Supermarkets in United Kingdom Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Supermarkets in United Kingdom - Essay Example Although the supermarkets claim to provide a wide range of options for their shopping but the prices that they charge on their products and the pressure given to the suppliers has created certain predicaments in the market. The four giants in the UK supermarket are Tesco, Sainsbury’s, Asda and Morrison. In addition to the planning controls by the government for taking care of the pressures felt by the suppliers in the retail industry, it has restricted the expansion plans of the four giants in the market (Grugulis, Bozkurt and Clegg, 2). Despite the recession happening in the country and decrease in the consumer’s spending, the food and retail industries are showing exponential growth; the main credit goes to the four giants in the supermarket industry who are opening numerous stores at an accelerating rate (Neate, 1). The report by Corporate Commission has indicated that Tesco, Sainsbury’s, Asda and Morrison have been successful in getting permission from the co ncerned authorities to expand into other areas by opening up new stores. The report also highlighted the threat the expansion of these large supermarkets posed to the convenience stores, local grocery stores and specialty stores. The study of Clerren et al. revealed that the large supermarkets are doing expansion on such an increasing rate so that they can get more market share as compared to their competitors and it is expected that the trend will continue so because of the support that they are receiving by the UK government (470-471). Grocery Market of UK The IGD research has shown that in the past ten years, the grocery market of UK has been growing at an exponential rate and the number of large supermarkets has risen to an exceptionally high figure (Li, 2). In 2008, the grocery market had reached ?146.3bn from ?93.3bn in the year 1998. Afterwards, the market has seen numerous uncertainties in the form of less consumer spending power, high rate of unemployment, financial crisis and many more. As of 2008, the UK grocery store has been divided into four major sectors i.e. convenience store; hypermarket, superstore and supermarkets; online channel and traditional retail. Among all the sectors, the huge market is of hypermarket, superstore and supermarkets and these comprise of more than 73% of the entire sales of the grocery market, followed by convenience stores’ sector that has 21% of the total sales; however, traditional retail faces stiff competition from the aforementioned two sectors and it has declined to 5% (Michaels, 1). According to the Corporate Watch, the four biggest supermarket chains in the UK market comprise of Tesco, Sainsbury’s, Asda and Morrison and they collectively constitute of about 68% of the complete grocery market (3). Tescopoly has shown that the grocery market share can be distributed as the traditional retail stores and supermarket chains; the market share is divided as 30% of Tesco, 15% of Asda, 14% of Sainsburyâ₠¬â„¢s, and Morrison of 10%. Other supermarket chains that are included in UK grocery market are Marks and Spence, Iceland, Waitrose, Whole Foods Market, Aldi, Lidl and many more (Vasquez-Nicholson, 3). Porter has reported that the disclosed sales figure of the four large supermarket chains in the last financial year are as follows, Tesco ?3.8billion, Asda

Wegman's Supermarkets Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Wegman's Supermarkets - Essay Example This makes it easy for the supermarket personnel know their various roles and responsibilities. Owing to its fewer layers of leadership, it also gives employees an idea of who to answer to (Berkun 78). Because projects are carried out within one department, it is easier for the unit to supervise the whole project. Departments are given the autonomy to determine the project targets and are, therefore, able to exercise complete control on the outcome of these projects. Berkun argues that enables the various projects to be designed according to departmental needs (78). In addition, the feeling of having absolute control over projects encourages creativity and offers a favorable work environment (Kloppenborg 103). Research indicates that decisions can be made quicker when people share similar perspectives than when they differ fundamentally. This model, therefore, leads to faster decisions and leaves little room for antagonism since the decisions are always made by an authoritative figure at Wegman’s supermarkets. Because this model clusters people of similar professions and ideals together, it encourages free communication between them. This leads to knowledge and skill sharing among the supermarket’s staff (Kloppenborg 104). Rather than spend unnecessarily on expensive capacity building workshops, the supermarket uses its experienced senior managers and supervisors to offer apprenticeship trainings to the less experienced employees. This leads to a more comprehensive and solid project execution. Wegman’s Supermarkets follow a functional structure because it gives the other team members a definite and clear corporate ladder for the supermarket’s employees to pursue. Because project managers are mostly drawn from a pool of experts in various domains, these managers are exceptionally gifted in their fields and this makes it easy for them

Theories of Leadership in Sports Coaching

