Environmental hw Essay Example

Environmental hw Paper After fossil fuels are created and depleted, they cannot be replaced in our civilization. This extremely long process takes thousands of years and if we were to replenish the depleted fossil fuels it would take millions of years. 2) How are fossil fuels formed? How do environmental conditions determine what type Of fossil fuel is formed in a given location? Why are fossil fuels often concentrated in localized deposits? Fossil fuels form by preserving the anaerobic decomposition of organic matter. This organic matter then undergoes a slow process of anaerobic decomposition under sediments which form kerosene. After this, geothermal heating and pressure take action to change kerosene to create crude oil and thermometric natural gas. As a result crude oil and gas rest in porous rock layers. Lastly, coal is formed when plant matter is compacted very tightly that there is little decomposed. Environmental conditions determine what type of fossil fuel is formed in a given location by studying the chemical composition of the starting material, checking the temperatures and pressures of the material, any presence or absence of anaerobic decomposer, and how much time it takes. Fossil fuels are concentrated in localized deposits due to the uneven distribution on earths surface because some parts of the world contain more fossil fuels than others. The duration of a nations fossil fuel depends on extraction, consumption, and imports/exports to other nations. 4) Describe how coal is used to generate electricity. In a coal- fired power plant, electricity is generated by combustion coal to convert water to steam and leads to turbine. First, the coal is crushed and blown inside a high temperature furnace. We will write a custom essay sample on Environmental hw specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Environmental hw specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Environmental hw specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer Heat from combustion boils the water and the steam forms into turbine to turn the generator. This generates electricity by passing magnets through copper coils. Thereafter, steam is cooled and compressed in a circling loop and returns to the furnace. 5) How have geologists estimated the total amount of oil beneath the Arctic National Wildlife Refuges 1 002 Areas? How does this amount differ from the technically recoverable and economically recoverable amounts of oil? Geologists use seismic waves to survey the estimated underground geologic conditions at a site. By using techniques Of ground, air, and seismic graphs they show measurements that can infer the volume of the underground reserve. At Onwards 1002 Area, the total reserves are estimated between 1 1. 6 and 31. 5 billion barrels. The technically recoverable fraction of that total is between 4. 3 and 1 1. 8 billion barrels. The economically recoverable fraction varies with the price per barrel of the oil. At $30 per barrel it would be 3. 0 to 10. 4 billion barrels. 6) How do we create petroleum products? Provide examples of several of these products. Crude oil is a mix of hydrocarbons, so e can create petroleum products by separating its components. At the start of this process, crude oil is boiled or cooled, generating hydrocarbon components to evaporate and rise through a distillation column. Higher oils are separated from lower oils. As a result the refinement process produces an area of petroleum products such as diesel, gasoline, jet fuel, and other products. Some examples of these petroleum products are a toothbrush, shower curtains, cosmetics, and detergent which are products that are pretty common to us. 7) What is meant by peak oil? Why do many experts think we are about to pass the global production peak for oil? What consequences could there be for our society if we do not shift soon to renewable energy sources? Peak oil refers to when the rate of production of oil will reach its highest rate and decline gradually. If our production declines after the peak Of oil and demand continues to increase, scientists say we will fall into an oil shortage. Many experts think we are about to pass the production peak for oil since Hubert peak was proved to be accurate, every since 1970, U. S oil reduction peaked and has continued to decline ever since. Factors of this problem were the discoveries of new oil fields that peaked 30 years ago, but we still continue extract and consume more oil than we have been finding. In addition depending on year to year use for production, would make us unable to realize that we have pasted the peak of oil production until four years after, so we wouldnt even known if we passed the peak or not. For example many oil companies and government are untrustworthy about the amount of oil reserves there are, and the estimated difference on how much e can extract based on how much oil there is. Also, a U. S geological survey report shows that there are about 2 trillion barrels of oil left in the world and not 1 trillion. Developed countries such as the U. S continue to use this limited supply of oil because their demand is increasing rather than a developing country where they are beginning to industrialized. One thing is for sure, if the peak of oil does come about, it would affect the lives of everyone in the world, negatively. Cheap oil would be used to transport goods over long distances, he worlds economy would fall, and economies would become very limited. Urge cities such as New York City would no longer be supported by agriculture and without petroleum based fertilizers; we wouldnt be able to feed the world. Suburbs would turn into slums and crime rates would rise. The abuse of demand and supply of oil would indeed lead to these economic, social, and political outcomes if we do not shift into renewable energy sources. 8) Describe three environmental impacts of fossi l fuel production and consumption. Compare contrasting views regarding the environmental impacts of drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Burning crude oil adds greenhouse gases to the atmosphere; this creates climate change and global warming. Another impact of fossil fuel production and consumption is when burning crude oil releases sulfur dioxide (ASS) and nitrogen oxides into our atmosphere, this creates industrial or photochemical smog and acid rain. Pollution is another problem to the environment, oil spills can contaminate plants and animals because crude oil is toxic which can lead to killing them along with destroying biodiversity. This does not only apply to animals, but to humans as well by putting us at a high risk for health problems, even cancer due to exposure since burning oil can cause irritation of eyes, throat and lungs. Ever since oil spills have occurred there have been different perspectives regarding the drilling for oil in NAIR. On one side, scientists are concerned about damage to habitats in the Alaskan wildlife, based on the results of previous experience and small-scale manipulative studies. On the other hand, scientists argue that drilling at NAIR would have title environmental impact because of new technology that would be sensitive to the environment. 9) Give an example of a clean coal technology. Now describe how carbon capture and storage is intended to work. Drying coal with high water content is an example of clean coal technology, this is a cleaner way of burning and we gain more power from coal through gasification, which is less pollutant. Clean coal technologies are able to remove chemical contaminants from power plant emissions. Carbon capture storage intends to prevent carbon dioxide from coal combustion to reach our air. It seizes carbon dioxide emissions, turns it from a gas to liquid form and then stores it in the ocean or underground. This method also prevents greenhouse gases from increasing and climate change. 10) Describe two main approaches to energy conservation and give a specific example of each. Converting to renewable energy sources is a big approach to energy conservation by spending money for new technology, so our renewable source of energy would be the only thing we need. This change would solve many problems of depletion, price values, international policies, and environmental consequences. Examples of renewable energy sources are electric cars, and electricity generated from wind or solar energy. These sources conserve our energy. Another approach is personal choice, to reduce a persons energy consumption in order to conserve energy. This can be done by driving less and instead using a bicycle, turn off electric generated appliances when they are not in use, regulating thermostat use, and using less energy appliances. This choice can save you money while conserving resources. SEEKING SOLUTIONS 2) Compare the effects of coal and oil consumption on the environment. Which process, our use of oil or use of oil, do you think has ultimately had greater environmental impact, and why? What steps could governments, industries, and individuals take to reduce environmental impacts? The consumption of coal affects the environment by destroying land and habitats, declined biodiversity and erosion. It produces acid rain and a ton of contaminants. When coal is mined the landslides of the earth are disrupted due to mountain top removal and miners are at a health risk to having black lung disease. Oil also affects the environment in a similar way through a recess called petroleum production, it is a form of mining that pumps oil and gas from underground to the surface which also disorganized landslides. Workers exposed to transporting and refining oil are also at risk for carcinogens. In my opinion think oil has a greater environmental impact because we have such a limited supply left in certain regions, that if we take more from that area such as NAIR we would destroy biodiversity and maybe pollute it through oil spills, therefore it puts that environment in a potential risk for being degraded. Steps that can be taken by governments, industries ND individuals that can reduce environmental impacts are by following a renewable energy act. It would teach us to conserve the energy that we have and not depend so much on fossil fuels, especially Oil and coal. 3) If the United States and other developed countries reduced dependence on foreign oil and on fossil fuels in general, do you think that their economies would benefit or suffer? Might your answer be different from the short term and the long term? What factors come into play in trying to make such a judgment? At the start of reducing dependence on foreign oil and fossil fuels, heir economies would suffer because they have put their usage under a limited amount and there could be an economic depression through health problems, money and social disruption. This explains the short term side of it because this option is struggle from the beginning because of the change but on the long term of this, they would greatly benefit. It would be an introduction to a world of just renewable energy and conserved states of fossil fuels. Economic, social and political aspects take part into making this judgment. ) Contrast the differences of the Going people of Nigeria with hose of the citizens of Alaska. How have they been similar and different? Do you think businesses or governments should take steps to ensure that local people benefit from oil drilling operations? How could they do so? Alaskan withhold a better representation within their own state and country rather than the Going people in which the y dont have such a strong standing. They both have issues with oil companies that want to extract, transport and refine crude oil by all mean necessary because these companies believe it will do little impact to that environment. The Alaskan hold a representation in congress and have federal judicial courts to settle the oil drilling operations. However the Going people are sharing the same oil problems with neighboring people and have protested to oil companies about drilling crude oil on their land. Businesses and governments should take steps to ensure that local people benefit from oil drilling operations because that area is sacred to them but oppression on these people is not the way to go about it. Politics are involved, international laws should be established and their rights should be defied Ned.

