Sentences with phrase «as discussion points»

Many of these same faculty members also used video examples of classroom teaching as illustrations and as discussion points.

Printable teacher guides are available to help you expand on the material by way of prior knowledge and follow - up questions, as well as discussion points and expected student responses.

Photos are all high quality and could be used as discussion points, writing prompts or as an introduction to a topic.

In addition a number of the visuals have questioning prompts on them that you can use as discussion points and for peer assessment.

He said since the formulas for stats that were brought up were unknown, they would not be allowed to use them as discussion points in the room.

Absolute nonsense, so this site is being abused by people to ramble on about anything they want regardless of what people put up as discussion points.

You can either give the card away to each teen, or let them choose a card that calls to them, and use it as a discussion point.

A resource designed as a discussion point about safeguarding.

This is a great tool for using with staff as a discussion point with new learners with SEN needs.

So I think that it's fair to leave these factors as a discussion point for pushing the final figure upwards or downwards but I wouldn't compute them in the climate sensitivity calculation.

Privacy and protection of information is a complex and rapidly developing legal field and the above post is meant as a discussion point and is not in any way a complete statement of the myriad issues that lawyers must be aware of in order to discharge their responsibilities in regards to privacy and protection of information.

Not exact matches

This agenda should reiterate the purpose of the meeting, as well as provide a clear set of discussion points or action items to tackle as a group.

The point, rather, is how Facebook handles painful controversies like these: generally, with as little public discussion as possible.

In a heated discussion on Reddit this week, social engineer Chris Hadnagy, who tests the network security of companies using tactics such as phishing and keylogging scams, shared his tips on cybersecurity from a hacker's point of view.

A White House official pointed to trade as part of a «bigger picture» for the economy, with cabinet - level discussions described as «deliberative» and the President focused on doing right by American workers.

What it's about: «Sargeant York» may have been about World War I — a sharpshooter becomes an unexpected hero after attacking and capturing a German position using the same strategy as turkey hunting — but the American - proud movie became a point of major discussion in the United States over the merits of entering World War II.

During a panel discussion as part of the South by Southwest Festival's interactive program, Denton admitted that the Hogan story — which was about a sex tape that the wrestler made with a friend's ex-wife, and included a short clip from the tape — didn't have an obvious point to it, apart from embarrassing Hogan.

She noted that with the $ 15 minimum wage (a frequent point of comparison in the discussion) Safeway chose to absorb the cost of the minimum wage instead of cutting jobs or passing the costs on to consumers, but that made Seattle Safeway stores» profit margin half as much as stores in other locations.

This is not a discussion of whether Bitcoin is fraudulent or not, this comes down to a discussion of whether collectively as individuals at this point in history we want to put our faith in a currency backed by a centralized system or decentralized system.

P.s., Understanding the previous discussion of the restaurant microeconomics depends on the reader understanding these points which I raised in my post on Michael Porter (his quotes are in bold and mine are in plain text as is usual):

Privacy, freedom of speech, and financial security remain major discussion points as the Government dips its feet into the world of virtual currency.

You know, this was something that came up originally as a means to make a political point when there were substantive discussions around Senate reform a long, long time ago.

For the purposes of this discussion that is taken as a premise since the OP seemed willing to concede it for his / her point.

I should point out the links I posted elsewhere aren't to «scientific hypotheses» but rather web pages that cite sources for studies or as reference to their discussions.

This discussion masy be too simplistic; and yet it points to the basic problem of the Western epistemology as an act of rational domination.

If sociologists have tended to center on the foregoing argument and to single out work as the basis of their assessment of our present inability to play authentically, theologians and philosophers have tended to: focus upon a second area: America's distorted value structure that has accepted as true the «mindscape» of technology 48 This is Theodore Roszak's phrase, and his discussion can perhaps serve as a helpful starting point.

Whitehead did work out a complex theory of value, but my point here is only to indicate that Whitehead's way of understanding human beings as part of nature both requires that we extend the ethical discussion and gives us clues as to how to do this.

The point of this whole discussion, as far as I'm concerned, is that we are ALL selective in our interpretation and application of Scripture.