Theories of Leadership in Sports Coaching Introduction Main Section The application of Chelladurai’s (2001) Multidimensional Model of Leadership The Multi-dimensional Model of Leadership (MML) (Chelladurai 1978,1990,1993,2001 cited in Riemer, 2007) is a framework which builds on research from non-sporting settings in order to analyse effective leadership in sport. MML demonstrates how success in leadership is influenced by many different factors (Riemer, 2007). The main objective of the leader/coach is to bring about high levels of performance and satisfaction in the athlete (OU 16-1, 2013). To achieve this, three ‘antecedents’ must be taken into account: situational characteristics (the environment in which the leader is performing); leader characteristics (eg personality, experience, education); and athlete characteristics (e.g. age, gender, skill level, background) (Riemer, 2007). These three antecedents produce three types of leader behaviour: ‘required’, ‘actual’ and ‘preferred’ behaviour (OU 16-1.3, 2013). MML shows that a leader/coach’s `actual` behaviour is affected both by his awareness of the athlete’s `preferred` behaviour and by the behaviour `required` of him by the coaching context. For example, an elite tennis player may question coaching methodology and seek more input into training. The coach may modify his/her behaviour accordingly. At the same time the coach will be limited by the constraints of the regional governing body regulations when selecting a county team. The coach’s actual behaviour will also be influenced by his/her character traits and skill/knowledge base (Riemer, 2007). Thus, a mature golf professional, who has recently increased her knowledge base by attending a video analysis seminar, may modify her leadership behaviour to involve the use of smart phone apps in her efforts to improve feedback to the athlete. Chelladurai (1978, 1990, 1993, 2001 cited in Riemer, 2007) states that when the three types of leader behaviour (`required`, `actual`, and `preferred`) complement and sustain one and other, athlete performance and satisfaction levels will increase. Athlete preferred behaviour is influenced by a combination of athlete characteristics and situational characteristics (Riemer, 2007). Most studies into preferred coaching behaviour have used the Leadership Scale for Sport (LSS), which was developed by Chelladurai and Saleh (1980, cited in OU 17.1, 2013). The LSS measures five leadership dimensions: training and instruction; social support; positive feedback; autocratic behaviour; and democratic behaviour. Results show that the two most valued leadership styles are positive feedback and training/instruction, with the autocratic approach being least appreciated (OU 17.2, 2013). Research into the effect of gender on athletes’ leadership preference has produced mixed results (Riemer, 2007). The OU (17.2, 2013) suggests that this may be due to the false equation of gender with biological sex, and that the differences in leadership preferences may be more related to gender role (masculinity/femininity) than to biological sex (male/female) (Riemer, 2007). Findings from Riemer and Toon, 2001, cited in Riemer 2007 suggest that some of the variance in results might be connected to the coach’s gender, rather than the athlete’s, as they showed that female athletes expressed different leadership preference in female coaches compared with male. Similarly, research has produced no significant relationship between age and preferred leadership styles (Riemer, 2007), although the author does suggest that an overview of the results indicates a shift from a preference for task behaviours to a preference for relationship behaviours as the athlete matures (Riemer, 2007). Research into how situational characteristics influence leadership preferences has also been mixed (Riemer, 2007). Chelladurai (1978, cited in Riemer, 2007) hypothesised that team/open sport athletes would prefer more training/instruction and positive feedback than those involved in individual/closed sports. Research by Terry and Howe (1984), Terry (1984) and Kang (2003), all cited in Riemer 2007) supported this hypothesis, but Chelladurai and Saleh (1978, cited in Riemer 2007) found the polar opposite. Riemer and Chelladurai (1995, cited in Riemer 2007) found that, within American football, athletes whose tasks differed from their teammates (e.g. offensive or defensive) preferred different coaching behaviours. The defensive squad operating in a more open environment preferred more democratic, autocratic and socially supportive coaching behaviours. Given the varied results of studies into athlete and situational characteristics on leadership preferences, it is unclear how coaches should adapt their coaching strategies based on member characteristics. The role of transformational leadership in coaching Chelladurai (1978, 1990, 1993, 2001 cited in Riemer, 2007) adapted his model of the MML to include transformational leadership (Open University, 17, 2013). In the previous versions of the model, leadership was thought to be transactional in its nature (Riemer, 2007). Transactional leaders have a reciprocal relationship with their athletes whereby they trade something the athlete wants (e.g. knowledge), with something they want (e.g. respect) (Riemer, 2007 cited in Open University, 16.5, 2013). Transactional leadership is built on mutual trust in which the coach must manage the changing needs of the athlete in order to be effective (Riemer, 2007). Transformational leadership on the other hand, is a charismatic type of leadership in which followers associate themselves with leaders, giving