Policy Statements3500120112395 Essays - Free Essays, Term Papers

Policy Statements3500120112395 Essays - Free Essays, Term Papers Policy Statements3500120112395 You're preparing for a conference. You've been given a country. You've read the research report. You've researched your country's stance. You've even got some clauses ready that you think are pretty good. But what are you going to say? A policy statement is a necessity when you go to a conference. You may not want to talk, but the chairs have the right to call you up to speak whenever they want. In some conferences they even ask that you send them your speech before the conference! Policy statements can often be pretty boring, but they are useful. Through the statements you can learn what people's stances are on the issues and figure out which issue they have focused on. This lets you decide who will be your allies and who else may be your enemies. Here are some of the key things to put in a policy statement (this is not rigid but definitely recommended): Address the committee - The first thing you need to do is greet your audience, a way to do that would be by saying something like this when you start: "Fellow delegates and esteemed chairs" Tell them who you are - I don't mean your personality, but the country you're representing. Make this clear from very soon into the speech: "As the representative for Cambodia" or "On behalf of Jamaica" or just "Canada believes" Briefly state what the issue is - This could be general about all the issues being discussed in the committee or specifically about the topic you are going to discuss. Don't go on for ages about it though, they probably know most of the stuff anyway, keep it short and to the point Explain what has already been done to solve the issue - Focus this mainly on what your country has done, but make reference to other big events too. Again though, short and to the point, they don't need a detailed history of the crisis Introduce what solutions you think are the most important - Don't go in depth about your clauses but just state the general ideas you will be pushing for in a resolution: "Guatemala believes that the only way to solve this is through the removal of foreign military from Iraq to allow the country its independence again" Conclude formally/powerfully - "The delegate hopes for a discussion to solve these issues and help the world become a better place" (like that but less cliched) or "Without these solutions the world is guaranteed to slip into chaos. It is our duty to rectify the situation before this can happen" "The delegate yields the floor back to chair" (when asked) Here's an example of a policy statement (bear in mind that it should not really be more than 2 minutes in length and you can be stopped if the Chair's believe that time is running out). Honourable chairs, fellow delegates, it is with grave urgency that we meet today. Venezuela is considerately alarmed by the rise of extremism within Syria. We strongly oppose the actions of the "Islamic State", and their brutality within the Middle East. However violence from foreign powers must not be resorted to, as it would serve only to worsen the issue. Venezuela believes that the Syrian people should be the ones responsible for the resolution of their internal conflicts without foreign interference and should be assisted politically to develop solutions that encourage eventual peace within the region. The insurgency in Syria is a pressing issue that must of course be addressed. The use of religion to promote violence is an age-old tactic for those in search of power. In the past, we have condemned the military attacks by NATO against Syria as these serve only to fuel terrorist organisations. We propose that the financing of the Syrian civil war caused a conflict that escalated and gave terrorist groups leverage within the country and so will not support military measures sent in by countries extraneous to the local threat of the Islamic State. We propose meetings where the countries' governmental figures will be actively encouraged to find political solutions that will lead to peace within the region. We propose an alliance that allows the countries

Managerial leadership (movie Forest Gump) Assignment

Managerial leadership (movie Forest Gump) - Assignment Example In theory, an authentic leader is the one who understands his purpose, passion and these powerful drive force results from an ongoing self-reflection (Marquis & Huston, 2009), in other words, being true to one’s self (Pless & Maak, 2011). Gump exuberates authentic leadership skills. He is relentless in his struggle to achieve his goals, be it getting better at ping pong, opening a shrimp catching Ship Company or saving his fellow soldiers in Vietnam War. He is a natural leader who hasn’t read any books on leadership. He simply assesses a situation, makes a decision and is simply unstoppable when he’s at it. Such skills are mandatory in an authentic leader, be it corporate, politics or even a baseball team. Without a follower, there is no leader. Authentic leadership skills develop relational process with the followers (Nichols, 2008). Dan Taylor, the Second Lieutenant, is probably the best example how an authentic leader, Gump, develops a relation with the Ã¢â‚¬Ë œfollower’, who in fact was Gump’s leader. Gump’s leadership traits are not of a one-dimensional leader, despite being authentic, he is a transformational leader; a hybrid category, including a proportionate combination of traits, situational and behavioural awareness (Gittens, 2009). There is a distinction between an authentic and pseudo leader, Gump belonged to the former category. For instance Hitler was a charismatic leader but how was he able to convince ordinary soldiers to commit heinous crimes? That’s where the difference lies; Hitler was a pseudo transformational leader, who was successful in committing crimes against humanity through his army (Schminke, 2010), while Gump’s character exhibits authentic transformational leadership skills. ... That’s where the difference lies; Hitler was a pseudo transformational leader, who was successful in committing crimes against humanity through his army (Schminke, 2010), while Gump’s character exhibits authentic transformational leadership skills. The greatest dilemma he faces in the movie is when he makes the decision to save his commander at the battle ground in Vietnam. His commander gets severely injured and is almost bleeding to death on ground. Gump works like a powerful robot saving his fellow soldiers by carrying the injured on his back and shifting them to safe ground. When it comes to saving Lieutenant Taylor, the captain refuses as he considers it honourable to die in the battlefield than to go home and face the shame for losing so many men. He orders Gump to leave him there and join his battalion, Gump refuses. Transformational leadership is associated with bringing change in organization and groups (Bass & Riggio, 2012). What Gump does at the battleground is the change, he defies order, changes the pattern of hierarchy to do what he deems right; this is transformational leadership. The other thing is the fact that when they reach home, his commander loses his legs and is dependent on a wheel chair. He hates Hump for saving his life, but Gump doesn’t leave him, the heart of good leadership is sacrificing (Maxwell, 2007). The sacrificial aspect of leadership is now considered ancient; it is a common thing to read in newspapers or on TV that the CEOs scapegoat their own employees whenever problems arise (Grint, 2010). Plus leaders usually demand sacrifice from employees but never take their share of hardship and sacrifice (Ruprecht, 2010). What Forrest Gump practices is

A new challenge for Trnscraanial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) Essay

A new challenge for Trnscraanial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) - Essay Example TMS is a procedure which induces magnetic fields to initiate the activities of the brain. Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation is based on electromagnetic induction. When compared to the other medical procedures, TMS is safe as it does not cause any side effects. Similar to the concept of electrical and magnetic fields, a stimulating coil is used to treat the affected part of the human brain. The instrument used in TMS is generally designed in such a way that the current flows from both the direction. This ensures that they converge at a particular point where the current from both the sides come to a direct contact. This instrument is placed on the area near the cortex and electrical ray passes through the scalp through the skull. Then this ray reaches the intended area below or above the cortex of the brain. TMS is performed to stimulate the functioning of the brain by stimulating the neurons. Neurons in the human brain perform the activity in a serial fashion. This neuronal activity might get disturbed and TMS is done to enable the neurons to work in a normal manner. (Gerlach, 2007). TMS is generally used when people have problems like memory issues, vision disorders, movement disorders and depression. As TMS stimulates the neurons as well as the other important nerves in the brain, it is effective in treating any sort of mental or physical disorder. TMS can be combined with any other magnetic imaging techniques to get a clear cut picture of a person’s disorder. Picture of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Depression Treatment, 2010). Benefits of TMS Psychological problems like depression often leave the patient in an agitated state. It has been proved that TMS reduces the level of agitation to a greater extent. People affected by memory problems, concentration issues and problems with paying attention to a particular task. (Desmond, 2006). It is declared as one of the most effective method in treating depression. TMS eradicates the need for relapse as the patients respond to the treatment even during the first week of the treatment phase. This eventually reduces the need for treating them for a longer time. The effects are more as the magnetic rays target the cortex; the neurons near the cortex also get activated. This stimulates the neurons that evoke the activity of other parts of the body. Patient with movement disorder can easily recover as the motor cortex of the brain is automatically activated. (Belmaker, 2007). The functioning of the muscles can also be activated by placing the instrument at a particular place where the respective neurons reside. TMS is also effective in treating other problems like ADHD. ADHD Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is mostly found in children and these children suffer from inattentiveness. Patients diagnosed with ADHD might also have problems like depression, behavioral problems and other disorders. (Levy, 2001). They exhibit inattentiveness to any sort of an activity and might h ave difficulty in concentrating on a particular task. Adults affected by ADHD are generally disorganized and they find it difficult to complete a task within the stipulated time. Forgetfulness is also a symptom of ADHD. (Wender, 2000). Some people suffer from emotional disorders as they do not have the ability to deal with frustration. Certain regions of their brain often showed delay in the process of growth and development. The ability to concentrate

The difference and similarity of the The Killing and The girl with the Essay

The difference and similarity of the The Killing and The girl with the dragon tattoo in American and Danish version - Essay Example The differences could be due to culture. American culture is unabashed and outgoing. People are also accustomed to Chinese based action style of movies. Therefore, American movies or series without violence in graphic details does not perform well. This has been the case since the 70s. Hollywood movie makers attempt to present a complex plot with various scene that usually climax in violence or sex scene. The Danes, on their part prefer more tame films that focus more on betrayal, love, greed, and such themes without expression of too much violence or explicit sex. These differences in preferences are notable in the two films in when American and Danish versions are examined. The Danish people bulk at scenes of extreme violence even in films and prefer follow through the themes such as people do in staged theatre. However, the two are similar in the sense that issues of love, greed, and other themes permeate the whole films. Such themes are tackled by American and Danish versions of the films. The two versions were, after all, based on the same

