Clean Air Act Essays - Pollutants, Soil Contamination, Free Essays

Clean Air Act Essays - Pollutants, Soil Contamination, Free Essays Clean Air Act 1990, the federal Clean Air Act was passed to improve air quality in the United States. President Bush's proposed amendments to the Clean Air Act initially would have led to the introduction of alternative, non-petroleum fuels. The petroleum and oxygenate industries responded by offering a reformulated gasoline program as a substitute for most of the alternate fuel proposals. As a result, the amendments to the federal Clean Air Act adopted in 1990 required steps to achieve lower vehicle emissions, including programs to oxygenate and reformulate gasoline. Oxygenated gasoline is designed to increase the combustion efficiency of gasoline, thereby reducing carbon monoxide emissions. Since January 1995, the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments require areas that have the most severe ozone pollution to use reformulated gasoline containing fuel oxygenates to improve air quality. Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether is one of the most commonly used fuel oxygenates because it is produced in very large amounts from isobutylene, a waste product in the refining process. MTBE can be easily produced at the refinery, at a low cost, and can be transferred through existing pipelines once it has been blended with gasoline. In contrast to other gasoline additives used in the past, MTBE is a member of a class of chemical compounds, ethers, whose unique properties are enhanced solubility in water and chemical attraction to water molecules. These properties, along with widespread use of MTBE, have resulted in frequent detection of MTBE in samples of shallow groundwater from urban areas throughout the United States. MTBE moves quickly to shallow groundwater because it is not attached to soil particles, and is chemically attracted to water molecules. MTBE the potential to impact regional groundwater sources and may present a cumulative contamination hazard due to its mobility and apparent recalcitrance. The United States Geological Survey, in a paper presented to the American Chemical Society in San Francisco in April 1997, noted that MTBE can move from shallow to deeper aquifers with time. MTBE enters the environment, and eventually the groundwater, mainly from leaking underground fuel tanks and associated piping, but also from incomplete combustion in internal combustion engines, spilling and evaporation during transportation and refueling, and watercraft exhaust. Atmospheric precipitation may be another potential sourc e of MTBE in groundwater, because MTBE percolates easily through soil due to its small molecular size and solubility in water, allowing it to move rapidly into groundwater. The Environmental Protection Agency has classified MTBE as a possible human carcinogen, but no drinking-water regulation has been established for the compound. The Environmental Protection Agency has issued a drinking water advisory of 20- 40 micrograms per liter, based upon odor and taste thresholds, and to provide a large margin of safety from carcinogenic effects. Since February 1997, the California Department of Health Services has required public water suppliers to monitor their drinking water sources for MTBE. As of December 1997, about 23%of drinking water sources in California had been sampled for MTBE contamination. Of those sites tested, 33 or 1.3%, had detectable levels of MTBE. Of the contaminated sites tested, 36% had MTBE levels above the state's proposed drinking water standard. Some water systems only test every three years for volatile organic compounds, such as MTBE, so it will be the end of 2000 before all systems will have been tested. For MTBE, this frequency of impact to public drinking wells may not be a reliable indicator of future trends because it reflects a history of releases, including those involving gasoline formulations containing no or only low volumes of MTBE. It also appears that dissolved benzene plumes were of larger regulatory concern than MTBE in previous studies. Most studies have indicated that MTBE does not biodegrade easily under various environmental conditions. If a research investigation determines that a compound does not degrade, a half-life is not reported and the compound is classified as recalcitrant. MTBE is generally reported as recalcitrant, and there are no widely accepted estimates of the half-life. Investigators have reported that MTBE is recalcitrant in anaerobic laboratory studies including denitrifying conditions, sulfate-reducing conditions, methanogenic-reducing conditions, and anaerobic conditions in landfill-affected aquifer material, soils, and sludges. One 1995 result indicated there was no degradation of MTBE in an aerobic laboratory study after more