rise to greatly increased levels of performance (Yammarino, Dubinsky, Comer and Jolson, 1997 cited in Riemer, 2007). A transformational leader will exhibit five traits: charisma, an assertive and self confident quality that results in athletes connecting emotionally to their leaders, generating high levels of trust; idealised influence, which enables leaders to motivate athletes to follow their beliefs and visions for the future; inspiration, which enables leaders to instil confidence in athletes so that they are able to meet the challenging aspirations s/he has set for them; intellectual stimulation, through which leaders provoke original and imaginative thought processes; and individual consideration, by which leaders pay attention to each member of their team and are able to set specific goals for each dependant on their skill level (Bass, 1985; Bass and Aviolo, 1990; Doherty and Danylchuk, 1996; Weese, 1994 cited in Open University, 17.1, 2013). Transformational leaders affect both the situational and athlete characteristics of the MML (Riemer, 2007). Firstly, situational characteristics are affected by the coach introducing new ambitions for the organisation / team they are involved with. These ambitions are based on the coach’s beliefs and visions for the future. Secondly, athlete characteristics are changed by the coach transmitting his/her vision so that athletes embrace this as their own, and by motivating athletes to believe they will achieve this vision (Open University, 17.1, 2013). Bass (1985, cited in Riemer, 2007) suggests that not all coaches are transformational, rather that leaders will display a spectrum of transformational behaviours. Although there is minimal literature into the role of transformational leadership in sport (Riemer, 2007), the MML suggests that a transformational leader may be a more effective coach (Chelladurai, 2001 cited in Riemer, 2007). This is backed up by findings in Arthur et al’s (2011) study into athlete narcissism, coach’s transformational behaviours and athlete motivation. The study found that the dimensions of individual consideration and intellectual stimulation were linked with higher levels of athlete effort. Creating an effective coaching environment In order to further understand the complicated, intertwined relationship between coach, athlete and the conditions they work under, Smith and Smoll (1977, 1989, cited in OU 18.1, 2013) proposed the meditational model of sport leadership. This model was formulated to improve coach understanding around how to create a positive environment for children in sport (Smith and Smoll, 2007) and focuses on three variables: coach behaviour (what the coach actually does); athlete perceptions (how behaviour is understood by athletes); and athlete reactions (subsequent responses to the coach) (Smith and Smoll, 2007, cited in OU, 18.1, 2013). With a view to measuring the first of these variables, Smoll, Smith and Hunt (1977, cited in OU, 18.1, 2013) designed the coaching behaviour assessment system (CBAS). Leadership behaviour was observed and coded in coaches working with children across a collection of different sports (Smith and Smoll, 2007). Although widely used to research leadership behaviours (OU, 18.1, 2013) the statistical methodology used in the CBAS has been considered too narrow an approach to develop an understanding of the complex nature of effective coaching practice (Cushion, 2007 cited in OU, 18.1, 2013). To gain deeper insight into coaching behaviours, the origins of these behaviours need to be examined, along with how these behaviours affect perceptions and finally how these perceptions shape actions (Chelladurai, 1993; Cumming, Smith and Smoll, 2006 cited in OU, 18.1, 2013). Research by Stebbings et al (2011) explored the antecedents of autonomy supportive and controlling behaviours in coaches in regards to the coaches’ own psychological needs. Autonomy supportive environments are created by a coach offering athletes’ choice in making decisions, the opportunity for experimentation, meaningful justification for activities and a recognition of an athlete’s emotional needs (Mageau and Vallerand, 2003, cited in Stebbings et al, 2013). A controlling environment is created by a coach with an autocratic, dictatorial demeanour, giving athletes no choice in the decision making process. Punishment, criticism and tangible rewards are used to control athletes (Bartholemew, Ntoumanis and Thogersen-Ntoumani, 2009 cited in Stebbings et al, 2011). Autonomy supportive environments are thought to elicit positive responses from athletes such as increased intrinsic motivation and higher levels of performance (Amorose, 2007; Gillett, Vallerand Amoura and Baldes, 2010; Mageau and Vallerand, 2003, cited in Stebbings et al, 2011). Conversely, a controlling environment is associated with decreased motivation and increased levels of sport drop out (Pelletier et al, 2009 cited in Stebbings et al, 2011). This research hypothesised that coaches whose psychological needs were met would work in an autonomy supportive manner, whilst those whose needs were not met would exhibit more controlling behaviour (Stebbings et al, 2011). The results proved to be in line with the initial hypothesis with the pivotal conclusion being that the ‘satisfaction of coaches psychological needs can allow coaches to thrive, and to create an adaptive interpersonal coach environment for athletes.’ (Stebbings et al, 2011, p269). Lack of governing body support in terms of training, feedback and guidance were cited as possible reasons for coaches’ psychological needs not being met (Allen, Shaw, 2009 cited in Stebbings et al, 2011). However it is als o noted that further research into the effect of environmental factors on coach psychological need satisfaction would aid understanding (Stebbings et al, 2011). As coach behaviours are thought to influence athlete perceptions, and these perceptions will subsequently shape actions (Smith and Smoll, 2007), coaches must be careful not to make immediate judgements towards their athletes based on first impressions (OU, 18.5, 2013). This is to minimise the risk of creating a self-fulfilling prophecy (OU, 18.5, 2013) whereby a coach will make initial predictions of the athlete’s behaviour and performance. These predictions will affect the way the coach communicates with the athlete, which in turn will affect the athlete’s perception of themselves and their performance levels (Horn, 2008 cited in OU, 2013). Coaching behaviours and team performance In contrast to those working with individuals, coaches working with teams have to be much more concerned with team cohesion. Team cohesion is associated with the amount of unity, closeness and camaraderie displayed by a team (Carron, Eys and Burke, 2007) and is defined as a dynamic process, reflected in the tendency of a group to remain united in pursuit of its goals and objectives (Carron, Brawley and Widmeyer, 1998 cited in Carron, Eys and Burke, 2007). Cohesion has been described as the most important group property (Bollen and Hoyle, 1990; Golembiewski, 1962; Lott and Lott, 1965, cited in Carron, Eys and Burke, 2007) and involves two dimensions: task cohesion – the ability of a team to work towards shared goals; and social cohesion the degree to which team mates get along with each other (Carron, Ely and Burke, 2007). These dimensions are not mutually exclusive, and change in one dimension will effect change in the other. When formulating a coach agenda a coach should aim to achieve a balance of both appropriate for a given context (OU, 19.2, 2013). The formulation of a cooperative training environment has also been cited as benefitting team performance (Collins and Collins, 2011 cited in OU, 19.2, 2013). Coaches need athletes to work in collaboration with each other (e.g. on tactics, formations and patterns of play) and against each other (e.g. attack versus defence) in order to drive overall and individual performance levels up (Collins and Collins, 2011, cited in OU, 19.2, 2013). As part of this cooperative training environment, coaches and athletes need to be able to understand each other’s strengths and weaknesses, both as individuals and in their team responsibilities (Collins and Collins, 2011, cited in OU, 19.2, 2013). Effective teams are considered to have a high degree of shared knowledge built up through communal experience of intense training and performance situations (Bourbouson et al, 2011 cited in OU, 19.2, 2013). For example, a team may change seamlessly between a number of formations and tactical variati ons during a match at their coach’s request. Shared knowledge can also extend to off field activities. When coaches are creating and developing their coaching agenda they should examine their players in many different domains. Information should be garnered from multiple sources, such as discussions with colleagues, personal observation, formal assessments and past experiences, in order to surmount current obstacles and to plan for the future (OU, 19.2, 2013). Systems of work and team ethics need to be established so that existing and new team mates can carve an individual niche for themselves but also to see what is expected of them as part of the team (Martens, 2012 cited in OU, 19.2, 2013). When considering how a coach develops his/her team, research has suggested that team cohesion and performance are mutually beneficial, with increased task and social cohesion leading to increase performance, and vice versa (Carron et al, 2002; Cox, 2012 cited in OU, 19.3, 2013). Therefore in order to raise performance levels, coaches must attempt to create cohesion, achieved by developing motivation and a sense of personal reward. They can identify leaders to help them facilitate change but also must preserve and unite all existing members of the team (including the assistants, parents and others in the support network). Individual and group accomplishments need to be recognised, changes need to be discussed and performance regularly assessed through feedback in order to facilitate a supportive culture (Martens, 2012 cited in OU, 19.3, 2013). Allowing athletes more influence in team goal setting can also lead to increased task and social cohesion (Carron et al, 2005 cited in OU, 19.3, 2013). This increased influence also leads to greater understanding of the tasks they need to undertake, and stronger beliefs that the goals will influence team behaviour positively (Collins and Collins cited in OU, 19.3, 2013). The coach should develop individual and communal understanding of roles, and encourage team members to have confidence in each other. Through regular meetings and discussions with various team groupings, teams and coaches can build agreement, understanding and commitment (Collins and Collins, 2011, cited in OU, 19.3, 2013). This is as necessary within coaching teams as between the coach and athletes. Experimentation, questioning and argument are far more acceptable in a sharing and cooperative environment which reinforces team cohesion (Piggott, 2012, cited in OU, 19.3, 2013).

