childrens development of play occupations. For example, outdoor play provides children with opportunities for sensory exploration (e.g., in dirt, water, sand, and mud), learning about space, and vigorous physical activity. Indoor play offers opportunities for quiet play, reading, drawing, construction, and computer games (Clements, 2004). Research Questions The literature on childrens play preferences suggests that children have clear preferences that are influenced by gender, age, and developmental status. Examining the current play choices and preferences of children is important to further understand the development of play occupations and what variables influence a childs play choices. This study investigated the play preferences of children with and without developmental delays who were between 3 and 7 years old. The specific research questions that guided our survey research were the following: 1. Do boys and girls differ in their play activity preferences? 2. Do childrens play activity preferences differ by age in early childhood years? 3. Do play activity preferences differ between children with developmental delays who receive therapy services and children with typical development? Methods Sample Convenience sampling was used to recruit parents of children with typical development or with developmental delays (who received occupational, speech, or physical therapy services) who were between 3 and 8 years old to complete a survey describing play preferences. A total of 330 surveys were provided to parents of typically developing children and children with developmental delays in the Northeast and the Midwest regions in the United States. In the Midwest, participants were obtained through a large childcare center and two preschools. All participants in the Northeast were obtained through two large private practice clinics. To obtain a sample of typically developing children in the Northeast, parents of children receiving therapy services in the clinics were asked to complete a survey for a sibling without developmental problems. Instrument The survey was based on Takatas instrument (Takata, 1969) that measures play preferences and the categories were modified to reflect modern play activities. The survey required parents to respond to a list of play activity preferences for one of their children. Studies have demonstrated that mothers can accurately rank play activities (Tamis-LeMonda, Damast, Bornstein, 1994) and parent report has been used previously in research of childrens play preferences (Finegan, Niccols, Zacher, Hood, 1991). The survey listed play activities and contexts and asked parents to rate their childs preference for each activity and context. Parents were also asked to provide information about age, disability status, and gender. The parents were asked about play preferences within a 3-month period because other researchers have suggested that play preferences remain relatively stable within this period of time (Finegan et al., 1991). Parents were not asked questions regarding their nationality, race, ethnicity, social class, or socioeconomic status because these factors have not been demonstrated to be related to play preferences (Meyer-Bahlburg et al., 1994). To pilot test the survey, two peer reviewers commented on the items and then six parents completed the survey and were asked to comment on its format and clarity and the amount of time it took to complete. Minimal revisions were made to improve clarity. The final survey listed 37 play activities in 11 categories of play and 11 contextual variables. The survey used a 4-point Likert scale for scoring, with each play activity rated from highly preferred (4) to not preferred (1), and respondents could also select not applicable. Individual activities were listed under broader categories (e.g., gross motor play, creative play, and pretend play). The second part of the survey asked for the childs preferences for specific play environments, including social context (e.g., friends or family) and physical contexts (e.g., inside or outside). A third section asked for descriptive information about the child (e.g., gender, birth date, diagnosis, if any, and services received). Data Analysis Demographic data and preference ratings were summarized using descriptive statistics. Children were combined into age groups by year by rounding to the nearest year. Although specific diagnoses were identified for the children, the children were grouped into those with and without developmental delays for purposes of analysis. To reduce the data, the individual activities were combined into play categories (e.g., gross motor, rough-and-tumble play, and pretend play). The 33 activities were collapsed into 9 play categories and the 11 contextual variables were collapsed into 4 play contexts. The figure identifies how the items were combined into categories. When computing mean scores, the responses not applicable and not preferred were combined as a score of 1 because both responses indicated that the child did not engage in that play activity. Using each play category and play context, a three-way analysis of variance with gender, age, and disability status as the independent variables was computed. Scheffe post-hoc analyses were used to compare individual age groups. Effect sizes (Cohens d) were calculated for gender and developmental status comparisons. Although a Likert scale produces ordinal data, parametric statistical procedures were selected over non-parametric statistical procedures based on research demonstrating that these statistics result in the