Self Efficacy And The Social Cognitive Theory Education Essay

Self Efficacy And The Social Cognitive Theory Education Essay This chapter is divided into four parts. The first part initially discusses the construct of self-efficacy in the social cognitive theory. Then, definitions and properties of self-efficacy, characteristics of high and low self-efficacious individuals, the sources of self-efficacy and the difference between this construct and other similar constructs are discussed. Moreover, the last section of the first part is devoted to the role of self-efficacy in second/foreign language achievement and proficiency in general and in specific skills. The second part is devoted to the definitions of language learning strategies and their classifications. Moreover, the role of language learning strategies in second/foreign language proficiency and achievement and the relationship between language learning strategies and self-efficacy are discussed in this part, too. The third part is devoted to the construct of anxiety in general and foreign language anxiety in particular. In this part, definitions a nd classifications of anxiety, the role of anxiety in second/foreign language achievement and proficiency and the relationship between foreign language anxiety and self-efficacy are discussed. The last part discusses the concept of listening comprehension and how it is related to the three constructs of self-efficacy, language learning strategies, and foreign language anxiety. 2.1 Self-efficacy and the social cognitive theory To understand the concept of self-efficacy better, one must consider the theoretical framework of social cognitive theory. Bandura (1986, 1997) considers the social cognitive theory as a theory of human functioning. Based on this theory, human functioning can be explained through the operation of three factors that interact with each other. One factor is what Chomsky refers to as cognition, and Bandura in the social cognitive theory refers to as personal factors. Another factor is what Skinner referred to as environment and the third factor is what Bandura refers to as behavior. Bandura (1986) believed in the concept of triadic reciprocality in the social cognitive theory. This refers to the interaction among personal, behavioral and environmental factors. Moreover, an individuals behavior is determined by the interaction of the above mentioned factors. In this theory, individuals are considered as proactive, self-regulating, self-organizing and self-reflecting rather than reactive o nes and controlled by biological or environmental forces. Based on the social cognitive theory, individuals have a system of self-belief or a self-system that enables them to control their actions, feelings, thoughts, and motivation (Bandura, 1986; Pajares, 1997). This self-system makes it possible for individuals to make choices, choose their courses of actions, self-examine the adequacy of their behavior, interpret the outcomes, develop beliefs about their capabilities, and store this information to be used as a guide for future behavior (Bandura, 1986). Bandura (1997) considered the practice of self-reflection as the most influential mediator of human functioning and among the most arbiters of self-reflection are perceptions of self-efficacy. 2.1.1 Self-efficacy and its definitions Bandura (1986) considers self-efficacy as the main feature in the social cognitive theory. Based on the social cognitive theory, self-efficacy is the primary determinant of an individuals motivation to act. Bandura (1986) defines self-efficacy as peoples judgment of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of performances. It is not concerned with the skills one has but with the judgment of what can one do with whatever skills one possesses (p. 391). Besides Bandura, many researchers have provided different definitions of self-efficacy but most of them are based on Banduras definition. Delcourt and Kinzie (1993) stated that self-efficacy reflects an individuals confidence in his or her ability to perform the behavior required to produce specific outcomes (p. 36). Huang and Shanmao (1996) defined self-efficacy expectations as the beliefs about ones ability to perform a given task or behavior successfully (p. 3). Schunk (2001) considers self-efficacy as beliefs about ones capabilities to learn or perform behaviors at designated levels (p. 126). Moreover; Baron and Byrne (2004) identified three kinds of self-efficacy: Social self-efficacy, self-regulatory self-efficacy and academic self-efficacy. They considered social self-efficacy as the ability to maintain relationships, engage in social activities, and become assertive. They referred to the self-regulatory self-efficacy as the ability to be curious, think carefully, and avoid hi gh-risk activities. Finally, they considered academic self-efficacy as the ability to take part in learning activities, regulate the learning activities and meet expectations. 2.1.2 Self-efficacy and its properties Self-efficacy beliefs are not dependent on ones abilities but instead on what one believes may be accomplished with ones personal skills. Moreover, Bandura (1997) believed that there is a major difference between possessing skills and being able to use them in different situations. And that is why, different people with similar skills or the same person on different occasions may perform differently. Bandura (1997) mentioned that self-efficacy beliefs are distinguished from the skills one possesses, although they may be influenced by the acquisition of skills. That is why he assumed that self-efficacy beliefs are often better predictors of success than prior accomplishments, skills, or knowledge. For example, in educational settings, students self-efficacy mediates between the several determinants of competence (e.g., skills, knowledge, ability, or previous achievements) and their subsequent performances (Bandura, 2006; Schunk Pajares, 2001). Bandura (1997) mentioned that optimistic efficacy beliefs maintain and enhance motivation, and boost performance. Optimistic self-efficacy beliefs are instrumental to the successful completion of challenging tasks. These beliefs may increase effort and persistence and promote accomplishment in challenging circumstances. In academic settings, these beliefs seem to be necessary for attempting novel tasks or for learning new materials. He also stated that innovativeness requires an unshakable sense of efficacy to persist in creative endeavors when they demand prolonged investment of time and effort (Bandura, 1997, p. 239). Self-efficacy is not a fixed ability that individuals have or dont have in their repertoire of behaviors. But it is a generative capability in which cognitive, social, emotional and behavioral sub-skills must be organized and effectively orchestrated to serve innumerable purposes (Bandura, 1997, p.36). Bandura (1997) believed that the sense of self-efficacy influences individuals motivations, the goal they set, the effort they expend to achieve their goals and their willingness to persist in the face of difficulties and failures. For example, in an educational setting, students who have the sense of self-efficacy in their academic skills expect high marks on exams and expect the quality of their work to gain benefits for them. Another feature of self-efficacy is that it is task and domain specific. In other words, it refers to specific judgment of a specific situation and it is not a context-free disposition. A high sense of efficacy in one domain does not necessarily mean high sense of self-efficacy in another domain. And this is why measures of self-efficacy must determine the domains of action. In educational settings, self-efficacy beliefs are more specific and situational judgments of capabilities (Bandura, Barbaranelli, Caprara, Pastorelli, 1996; Bong, 2006; Pajares, 1997). In academic settings, according to Bandura (1986), self-efficacy refers to judgment of confidence to perform academic tasks or succeed in academic activities. Self-efficacy beliefs are also hypothesized to mediate the influence of other determinants of academic outcomes such as skills or past performance on subsequent actions. Efficacy beliefs also act in concert with other common mechanisms of personal agency such as self-concept beliefs, anxiety, and self-regulatory practices in influencing and predicting academic outcomes. Also, Bandura (1997) mentioned that in such settings self-efficacy affects students aspirations, their level of interest in academic work and accomplishments and how well they prepare themselves for future careers. He identified two types of efficacy in such settings: One refers to achievement in specific subject area such as language or science and the second refers to self-regulated learning and the extent to which an individual feels successful on tasks that generalize across academic domains. 2.1.3 High and low sense of self-efficacy Bandura (1997) stated that people usually tend to become involved in and perform activities that they judge themselves capable of managing, but they tend to avoid those situations that are threatening and they believe exceed their skills and abilities. In an educational setting, a learner is more likely to exert effort to engage in an assigned learning task when he or she sees him/herself capable of accomplishing it. When facing with difficult situations, those who have a stronger sense of self-efficacy tend to make greater efforts to deal with challenges. But those who have a lower sense of efficacy are likely to avoid engaging in a difficult task or even not try hard enough to accomplish the task. Avoiding difficult tasks leads to lower success and this, in itself, leads to even lower sense of self-efficacy. Based on the researches done in the area of self-efficacy, there are major differences between those with high and low sense of self-efficacy. High self-efficacious people exert more attention, effort and persistence in the case of difficulties than people with lower sense of self-efficacy. Those with high sense of efficacy work harder than their low self-efficacy peers. When those with low sense of self-efficacy fail, they often put the blame for their failure on everything except their own shortcoming. High self-efficacious people set more challenging goals for themselves than low self-efficacious ones. People with high sense of self-efficacy outperform those with low sense of self-efficacy and they employ more strategies to accomplish their goals (Bandura Locke, 2003; Latham, 2004; Locke Latham, 1990). Pajares (2006) reported that students with high sense of self-efficacy, regardless of previous successes or abilities, persist in the face of adversity. Moreover, these students are more optimistic and have lower stress levels and achieve more. Pajares and Schunk (2001) stated that the higher the sense of efficacy, the more energy and effort are used to keep trying tasks or situations that may be more difficult and challenging in nature. They believed that in educational settings, a self-efficacious student takes academic risks, sets goals for him/herself, compares him/herself to other peers, maintains routines, and keeps track of what works well and what doesnt regarding academic and social progress. A self-efficacious person may not have the highest grades in the class, but he/sh e believes in his or her own abilities to accomplish tasks, to find the right answer, to meet goals and often to surpass other peers. Schunk (1983) stated that a heightened sense of efficacy sustains task involvement and results in greater achievement and lower perceptions of efficacy lead to less persistence and lower achievement. Regarding the difference between high and low sense of self-efficacy, Bandura (1997) stated that self-efficacy beliefs influence individuals pursued courses of action, effort expended in given endeavors, persistence in the confrontation of obstacles, and resilience to adversity. Self-efficacious individuals will, therefore, approach challenges with the intention and anticipation of mastery, intensifying their efforts and persistence accordingly. These individuals rapidly recover their lowered sense of self-efficacy after enduring failure or difficulty, and attribute failure to insufficient effort or deficient knowledge. Students with a high level of self-efficacy perceive tough tasks as challenges. They also have higher motivation to conquer the difficulties and more confidence to accomplish demanding tasks. On the contrary, students with low sense of self-efficacy regard things as harder than they really are; they do not perceive their efforts can lead to better results, so they hav e less motivation to devote time to demanding tasks. He also stated that self-efficacy is a factor that can differentiate successful learners from unsuccessful ones. Eggen and Kauchak (2004) mentioned that students who have high self-efficacy are more willing to accept a challenging task, work harder, have a calmer disposition despite experiencing failure in the beginning, practice effective learning strategies, and generally generate better performance than students who have low self-efficacy, even if they have the same ability and skill. Finally, Bandura (1997) describes the feature of self-efficacious learners as follow: self-efficacious learners feel confident about solving a problem because they have developed an approach to problem solving that has worked in the past. They attribute their success mainly to their own efforts and strategies, believe that their own abilities will improve as they learn more, and recognize that errors are part of learning. Students with low self-efficacy believe that they have inherent low ability, choose less demanding tasks and do not try hard because they believe that any effort will reveal their own lack of ability (p. 3). 2.1.4 Self-efficacy and its sources People get their self-efficacy information from four different sources: Mastery experiences, vicarious (observational) experiences, verbal persuasions, and physiological reactions or states (Alderman, 2004; Bandura, 1997; Ormrod, 2003; Pajares, 2003; Pintrich Schunk, 2002; Zimmerman, 2001). The first source of self-efficacy is a mastery experience which is, according to Bandura (1997), the most influential source of efficacy information. Mastery experiences are prior performances that may be interpreted positively or negatively. Successful performances strengthen personal efficacy beliefs while failed performances undermine ones sense of self-efficacy. Successful performances lead to the anticipation of future success. Therefore, the information which is gathered from mastery experiences provides a reliable base from which one can evaluate self-efficacy and predict successful performance of future tasks. According to Palmer (2006), mastery experiences are the most powerful sources of creating a strong sense of efficacy because they provide students authentic evidence that they have the capability to succeed at the task. In educational settings or academic contexts, the previous success of a learner is the most influential source of self-efficacy beliefs. The second source of information for self-efficacy is vicarious experiences. It refers to the appraisal of ones own capabilities in relation to the accomplishment of peers. One can manage a task and foster the belief that he/she might possess similar capabilities by observing the success of comparable peers. Also, observation of the failure of a comparable peer can undermine an individuals perception of the ability to succeed. So, vicarious experience may affect efficacy positively or negatively. The third source of self-efficacy comes from verbal persuasion. It refers to the peoples judgments of others ability to accomplish a given task. Verbal persuasion is a weaker source of efficacy information in comparison to mastery or vicarious experiences. Verbal persuasion can be in the form of performance feedback or encouragement in overcoming obstacles. Positive verbal messages can lead to successful performances in future. On the other hand, negative persuasion can hinder the development of stronger sense of self-efficacy. The last source of self-efficacy information is physiological or emotional states of people such as stress, anxiety, or fatigue in judging their capabilities. Physiological and emotional states can lead both to an expectation for failure or enhancing beliefs for future success. According to Bandura (1997), high emotional arousal can undermine performance and people are more likely to expect success when they are not troubled by aversive arousal than when they are tense and emotionally agitated. Finally, it should be mentioned that self-efficacy beliefs do not come from a single source of the above mentioned information, but it is through the selection, integration and interpretation of information from these diverse sources that ones sense of self-efficacy is formed (Bandura, 1997). 