Not exact matches
The interview format used by the Oliner team had
over 450 items and consisted of six main parts: a) characteristics of the family household in which respondents lived in their early years, including relationships among family members; b) parental
education, occupation, politics, and religiosity, as well as parental values, attitudes, and disciplinary approaches; c) respondent's childhood and adolescent years -
education, religiosity, and friendship patterns, as well as self - described personality characteristics; d) the five - year period just prior to the war — marital status, occupation, work colleagues, politics, religiosity, sense of community, and psychological closeness to various groups of people; if married, similar questions were asked about the spouse; e) the immediate prewar and war years, including employment, attitudes toward Nazis, whether Jews lived in the neighborhood, and awareness of Nazi intentions toward Jews; all were asked to describe their wartime lives and activities, whom they helped, and organizations they
belonged to; f) the years after the war, including the present — relations with children and personal and community — helping activities in the last year; this section included forty - two personality items comprising four psychological scales.
Fifth, Piper highlights the controversy
over Confederate memorials which «too many of us feel like they
belong in a museum for
education instead of on a pedestal for celebration.»
Rodriguez thus
belongs to a long line of federal cases emphasizing the value of state and local control
over public
education.
But White speaks for many anti-Common Core parents around the country when she notes: «We've already been through eight years of «transformational change» in public
education and we don't need any more... I want a [n] Education] Secretary to hand off responsibility over education to the parents where it belongs... Yet, here is DeVos «ensuring» me of «opportunities» for my children — whom she doesn't know — in order to make sure she can benevolently «give» my kids what they need to fulfill their «highest potential» — which is MY jo
education and we don't need any more... I want a [n]
Education] Secretary to hand off responsibility over education to the parents where it belongs... Yet, here is DeVos «ensuring» me of «opportunities» for my children — whom she doesn't know — in order to make sure she can benevolently «give» my kids what they need to fulfill their «highest potential» — which is MY jo
Education] Secretary to hand off responsibility
over education to the parents where it belongs... Yet, here is DeVos «ensuring» me of «opportunities» for my children — whom she doesn't know — in order to make sure she can benevolently «give» my kids what they need to fulfill their «highest potential» — which is MY jo
education to the parents where it
belongs... Yet, here is DeVos «ensuring» me of «opportunities» for my children — whom she doesn't know — in order to make sure she can benevolently «give» my kids what they need to fulfill their «highest potential» — which is MY job.»
That little A has been popping up all
over the place, and for many, it's been prompting a question: Do the arts
belong in STEM
education?
If that seems like something out of the ancient past in an age of hundred - million - dollar lawsuits
over your phone's bezel design, students can also come to see that
education retains an «exceptional» status within intellectual property law that promotes learning through fair use rights (copyright), experimental exceptions (patents), and an academic exception that recognizes the special contribution of teachers and scholars in creating intellectual property that does not simply and automatically
belong to their employer (both).