Battle of Waxhaws in the American Revolution

Battle of Waxhaws in the American Revolution The Battle of Waxhaws was fought May 29, 1780, during the American Revolution (1775-1783) and was one of several American defeats in the South that summer. In late 1778, with the fighting in the northern colonies increasingly becoming a stalemate, the British began to expand their operations to the south. This saw troops under Lieutenant Colonel Archibald Campbell land and capture Savannah, GA on December 29. Reinforced, the garrison withstood a combined Franco-American attack led by Major General Benjamin Lincoln and  Vice Admiral Comte dEstaing the following year. Seeking to expand this foothold, the British commander-in-chief in North America,  Lieutenant General Sir Henry Clinton, mounted a large expedition in 1780 to capture Charleston, SC. The Fall of Charleston Though Charleston had defeated an earlier British attack in 1776, Clintons forces were able to capture the city and Lincolns garrison on May 12, 1780 after a seven-week siege. The defeat marked the largest surrender of American troops during the war and left the Continental Army without a sizable force in the South. Following the American capitulation, British forces under Clinton occupied the city. Escaping North Six days later, Clinton dispatched Lieutenant General Lord Charles Cornwallis with 2,500 men to subdue the South Carolina back country. Advancing from the city, his force crossed the Santee River and moved towards Camden. En route, he learned from local Loyalists that South Carolina Governor John Rutledge was attempting to escape to North Carolina with a force of 350 men. This contingent was led by Colonel Abraham Buford and consisted of the 7th Virginia Regiment, two companies of the 2nd Virginia, 40 light dragoons, and two 6-pdr guns. Though his command included several veteran officers, the majority of Bufords men were untested recruits. Buford had originally been ordered south to aid in the Siege of Charleston, but when the city was invested by the British he received new directions from Lincoln to assume a position at Lenuds Ferry on the Santee River. Reaching the ferry, Buford soon learned of the citys fall and commenced withdrawing from the area. Retreating back toward North Carolina, he had a large lead on Cornwallis. Understanding that his column was too slow to catch the fleeing Americans, Cornwallis detached a mobile force under Lieutenant Colonel Banastre Tarleton on May 27 to run down Bufords men. Departing Camden late on May 28, Tarleton continued his pursuit of the fleeing Americans. Armies Commanders Americans Colonel Abraham Buford420 men British Lieutenant Colonel Banastre Tarleton270 men The Chase Tarletons command consisted of 270 men drawn from the 17th Dragoons, Loyalist British Legion, and a 3-pdr gun. Riding hard, Tarletons men covered over 100 miles in 54 hours. Warned of Tarletons rapid approach, Buford sent Rutledge ahead towards Hillsborough, NC with a small escort. Reaching Rugeleys Mill mid-morning on May 29, Tarleton learned that the Americans had camped there the previous night and were around 20 miles ahead. Pressing forward, the British column caught up with Buford around 3:00 PM at a location six miles south of the border near Waxhaws. The Battle of Waxhaws Defeating the American rearguard, Tarleton sent a messenger to Buford. Inflating his numbers to scare the American commander, he demanded Bufords surrender. Buford delayed responding while his men reached a more favorable position before replying, Sir, I reject your proposals, and shall defend myself to the last extremity. To meet Tarletons attack, he deployed his infantry into a single line with a small reserve to the rear. Opposite, Tarleton moved directly to assault the American position without waiting for his entire command to arrive. Forming his men on a small rise opposite the American line, he divided his men into three groups with one assigned to strike the enemy right, another the center, and the third the left. Moving forward, they began their charge approximately 300 yards from the Americans. As the British approached, Buford ordered his men to hold their fire