Jennifer Lopez :: Art

Jennifer Lopez Jennifer Lynn Lopez was born July 24, 1970 in Castle Hill, Bronx. She is the daughter of Guadalupe and David Lopez. Lopez has been able overcome the Spanish stereotypes becoming the highest paid Latin woman in the world. Every time she appears on magazine covers, presents on the Oscars, makes movies and music she is breaking down barriers and showing that every woman, no matter what race, can do this. The place where Jennifer grow up was a Spanish area, with people, food, and music Her grandparents taught her all about her roots. That is why she is proud of her ethnic background. As Jennifer grow up â€Å"West Side Story† was an inspiration to her, she especially looked up to a character named â€Å"Anita† played by Rita Moreno. She has always admired her. Ever since Jennifer was a kid she knew that she wanted to be a actress, singer, and dancer. When she was 5 years old she took ballet classes at the â€Å"Ballet Hispanico†. She Contained taking classes trough her teenage years. All trough her life she â€Å"On The 6† train to go tryout for dance auditions. When Jennifer was 15 years old, she meets her ten year long boyfriend David Cruz, know as â€Å"The best looking guy in the neighborhood†. Her parents did not approve of the relationship. Eventually they had outgrown the relationship, because David’s and her life were headed in a different direction, she also got lost in the Hollywood entertainment culture. Jennifer held multiple jobs, going to school during the day, dancing at night and kept a job, she was not home often. She even dropped out of college, because she knew she wanted to pursue dancing . At one point she and her mom had big fallout. When she was 18 years old she got kicked out of her house. She got an apartment at â€Å"Hell’s Kitchen†, the same neighborhood that Jennifer’s other role model â€Å"Lisa Lisa† grow up in. In 1990 Lopez gets her first big break as a fly girl in â€Å"In Living Color†, she beat more then 100,000 other girls for the part. She also takes acting classes and begins to appear in music video’s like Janet Jackson’s â€Å"That’s The Way Love Goes†. She went on tour with Janet and saw the pop culture that eventfully she would lead. She appears in sit-coms that did not really last like â€Å"Hotel Malibu† and â€Å"Nurses On The Line†.