same conclusions as non-parametric tests (Glass, Peckham, Sanders, 1972), they are preferable in most cases, and they do not increase the likelihood of a Type I or Type II error (Nanna Sawilowsky, 1998; Rasmussen Dunlap, 1991). Use of parametric statistics allowed us to examine t he interactions among the variables. Results Sample A total of 175 surveys were returned. Only five surveys for 8 year olds were returned; therefore these were omitted from the analysis. Of the 170 remaining, 166 were sufficiently complete to use in the analysis. Demographic data for the sample are presented in Table 1. Gender The three-way analysis of variance identified no significant differences in play activity preferences between boys and girls (effect size ranged from .01 to .26). Table 2 lists the mean scores, analysis of variance results, and effects sizes for the primary play categories. Play preferences were remarkably similar for boys and girls, with equivalent preference for gross motor play, rough-and-tumble play, video and computer games, drawing and coloring, dolls, and pretend play. The interaction for gender and age was significant for doll play preference. Three- to four-year-old boys preferred play with dolls and action figurines more than 3- to 4-year-old girls. In contrast, 5- to 6-year-old boys preferred play with dolls and action figurines less than 5- to 6-year-old girls. Play contexts were also compared by gender. Boys (m = 2.03) and girls (m = 1.95) were equally neutral about playing alone (F [1,156] = .074; p = .786). Both boys (m = 2.63) and girls (m = 2.60) equally preferred to play with friends (F [1, 156] = .031; p = .860) and equally preferred indoor (mean range: 2.73 to 2.80) and outdoor (mean range: 2.75 to 2.86) play. Age Groups Play preferences were compared by age groups. Table 3 shows which play categories were significantly different for age groups between 3 and 7 years old. In this early childhood age span, changes in play preferences were few. Preference for rough-and-tumble play changed significantly from 3 to 7 years old. Rough-and-tumble play was preferred most at 5 years old and was only somewhat preferred at 7 years old. Preference for video and computer games increased significantly in this age range. Video and computer game play was scored between not preferred and neutral at 3 years old and was somewhat preferred by 7 years old. Preference for drawing and coloring and construction increased from 3 to 7 years old, but these differences were not significant. Preference for pretend play differed significantly across the age groups, with low preference scores at the youngest and oldest ages and higher preference scores at 4 and 5 years old. Doll and action figurine play was also highest at 4 years old; however, changes in doll play preference were not significant across age groups. When play contexts were compared across the age groups, children showed no differences in preference for playing alone (range: 1.88 to 2.23; F [4,156] = 1.3; p = .272) or with friends (range: 2.27 to 2.93; F [4,156] = 1.95; p = .105) or for playing indoors (range: 2.35 to 2.86; F [4,153] = .793: p = .531) or outdoors (range: 2.50 to 2.91; F [4,152] = 1.23; p = .300). The least preferred play context across all ages was alone. Children With and Without Developmental Delays Play preferences of children with developmental delays were compared to those of children with typical development. Mean scores, analysis of variance results, and effect sizes are presented in Table 4. Children in the delayed and non-delayed groups equally preferred gross motor play, but rough-and-tumble play was preferred more by children with developmental delays, demonstrating a moderate effect (d = .52). In the quiet play categories, typically developing children preferred drawing and coloring more than children with developmental delays. For drawing and coloring, there was also an interaction with gender: preferences of boys with developmental delays (m = 2.57) were lower than those of boys with typical development (m = 3.42), but girls were equivalent in the two groups (developmental delays m = 3.13; typical development m = 3.19). In children with developmental delays, preference for doll and action figurine play was significantly less and preference for object exploration was slightly greater than for children without developmental delays. Although pretend play did not differ in these groups, the interaction of age and developmental delay status for pretend play preference was significant. In younger children (3 and 4 years old), those who were typically developing preferred pretend play; this preference reversed by 7 years old when preferences of children with developmental delays were significantly higher than typically developing children for pretend play. Play preferences for these two groups of children are rank ordered in Table 5. The five most preferred play forms for children with typical development were gross motor, drawing and coloring, reading and watching television, construction, and rough-and-tumble play. The five most preferred play forms for children with developmental delays were rough-and-tumble play, gross motor, reading and watching television, drawing and coloring, and construction. Preferred play contexts also differed for the two groups. Although both groups were neutral about playing alone, children with developmental delays showed a lower preference for playing with friends (m = 2.29) than children with typical development (m = 2.93) (F [1,156] = 13.11; p Discussion Gender Comparisons A surprising finding was that boys