until they were 10-30 yards away. While an appropriate tactic against infantry, it proved disastrous against cavalry. The Americans were able to fire one volley before Tarletons men shattered their line. With the British dragoons hacking with their sabers, the Americans began surrender while others fled the field. What happened next is a subject of controversy. One Patriot witness, Dr. Robert Brownfield, claimed that Buford waved a white flag to surrender. As he called for quarter, Tarletons horse was shot, throwing the British commander the ground. Believing their commander to have been attacked under a flag of truce, the Loyalists renewed their attack, slaughtering the remaining Americans, including wounded. Brownfield insinuates that this continuation of hostilities was encouraged by Tarleton (Brownfield Letter). Other Patriot sources claim that Tarleton ordered the renewed attack as he did not wish to be encumbered with prisoners. Regardless, the butchery continued with American troops, including wounded, being struck down. In his report after the battle, Tarleton stated that his men, believing him struck down, continued the fight with a vindictive asperity not easily restrained. After approximately fifteen minutes of fighting the battle concluded. Only around 100 Americans, including Buford, succeeded in escaping the field. Aftermath The defeat at Waxhaws cost Buford 113 killed, 150 wounded, and 53 captured. British losses were a light 5 killed and 12 wounded. The action at Waxhaws quickly earned Tarleton nicknames such as Bloody Ban and Ban the Butcher. In addition, the term Tarletons Quarter quickly came to mean that no mercy would be given. The defeat became a rallying cry in the region and led many to flock to the Patriot cause. Among those were numerous local militias, particularly those from over the Appalachian Mountains, which would play a key role at the Battle of Kings Mountain that October. Vilified by the Americans, Tarleton was decisively defeated by Brigadier General Daniel Morgan at the Battle of Cowpens in January 1781. Remaining with Cornwallis army, he was captured at the Battle of Yorktown. In negotiating the British surrender, special arrangements had to be made to protect Tarleton due to his unsavory reputation. After the surrender, the American officers invited all of their British counterparts to dine with them but specifically forbade Tarleton from attending.

Battle of Waxhaws in the American Revolution

Battle of Waxhaws in the American Revolution The Battle of Waxhaws was fought May 29, 1780, during the American Revolution (1775-1783) and was one of several American defeats in the South that summer. In late 1778, with the fighting in the northern colonies increasingly becoming a stalemate, the British began to expand their operations to the south. This saw troops under Lieutenant Colonel Archibald Campbell land and capture Savannah, GA on December 29. Reinforced, the garrison withstood a combined Franco-American attack led by Major General Benjamin Lincoln and  Vice Admiral Comte dEstaing the following year. Seeking to expand this foothold, the British commander-in-chief in North America,  Lieutenant General Sir Henry Clinton, mounted a large expedition in 1780 to capture Charleston, SC. The Fall of Charleston Though Charleston had defeated an earlier British attack in 1776, Clintons forces were able to capture the city and Lincolns garrison on May 12, 1780 after a seven-week siege. The defeat marked the largest surrender of American troops during the war and left the Continental Army without a sizable force in the South. Following the American capitulation, British forces under Clinton occupied the city. Escaping North Six days later, Clinton dispatched Lieutenant General Lord Charles Cornwallis with 2,500 men to subdue the South Carolina back country. Advancing from the city, his force crossed the Santee River and moved towards Camden. En route, he learned from local Loyalists that South Carolina Governor John Rutledge was attempting to escape to North Carolina with a force of 350 men. This contingent was led by Colonel Abraham Buford and consisted of the 7th Virginia Regiment, two companies of the 2nd Virginia, 40 light dragoons, and two 6-pdr guns. Though his command included several veteran officers, the majority of Bufords men were untested recruits. Buford had originally been ordered south to aid in the Siege of Charleston, but when the city was invested by the British he received new directions from Lincoln