2.1.5 Self-efficacy and similar constructs There are some constructs such as self-esteem, self-concept, and confidence that have fuzzy boundaries with self-efficacy or seem to constitute a conceptual overlap with it. The common feature of all these constructs is that they all refer to beliefs about perceived ability but what distinguishes self-efficacy from them is the idea that it refers to specific types of performance and explicit desired goals or results (Pajares, 1996). The main difference between self-esteem and self-efficacy is that self-esteem is a personal trait while self-efficacy is not. Self-esteem is a more emotional response to self while self-efficacy applies to specific fields of human behavior. Self-efficacy is the assessment of ones capabilities while self-esteem is the assessment of ones self-worth (Epstein Morling, 1995; Maddux, 1995). According to Zimmerman and Cleary (2006), self-esteem is an affective reaction indicating how a person feels about him or herself whereas self-efficacy involves cognitive judgments of personal capacity. They stated that self-esteem is not a predictor of academic performance while self-efficacy is. The main difference between confidence and self-efficacy is that self-efficacy is the belief in ones power to achieve certain levels of performances while confidence does not involve the persons power or ability to perform at a certain level (Epstein Morling, 1995). According to Pajares and Schunk (2001), an individuals self-concept involves evaluation of self-worth and it takes the cultural and social values into consideration. Self-concept has an indirect influence on performance while self-efficacy due to its task-specific nature can predict performance more easily than generalized measures of self-esteem, self-concept or anxiety (Zimmerman Cleary, 2006). Bong and Skaalvik (2003) argued that self-efficacy can be seen as providing a basis for the development of self-concept. Moreover, Pajares (2003) stated that writing self-efficacy is a significant predictor of achievement in writing while writing self-concept beliefs are not. 2.1.6 Self-efficacy and its role in achievement and proficiency Based on the properties of self-efficacy mentioned above, it seems that it plays a great role in determining individuals behavior in their daily lives and especially in educational and academic settings. In this part the role of self-efficacy in individuals achievement and proficiency will be elaborated and some major relevant studies will be reviewed. Some of these studies focus on the predictive power of self-efficacy in individuals achievement. Bandura (1986) assumed self-efficacy to be a much more consistent predictor of behavior than any other closely related variables. He mentioned that many students have difficulty not because they are incapable of performing successfully, but because they are incapable of believing that they can perform successfully, that they have learned to see themselves as incapable of handling academic skills(p. 390). Some researchers (e.g., Bandura, 1997; Pajares, 1997; Schunk, 1989; Zimmerman, 1995) assumed that self-efficacy, which is an individuals judgment about his or her abilities to perform a given task can be a better predictor of success than his/her actual abilities because they considered self-efficacy a critical determinant of behaviors. Some studies that have been done in the educational settings (e.g, Berry, 1987; Schunk, 1989) have shown that when learners have the same skills or they are at the same level of cognitive skill development, their performance can be different depending on their self-efficacy beliefs. That is why, Pajares (1997) stated that peoples prior accomplishments or actual abilities are not always good predictors of their subsequent success because the beliefs they hold about their abilities influence their subsequent behavior. But some researchers (e.g, Carmichael Taylor, 2005; Mills, 2004) warned that measuring self-efficacy in educational settings before the target skills are acquired cannot be considered as a good predictor of achievement. For example, in Mills (2004) study, self-efficacy was measured at the beginning of a semester when the participants had not acquired the required skills to perform the tasks. So, the result revealed that self-efficacy did not predict the final grade. According to Zimmerman and Kitsantas (2005), self-efficacy can better predict or explain subsequent performance when the students are familiar with the necessary skills to perform the task being measured. Schunk (1999) also warned that high self-efficacy beliefs will not produce competent performance if students lack necessary skills. For example, Chen (2003) found that the impact of students self-efficacy beliefs on their math performance was greater when they possessed underlying math skills. Multon, Brown, and Lent (1991) after doing a meta-analysis of self-efficacy research found a positive and significant relationship between self-efficacy beliefs and academic performance. Moreover, they indicated that self-efficacy was strongly related to student performance in a variety of subject matters. They reported that self-efficacy beliefs accounted for approximately 14% of the variance in students academic performance. Graham and Weiner (1996) found that self-efficacy beliefs more consistently predicted academic performance than other motivational constructs. Recently, several researchers (e.g, Maddux Gosselin, 2003; Skaalvik Bong, 2003) have shown that students academic self-efficacy is predictive of their study behavior as well as academic outcomes. Self-efficacy has consistently been shown to be positively associated with general academic achievement (e.g., Jackson, 2002; Lane Lane, 2001) and with performance in several specific domains, including math (Pajares Miller, 1995), and writing (Pajares, 2003; Pajares, Britner, Valiante, 2000). Some recent studies have found a consistent link between having a high sense of self-efficacy and achievement and the fact that efficacy beliefs are one of the most important predictors of motivation and performance (Bong, 2002; Pajares, 1996; Robbins, et al., 2004; Schunk Pajares, 2001). Also, Mills, et al. (2006) found that a stronger sense of self-efficacy leads to higher levels of achievement, greater willingness to face challenges and to exert effort. Many researchers indicated that self-efficacy has a stronger effect on academic performance than other motivational beliefs and it is found to have critical effects on various types of academic learning (Gibson, Randel, Earley, 2000; Linnenbrink Pintrich, 2002; Pintrich Schunk, 2002). Yazici, Seyis, and Altur (2011) found that self-efficacy beliefs are the most powerful predictors of academic achievements. Yang (2004) and Wong (2005) stated that students learning outcome is influenced by their perceived sense of self-efficacy. Moreover, Yang (2004) asserted that students learning attitudes, learning behaviors or even learning performances are affected by their sense of self-efficacy. Wong (2005) has shown that students performance can be facilitated by the enhancement of their sense of self-efficacy. Pajares (2002) mentioned that students academic self-efficacy influence their academic achievements in several ways. It influences the choices students make and the courses of action they pursue. In situations that students have free choices, they tend to engage in tasks about which they feel confident and avoid those in which they dont. It also helps to determine how much effort students will expend on an activity, how long they will persevere when facing obstacles and how resilient they will be in the face of adverse situations. Although considerable research has been done to study self-efficacy in educational and academic settings, most of these studies have been restricted to the domain of mathematical problem solving and languages other than English. For example, (Britner Pajares, 2001; Pajares Graham, 1999) found that perceived self-efficacy of the students mediate between their abilities and their academic performance in mathematics and science. Collins (1982) found that across ability levels, students whose self-efficacy is higher are more accurate in their mathematics computation and show greater persistence on difficult items than do students whose self-efficacy beliefs are low. Pajares and Graham (1999) aimed to determine whether mathematic self-efficacy makes an independent contribution to the prediction of mathematic performance when other motivational variables and previous achievements are controlled. They found that mathematic self-efficacy was the only motivational variable to predict mathem atic performance. Ayotola and Adedeji (2009) examined the relationship between mathematics self-efficacy and mathematics achievement. The result revealed that there was a strong positive relationship between mathematics self-efficacy and achievement in mathematics. The researchers concluded that self-efficacy beliefs are important components of motivation and of academic achievement. Jaafar and Ayub (2010) also found a positive relationship between mathematics self-efficacy and mathematics performance. In the case of languages other than English, McCollum (2003) found that the German language self-efficacy was a significant predictor of the semester final grade. In a similar study, Mills (2004) investigated the relationship between French self-efficacy in reading and listening and proficiency in reading and listening. The result of the analysis indicated that French reading self-efficacy was a predictor of French reading proficiency but French listening self-efficacy was not a predictor of proficiency in listening. Mills (2004) assumed that the failure of French listening self-efficacy to predict French listening proficiency may have been partly due to the fact that the critical task measure in the study-that is, listening proficiency test-possessed psychometric flaws. Recently many researchers have investigated the role of self-efficacy in foreign language settings and the role it plays in the achievement and proficiency in foreign languages specially English. Hsieh and Schallert (2008) examined the relationship between self-efficacy and attribution in a foreign language setting. In their study attribution referred to the explanations individuals give for their success or failure in a particular performance. The result indicated that despite failure in performing the given tasks, students reported the same level of self-efficacy as successful students when they attributed their failure to lack of effort. The researchers concluded that even when students reported having low self-efficacy, helping them view success and failure as an outcome that they can control may increase their expectancy for success and lead to successful experiences. Wang and Wu (2008) adopted the social cognitive model to investigate the role of self-efficacy on behavioral influences such as feedback behaviors and learning strategies and on environmental influences such as achievement. In the case of behavioral influences, the result indicated that self-efficacy was significantly related to students elaborated feedback behaviors and use of learning strategies. However, the results indicated that self-efficacy was not related to students academic performance. The researchers argued that this may be due to the domain specific nature of self-efficacy. They assumed that students who lack performance information or experience in the academic domain may form inaccurate estimation of self-efficacy and this may have been the reason why self-efficacy did not predict students achievement in this study. With regard to learning English, Huang and Shanmao (1996) found a relationship between self-efficacy of ESL students and their scores on the reading and writing sections of the TOEFL test. In a similar study, Templin (1999) divided the EFL participants into high and low self-efficacy groups and found a significant difference between the English proficiency of the two groups. 2.1.7 Self-efficacy and its role in achievement and proficiency in specific skills Some researchers studied the role of efficacy in specific skills of listening, speaking, reading and writing in English. Pajares (2003) in reviewing the predictive power of self-efficacy in writing found that writing self-efficacy makes an independent contribution to the prediction of writing outcomes and plays a meditational role that social cognitive theorists hypothesized. Moreover, he suggested that instruction in self-regulatory strategies such as goal setting, self-recording progress, revision strategies, and self-evaluating progress may increase both self-efficacy and writing skills. Shang (2010) investigated the impact of EFL self-efficacy in reading and reading proficiency. He found a correlation between EFL learners self-efficacy in reading and their reading proficiency. Recently, Sioson (2011) aimed to determine among the subscales of language learning strategies, beliefs about language learning and anxiety which one is the strongest predictor of performance in an academic speaking context. The result of multiple regression analysis revealed that only the motivation and expectation subscale of beliefs about language learning was the significant predictor of speaking performance. Woodrow (2011) indicated that self-efficacy is a powerful predictor of writing performance than anxiety. According to the finding of his study, highly self-efficacious students performed well in their English writing and showed desirable learning attributes such as exerting effort. Ghonsooly and Elahi (2010) found a positive relationship between the Iranian EFL learners self-efficacy in reading comprehension and their reading achievements. The researchers indicated that high self-efficacious learners performed better than low self-efficacious learners in reading achievements. They concluded that EFL learners self-efficacy is an important factor in the achievement of high scores in English language skills such as reading comprehension. Rahemi (2010) studied the self-efficacy of Iranian high school students. The result indicated that students majoring in humanities had a very weak English self-efficacy and held certain negative beliefs about their academic ability as EFL learners. Moreover, a strong correlation was found between their English achievement and sense of self-efficacy. Rahimi and Abedini (2009) explored the role of self-efficacy in listening comprehension of Iranian EFL learners and their listening comprehension test performance. According to the res ults of the study, there was a significant difference between high and low self-efficacious students in terms of listening comprehension. Moreover, self-efficacy in listening was significantly related to listening proficiency. In another study, Graham (2006) studied the role of efficacy in the development of listening skills and