and girls held the same or similar play preferences. For example, we found no differences between boys and girls in doll and action figurine play or pretend play. In contrast, most of the research literature has concluded that boys and girls prefer different types of play. In older studies (Fagot, 1974, 1978; McDowell, 1937), girls and boys preferred different toys (i.e., girls preferred dolls and house toys, whereas boys preferred blocks and transportation toys). During the preschool and early childhood years, boys are more likely to adopt fantasy and aggressive play (e.g., monsters or fighting) and girls are more likely to play house (Fein, 1981). One possible reason for our finding that boys and girls were similar in play preferences is that we broadly defined doll play to include play with action figurines (e.g., Batman, Spiderman, and robots), which are considered boy toys. With dolls defined this broadly, boys and girls did not differ. In the research literature, pretend play is not the only play category where boys and girls differ. In two studies of children between 4 and 12 years old, boys preferred rough-and-tumble play and girls preferred quiet play (Finegan et al., 1991; Saracho, 1990). Saracho (1990) found that boys are more likely to prefer physical and block play over dramatic and manipulative play, and girls were the reverse. In a review of electronic play, Salonius-Pasternak (2005) reported that boys spend more time in video and computer game play than girls. Our study found no differences between boys and girls in preference for gross motor, rough-and-tumble play, or video game activities. Gym sets, trikes and bikes, and playgrounds were preferred play activities for both genders. When genders are compared, preferences of boys and girls were remarkably similar. Boys were slightly, but not significantly, higher than girls in rough-and-tumble play (d = .26), and other areas that differed in previous studies (e.g., preference for video and computer games and drawing and coloring) were equivalent. The equivocal results between our study and those that preceded it may be explained by their different methodologies (e.g., our survey used parent report and listed both boy and girl examples of the play categories). Gender differences may not exist when broad play categories are measured. Age Comparisons When the ages of the children were compared, three categories showed significant differences across age groups. Rough-and-tumble play increased from 3 to 5 years old, and then decreased from 5 to 7 years old. As preference for rough-and-tumble play decreased, preference for video and computer games increased. Other researchers (Salonius-Pasternak, 2005) have documented the increase in computer game play, which begins at 7 years old and peaks in adolescence. As documented in the literature, pretend play increases during the preschool years (3 to 5 years old) and decreases after 6 years old (Fein, 1981), when rule-governed games begin to dominate play (Parham Primeau, 1997). Other categories showed expected trends, but differences among the age groups were not significant. Gross motor play (defined as bike, trike, tag, and gym set activities) did not decrease across the age groups and was consistently a highly preferred activity. Drawing and coloring, construction, watching television, and reading activities remained somewhat preferred throughout the age range. The development of play skills has been well documented by researchers (Rosenblatt, 1977; Takata, 1969); however, most research has focused on the first 2 to 3 years of life, which is when play skills change dramatically. Our study captured ages during which play preference is stable for certain forms of play and evolving for others. Takata (1969) conceptualized 4 to 7 years old as one play epoch. Dramatic role playing, social role playing, and realistic construction characterize this epoch. Play preferences appear to change substantially after 7 years old, which is when children prefer games with rules and social play in the context of organized games. Our findings regarding the effect of age on play preferences, which were significant but not dramatic, may reflect that our age range was essentially one play epoch (Takata, 1969). Differences Between Children With and Without Developmental Delays In our sample, children with developmental delays were primarily children with sensory integration dysfunction, autism, pervasive developmental disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, or general developmental delays. Children with these diagnoses often have motor planning difficulty, sensory processing problems, and social and communication limitations without frank motor, manipulation, and mobility impairments. The play preferences of children with developmental delays were consistent with the performance limitations associated with these development disorders. Children with developmental delays preferred rough-and-tumble play significantly more than children with typical development. This preference may reflect the sensory needs of children with autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, pervasive developmental disorder, or sensory integration disorder. Rough-and-tumble play, such as wrestling and rough housing, provides children with deep tissue pressure and joint compression, which is the proprioceptive input that helps their systems organize and calm (Baranek, 2002; Blanche Schaaf, 2001). In addition, rough-and-tumble play does not demand fine motor skills or precision performance; it is play in which almost every child