to assume a position at Lenuds Ferry on the Santee River. Reaching the ferry, Buford soon learned of the citys fall and commenced withdrawing from the area. Retreating back toward North Carolina, he had a large lead on Cornwallis. Understanding that his column was too slow to catch the fleeing Americans, Cornwallis detached a mobile force under Lieutenant Colonel Banastre Tarleton on May 27 to run down Bufords men. Departing Camden late on May 28, Tarleton continued his pursuit of the fleeing Americans. Armies Commanders Americans Colonel Abraham Buford420 men British Lieutenant Colonel Banastre Tarleton270 men The Chase Tarletons command consisted of 270 men drawn from the 17th Dragoons, Loyalist British Legion, and a 3-pdr gun. Riding hard, Tarletons men covered over 100 miles in 54 hours. Warned of Tarletons rapid approach, Buford sent Rutledge ahead towards Hillsborough, NC with a small escort. Reaching Rugeleys Mill mid-morning on May 29, Tarleton learned that the Americans had camped there the previous night and were around 20 miles ahead. Pressing forward, the British column caught up with Buford around 3:00 PM at a location six miles south of the border near Waxhaws. The Battle of Waxhaws Defeating the American rearguard, Tarleton sent a messenger to Buford. Inflating his numbers to scare the American commander, he demanded Bufords surrender. Buford delayed responding while his men reached a more favorable position before replying, Sir, I reject your proposals, and shall defend myself to the last extremity. To meet Tarletons attack, he deployed his infantry into a single line with a small reserve to the rear. Opposite, Tarleton moved directly to assault the American position without waiting for his entire command to arrive. Forming his men on a small rise opposite the American line, he divided his men into three groups with one assigned to strike the enemy right, another the center, and the third the left. Moving forward, they began their charge approximately 300 yards from the Americans. As the British approached, Buford ordered his men to hold their fire until they were 10-30 yards away. While an appropriate tactic against infantry, it proved disastrous against cavalry. The Americans were able to fire one volley before Tarletons men shattered their line. With the British dragoons hacking with their sabers, the Americans began surrender while others fled the field. What happened next is a subject of controversy. One Patriot witness, Dr. Robert Brownfield, claimed that Buford waved a white flag to surrender. As he called for quarter, Tarletons horse was shot, throwing the British commander the ground. Believing their commander to have been attacked under a flag of truce, the Loyalists renewed their attack, slaughtering the remaining Americans, including wounded. Brownfield insinuates that this continuation of hostilities was encouraged by Tarleton (Brownfield Letter). Other Patriot sources claim that Tarleton ordered the renewed attack as he did not wish to be encumbered with prisoners. Regardless, the butchery continued with American troops, including wounded, being struck down. In his report after the battle, Tarleton stated that his men, believing him struck down, continued the fight with a vindictive asperity not easily restrained. After approximately fifteen minutes of fighting the battle concluded. Only around 100 Americans, including Buford, succeeded in escaping the field. Aftermath The defeat at Waxhaws cost Buford 113 killed, 150 wounded, and 53 captured. British losses were a light 5 killed and 12 wounded. The action at Waxhaws quickly earned Tarleton nicknames such as Bloody Ban and Ban the Butcher. In addition, the term Tarletons Quarter quickly came to mean that no mercy would be given. The defeat became a rallying cry in the region and led many to flock to the Patriot cause. Among those were numerous local militias, particularly those from over the Appalachian Mountains, which would play a key role at the Battle of Kings Mountain that October. Vilified by the Americans, Tarleton was decisively defeated by Brigadier General Daniel Morgan at the Battle of Cowpens in January 1781. Remaining with Cornwallis army, he was captured at the Battle of Yorktown. In negotiating the British surrender, special arrangements had to be made to protect Tarleton due to his unsavory reputation. After the surrender, the American officers invited all of their British counterparts to dine with them but specifically forbade Tarleton from attending.