Vygotsky and Paigets Perspective of Learning

The theorists, Piaget and Vygotsky both had views on the significance of learning and the role of play, which they considered being a crucial part of a child’s development. Although they had similar views, they differed in terms of what children do when they play (Drewery & Bird, 2004). This essay supports learning opportunities and examples of children’s play through experience, events and interactions with people, places and things. Piaget explained the importance of learning through play, in which children explored and experimented for themselves with minimal adult interactions. He considered development went through four stages: sensori-motor, pre-operational, concrete operational and the formal operational stage. (Papalia, Olds & Feldman, 2004). The sensori-motor period (0-2 years) is the 1st stage, as the infant’s interactions are based on exploring their environment through their senses and abilities to practice schemas, such as grasping and sucking, this also included practice play as the infant is able to repeat actions continuously but with no intention. This stage follows on to the pre-operational stage (2-7) where children’s language is developing rapidly, allowing them to express themselves. They are starting to use pretend play and parallel play which means children are talking but it is not directed to others. This also means that they only see the world in their terms, they are egocentric (Drewery and Bird, 2004). The concrete operation (7-11) and the formal operational (11-adult) periods are the third and fourth stages. These are not considered in early childhood education but are still important as they can think realistically and logically about situations and understand their world (Pulaski, 1980). However, Vygotsky argued differently. He proposed that children are social learners and like to explore and discover new things with the help of adults and peers. This was scaffolding and the zone of proximal development (ZPD). He also considered culture surroundings, language and thinking (Whitebread, 2003 cited in Beaumont, 2002). He thought children could perform better with others than on their own. This is shown through the ZPD, the difference between what children can do alone and with help. Like Piaget, Vygotsky believed there were things that children couldn’t understand. However, Vygotsky believed that given proper help children could perform what Piaget would consider, not possible. Scaffolding however, meant that in order for a child to learn, a more competent adult or peer can help support and guide the child’s learning through the ZPD until the child is able to do the task alone which helps the child use private speech, a way of understanding is to talk to themselves and also to reason, problem solve, extend memory and imagination skills (Woolfolk, 2004 cited by Educational Psychology, n. d. ). Vygotsky considered cultural surroundings, language and thinking to be important. He said for children to learn, they need to interact through communication with others. This was explained through cultural influences and what was important within each setting. Language is part of culture, which is the key to communication about customs and knowledge of people. Through cultural tools, such as books and television, we could help extend children’s communication skills with others in their environment (Tauranga Regional Free Kindergarten Association, 2003). These theorists can support learning opportunities within Aotearoa through experiences, events, and interactions with people, places and things. For Piaget however, his first two stages are only considered in early childhood education (Nuttall, 2003). Piaget considers that children learn best when their left to discover their world by themselves through hands-on involvement but adults need to provide stimulating activities within their environment (Hedges, 2003). The Aotearoa context gives children the independence to experience and learn about what they enjoy on their own through experiences, events and interactions, with little supervision. It also encourages them to explore and develop knowledge and skills at their own pace. Ministry of Education (1998) states that, ‘Educators should enhance children’s learning and development through extending children’s thinking and actions through sensitive and informed guidance, interventions and support (p. 19). Piaget’s practice play and pretend play are supported in Aotearoa. These are concepts used to explain the child’s use of creativity and spontaneous play which provides great interactions with people, places and things. Each child brings experiences from their own environment which builds knowledge and skills amongst children but this can be slightly difficult, as children naturally parallel play (Drewery & Bird, 2004). A way to enhance their interests could be a dress-up day. The Ministry of Education (1996) explains that ‘Children experience an environment where their play is valued as meaningful learning and the importance of spontaneous play is recognised’ (p. 84) Vygotsky’s theory is well acknowledged in Aotearoa. He believed that children learn best through social environments which lead to powerful and competent learners. Children learn better through the ZPD with the support of an adult or peer. This provides the use of private speech for the child, which creates better understanding and extends skills such as problem solving and imagination (Connor & Diggins, 2002). According to Royal Tangaere’s theory of learning, some of Vygotsky’s ideas related to hers. She believed in the Tuakana/Teina concept which was related to the ZPD and scaffolding. The Tuakana (older sibling) contributes to the Teina’s (younger sibling) learning and vise versa. This provides both siblings the responsibility