can participate and succeed. The other play category in our study preferred significantly more by children with developmental delays was object exploration. Object exploration reflects basic sensory motor play that predominates in children 1 to 3 years old and decreases during the preschool years as more skillful and symbolic play emerges. The higher preference by children with developmental delays probably reflects preference for simpler, lower demand play activities. In other play forms, typically developing children showed higher preference; they preferred drawing and coloring and dolls and action figurines more than children with developmental delays. These play forms require fine motor and manipulative skills, and they require higher levels of cognitive ability, imagination, pretend, and understanding of symbols. In addition, the interaction of pretend play, age, and developmental delay was significant. At younger ages, pretend play was preferred more by children with typical development; this reversed at older ages, when pretend play was preferred more by children with developmental delays. Therefore, the children with developmental delays developed an interest in pretend play at older ages, which is when interest by children with typical development was diminishing. This finding contrasts with that of Sigafoos et al. (1999), who found that children with disabilities did not exhibit play forms beyond sensorimotor and functional play. Our contrasting findings may be explained because the children in our sample were less severely involved. Both groups were neutral (mean range: 1.81 to 2.45) for doll and action figurine play and pretend play. This neutral preference may reflect that the time spent in pretend play is minimal when compared to other play forms. Fein (1981) suggested that preschool children spend between 10% and 17% of their time in pretend play, which reflects only a small portion of boys and girls total play time. Sigafoos et al. (1999) observed that children with developmental delays spent 10% of their time in pretend play. When the types of play are rank ordered by preference, pretend play and doll and action figurine play have the lowest preference scores. Numerous studies have documented differences in play when children with disabilities were compared to children without disabilities. Research demonstrates differences in play skills (Mogford, 1977), object and social play (Sigafoos et al., 1999), and playfulness (Clifford Bundy, 1989; Okimoto et al., 2000). Sigafoos et al. (1999) followed preschool children with developmental disabilities for 3 years and documented that they primarily engaged in exploratory (28%) and functional play (57%) and that these percentages did not change over time. Baranek, Reinhartsen, and Wannamaker (2001) described the play of children with autism as lacking in imitation and imagination, containing fewer play repertoires, exhibiting decreased play organization, and exhibiting limited social play. Their play tends to lack flexibility and creativity (Craig Baron-Cohen, 1999). Functional play seems to dominate in children with autism with minimal evidence of pretend or symbolic play (Libby, Powell, Messer, Jordan, 1998). Differences in children with sensory integration dysfunction have been identified by Parham and Mailloux (2005) and may be more subtle than the differences seen in autism (Desha et al., 2003). The play of children with sensory integration dysfunction is often limited in play scenarios because they avoid certain play experiences that cause sensory feedback discomfort and they have restricted action repertoires due to perceptual difficulties and dyspraxia (Knox, 2005; Parham Mailloux, 2005). Using a sample of preschool age children (4 to 6 years) with sensory integration dysfunction, Clifford and Bundy (1989) did not find significant differences in play materials preferences but did find differences in how the children used toys. Our sample with developmental delays, which included autism, sensory integration dysfunction, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, showed trends similar to the literature in that the children preferred simple play forms (i.e., object exploration and rough-and-tumble play) to more complex and skilled play forms (i.e., drawing and coloring and pretend play). When all play preference categories are ranked, the order of preference differed between groups, but the top five preferences were the same. The primary difference between the groups was in rough-and-tumble play (ranked first for children with developmental delays and fifth for children with typical development). Object exploration was the least preferred for children with typical development and dolls were least preferred for children with developmental delays. Consistent with the literature that describes problems in social play in children with developmental delays, children with typical development had significantly higher preferences for playing with friends (d = .57) than children with developmental delays. Playing alone was significantly more preferred in children with developmental delays. Response to these items may reflect the childs preference or may relate to actual play opportunities and experiences. Delays in communication and social interaction may create barriers for children with developmental delays to play with peers (Baranek et al., 2001; Tanta, 2004). Clinical Implications The findings of our study confirm the importance of physical play because, almost universally, the study participants enjoyed, and often preferred, physical play. At the same time, the participants balanced their preference for physical play with more sedentary play forms, such as reading, watching television, drawing and coloring, and construction. The range of preferences may indicate the need for relaxation as one aspect of play (Parham Primeau, 1997). Children seem to have broad and varied play preferences because 6 of the 11 play forms were rated as somewhat to highly preferred. Individual play preferences appear to be best defined by the player and cannot be assumed based on age, gender, or disability status. Of concern is the preference of children with developmental delays t