Should it be lowered Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Should it be lowered - Essay Example During an interview by CBS News, John McCardell, former president of Middlebury College said that the drinking law was an abysmal failure in eliminating underage drinking, it drove the habit underground behind the scenes, into more risky and unmanageable settings. These settings included basements, fraternity houses and locked dormitories where minors hid from the law and adults. The law created a dangerous culture of irresponsible and reckless habits, unsupervised binge and excess drinking. For example, minors gulp bottles of beer in seconds trying to perfect the art of getting drunk quickly before they are discovered by adults (Johnson & Alex, 46). The irresponsible drinking behaviour endangers the lives of minors because they cannot access emergency medical care during their drinking sprees as they hide themselves. They also fear reporting alcohol related medical emergencies since it is breaking the law. The drinking age should be lowered because the current law is unworkable, difficult to enforce and doesn’t stop minors from drinking. The enforcement of this law is routinely avoided and results in two or three arrests out of thousands of violations. The police aren’t in apposition to stop all cases of underage drinking, they can only contain it. The police department admitted that the law is ineffective. The police tried different techniques to curb drinking by minors but only few techniques succeeded (Toomey & Rosenfeld, 57). For example, they would find a party where minors were drinking and seal the house. They would write tickets to all the minors coming from the house and report them to their parents. All these efforts only pushed underage drinking underground instead of eliminating the habit. Pushing the drinking habit underground is endangers lives of the minors because encourages irresponsible drinking extremes and other antisocial behaviour such as drug abuse and crime. According to Ellis Henican (author of

American International Group (AIG) Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

American International Group (AIG) - Essay Example These resulted when AIG was encountered with ratings downgrades. The company underwent demands of tens of billions of dollars for cash collateral on the credit default swops that were written by financial products and assured by the investing company. Some of the world’s biggest financial institutions managed to hedge their contribution in the risky credit default swap business living AIG struggling on its own (Roth and Buchwalter, 1). AIG selected the federal office of Thrift supervision (OTS) after purchasing a saving’s loan in 1999, which was an agency charged with supervision of savings, loan banks and economy associations. OTS became the primary regulator of the company. Notably AIG financial products are not a licensed insurance agency; therefore, it was not synchronized by the states. The financial product is primarily an investment that is based in London. It managed to evade control, as provided by the British financial services authority, principally because O TS, which was an equivalent regulator of the British regulatory body, had registered the AIG holding company. Nonetheless, even though OTS accepted its part as the holding company regulator, it should be understood that credit swaps were exempted from regulation by British policies thus preventing the states from regulating these instruments (Dinallo, 4). Collateralized Death Obligations Most people buy life insurance for the profit off their family members or those that rely on their on their earnings. Banks would buy a large number of life settlements to create the collateral pool which they would expect to begin making payment as earlier as probable. However, risks arise when the insurer fails to meet the death gain claim. This policy entails that investors will persist in paying out premiums on insurance and will eventually get the payout once a person dies. If the policyholder encounters his death earlier, this will entail that the returns will be immense. However, if there is a greater increase in life expectancy for a certain segment of the populace. Companies such as AIG lose money in downturns when claims mount which at times may result in bankruptcy (Lewitt, 183). Recently AIG has sought to garner support among investors and credit ratings companies for a deal that is highly viewed as controversial. This is the sale of securities supported by insurance guidelines of the aging people. However, this has gained few customers as critics refer to these deals as death bonds because they principally pay once the insured person has demised. The giant insurer’s life-settlements portfolio overall sum is $18 billion in anticipated death benefits. This is in regard to the company’s financial filings which has witnessed an approximation of over $45 billion traded since the market started over a decade ago. The AIG activity in a way depicts the company’s entrepreneurial culture as well as exhibiting hoe the company has fallen in last few years as it strived to raise funds to repay the government bailout, thus resulting on it making little profits (Sullivan, 1). Credit Default Swaps (CDS)