Self Efficacy And The Social Cognitive Theory Education Essay

Self Efficacy And The Social Cognitive Theory Education Essay This chapter is divided into four parts. The first part initially discusses the construct of self-efficacy in the social cognitive theory. Then, definitions and properties of self-efficacy, characteristics of high and low self-efficacious individuals, the sources of self-efficacy and the difference between this construct and other similar constructs are discussed. Moreover, the last section of the first part is devoted to the role of self-efficacy in second/foreign language achievement and proficiency in general and in specific skills. The second part is devoted to the definitions of language learning strategies and their classifications. Moreover, the role of language learning strategies in second/foreign language proficiency and achievement and the relationship between language learning strategies and self-efficacy are discussed in this part, too. The third part is devoted to the construct of anxiety in general and foreign language anxiety in particular. In this part, definitions a nd classifications of anxiety, the role of anxiety in second/foreign language achievement and proficiency and the relationship between foreign language anxiety and self-efficacy are discussed. The last part discusses the concept of listening comprehension and how it is related to the three constructs of self-efficacy, language learning strategies, and foreign language anxiety. 2.1 Self-efficacy and the social cognitive theory To understand the concept of self-efficacy better, one must consider the theoretical framework of social cognitive theory. Bandura (1986, 1997) considers the social cognitive theory as a theory of human functioning. Based on this theory, human functioning can be explained through the operation of three factors that interact with each other. One factor is what Chomsky refers to as cognition, and Bandura in the social cognitive theory refers to as personal factors. Another factor is what Skinner referred to as environment and the third factor is what Bandura refers to as behavior. Bandura (1986) believed in the concept of triadic reciprocality in the social cognitive theory. This refers to the interaction among personal, behavioral and environmental factors. Moreover, an individuals behavior is determined by the interaction of the above mentioned factors. In this theory, individuals are considered as proactive, self-regulating, self-organizing and self-reflecting rather than reactive o nes and controlled by biological or environmental forces. Based on the social cognitive theory, individuals have a system of self-belief or a self-system that enables them to control their actions, feelings, thoughts, and motivation (Bandura, 1986; Pajares, 1997). This self-system makes it possible for individuals to make choices, choose their courses of actions, self-examine the adequacy of their behavior, interpret the outcomes, develop beliefs about their capabilities, and store this information to be used as a guide for future behavior (Bandura, 1986). Bandura (1997) considered the practice of self-reflection as the most influential mediator of human functioning and among the most arbiters of self-reflection are perceptions of self-efficacy. 2.1.1 Self-efficacy and its definitions Bandura (1986) considers self-efficacy as the main feature in the social cognitive theory. Based on the social cognitive theory, self-efficacy is the primary determinant of an individuals motivation to act. Bandura (1986) defines self-efficacy as peoples judgment of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of performances. It is not concerned with the skills one has but with the judgment of what can one do with whatever skills one possesses (p. 391). Besides Bandura, many researchers have provided different definitions of self-efficacy but most of them are based on Banduras definition. Delcourt and Kinzie (1993) stated that self-efficacy reflects an individuals confidence in his or her ability to perform the behavior required to produce specific outcomes (p. 36). Huang and Shanmao (1996) defined self-efficacy expectations as the beliefs about ones ability to perform a given task or behavior successfully (p. 3). Schunk (2001) considers self-efficacy as beliefs about ones capabilities to learn or perform behaviors at designated levels (p. 126). Moreover; Baron and Byrne (2004) identified three kinds of self-efficacy: Social self-efficacy, self-regulatory self-efficacy and academic self-efficacy. They considered social self-efficacy as the ability to maintain relationships, engage in social activities, and become assertive. They referred to the self-regulatory self-efficacy as the ability to be curious, think carefully, and avoid hi gh-risk activities. Finally, they considered academic self-efficacy as the ability to take part in learning activities, regulate the learning activities and meet expectations. 2.1.2 Self-efficacy and its properties Self-efficacy beliefs are not dependent on ones abilities but instead on what one believes may be accomplished with ones personal skills. Moreover, Bandura (1997) believed that there is a major difference between possessing skills and being able to use them in different situations. And that is why, different people with similar skills or the same person on different occasions may perform differently. Bandura (1997) mentioned that self-efficacy beliefs are distinguished from the skills one possesses, although they may be influenced by the acquisition of skills. That is why he assumed that self-efficacy beliefs are often better predictors of success than prior accomplishments, skills, or knowledge. For example, in educational settings, students self-efficacy mediates between the several determinants of competence (e.g., skills, knowledge, ability, or previous achievements) and their subsequent performances (Bandura, 2006; Schunk Pajares, 2001). Bandura (1997) mentioned that optimistic efficacy beliefs maintain and enhance motivation, and boost performance. Optimistic self-efficacy beliefs are instrumental to the successful completion of challenging tasks. These beliefs may increase effort and persistence and promote accomplishment in challenging circumstances. In academic settings, these beliefs seem to be necessary for attempting novel tasks or for learning new materials. He also stated that innovativeness requires an unshakable sense of efficacy to persist in creative endeavors when they demand prolonged investment of time and effort (Bandura, 1997, p. 239). Self-efficacy is not a fixed ability that individuals have or dont have in their repertoire of behaviors. But it is a generative capability in which cognitive, social, emotional and behavioral sub-skills must be organized and effectively orchestrated to serve innumerable purposes (Bandura, 1997, p.36). Bandura (1997) believed that the sense of self-efficacy influences individuals motivations, the goal they set, the effort they expend to achieve their goals and their willingness to persist in the face of difficulties and failures. For example, in an educational setting, students who have the sense of self-efficacy in their academic skills expect high marks on exams and expect the quality of their work to gain benefits for them. Another feature of self-efficacy is that it is task and domain specific. In other words, it refers to specific judgment of a specific situation and it is not a context-free disposition. A high sense of efficacy in one domain does not necessarily mean high sense of self-efficacy in another domain. And this is why measures of self-efficacy must determine the domains of action. In educational settings, self-efficacy beliefs are more specific and situational judgments of capabilities (Bandura, Barbaranelli, Caprara, Pastorelli, 1996; Bong, 2006; Pajares, 1997). In academic settings, according to Bandura (1986), self-efficacy refers to judgment of confidence to perform academic tasks or succeed in academic activities. Self-efficacy beliefs are also hypothesized to mediate the influence of other determinants of academic outcomes such as skills or past performance on subsequent actions. Efficacy beliefs also act in concert with other common mechanisms of personal agency such as self-concept beliefs, anxiety, and self-regulatory practices in influencing and predicting academic outcomes. Also, Bandura (1997) mentioned that in such settings self-efficacy affects students aspirations, their level of interest in academic work and accomplishments and how well they prepare themselves for future careers. He identified two types of efficacy in such settings: One refers to achievement in specific subject area such as language or science and the second refers to self-regulated learning and the extent to which an individual feels successful on tasks that generalize across academic domains. 2.1.3 High and low sense of self-efficacy Bandura (1997) stated that people usually tend to become involved in and perform activities that they judge themselves capable of managing, but they tend to avoid those situations that are threatening and they believe exceed their skills and abilities. In an educational setting, a learner is more likely to exert effort to engage in an assigned learning task when he or she sees him/herself capable of accomplishing it. When facing with difficult situations, those who have a stronger sense of self-efficacy tend to make greater efforts to deal with challenges. But those who have a lower sense of efficacy are likely to avoid engaging in a difficult task or even not try hard enough to accomplish the task. Avoiding difficult tasks leads to lower success and this, in itself, leads to even lower sense of self-efficacy. Based on the researches done in the area of self-efficacy, there are major differences between those with high and low sense of self-efficacy. High self-efficacious people exert more attention, effort and persistence in the case of difficulties than people with lower sense of self-efficacy. Those with high sense of efficacy work harder than their low self-efficacy peers. When those with low sense of self-efficacy fail, they often put the blame for their failure on everything except their own shortcoming. High self-efficacious people set more challenging goals for themselves than low self-efficacious ones. People with high sense of self-efficacy outperform those with low sense of self-efficacy and they employ more strategies to accomplish their goals (Bandura Locke, 2003; Latham, 2004; Locke Latham, 1990). Pajares (2006) reported that students with high sense of self-efficacy, regardless