Racial Prejudice in French and British Immigration Policy Essay example

Racial Prejudice in French and British Immigration Policy FRANCE AND BRITAIN TODAY ARE SHADOWS OF THE GREAT COLONIAL EMPIRES they once dominated, yet the consequences of their imperial acquisitions continue to linger as both countries seek to moderate the immigration of persons from countries once part of vast imperial collections.   In general, there is little public concern when an immigrant hails from Canada or Australia or another ‘white’ dominion.   It’s a different reaction, however, when it’s a low-skilled black immigrant from Algeria or the Caribbean.   This ‘reaction’ by both the general public and policy-makers results in immigration legislation that unduly discriminates on the basis of race, ethnicity, and national origin. It is recognized that countries cannot have full open-door immigration policies as the effects on national well-being would be staggering.   There is, however, a great deal of latitude for countries to shape policies that provide equal-opportunity for migrants without regard for race, ethnicity, or national origin, or, on the contrary, to enact legislation that discriminates on the basis of these attributes.   In the case of Britain and France during the past 40 years, immigration policies have drifted from the latter to the former, without fully characterizing either of these two extremes. During the latter half of the twentieth century, strong anti-black and anti-minority sentiment has been veiled in the form of anti-immigration stances by leading political parties in both France and Britain.   These positions were regulated in both countries by public sentiment, party power, and the economic well-being of the country.   In the case of France, however, the emergence of the prominent French nat... ..., is not foreseeable. It is lamentable that the immigration policies of France and Britain have become so restrictive during the past 40 years, but one can only hope that the next 40, whether as individual states or in unison as EU members, bring a gradual decline in the racially prejudicial nature of French and British immigration policy.    Works Cited ‘Background to British National Law.’   Britain in the USA.   British Information Services.   19 July 1998.   . Hargreaves, Alec G.   Immigration, ‘Race’ and Ethnicity in Contemporary France.   London:   Routledge, 1995. Miles, Robert.   ‘The Articulation of Racism & Nationalism.’   Racism & Migration in Western Europe.   Ed. John Solomos and John Wrench.   Oxford:   Berg, 1993. Solomos, John.   Race & Racism in Britain.   New York:   St. Martin’s Press, 1993.

201 Task a – Short Answer Questions

201 Task A – Short Answer Questions Ai: Three different sources of information would be found on the internet, through the management and the policy and procedure folder. Aii: a)Three aspects of employment covered by law are Health and Safety, Training and most important a contract, the employee must have a contact of employment. b)Three main features of the current employment legislation are holiday’s entitlement, pay and sick.Aiii: Employment laws exist to protect the best interests of the employees and employers without regulations there would be problems like workers being treated unjustly, unfairly and would cause minimum wages, safe working conditions and discrimination. Task B – Your work role Bi: The terms and conditions of my employment as in my contract are: Names of employee and employer Job title/description Date of employment Hours of work Place of work Remuneration Pensions Holidays Sickness/absences Uniform TrainingDisciplinary Rules Grievance Proc edures Confidentiality Notice Retirement Bii: The information that is needed on my payslip is: Employee number Employee name National insurance number Payment details – Hours, Rate, Tax and Net pay Tax code Date of pay Biii: Two changes of personal information which I would report to my employer would be: Change of name ie. If a marriage or divorce has taken place Change of bank details Biv: The procedure if I wanted to raise a grievance at work would be: The line managerWrite to the head of HR and the Administration at Shaw house An investigation of the facts of the case to obtain any evidence which may be relevant A formal hearing A written decision will be given from the Line Manager and Head of HR and Administration If necessary the right of appeal A note of recording would be placed on my personal file If needed an appeal in writing to a higher authority ie. President and 2 independent nominees and The Chief Executive Written decision to me after a complete investigation of the facts of the case Each stage would be placed on my personal fileBv: 1. Data protection – The major piece of legislation which covers confidential information is the Data Protection Act, the access to Health Records and the access to Personal Files Act. The Data held includes credit and financial information, membership of organisations, medical, health and social services records. 