Inequality in British Schools Essay Example for Free

Inequality in British Schools Essay The educational system is one of the most influential institutions in society as it provides young people with a vast amount of knowledge, attitudes and skills. These are acquired formally through set lessons or informally through the ‘hidden curriculum’ which provides the unofficial and unplanned consequences of school experience. Social Inequality is one of the major preoccupations of sociology. The relationship between inequality and education has been studied for many years. Although it seems obvious that educational success is simply down to an individual’s capabilities and motivation, sociological research shows that the inequalities in social class, gender and race and ethnicity have had a huge influence in the differential achievement within British schooling. The development of the educational system in Britain was first put in place to secure equal educational opportunities for all young people, however despite these efforts, sociological evidence states that not all children with the same ability achieve the same success. Some sociologists, such as Charles Murray have contended with the idea that genetic intellectual potential determines an individual’s performance in school. This idea is rejected by the conflict theorist’s as they believe social class to be one of the main factors that determine whether a child is successful at school or not, as there are major differences between the levels of achievement of those that are part of the working social class and those apart of the middle class. (Macionis. J, Plummer.K, 2008) One of the main explanations for this is material deprivation. Working class families are financially in a worse position than those of the middle class and therefore are not able to make the most of their educational opportunities. As they are living in poorer housing conditions they may not have the space at home to be able to complete their schoolwork with full concentration. The lack of financial funds means that many families will not be able to provide their children with the necessities needed to fully develop within education, for example a household computer, sports equipment, or even money for school trips. It may be financially difficult for parents on a low income to support their children in higher education as well. Although student grants have been put in place, many children avoid higher education as they worry about the debt or travel costs. It also more likely for those from a working class  background to be managing education with a part time job, such as paper rounds or shop work, this can cause conflict between the amount of time available for work and the amount of time spent on studying. (Browne. K, 2005) Research suggests that it is not only factors outside of the school that can effect achievement; there are also factors inside the school that have an impact on a child’s educational experiences. Teachers have been known to take into account things such as a child’s standard of behaviour, dress, speech and their social class and background and this reflects how teachers treat particular individuals within the classroom. Teachers are often part of the middle class and the children that share the same values and standards are likely to be seen as ‘brighter’ than those with working class values. The working class have a different focus on their values, attitudes and their lifestyle in soc iety. This often works as a barrier to the success of the working class. The blame for underachievement is often focused in the direction of the family and community. These material and cultural conditions put working class children at a disadvantage when it comes to achievement in schools. Many of these factors, which have no relation to biological potential, have contributed to the educational class divide in Britain. Sociologist Robert.K.Merton was credited for the term ‘self-fulfilling prophecy’ which focuses on a teacher’s attitude towards a pupil, for example if a pupil is labelled as bright and is encouraged and praised by the teacher, the child will feel self-confident and will strive for success. On the other hand if the teacher labels a pupil as ‘un co-operative’ or from a ‘poor’ background, this can cause low self-esteem and the pupil will be likely to fail to achieve much success. The Neo Marxist’s perspective on class stratification in Britain claims that schools create a ‘false class consciousness’ so it seems that they promote equal opportunities for all, but they really reproduce a capitalist division of labour, preparing young people for class-determined careers in the labour market. Willis (1977) accepts the Marxist’s view on education being closely linked to the needs of the capitalist’s system; however he does not agree with the idea of there being a direct link between education and the economy. (Macionis. J, Plummer.K, 2008) His study found that â€Å"poorer children often grow up in environments where people see little hope of upward social mobility and rebel against the system rather than trying to  conform with in. In such an environment adults often discourage rather than encourage success at school.