of previous successes or abilities, persist in the face of adversity. Moreover, these students are more optimistic and have lower stress levels and achieve more. Pajares and Schunk (2001) stated that the higher the sense of efficacy, the more energy and effort are used to keep trying tasks or situations that may be more difficult and challenging in nature. They believed that in educational settings, a self-efficacious student takes academic risks, sets goals for him/herself, compares him/herself to other peers, maintains routines, and keeps track of what works well and what doesnt regarding academic and social progress. A self-efficacious person may not have the highest grades in the class, but he/sh e believes in his or her own abilities to accomplish tasks, to find the right answer, to meet goals and often to surpass other peers. Schunk (1983) stated that a heightened sense of efficacy sustains task involvement and results in greater achievement and lower perceptions of efficacy lead to less persistence and lower achievement. Regarding the difference between high and low sense of self-efficacy, Bandura (1997) stated that self-efficacy beliefs influence individuals pursued courses of action, effort expended in given endeavors, persistence in the confrontation of obstacles, and resilience to adversity. Self-efficacious individuals will, therefore, approach challenges with the intention and anticipation of mastery, intensifying their efforts and persistence accordingly. These individuals rapidly recover their lowered sense of self-efficacy after enduring failure or difficulty, and attribute failure to insufficient effort or deficient knowledge. Students with a high level of self-efficacy perceive tough tasks as challenges. They also have higher motivation to conquer the difficulties and more confidence to accomplish demanding tasks. On the contrary, students with low sense of self-efficacy regard things as harder than they really are; they do not perceive their efforts can lead to better results, so they hav e less motivation to devote time to demanding tasks. He also stated that self-efficacy is a factor that can differentiate successful learners from unsuccessful ones. Eggen and Kauchak (2004) mentioned that students who have high self-efficacy are more willing to accept a challenging task, work harder, have a calmer disposition despite experiencing failure in the beginning, practice effective learning strategies, and generally generate better performance than students who have low self-efficacy, even if they have the same ability and skill. Finally, Bandura (1997) describes the feature of self-efficacious learners as follow: self-efficacious learners feel confident about solving a problem because they have developed an approach to problem solving that has worked in the past. They attribute their success mainly to their own efforts and strategies, believe that their own abilities will improve as they learn more, and recognize that errors are part of learning. Students with low self-efficacy believe that they have inherent low ability, choose less demanding tasks and do not try hard because they believe that any effort will reveal their own lack of ability (p. 3). 2.1.4 Self-efficacy and its sources People get their self-efficacy information from four different sources: Mastery experiences, vicarious (observational) experiences, verbal persuasions, and physiological reactions or states (Alderman, 2004; Bandura, 1997; Ormrod, 2003; Pajares, 2003; Pintrich Schunk, 2002; Zimmerman, 2001). The first source of self-efficacy is a mastery experience which is, according to Bandura (1997), the most influential source of efficacy information. Mastery experiences are prior performances that may be interpreted positively or negatively. Successful performances strengthen personal efficacy beliefs while failed performances undermine ones sense of self-efficacy. Successful performances lead to the anticipation of future success. Therefore, the information which is gathered from mastery experiences provides a reliable base from which one can evaluate self-efficacy and predict successful performance of future tasks. According to Palmer (2006), mastery experiences are the most powerful sources of creating a strong sense of efficacy because they provide students authentic evidence that they have the capability to succeed at the task. In educational settings or academic contexts, the previous success of a learner is the most influential source of self-efficacy beliefs. The second source of information for self-efficacy is vicarious experiences. It refers to the appraisal of ones own capabilities in relation to the accomplishment of peers. One can manage a task and foster the belief that he/she might possess similar capabilities by observing the success of comparable peers. Also, observation of the failure of a comparable peer can undermine an individuals perception of the ability to succeed. So, vicarious experience may affect efficacy positively or negatively. The third source of self-efficacy comes from verbal persuasion. It refers to the peoples judgments of others ability to accomplish a given task. Verbal persuasion is a weaker source of efficacy information in comparison to mastery or vicarious experiences. Verbal persuasion can be in the form of performance feedback or encouragement in overcoming obstacles. Positive verbal messages can lead to successful performances in future. On the other hand, negative persuasion can hinder the development of stronger sense of self-efficacy. The last source of self-efficacy information is physiological or emotional states of people such as stress, anxiety, or fatigue in judging their capabilities. Physiological and emotional states can lead both to an expectation for failure or enhancing beliefs for future success. According to Bandura (1997), high emotional arousal can undermine performance and people are more likely to expect success when they are not troubled by aversive arousal than when they are tense and emotionally agitated. Finally, it should be mentioned that self-efficacy beliefs do not come from a single source of the above mentioned information, but it is through the selection, integration and interpretation of information from these diverse sources that ones sense of self-efficacy is formed (Bandura, 1997). 2.1.5 Self-efficacy and similar constructs There are some constructs such as self-esteem, self-concept, and confidence that have fuzzy boundaries with self-efficacy or seem to constitute a conceptual overlap with it. The common feature of all these constructs is that they all refer to beliefs about perceived ability but what distinguishes self-efficacy from them is the idea that it refers to specific types of performance and explicit desired goals or results (Pajares, 1996). The main difference between self-esteem and self-efficacy is that self-esteem is a personal trait while self-efficacy is not. Self-esteem is a more emotional response to self while self-efficacy applies to specific fields of human behavior. Self-efficacy is the assessment of ones capabilities while self-esteem is the assessment of ones self-worth (Epstein Morling, 1995; Maddux, 1995). According to Zimmerman and Cleary (2006), self-esteem is an affective reaction indicating how a person feels about him or herself whereas self-efficacy involves cognitive judgments of personal capacity. They stated that self-esteem is not a predictor of academic performance while self-efficacy is. The main difference between confidence and self-efficacy is that self-efficacy is the belief in ones power to achieve certain levels of performances while confidence does not involve the persons power or ability to perform at a certain level (Epstein Morling, 1995). According to Pajares and Schunk (2001), an individuals self-concept involves evaluation of self-worth and it takes the cultural and social values into consideration. Self-concept has an indirect influence on performance while self-efficacy due to its task-specific nature can predict performance more easily than generalized measures of self-esteem, self-concept or anxiety (Zimmerman Cleary, 2006). Bong and Skaalvik (2003) argued that self-efficacy can be seen as providing a basis for the development of self-concept. Moreover, Pajares (2003) stated that writing self-efficacy is a significant predictor of achievement in writing while writing self-concept beliefs are not. 2.1.6 Self-efficacy and its role in achievement and proficiency Based on the properties of self-efficacy mentioned above, it seems that it plays a great role in determining individuals behavior in their daily lives and especially in educational and academic settings. In this part the role of self-efficacy in individuals achievement and proficiency will be elaborated and some major relevant studies will be reviewed. Some of these studies focus on the predictive power of self-efficacy in individuals achievement. Bandura (1986) assumed self-efficacy to be a much more consistent predictor of behavior than any other closely related variables. He mentioned that many students have difficulty not because they are incapable of performing successfully, but because they are incapable of believing that they can perform successfully, that they have learned to see themselves as incapable of handling academic skills(p. 390). Some researchers (e.g., Bandura, 1997; Pajares, 1997; Schunk, 1989; Zimmerman, 1995) assumed that self-efficacy, which is an individuals judgment about his or her abilities to perform a given task can be a better predictor of success than his/her actual abilities because they considered self-efficacy a critical determinant of behaviors. Some studies that have been done in the educational settings (e.g, Berry, 1987; Schunk, 1989) have shown that when learners have the same skills or they are at the same level of cognitive skill development, their performance can be different depending on their self-efficacy beliefs. That is why, Pajares (1997) stated that peoples prior accomplishments or actual abilities are not always good predictors of their subsequent success because the beliefs they hold about their abilities influence their subsequent behavior. But some researchers (e.g, Carmichael Taylor, 2005; Mills, 2004) warned that measuring self-efficacy in educational settings before the target skills are acquired cannot be considered as a good predictor of achievement. For example, in Mills (2004) study, self-efficacy was measured at the beginning of a semester when the participants had not acquired the required skills to perform the tasks. So, the result revealed that self-efficacy