2. Grievance – Failure of procedures ie. See Biv 3. Conflict Management – 4. Anti-discriminatory practice – to prevent race, class, gender etc 5.Health and Safety – The home ensures that reasonable practicable Health and Safety and welfare of its employees and others will work in partnership to take steps to ensure that its statutory duties with regard to safety are met at all time. Training in First Aid, Fire, Moving and Positioning, maintaining the rules of the policies and procedures. 6. Confidentiality – During or after the termination of my employment am I to use or disclose to anyone (other than in the proper course of my employment with the initiation, any information on a confidential nature or protected by Data Protection Act.This relates to Beneficiaries, Supporters of the institution and institution itself. 7. Whistle blowing – In the past, people who have reported colleagues’ actions who they consider have been ill treated, neglected or abused residents have been regarded as troublemakers. Now it’s recognised that staff are likely to observe and report bad practice. A case could be a criminal offence, has been a legal obligate, a miscarriage of justice, an individual as failed the health and safety rules or that the environment has been damaged. Bvii: ) To deliver a high standard of resident care within the legislation and regulations. To maintain the dignity, Privacy and independence of residents. b)To not carry out the requirements of my role would be monitored by my employees, advised on training an d supported to meet the standards. If after an informal discussion and support is not provided a constitutes misconducts the disciplinary procedure will be evoked. Bviii: Codes of Practice – can help with standards of conduct that are expected to meet, to encouraged us to use the Code to examine our own practice and to look for areas in which you can improve.National Occupational Standards – can be used for recruitment and selection, jobs and evaluation, training, learning programmes and performance appraisals. Good employers invest in training the staff in order to remain competitive, provide individuals to improve skills and opportunities for career development. Legislation and Government initiatives – can to make sure those essential quality standards are being bet everywhere care is provided in the home and help to improve.They promote who uses the services and have a wide range of power to take action if services are unacceptably poor. Bix: Two Representati ve’s bodies: 1. Care Quality Commission – Their job is to make sure that care provided by hospitals, dentists, ambulances, care homes and services in people’s own homes and elsewhere meets national standards of quality and safety. 2. Macmillan Nurses: They specialise in cancer treatment and care, supporting people with cancer from the time they are diagnosed.They offer emotional support and practical advice to people with cancer and their families in the UK. They are highly trained in managing pain and other symptoms. Macmillan Nurses work with and advise the District Nurse or primary care team. Task C – Career Path I have been working in residential homes for 20 years. My children are 15 and 12 and are finding them independents, so I’m finding more time for me. At the moment I’m starting my NQV3 in Health and Social care which could lead me into becoming a senior in a few years time.Becoming a senior would mean more responsibly and training in nursing, this will build my confidence. I am keeping my options open for my future, my interests are counselling, caring in the community or work from the NHS as a paramedic technician/escort. Task D – Presentation or report Elderly people could be paying for care fees twice over There are concerns that some elderly people and their families could be paying for long term care twice over, as pre-funded policies bought in the 90s to cover care costs have been forgotten.In the early 90s, several insurers sold 44,000 policies to people mainly in their 60s, to meet the cost of care fees in old age. These policies could be paid for in either regular premiums or in a single lump sum. Most policies were bought by relatively young, healthy people for peace of mind, and in the hope that they would never need to claim. Thousands of families in Britain could be paying for care fees for family members in their 80s or older, unaware that their relative may have taken steps to cover par t of their care cost already.The problem occurs when no one other than the policyholder knows about the pre-funded policy. Some people will now be suffering from dementia so they cannot remember the policy. A policy bought with a single premium over twenty years ago might be forgotten. If the children or person with power of attorney never knew about the plan it might not occur to them to investigate further. So people in care now may pay twice, because no one knows they established a plan some time ago.It would be advisable if family members or attorneys to search for long forgotten pre-funded policies, often issued by companies that have long since been history. There are companies that families can go to, to have peace of mind to know that existing long term care insurance policies are not only uncovered, but claimed on that are determined to pioneer a solution. They hope other providers will appreciate the seriousness of this situation so that together, they can put a process in place so that every person applying for an Immediate Needs Annuity has the opportunity.

