Discover Mexicos Giant Crystal Cave

The Effects Of School Lunch Programs On Children s Nutrition

School lunch programs supplement children’s nutrition needs and without them many children would go hungry, be malnourished and lack the fuel needed to learn. Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, passed into law by President Barack Obama, reauthorized funding of the original Child Nutrition Act of 1966. Changes impacting not only the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs but also Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), Summer Food Service Program, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and Child and Adult Care Food Programs. The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, for the first time in over 30 years, reformed school lunch and breakfast programs thereby improving nutrition for†¦show more content†¦The video, a parody of a well-known current song, cites the statistic that active teens require 2000-5000 calories a day to meet their growth and energy needs (You Tube, n.d.). Children in the video, undernourished from too few calories, fall down and crawl in fatigue. Limiting the lunch meal to 850 calories, required by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, is more than sufficient. Active male teens need between 2,800 to 3,200 calories a day while sedentary teens only need 2000. Athletic male teens need the high end of calories with 2000-5000 (Coleman, n.d.). If 2000- 4000 calories a day were needed, which is likely for the majority of teens, and those calories were divided between 3 meals and 2 snacks a day, the lunch meal would only need to consist of 400-800 calories; well within the range specified in the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010. Children in America are experiencing an epidemic where obesity and obesity-related disease is staggering, not only for adults, but also for children. The CDC reports, â€Å"childhood obesity has more than doubled in children and quadrupled in adolescents over the last 30 years. In 2012 more than one third of children and adolescents were overwei ght or obese† (CDC, 2014). This generation’s life expectancy is predicted to be the first in history to be less than their parents; they will be sicker and die younger (The New England Journal of Medicine, as cited in the New

The Seedling of Political PhilosophyPlato!!!! Essay Example For Students

The Seedling of Political PhilosophyPlato!!!! Essay Tara Political PhilosophyDecember 3,1998Option 1The Seedling of Political PhilosophyPlato!!!!!!!!Political philosophys are the theories and ideas of those who believe that they have an answer to the questions that politics raise in society. The questions that these political philosophers set out to answer range from describing what the state of nature is to what type of regimes are necessary to tame and organize the nature of man.The ideas that they come up with are not all that original. Plato, an early political philosopher and student of Socrates, set out to come up with a society that would function properly.His ideal society would consist of rulers, guardians, and the masses. All of which are molded at a young age to play a societal role in order to contribute to the betterment of their social arena. Plato has gone down in history as one of the better political philosophers to ever live, and arguably the best. While looking at what a society needs, he was able to recognize the n eeds of a society as well as the needs of the individual. He #humbled the ego of man, when he acknowledged that one individual could not survive on his own and that all people are dependent on others to survive. His idea of an organized community has been the focus of many political philosophy debates and has been a stepping stone from which many philosophers have created their own ideal social environment. Though their theories may not be identical to Platos, signs of his structures are definitely evident. Thomas Hobbes, a political philosopher in the seventeenth century, had many theories and ideas that seemed to have coincided with Platos thoughts.Hobbes view of the state of nature was a very primitive one. He felt that in the state of nature there was a war of every man against every man to survive. In the natural state, justice was impossible, because without set limits and structures, everyone has the rights to everything and anarchy is almost inevitable.The only way to escape the unfortunate fate of anarchy would be for everyone to agree to a covenant. In this covenant, all the people would give up their rights and create a sovereign. The conditions of the covenant was to give the sovereign full discretion in dealing with citizens. It was up to the sovereign to protect the lives of the citizens. Quite ironically, the sovereign also had the right to have any citizen #killed. Fortunately, the citizens did not give up their right to fight back and were allowed to, usually to no avai l. As long as the sovereign was keeping the majority of citizens alive and maintaining absolute power, the covenant would be considered successful and a civil society would have been created. The covenant proposed in Leviathan, was meant to help keep the common good of peace. As long as people werent killing each other the common good was being reached and the monarchy was considered successful. If people continued to kill each other the covenant of the absolute sovereign would be looked upon as tyranny. This is clearly comparable to Platos theory of a civil society. Plato pointed out how no one person could survive by them self or without the help of a controlled civil society. Hobbes takes Platos idea of men dependent upon other men, to extremes when he reveals that men will kill each other in order to survive. WHY? Because other people have what we need in order to maintain our lives, whether it be property, food or etc. But why do we need a civil society? Hobbes, again is playing off Platos acknowledgement of the selfishness of man. Because people are selfish and are willing to do whatever it takes to live, they are going to violate others in order to better themselve s. Only in a #society where restrictions and laws are placed upon people, will people begin to work with one another instead of against one another in the effort to survive together and use the resources and expertise that each person has to offer. Though Hobbes way of governing this communal society is a bit different than Plato, it still stems from the same premise. The sovereign that Hobbes describes will be given complete discretion and is trusted to act on what is best for the overall