did not predict the final grade. According to Zimmerman and Kitsantas (2005), self-efficacy can better predict or explain subsequent performance when the students are familiar with the necessary skills to perform the task being measured. Schunk (1999) also warned that high self-efficacy beliefs will not produce competent performance if students lack necessary skills. For example, Chen (2003) found that the impact of students self-efficacy beliefs on their math performance was greater when they possessed underlying math skills. Multon, Brown, and Lent (1991) after doing a meta-analysis of self-efficacy research found a positive and significant relationship between self-efficacy beliefs and academic performance. Moreover, they indicated that self-efficacy was strongly related to student performance in a variety of subject matters. They reported that self-efficacy beliefs accounted for approximately 14% of the variance in students academic performance. Graham and Weiner (1996) found that self-efficacy beliefs more consistently predicted academic performance than other motivational constructs. Recently, several researchers (e.g, Maddux Gosselin, 2003; Skaalvik Bong, 2003) have shown that students academic self-efficacy is predictive of their study behavior as well as academic outcomes. Self-efficacy has consistently been shown to be positively associated with general academic achievement (e.g., Jackson, 2002; Lane Lane, 2001) and with performance in several specific domains, including math (Pajares Miller, 1995), and writing (Pajares, 2003; Pajares, Britner, Valiante, 2000). Some recent studies have found a consistent link between having a high sense of self-efficacy and achievement and the fact that efficacy beliefs are one of the most important predictors of motivation and performance (Bong, 2002; Pajares, 1996; Robbins, et al., 2004; Schunk Pajares, 2001). Also, Mills, et al. (2006) found that a stronger sense of self-efficacy leads to higher levels of achievement, greater willingness to face challenges and to exert effort. Many researchers indicated that self-efficacy has a stronger effect on academic performance than other motivational beliefs and it is found to have critical effects on various types of academic learning (Gibson, Randel, Earley, 2000; Linnenbrink Pintrich, 2002; Pintrich Schunk, 2002). Yazici, Seyis, and Altur (2011) found that self-efficacy beliefs are the most powerful predictors of academic achievements. Yang (2004) and Wong (2005) stated that students learning outcome is influenced by their perceived sense of self-efficacy. Moreover, Yang (2004) asserted that students learning attitudes, learning behaviors or even learning performances are affected by their sense of self-efficacy. Wong (2005) has shown that students performance can be facilitated by the enhancement of their sense of self-efficacy. Pajares (2002) mentioned that students academic self-efficacy influence their academic achievements in several ways. It influences the choices students make and the courses of action they pursue. In situations that students have free choices, they tend to engage in tasks about which they feel confident and avoid those in which they dont. It also helps to determine how much effort students will expend on an activity, how long they will persevere when facing obstacles and how resilient they will be in the face of adverse situations. Although considerable research has been done to study self-efficacy in educational and academic settings, most of these studies have been restricted to the domain of mathematical problem solving and languages other than English. For example, (Britner Pajares, 2001; Pajares Graham, 1999) found that perceived self-efficacy of the students mediate between their abilities and their academic performance in mathematics and science. Collins (1982) found that across ability levels, students whose self-efficacy is higher are more accurate in their mathematics computation and show greater persistence on difficult items than do students whose self-efficacy beliefs are low. Pajares and Graham (1999) aimed to determine whether mathematic self-efficacy makes an independent contribution to the prediction of mathematic performance when other motivational variables and previous achievements are controlled. They found that mathematic self-efficacy was the only motivational variable to predict mathem atic performance. Ayotola and Adedeji (2009) examined the relationship between mathematics self-efficacy and mathematics achievement. The result revealed that there was a strong positive relationship between mathematics self-efficacy and achievement in mathematics. The researchers concluded that self-efficacy beliefs are important components of motivation and of academic achievement. Jaafar and Ayub (2010) also found a positive relationship between mathematics self-efficacy and mathematics performance. In the case of languages other than English, McCollum (2003) found that the German language self-efficacy was a significant predictor of the semester final grade. In a similar study, Mills (2004) investigated the relationship between French self-efficacy in reading and listening and proficiency in reading and listening. The result of the analysis indicated that French reading self-efficacy was a predictor of French reading proficiency but French listening self-efficacy was not a predictor of proficiency in listening. Mills (2004) assumed that the failure of French listening self-efficacy to predict French listening proficiency may have been partly due to the fact that the critical task measure in the study-that is, listening proficiency test-possessed psychometric flaws. Recently many researchers have investigated the role of self-efficacy in foreign language settings and the role it plays in the achievement and proficiency in foreign languages specially English. Hsieh and Schallert (2008) examined the relationship between self-efficacy and attribution in a foreign language setting. In their study attribution referred to the explanations individuals give for their success or failure in a particular performance. The result indicated that despite failure in performing the given tasks, students reported the same level of self-efficacy as successful students when they attributed their failure to lack of effort. The researchers concluded that even when students reported having low self-efficacy, helping them view success and failure as an outcome that they can control may increase their expectancy for success and lead to successful experiences. Wang and Wu (2008) adopted the social cognitive model to investigate the role of self-efficacy on behavioral influences such as feedback behaviors and learning strategies and on environmental influences such as achievement. In the case of behavioral influences, the result indicated that self-efficacy was significantly related to students elaborated feedback behaviors and use of learning strategies. However, the results indicated that self-efficacy was not related to students academic performance. The researchers argued that this may be due to the domain specific nature of self-efficacy. They assumed that students who lack performance information or experience in the academic domain may form inaccurate estimation of self-efficacy and this may have been the reason why self-efficacy did not predict students achievement in this study. With regard to learning English, Huang and Shanmao (1996) found a relationship between self-efficacy of ESL students and their scores on the reading and writing sections of the TOEFL test. In a similar study, Templin (1999) divided the EFL participants into high and low self-efficacy groups and found a significant difference between the English proficiency of the two groups. 2.1.7 Self-efficacy and its role in achievement and proficiency in specific skills Some researchers studied the role of efficacy in specific skills of listening, speaking, reading and writing in English. Pajares (2003) in reviewing the predictive power of self-efficacy in writing found that writing self-efficacy makes an independent contribution to the prediction of writing outcomes and plays a meditational role that social cognitive theorists hypothesized. Moreover, he suggested that instruction in self-regulatory strategies such as goal setting, self-recording progress, revision strategies, and self-evaluating progress may increase both self-efficacy and writing skills. Shang (2010) investigated the impact of EFL self-efficacy in reading and reading proficiency. He found a correlation between EFL learners self-efficacy in reading and their reading proficiency. Recently, Sioson (2011) aimed to determine among the subscales of language learning strategies, beliefs about language learning and anxiety which one is the strongest predictor of performance in an academic speaking context. The result of multiple regression analysis revealed that only the motivation and expectation subscale of beliefs about language learning was the significant predictor of speaking performance. Woodrow (2011) indicated that self-efficacy is a powerful predictor of writing performance than anxiety. According to the finding of his study, highly self-efficacious students performed well in their English writing and showed desirable learning attributes such as exerting effort. Ghonsooly and Elahi (2010) found a positive relationship between the Iranian EFL learners self-efficacy in reading comprehension and their reading achievements. The researchers indicated that high self-efficacious learners performed better than low self-efficacious learners in reading achievements. They concluded that EFL learners self-efficacy is an important factor in the achievement of high scores in English language skills such as reading comprehension. Rahemi (2010) studied the self-efficacy of Iranian high school students. The result indicated that students majoring in humanities had a very weak English self-efficacy and held certain negative beliefs about their academic ability as EFL learners. Moreover, a strong correlation was found between their English achievement and sense of self-efficacy. Rahimi and Abedini (2009) explored the role of self-efficacy in listening comprehension of Iranian EFL learners and their listening comprehension test performance. According to the res ults of the study, there was a significant difference between high and low self-efficacious students in terms of listening comprehension. Moreover, self-efficacy in listening was significantly related to listening proficiency. In another study, Graham (2006) studied the role of efficacy in the development of listening skills and