The Morality of Using College Essay Consultants

The Morality of Using College Essay Consultants I’m inspired today to address a sticky topic:   the moral issues around getting help with your personal statement/essays for college or MBA admissions. Let me start by saying that The Essay Experts college essay consultants and MBA admissions consultants do NOT write essays for college and business school applicants.   When I get calls requesting that service (and I do get those calls), I have no problem turning down the business. What Do We Do? What do we do at The Essay Expert?   We coach.   We explore ideas.   We help applicants see what is unique about them and their life experiences.   We draw connections.   We suggest directions to take, layers to add, and ways to best impress an admissions committee.   Sure, we also might suggest a few grammatical or organizational corrections.   But in the end, the essay is ALWAYS the client’s essay, NOT ours. Still, there are people who are troubled by the concept of what we do.   Here’s a comment I received after posting a request for a college essay coach: â€Å"†¦ I find this topic/profession very troublesome. Its a slippery slope from coaching a young person about choosing a topic and format and helping them focus to, in effect, writing it for them or do such extensive edits that its no longer the students PERSONAL essay. Yes, Im sure there are essay consultants that put on the brakes, and this one could be one of them, but a position description that is so blatant about the role (take a drab college application essay and turn it into gold!) †¦ gives me pause. Im not naive far from it but of all the pieces in the college application package subject to help, the essay should be the most sacrosanct.† The concerns expressed here are my concerns as well, and my promise is that The Essay Expert does not go down that slippery slope.   Yes, I promise to turn the drab into gold, but by asking key questions of the applicant – not by writing the essay. The NYT and The WSJ Chime In Not long after receiving the above comment, I also came across a New York Times article, Crafting an Application Essay That ‘Pops’, which related the results of a conference attended by nearly 5,000 admissions officers and counselors.   The group, which included professors, admissions officers, and other college administrators, offered nine pieces of practical advice for writing personal statements.   I was happy, and frankly relieved, to see â€Å"Have an editor. All panelists advised having a close, trusted editor and an objective, outside reader.† Soon after, an article came out in The Wall Street Journal with a similar message to M.B.A. applicants:   In Looking for an Edge:   MBA applicants are turning to pricey consultants to help them navigate the daunting admissions process , The WSJ reports that 20% of admitted students say they used an M.B.A. admissions advisor in the application process.   Furthermore, the article relates, â€Å"As the consulting industry has grown, some business schools have become more accepting of it.† In fact, the managing director of M.B.A. admissions and financial aid at Harvard Business School uses admissions consultants as a resource â€Å"to ‘get some field intelligence’ about how prospective students view the school and its admissions process.† The Difference We Make It is unquestionable that having a talented editor can give applicants an edge.   And not everyone has a family member, guidance counselor or close friend who can serve as an editor or consultant.   That’s where The Essay Expert comes in.   Indeed, what we offer that a friend or relative cannot, is an objective eye and the perspective of someone who has read dozens, if not hundreds, of essays.   We will make sure your essay does not sound like anyone else’s. It is especially difficult to find a reliable advisor for M.B.A. admissions, where very specialized knowledge of business schools and their admissions processes is key to choosing the right essay focus and application strategy. In fact, one of our recent clients had enrolled several business school graduate friends to review his essays, yet still required ten hours of our consultant’s time to retool just two of his essay sets. Lingering Questions I understand there is still an issue present.   What about people who don’t know someone who can help, and who also can’t afford to hire someone? I am concerned about that point myself, and do provide assistance to a limited number of clients for a reduced fee or some type of trade.   I don’t believe I have been contacted by anyone thus far whom I turned away solely due to lack of ability to pay. I’m curious to hear your thoughts on this topic. Admissions officers seem to have accepted that many applicants use paid consultants to assist them with the admissions process. Does this fact allay any of the concerns you might have had? I believe The Essay Expert provides an extremely valuable service and that we do not cross the ethical line that would have students presenting an essay that is not theirs. And we do help students transform pedantic or blah essays into stories that capture the hearts and minds of the admissions committee.