community. Likewise, Platos rulers are trusted to bring the community together in the hopes of making a strong and flourishing civil society. A definite difference between the two rulers of Hobbes and Plato is that Platos ruler would be naturally picked by the individuals inherent wisdom. His ruler would be someone who was born wise and meant to be in the ruling position. Hobbes ruler would be someone who the citizens picked and acknowledged as the absolute sovereign in the societies covenant. Alexis De Tocqueville, a political philosopher of the nineteenth century, is another good example of a philosopher whos ideas where simply branches of Platos philosophical roots. Coming from an aristocracy in France, De Tocqueville went to America to study the prison system. Instead of following through with this study, he found himself intrigued with the political #system that occupied America. His work, Democracy in America, became a political comparison between Aristocracy and Democracy. Instead of looking at the behavior of people in the primitive state of nature, like Plato and Hobbes, he focused on the present and what would be the best political structure for the societies that people were currently in. This way of building his political beliefs was different than Platos and Hobbes way of coming up with their theories, but was still effective in helping him analyze what type of societal structure would most effectively contribute to the common good of each communities individu als. Should voting be compulsory in Australia? EssayKarl Marx, a political philosopher from the nineteenth #century, is another very well known philosopher. Just like Plato, Hobbes and De Tocqueville, Marx had a vision of how a community that is segregated by social classes could possibly take up a new governmental structure that would best help all the citizens of the society, not just the aristocracies of the area. His ideal society would be classless.Marx saw societys structure to be a result of history, that would eventually smooth its way out. The beginning means to his plan of the classless society would commence when a movement towards ending capitalism took effect. He saw capitalism as a way in which the bourgeoisie exploited their workers in order to increase the value of their productions. Unfortunately for capitalism, it had a lethal and self-destructive characteristic that would bring an end to it. This ruinous trait was its voracious need to compete and dominate the product ion market. The competition of the producers to produce more and in turn exploit their workers more, would eventually cause some of the producers to go out of business. With less competition there would be more lower level and oppressed proletarians. The effect of having more proletarians than middle class citizens changed the society from being a capitalist community to a community of socialism. Eventually, this ever changing society would change from socialist environment #to a classless society. Marx held firmly that industrialism would be the key to the classless society. He calculated that more machines bearing the brunt of production would liberate humans from the harsh labor that they had endured. Because machines can produce more in a shorter period of time than humans, he speculated that their would be enough produce to allow everyone to live a generous life. Hence, everyone would have an equal means to a good life and the society would turn from an aristocracy to a classle ss society. This classless atmosphere would be a communist environment where no one person owns land, but instead the property and goods produced on property would be custody of the state, not the individuals of the state. Karl Marxs theory of the state being the owner of all property, in a sense, put all people in the state on an equal level. Because the state owned all the produce and property, they were able to distribute the goods to all the citizens. This would reassure that all citizens well-beings were being met, thus the common good would be attained. Because of Marxs sensitivity towards the proletariat class and their needs, as well as the needs of the middle class, his theories were merely concepts that would help meet the common good #of the state as a whole, not just the elite. Marxs mentality is what puts him in the same class as Plato, Hobbes and De Tocqueville. He sought a means towards improving the community; communism was the final concept he came up with, that he felt could enhance the living styles of all the people within his social arena. The ideas of Hobbes, De Tocqueville and Marx were all ways of making the means meet with an end. They all sought to provide a communal environment where all citizens could live without bias. Though Hobbes sought a monarchy, with one sovereign to lead the state, and De Tocqueville discovered that what is good for one state is not necessarily good for another and Marx founded a communist government he thought would best work for his state; doesnt mean that they did not all share a common goal. It is obvious through their thoughts and words that each of these philosophers focused an immense amount of their attention towards forming the perfect political structures to manage the citizens of their states with. All three of them shared the same goal, their goal was to seek out the finest solutions that would resolve the dilemmas that their states faced, they were all on a quest for the common good. The only thing that separates these writers is the means they used, in an attempt to satisfy the endthe #common good. Plato was the earliest of all the presented philosophers. His ideas and aspirations were all based on the knowledge that he acquired from his teacher, Socrates, and his own experiences. His thoughts of pursuing a common good for a community of people, not just for an individual, were foundational thoughts that had a drastic carry through on political philosophers that would follow. Hobbes, De Tocqueville and Marx have had noteworthy effects on the political systems that have emerged; but I can say with confidence, that at the root of their philosophical writings, is the seedling that Plato first planted. Platos thoughts were the first seedlings and roots in the search for the common good. Hobbes, De Tocquevilles and Marxs writings are the branches that have flourished from Platos seedlings. The ideas and theories of political philosophy owe a great deal to Plato. Without Platos initial seedlings, we wouldnt have the strong foundation that has allowed us to obtain the means which has allowed us to come even closer to achieving the ultimate common good of society.