† (Macionis. J, Plummer.K, 2008) Social class is not the only inequality in Britain’s schooling. So ciologists have also found a link between gender and academic success. Until the late 1980’s there was high concern about the underachievement of girls. Societies had been structured to consider schooling more important for males than for females. Although the gap in gender inequality has narrowed in Britain, many women still study traditionally feminine subjects, such as literature whilst men are more likely to study subjects that are seen to be more masculine like engineering. (Macionis. J, Plummer.K, 2008) Sue Sharpe in a 1976 survey called ‘just like a girl’ discovered that the priorities of young girls were ‘love, marriage, husbands, children and then jobs and careers, more or less in that order’. When she repeated her research in 1994, she found that the order had changed to ‘having a job, career and being able to support themselves before having a family.’ (Browne. K, 2005) Weiner (1995) has argued that teachers have more forcefully challenged stereotypes since the 1980’s and sexist images have been removed from learning materials, which could be the reason for the changes in girl’s attitudes towards their own education. The increase in incentives for girls to gain qu alifications has been due to a number of reasons, one of them being the women’s movement that managed to achieve a great deal of success in challenging traditional stereotypes for women’s roles in society. Many women now look past traditional roles, such as housewives and mothers and are motivated to gain independence and to do well in their careers. Women on average work hard during their time at school and are more motivated to do well. They put more effort into their presentation as they give up more time to do their school work. (Browne. K, 2005) It is clear that there have been major changes in the gender perception of girls in Britain’s schools and the inequalities between males and females has become less and less. Although certain traditional gender perceptions exist through subject choice, females now have more equal opportunities to gain knowledge within the classroom and achieve success. However in modern day society the tables have now turned and there has been a sudden ‘moral panic’ over the underachievement of boys. (Weiner, Arnot and David 1997) Swann (1992) found that boys dominated class discussion by often acting inappropriately and interrupting, whereas girls  are known to have a more laid back attitude within the classroom and are praised for their abilities to listen and co-operate, which leads to the teacher having a more positive view to girls within the class, helping to produce the ‘self-fulfilling prophecy’ of girls greater achievement levels. (Holborn.M and Langley.P, 2002) Mitsos and Browne accept that boys are under-achieving and suggest that it is because men are culturally encouraged to appear macho and tough in society and these types of behaviours take place within the classroom and distract from learning. They also believe that the decline in manual work may result in the working class boys losing motivation as it is getting harder and harder to find jobs. Although these reasons seem valid, sociologists believe that more research has to be done within this area. (Holborn.M and Langley.P, 2002) More recent studies on education and gender have come away from the simple ‘differential achievement’ and now take into account a lot more processes within schools. The active role of the pupil is seen to create gender relationships and the way in which children form ideas on identities is seen to have a bigger impact. We have discussed social class and gender inequalities within Britain’s schools; however we are still to look into ethni city and race and the effects this has on differential achievement within schools. Many children from ethnic minority backgrounds tend to not do as well as other members of the population when it comes to education. Similar to the working class issues as majority of ethnic minority groups are part of the working class they face a series of disadvantages in social conditions, such as poor housing conditions and higher rates of unemployment within their home, which can cause a disadvantage in the chances of success. (Macionis. J, Plummer.K, 2008) Ethnic minorities are also at a disadvantage in school as they often suffer from isolation or racism from other pupils or are even discriminated against from teachers. Although, all schools in Britain are now legally obliged to have an anti-racist policy and teachers are now trained in equality legislation, research in secondary schools has shown conflict between white teachers and African Caribbean pupils. Stereotypes of African Caribbean young males have caused teachers to have more positive expectations of other ethnic mi nority groups, more than others. This explains the high level of black exclusions from schools and also explains why most permanent exclusions are down to disobedience of some sort, for  example pupils refusing to conform to school rules or being verbally