of ako (learning as well as teaching (Te Whaiki, McCarthy & Durie, 1997). Secondly, Vygotsky believed that each child brings with them, their own cultural experiences from their environment as a way of communicating. As a multi-cultural nation, it is important to consider each child’s culture; therefore part of culture is language and the values and beliefs that influence them. As teachers we are encouraged to be aware of other cultures. When we learn about the culture of children we are able to understand and help them learn and experience more about culture through communication such as books or music (Tauranga Regional Free Kindergarten, 2003). We could also organize cultural outings to Museum’s which is a great place for learning. As Ministry of Education (1996) states, ‘Children experience an environment where there are equitable opportunities for learning, irrespective of gender, ability, age, ethnicity, or background (p. 66). Examples of these theories are shown throughout children’s play. Piaget’s idea of the sensori-motor stage and the pre-opertional stage can be put into practice as follows: Infant: A is lying down on her stomach, where toys are placed in front of her. She picks up a soft ball, looks at it then puts it in her mouth, drops it then picks up a rattle and turns on to her back. She lifts it up and shakes and listens to the noise. She then puts it in her mouth then continues the enjoyment of shaking the rattle. Toddler: The wiggles come on and children start dancing, B gets up and begins to dance. As he listens to the sounds of a car, he pretends to drive going, ‘Brum brum! , and then drives around the room saying, ‘I’m driving my car! ’ Young Child: A is in the sandpit with children surrounding her. She picks up a frying pan and pretends to make a cake with sand. A then picks up a spoon and pretends to mix the cake, then places it down saying, â€Å"Cook for 2 minutes† using her fingers to count. She pulls it out straight after and says, â€Å"Mmm, smells good! That will be for me and mummy†. Vygotsky’s views can be shown in practice through an infant as: M is learning to walk, he can stand up while holding onto the couch, he wants to let go, but does not have the balance or coordination. A teacher comes over and M reaches out his hands, gesturing that he needs help. She takes his hands and walks with him saying, â€Å"Good boy, you’re doing so well! † She then lets go to see if he can stand on his own, he stands for a few seconds then falls. He crawls back to the couch, stands up and gestures to the teacher to help. She stands three feet away, puts out her hands and says, â€Å"Try again†. He takes a few steps then falls again. Toddler: L wants to climb up the plank. The teacher recognises that he is not confident enough on his own. She takes his hand nd helps him, he turns around and repeats this a few times, the teacher lets go of his hand half way up, he stops and says, â€Å"Help! † Teacher says, â€Å"You can do it, have a go, I’ll stay with you†. Looking unsure, he has a go while the teacher encourages him. In being successful, L is overjoyed, and the teacher supports the accomplishment. Young Child: H is learning literacy, he seems to be frustrated and is struggling. The teacher approaches him, and asks if he wants help. H replies, â€Å"Yeah, I can’t do it†. Firstly, the teacher writes his name at the top and says, ‘H, copy over your name with a pen†. â€Å"Yep†, H says. In doing so, the teacher encourages him and supports his learning. The teacher helps H do his literacy activity until he is able to do it himself. He shows her when he is finished then she gets him to put a smiley face on the page, to show what a great job he did. There are many more theories that could be acknowledged throughout this discussion but Piaget and Vygotsky will always provide teachers with a solid understanding of how children learn and the role of play which provides great learning opportunities for experiences, events and interactions with people, places and things within New Zealand.

Miss Carolines First Day Essay

I walked into the classroom to see all my new pupils, I was nervous at first but then Miss Maudie introduced me to the class and everything was fine. I wrote my name on the board and told them what it said and where I am from. The class just murmured back to me. I started the day by reading the children a story about cats, I think they liked it but then again some of them did seem immune to imaginative literature. After reading I went to the blackboard and printed the alphabet in large capitals. I wasn’t surprised that everyone knew what they were seeing as most of the first grade had failed last year and where now back again for me to teach them. I choose Jean Louise Finch to read out the first line, when I discovered she could read. I then made her read My First Reader and the stock-market quotations from The Mobile Register aloud. I was shocked that Jean was literate but I told her not to tell her father not to teach her anymore as it would interfere with her reading. Jean then replied to me trying to tell me that her father hadn’t taught her anything, I just smiled and shook my head somebody had obviously taught her, she wasn’t born reading The Mobile Register. Jean then told me Jem had taught her and he read a book to her where she was Bullfinch instead of Finch. Jem said she got swapped when she was born. She was about to carry on but I just interrupted her, she was quite clearly lying to me so I told her again to tell her father not to teach her anymore because it is better to begin reading with a fresh mind and that I will try and undo the damage. Her father does not know how to teach properly. At least at the end of it she mumbled sorry to me but then again it was her fathers fault for teaching her in the first place. I am