The leadership Journey of Every Leader Free Sample for Students

Question: Write a Report on 21st Century Leadership. Answer: Introduction From the last 25 years, there has been a lot of change in the business environment which has changed the way business is conducted. The technological modernization, and its regular improvement, and the advent of the internet have augmented the speed of globalization. It has fetched a grid of knowledge-based culture, which is inter-linked through online applications (Barnes, 2010). As with the significance of this varying business backgrounds on leadership are that there is a necessity to express the new requirements for the 21st century leadership. This report will outline the critical literature review on the 21st century Leadership. It will summarize the leadership theories with the traditional theories and will contrast, compare and critically analyses the academic research on the topic of 21st century leadership. Literature Review The 21st century leadership definition can be sketched, as, collaboration procedure amongst the leader, the atmosphere and the admirers. It is now a procedure that contains the preparation of the apparitions due to assimilated situational information and combines admirers to conjointly accomplish these visualizations. Numerous classifications, explanations, theories and definitions have been done by scholars and researchers about the leadership of 21st century. Substantial effort has been done in classifying and clarifying the diverse magnitudes of active leadership and thus producing a significant managerial research of leadership patterns and performances (Bush, 2012). Many examiners of leadership traits have established consent that the development of thinking over the years has created a certainty that leadership is an adaptable and accommodating development course (Burns, 2012). Literature about leadership exposes that concepts of leadership have been redefined and altered with the way of time and none of the concept is entirely unrelated (Davies, 2002). The 21st century type of leadership applied in the functions of organizations entails a high grade of accuracy, sensitivity, self-assurance level, care and practical expertise that is unlike from the traditional and simple management oriented portfolios. According to Gilbert 2000, the understanding of leadership initiates with methodical supervision that outlines the progression of leadership philosophies through the superiority movement on the ethnic based, morals based, and trust-constructed relationship models. The author stated that people are spiritual by nature and leaders in the 21st century have to embrace a leadership style that has to be based on the traditional models beside with the emphasis on beliefs, communal, facility and religiousness (Guthrie and Callahan, 2016). Ciulla 2004 stated that respectable leadership has to be evaluated on two magnitudes, namely, ethically good and technologically effective. However, the problem is in finding the both qualities in the same person. The study of Ciulla stated that issue is not that the leaders should be held to high moral standard but they have to hold to the same standard with the rest of the staffs or people (Guthrie and Callahan, 2016). We usually hope that leaders who hav e a higher rate of success have high standards than the average person. An effective leader is one who is can bring the change in a positive way. With various examples that range from Machiavelli to Mahatma Gandhi, the study of Ciulla states that leadership requires a mixture of humility and confidence (Hill and Stephens, 2005). A good leadership is a call for the individuals who are confident enough to ask for help and can admit that they are wrong and can invite discussion and debate with their followers and superiors. Leadership theory can be progressed from the philosophy that leaders are natural or designed by nature to be in their character at a specific time to a replication of convinced traits that predict a prospective for leadership (Davies, 2002). The maturity or group would control the most of the operational style of leadership. The established four styles of leadership that are of participating, selling, delegating and selling have the significance of the styles with the maturity level of subordinates. In the article, the challenges of leadership in the modern world 2007, author Bennis and Warren reflected on the modern tendencies in the leadership model and its present eminence and social background (Leadership for 21st century learning, 2013). The author has confidence in that a good leadership has emotional impact the condition of his or her followers lives. The article stated that leadership is eventually about the standards and every leader has a schedule, an ambition and determina tion to accomplish that ambition grounded on the basis of his or her standards (Leadership for 21st century learning, 2013). Thus principles are measure of the every framework of leadership. But according to Duggar 2009, people with truthfulness are demarcated as ones that can be considered as leaders (Leadership for 21st century learning, 2013). At the corporate levels, integrity is about leaders that have developed a corporate culture that provides consistency, trust and predictable results. The leadership journey of every leader start with the understanding of their own life tales. Dependable leaders structure their tales in unique ways that permit them to see themselves not as impassive spectators but as persons who learns from the involvements. These leaders take a time to scrutinize their understandings and in doing so they grow themselves as a leader. The leadership growth for the 21st century is all-inclusive (Kelly, 2006). It is centered in collections or societies rather than