abusive to teachers. The Labelling of certain pupils can cause them to comply with what is expected of them, for example disruptive behaviour and therefore leads to major effects on achievement. Phoenix (2001) conducted numerous studies identifying racism in schools; some suggest teachers discriminate against black and South Asian students, treating them in stereotypical ways. (Holborn.M and Langley.P, 2002) Racism can cause ethnic minorities to feel in some ways rejected from society and therefore racism within schools can cause young people to feel rejected from school as well, which can lead to prevention of achievement as individuals are not able to work to their full potential as they are not happy and comfortable in the school environment. Not all sociologists agree with the inequalities of ethnic minorities in schools. Taylor (1981) argues that the emphasis on faults in the education system should be treated with some degree of caution. Teachers do not necessarily behave in ways that reflect negative stereotypes of ethnic minority groups according to Taylor and that many teachers consider ethnic equality within schools to be of a high level of importance. (Holborn.M and Langley.P, 2002) There is enough evidence to link differential achievement with inequalities within Britain’s schools. Social class and ethnic inequalities effect the education and success of some pupils to some extent. Although, there have been developments and improvements on equality in society as a whole including educational institutions, there is still a long way to go before all individuals can be provided with equal opportunities of success. There are still clear class divisions within Britain’s schools as the working class are constantly at a disadvantage which prevents them from achieving to their full potential. Ethnic minority groups have very similar issues that need to be addressed in order for equal opportunities to evolve. However, there have been drastic changes in gender equality in schools and females and males are now being treated equally within the classroom. These changes have occurred within the whole of society as traditional gender stereotypes have been broken. These changes have had positive results as females now strive to achieve success. Referencing Browne, K., 2005. An introduction to sociology. 3rd ed. Cambridge: Polity Press Holborn, M., Langley, P., 2002. Sociology Themes and Perspectives. Fulham: Collins Macionis, J.J., Plummer, K., 2008. Sociology. 4th ed. Essex: Pearson Moore, S., Aiken, D., Chapman, S., 2006. Sociology A2. 2nd ed. Fulham: Collins Girls and Education (online) Available at: http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/girls_education.htm Assessed on 07/06/2012

Full Body Scanners Do Not Lead to Safer Travel Essays -- Airport Secur

Why should anyone including my 3-year-old daughter unnecessarily be exposed to cancer causing X-ray beams in a full body scanner? Or have a total stranger run his or her hands up and down my daughter's body for a full pat-down upon refusing the scan? Most enraging is that the scan can be done without my knowledge. Full body scanners should not be used in United States airports. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA), on November 20, 2010 implemented the use of 385 scanners, otherwise know as advanced imaging technology in 68 airports to include Denver International Airport. The TSA is using these machines supposedly to ensure safer travel and be steps ahead of security threats. According to the TSA, as a preventive measure, scanners where rapidly deployed after Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's failed attempt at blowing up an aircraft with pentaerythritol tetranitrate, or PETN sewn in his underwear December 25, 2009. Former Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff claimed that if Abdulmutallab had gone through screening or a full pat-down, the explosives would have been discovered (Eggen, DeYoung and Hsu 2). The TSA also claims that not all explosives or explosive devices can be detected through metal detectors. The scanner machines cannot detect explosives such as the type that Abdulmutallab had concealed. Abdullah Ansieri had a detonator and explosives hidden in his rectum when he tried to kill Saudi Arabia's counter-terrorism chief, Prince Mohammed bin Nayef. Ansieri was Saudi's most wanted man and managed to get through two rigorous airport screenings and Saudi Secret Service, who defend royals by any means necessary. Professor Clive Williams a counter-terrorism expert of the Australian National University said the mac... ...he-real-radiation-risk-of-the-tsas-full-body-x-ray-scans/> 5. Bell, Jason. â€Å"Review of the TSA X-ray backscatter body scanner safety report: hide your kids, hide your wife.† My Helical Tryst, blogspot.com, 22 Nov 2010. Web. 1 Dec 2010. 6. â€Å"You asked for it...You got it, Millimeter Wave images.† blog.tsa.gov. TSA 09 May 2008. Web. 1 Dec 2010. . 7. "Are Full Body Scan Images Saved? Issue Challenged In Federal Court...† wgrz, Buffalo, 06 Aug 2010. Web. 1 Dec 2010. . 8. Meserve, Jeanne, and Mike M. Ahlers. â€Å"Body scanners can store, send images, group says.† CNN 11 Jan 2010: 1. Web. ! Dec 2010.