Surely much more thought and honest discussion between Christians is needed on this point, as well as a more realistic appraisal of the actual demonstrated methods of Jesus.

As to our three discussion points: 2) I think we have basically agreed here that we may have both been guilty of putting things in that may not be able to be backed up.

In the context of the present discussion, the same point could be posed as helping people to discipline themselves in such a direction that love is increasingly the criterion of their decisions.

And, as David pointed out — that's a good discussion point.

I remember as a child hearing adults have very animated discussions over various points of theology, then sit down and eat together once the argument was over.

In the present field of discussion the only points of certainty seem to be these: (a) both creation and redemption establish the equality of men and women before God, as both image bearers and children of God through Christ (Gen. 1:26 - 27; Gal.

Now, if we accept «being opposed to war for any reason» as a working definition, I would say, I do agree with some of your points in your discussion with MarkR, but disagree with much of your basic premises.

Unless the discussion in the preceding pages has entirely failed to make its point, it will be plain that what is being proposed in this book is (as I have said) a «de-mythologizing» of the inherited notions of «life after death», with their (to many of us) impossible assertions; and also the «re-mythologizing» — or better, the re-conceiving — of their implicit intention so that we may have a valid way of affirming the value and worth of human existence, its significance and importance for God, and its preservation in God as a reality which has affected the divine life and in God has acquired an enduring quality which nothing can take away.

Just as in scientific discussion, which makes no sense without a presupposed truth, moral inquiry has no point apart from a presupposed objective right.

Let us illustrate this point of view toward which our whole discussion has been moving by looking briefly at the sacraments of the Church, the Christian meeting of death, and the Christian life of active service as expressions of the way which is enclosed in the grace of this kind of community.

(7) He sets the tone by paying attention to the contributions of others, perhaps of reflecting what they are saying with, «Let's see if I understand what you mean...» (8) He helps build group - centered (as contrasted with self - centered) contributions by his linking function in which he points to the relationships among various individuals» contributions to the discussion.

The point is not that the preaching is to be a discussion of moral issues, such as might be entirely appropriate in a lecture or discussion - group; rather, the preaching is both a challenge to and a demand for a response which will represent in act that requirement of love in action in the world.

In any event, the point of this chapter, intended to prepare the way for further discussion of what I have styled «another» (and I am convinced a better) theological approach, is simply to insist that we can only be loyal to our ancestors in the Christian tradition, but above all loyal to the chief stress in the faith which that tradition has conveyed to us, if and when and as we are ready to put stress on love's centrality — and to use that as our key to the whole theological enterprise.

In the meantime, I encourage you to read Torn, and we'll use it as a starting point for future discussions.

The point of this discussion is not to give a lesson in physics, but to help the reader view the universe as composed of events rather than things.

But as we will see in the discussion of this point, such a belief can not be defended from Scripture, reason, or experience.

Some of Allman's discussion illustrates this point (section A. 2), as does later material (in B. 10).

Let me digress for a moment from the main course of the discussion to observe that this last point must be kept in mind as an answer to a possible objection to Peirce's account.

This last point is suggested in a number of Peirce's discussions, particularly in his accounts of the function of the sciences (see, for instance, 1.191) as well as in his references to the goal of rational conduct which is the summum bonum (e.g., 5.4 - 5, 5.433).

We can summarize the discussion up to this point by saying that the literary form of Mark's tomb pericope shows definite signs of having developed in three stages, consisting of two appendices with one third final addition (leaving aside the fact that in the second century a still further addition of Mark 16:9 — 20 was made) and that because of this, it may not have been part of the author's original plan as he set out to write his Gospel.

Although there are obvious affinities between my reasoning and the thought of Teilhard de Chardin, his discussion of the body of Christ focuses rather upon the individual Christian's incorporation within Christ as the Omega point toward which all creation moves.

Such anthropological discussion and hoped for actions are somewhat more specific than, though overlapping with, the more theological dialogue proposed by the Islamic scholars who suggest the call to «total devotion» to the one God as our starting point.