persons that engage the group in emotion (O'Connell, 2014). From the 21st century point of view, leaderships expansion changes from separate focused to share focused. It has changed from separate leadership growth platforms to leadership platforms that are entrenched in existing issues recognized by the contributors in the course. In the 21st century, the utmost effective leaders will struggle on supporting superior portrayal by bring into line the publics around work and ethics and bestowin g leaders at all stages while having concentration on helping the consumers and cooperate with each other within and all the way through the establishments (Morrison, 2007). Leaders in the modern era have to achieve their intent for the organization with a strong focus on integrity, ethics that must be built on the foundation of values, all of which are necessary for long term success and corporate sustainability. Leadership can be observed, as the separate and communal response to alter the world for improved. For the current challenging business situation, the knowledge of leadership approach is very much important for the unforeseen and unprecedented events (O'Connell, 2014). Leadership has become very important for todays business due to its enormous complexity and accelerating change. The 21st century leadership is the viewpoint of leadership that aims to revert on the current business challenges and opportunities. With the long-drawn-out standard of leadership, it assimilates the concepts and customs from a widespread range of restraints and customs to substitute the applied acquaintance and transformative modification in the service of the world. The 21st century leadership is more than the activities, personalities and patterns of personalities (Penney, 2011). It is now viewed as the process in which everyone participates. The appearance of this viewpoint of leadership includes a full range of morals and adopts a variety of dimensions. The 21st century form of leadership has the capabilities and services which are endorsed in the various activities of life in framed ways. These embrace the perilous, inventive and structures thinking, communication, self-awareness and facilitation of the team and its combined procedures (Penney, 2011). For developing this view point of leadership, an overall orientation is necessary that must contain inward and outward alignment in including the person that is affianced in the system. In 21st century, the prosperous leaders will emphasis on nourishing superiority presentation by assigning and by bringing people into line with mission and standards authorizing them at all stages while directed on helping the consumers (Leadership for 21st century learning, 2013). Customary leaders thought that they could explain the difficulty of aligning with rule books and training platforms but where shocked when people deviated. The 21st century leaders enable the leaders of all stages joined with cultured responsibility to safeguard that the assurances are met. To promote the value based leadership, 21st century leadership has to establish a leadership culture of integrity. This entails weaving values and ethics in decision making process and considering the interests not only for the stock holders but also for the stockholders of the industries (Slavkin, 2010). The 21st century leaders are proactively capturing the knowledge of traditional leadership theories in order to gene rate the visions. Organization in this century is exposed to the external dynamism. The only way to be competitive and sustainable in the current business environment is by remaining flexible on all levels of the organization. Conclusion In summary, the 21st century leadership can be described as the varied and integrative dimensional opinion of leadership that is grounded in associations. With shared views and objectives, leadership brings new ways of being, knowing and doing while acknowledging the development nature of human life. The 21st century leadership is focused on towards collective provision, the social upright and maintaining balance to individuals and environment. The study concluded that the 21st century leadership has the capabilities and services which are endorsed in the various activities of life in framed ways such as thinking, communication, self-awareness and facilitation of the team and its combined procedures. References Barnes, J. (2010). Extending traditional 21st-century leadership skills. Journal of Leadership Studies, 3(4), pp.111-112. Burns, J. (2012). Leadership. 1st ed. New York, NY: Open Road Integrated Media. Bush, T. (2012). Leadership and Research in the 21st Century. Educational Management Administration Leadership, 40(4), pp.421-422. Davies, A. (2002). Focus on LeadershipServant-Leadership for the 21st Century. Long Range Planning, 35(4), pp.434-436. Guthrie, K. and Callahan, K. (2016). Liberal Arts: Leadership Education in the 21st Century. New Directions for Higher Education, 2016(174), pp.21-33. Hill, R. and Stephens, D. (2005). The Multiplicity of Selves and Selves Management: A Leadership Challenge for the 21st Century. Leadership, 1(1), pp.127-140. Kelly, S. (2006). Leadership Refrains: Patterns of Leadership. Leadership, 2(2), pp.181-201. Leadership for 21st century learning. (2013). 1st ed. Paris: OECD. Morrison, A. (2007). Leadership diversity and leadership challenge. Leadership in Action, 12(3), pp.1-4. O'Connell, P. (2014). A simplified framework for 21st century leader development. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(2), pp.183-203. Penney, S. (2011). Voices of the future: Leadership for the 21st century. Journal of Leadership Studies, 5(3), pp.55-62. Slavkin, H. (2010). Leadership for health care in the 21st Century: A personal perspective. Journal of Healthcare Leadership, p.35.