introducing a new way of teaching that I learned about in college I hope it is going to work well. The Dewey Decimal System is the new way of teaching it consists of me holding up cards to the children with words on them. I then caught Jean writing a letter so I told her to tell her father not to teach her to write either and that she doesn’t start writing until the third grade. It really surprised me that she was able to do this but also angered me because it is just going to make it harder to teach her the proper way to read and write. At lunchtime I told everyone who goes home for lunch to hold up there hands and then everyone who brought a pack lunch I told them to put it on there desk. I had a walk around to see what the children had and if I approved. I then stopped at Walter Cunningham’s desk, he didn’t have any lunch, at first I thought he had just forgot it so I asked him and he just looked straight ahead a muscle jumped in his skinny jaw then I asked him again. He finally replied with ‘Yeb’m,’, so I went to my desk and opened my purse and lifted out a quarter for him to go town and buy something then he could pay me back the next day. He shook his head and drawled softly ‘Nome thank you ma’am,’ I was getting impatience and told him to come get it, he shook his head again, and the third time he shook it I heard someone whispering to Jean saying ‘go on tell her, Scout’. I didn’t understand but then Jean told me Walter is one of the Cunningham’s and from the country. It was then clear to me that Walter didn’t forget his lunch; it was just that he didn’t have any today nor would have any tomorrow or the next day. I didn’t like the way Jean had to tell me all of this so I hauled her up to my desk; I had just had enough of her. She had started on the wrong foot in everyway. I just could not take anymore of her so without a thought I made her hold out her hands and I picked up my ruler and gave her half a dozen of quick little pats and made her stand in the corner. Now I think about it I do feel guilty but I think she did deserve it and hopefully will teach her a lesson. Everyone had now realised what I had done and broke out in a storm of laughter. I threatened the rest of the class with a similar fate and they exploded again, it only went quiet when the shadow of Miss Blount fell over them. Miss Blount is a native Maycombian as yet uninitiated  in the mysteries of the Decimal System, appeared at the door hands on hips and announced that if she hears another sound from the room she’ll up everyone in it.’ She also told me the sixth grade couldn’t concentrate on the pyramids because of the so called racket coming from my room. I did not appreciate her coming into my classroom and telling my pupils to be quiet. The bell then went for lunch everyone filed out I just sunk in my chair and put my head in my arms. A lot had happened in just half a day and there was still the afternoon to come. Everyone came back from lunch, I was standing in the middle of the room and I’m sure the children could see sheer horror flooding into my face when I saw the cootie crawling out of Burris Ewell’s hair I screamed ‘it’s alive’. Little Chuck told me not to be afraid of a cootie and brought me back up to my desk and got me a drink of water. I really do not like cooties and insects so that’s why I reacted in such a way. I took out a thick volume, leafed through its pages and read for a moment and told him a good home remedy for Burris. I told him I wanted him to go home and wash his hair with lye soap and when he’s done that treat his scalp with kerosene. He looked and me and said ‘What fer, missus?’ I replied quickly to him to get rid of the cooties because the other children might catch them and we wouldn’t want that. The boy then stood up he was filthy, his neck was dark grey and his hands were rusty also his finger-nails were black deep into the quick. Before he left I also asked hi to bathe him self before he comes back tomorrow. I was very surprised when he just laughed at me rudely and told me that I wasn’t sending him home and that he was already on the verge of leaving also that he had done his time for this year. I was quite puzzled about this so I asked him what he meant. The boy didn’t answer though .An older pupil from the class then told me he was one of the Ewell’s, and that this school is full of the apparently they only come in the first day and then leave. He had the first day of the first grade for three years now. Burris stood up and I told him to sit back down please that was a serious mistake. The boy’s condescension flashed into anger and told me to try and make him. I just did not know what to do. Luckily Little Chuck stood up and just said let him go and that he was a mean one, a hard-down mean one and  Little Chuck was right. Burris walked towards Little Chuck but then his hand went up and just said ‘Go home’. Burris seemed afraid of Little Chuck, I still didn’t know what to do so I took advantage of this of his indecision and told Burris to go home and if he doesn’t that I would call the principal. When he was walking out he shouted to me ‘Report and be damned to ye! Ain’t no snot-nosed slut of a schoolteacher ever born c’n make me do nothin’! You ain’t makin’ me go nowhere, missus. You just remember that, you ain’t makin’ me go no-where!’ I just couldn’t hold it in and I started crying, don’t know what came over me it was just what he had said, I was only trying to help him. Everyone came around my desk they all made me feel a lot better. I was happy when they asked me to read the story about the cats again, so I opened up a book and started reading for them again. I liked my first day but I hope tomorrow goes better and I get no more cheek from the children or Jean telling me lies. Other than that I think I will have a lovely time at this school.