Essay example --

The Great Irish Famine was undoubtedly one of Irelands darkest periods of history. The Great Famine, or also referred to as the Irish Potato famine was from 1845 through 1852 where many people starved, were disease stricken, poor and some forced to emigrate. The reliance on the potato to the Irish people was so great that when the Famine struck, the population declined greatly. The famine caused around one million deaths and another million immigrated to different countries. The Irish people’s health, death and emigration didn’t only impact themselves and their families but also Irelands social and economical state. For what began as a natural disaster, the conditions of Ireland during and post famine were intensified by actions (or the lack of action) from the Whig government. (BBC) In 1800 the British Act of Union made Ireland apart of the United Kingdom after the Irish staged a major rebellion against British rule. Before the famine happened, Ireland was a society in a crisis because of a rapidly expanding population. The population went from 2.5 million to 8.5 million, which put pressure on land, and food. The potato was a cheap crop, which was the staple diet of the rural population of Ireland. While it was cheap and easily accessible, it was also easily diseased. Potatoes are good with cleansing soil so they became more numerous in Irelands agriculture and diet. About one acre of potato growth could feed a family for a year since it is a crop that is healthy and can well feed people. Pre-famine, the rural poor people of Ireland ate around fourteen pounds of potato per person per day. They would eat it for breakfast, lunch and dinner with a liquid compliment such as salty water, skimmed milk, buttermilk, etc. The potato was ... ...sh Potato famine from 1845-1852 was Irelands greatest natural disaster that created a lasting struggle. The famine produced struggles that had a great effect on the economic and social trends for many years. The impact it had on the country and its lasting legacy through out the world is significant in Irish history. Unfortunately the famine had great negative impact on the country and forced many citizens to immigrate. The political aspect of the famine was disordered and produced a lot of difficulties and troubles. Although it is unknown what exactly the death count was, it was exceptionally high enough to be called a natural disaster, which occurred within the authority of Great Britian. Great Britian was the most industrially advanced empire at the time. The impact that Great Britian had on the Irish famine produces questions on how they reacted to the tragedy.

Edm Influence

In the last decade Electronic Dance Music, or EDM, has made a complete 180 in the United States. It has shifted from a genre that was mostly underground with few listeners into popular music. Not only has it begun to top billboards, but it has influenced artists of many other genres to â€Å"hop on the bandwagon† and begin using it in their songs as well. From commercials to theme songs of popular television programs, the influx of EDM can be seen throughout American society.One of the biggest changes EDM has brought to the music industry is that due to most of the artists’ knowledge of computers, not to mention the day and age we live in where we are all connected over the internet, they are able to take advantage of communicating and promoting over the internet to reach out to their fans. This allows these artists to listen to their fans and give them what they are asking for.Contrary to the EDM artists, many rock and pop artists have â€Å"used and abused them [fans ], sold them overpriced CDs, tried to sell them music they didn't like by using stupid gimmicks† (Doherty) causing them to lose their foothold on the charts and allow EDM to step right in. The influences of EDM can also be seen by looking at pop artist and the way their songs have begun using more electric beats and styles. â€Å"Katy Perry's ‘Fireworks' and Rihanna's ‘Only Girl' [were] both co-produced† (Doherty) by electro-house artists and one of Britney Spears’ newer songs, ‘Hold It Against Me,’ also included signs of dubstep.On Jay-Z and Kanye West’s collaborative album ‘Watch the Throne’ the song ‘Who Gon Stop Me’ has a sample from a very popular EDM song by Flux Pavilion called ‘I Can’t Stop. ’ The most surprising influence of EDM on an artist, however, can be placed on Taylor Swift. In her new album ‘Red’ she has a song called ‘22’ which features many e lectronic and upbeat rhythms in it. These are only a few of the many artists that have incorporated electronic music into their songs and in doing so helped to render EDM even more widespread and dominant in today’s music industry.EDM also has begun showing up in music festivals, on television, and in movies. â€Å"It’s artists headline huge festivals†¦ its hooks soundtrack commercials; its textures bolster movie scenes† (Doherty). The EDM music festivals have grown very popular in the last decade, Deadmau5, a famous EDM Dj, compares one of these festivals in the 90’s to one a few years ago and recalls â€Å"[there were] only about 4-5000 people, but it was huge at the time. You go out to L. A. now, to Gary Richards' Hard parties — he gets 20-40,000. The Dj’s are bringing a visual and physical experience for the audience during these festivals by having laser shows and visual graphics appear while their music plays. Television commerci als have also started to embrace this trend. Microsoft included and promoted Alex Clare’s ‘Too Close’ in their commercial for the new Internet Explorer. This commercial boosted Alex Clare’s career, before the commercial he was only known in the U. K. In a final form of media the movies have also assimilated EDM into their soundtracks. ‘Tron: Legacy’ had a soundtrack that was almost entirely devoted to EDM.Because of all this assimilations into mass media of all forms, EDM’s influence in the United States has only grown more rapidly and stronger. It seems that one cannot go a day without hearing a song under this genre; it surrounds and influences pop culture every day. Similar to rock and roll in the 1950’s, EDM has experienced demonization from parents and threats of legislation over the concern â€Å"fueled by concern over the ecstasy-related deaths. † These laws see â€Å"electronic music itself as a gateway to social degradation† (Doherty) and seek to disassemble EDM.According to Josh Glazer, editor of URB magazine, â€Å"It may cause a cooling down period, but in the end, electronic music, festivals, etc. , are simply not something that will ever be halted. There is both too much demand and too much economic incentive. † If the law were to shut down EDM then many business and individuals would be left bankrupt or jobless. Although this may seem dismal and unfair in the present, rock and roll received the same kind of â€Å"critique which now seems quaint and ridiculous. †In conclusion EDM has brought about many social and cultural effects due to the changes it created to the industry. Through its artists’ computer knowledge they have brought about a greater fan/artist connection along with allowing any aspiring artist the ability to create his/her own music just by downloading different software. Finally EDM has influenced mainstream pop artists, directors, and market ing agencies to incorporate a more electrical and up beat sound to their music, ads, or movies because it appeals to the young audiences.

Aplied Linguistics, L1 and L2 Essays

Aplied Linguistics, L1 and L2 Essays Aplied Linguistics, L1 and L2 Essay Aplied Linguistics, L1 and L2 Essay Reading Worksheet 1: Read the extract Applied Linguistics: An emerging discipline for the twenty-first century in your reading packs and answers the following questions: 1. On the basis of the information provided by Grabe, complete the following chart. Which conclusions can you draw regarding the scope of Applied Linguistics? Decade |Focus of Applied Linguistics | | |Insights of structural and functional linguistics that could be applied to language teaching and | |1950s |literacy in first and second language. | |Language assessment, language policies and second language acquisition ( focused on learning rather | |1960s |than teaching) | | |Real world problems rather than theoretical explorations: Language assessment, second language | |1970s |acquisition, literacy, multilingualism, language minority rights language planning and policy and | | |teacher training. Language teaching remains important. | | |Incorporation of many subfields beyond language teaching and language learning such as: language | |1980s |assessment, language policy and planning, language use in professional settings, translation, | | |lexicography, multilingualism, language and technology and corpus linguistics. | |Incorporation of more subfields and drawing on supporting disciplines: Psychology, education, | |1990s |anthropology, sociology, political science, policy studies, administration studies, English studies ( | | |rhetoric, composition, literacy) | 2. What is the central issue in Applied Linguistics? Has it changed in the same way as its scope? In a very general point of view, applied linguistics is focused on language-related real-life problems; but it hasn’t always been this way, back in the 50s, applied linguistics focused mainly in second and first language teaching and then it began to emerge as a genuine problem-solving enterprise. Late in the 90’s, applied linguistics led into the theoretical and empirical investigation of real world problems in which language is a central issue. So, upon the course of years, applied linguistics has developed into a more practical use of this one. 3. Why is Generative Linguistics not dominant in Applied Linguistics? Which are the competing approaches for linguistic analysis that are growing recognition, instead? Why are they preferred to the generative approach? 4. Why is interdisciplinary a defining aspect of Applied Linguistics nowadays? Because applied linguistics uses methods and insights of several established disciplines or traditional fields; it has acknowledge about other fields a part from linguistics and it crosses a wide range of settings follow. 5. Why do some scholars claim that Applied Linguistics is not a discipline? What is the author’s point of view? Why? Because they do believe that applied linguistics is too broad and fragmented that it demands expert knowledge in too many fields and that doesn’t have a set of unifying research paradigms. The author believes that applied linguistics can be considered a discipline much in the way that many other disciplines are defined. He explains that as several other new relatively new disciplines in academic institutions, applied linguistics has its core and periphery which can blur into other disciplines that can or not be allied with it. Read the extract An Overview of Applied Linguistics in your reading pack and answer the following questions: 1. How many different areas within AL are listed in the chapter? Which is the dominant one? 2. What is Authorship identification? 3. What is the Grammar-translation method? What is the Direct method? Which are the main problems with those methods? How long did they last? 4. When and why did Audiolingualism emerge? Was it successful? Why? 5. What replaced Behaviourism? Why? 6. What is the main argument for linguistic nativism? 7. What is communicative competence? 8. Describe the main focus of communicative language teaching. In which particular aspects of language use is it useful? Which is the main problem with this approach? What replaced it? 9. In which way(s) has computing technology provided useful insights in language description? 10. Why isn’t Chomsky’s notion of competence a proper object of study for Sociolinguistics?