Salinity groundwater in eastern province saudi arabia Term Paper

Salinity groundwater in eastern province saudi arabia - Term Paper Example As such, the country suffers from the consequent desert effects, which include lack of enough clean water since there are no perennial rivers in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia depends on surface water resources which include the annual rainfall of about 300mm that occurs between October and March in southeast Saudi Arabia (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2009). Moreover, other parts in Saudi Arabia depend on groundwater especially in the eastern province of Saudi Arabia. Just like in any other part of the world, water quality is very fundamental for the development of civilization in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Indeed water quality helps in establishing a database for planning future water resources development strategies in the country. Notably, the central and eastern region in Saudi Arabia depends on groundwater for domestic and industrial purposes. Geologists and other environmental experts confirmed that six major consolidated sedimentary old-age aquifers called the Arabian Shelf are the main sources of groundwater in Saudi Arabia (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2009). Depending on the geochemistry of the underlying aquifer, the groundwater from the Arabian Shelf contains dissolved salts and other components that contaminate the available water in the Eastern province of Saudi Arabia. Various factors define the quality and contamination levels of groundwater. Such factors include the irregular recharge in arid regions (Sharaf, 2012). Such variations occur in different times and in different places including the Eastern province of Saudi Arabia. Most assuredly, the chemical and physical components in the groundwater may be in significant levels that lead to adverse health and environmental effects. In the Arabian Shelf, such constituents are in excess of their permissible limits that promotes health hazards and environmental problems (Al-Zarah, 2007). This

Considered for academic reinstatement Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Considered for academic reinstatement - Essay Example me tasks for the city and borough of Juneau as a Security Officer; (3) I inadvertently took several Law Enforcement classes all over the country which were too structured and used up most of my spare time; (4) I was also an Army reserve and therefore, due to longer hours spent at work, there remained virtually shortened time periods for both compliance to academic requirements and to personal rest; and finally (5) time constraint inevitably limited access to references and sources for academic compliance. Currently, I definitely am not satisfied with my general standing in the program. I am aware that the desire and pursuit to attain my original vision is still aflame. With the awareness of the rationale for failure to sustain the required GPA, I am more than determined to overcome whatever obstacles I have recently encountered. I realize that my ultimate objective of finishing the program I started with Empire State College is still my priority. In this regard, with renewed hope and unwavering spirit, I humbly seek for re-admission in the program. The dilemma brought about by mistakes in the previous semester made me aware that I deeply regret the academic lapses. The realization and threat of being totally obliterated from the program awakened my senses. I have planned the following measures to improve and maintain the required GPA: (1) severance of my employment responsibilities for the state of Alaska and the city of Juneau to make compliance to academic requirements my priority; (2) leave the Army; (3) participate more actively in study groups; (3) consult with my advisor and professors for academic requirements; (4) be more involved in both curricular and extracurricular activities; (5) apply time management techniques to prioritize tasks and responsibilities; and (6) seriously prepare for tests and examinations to maximize learning. I have utilized the same techniques when I took specialized training for the State of Alaska. I am aware that it is a

Perfume Essay Example for Free

Perfume Essay Identify all the things that happen to Grenouille in these chapters that you feel either shouldn’t happen to a child or are insensitive. Explain or attempt to justify these events. Within the pages of the first few chapters, Grenouille’s birth and early childhood is narrated. Grenouille is coldly dismissed at birth. He was brought to the world, by his mother on heap of fish guts, only for her to abandon him. No child should ever have to endure such cruel rejection, no human should ever be left to die in such a grotesque manner. Grenouille however survives and is placed under the care of a wet nurse, who put him into anothers arms in complain of him drinking too much milk and being too much of a liability. Grenouille was passed on from one wet nurse to another, never being shown any affection. He was not treated as a child should be, never allowed to received a mother’s love. The last wet nurse that was given the responsibility of caring for Grenouille, handed him over to Father Terrier, in accusation of the infant being a devil due to his lack scent. She claimed he did not smell of a normal child, that he gave off no smell whatsoever. At the harmless age of a month, Grenouille was accused of being a monster. Father terrier however disregards the wet nurse’s absurd allegations. The novel progresses however, with Father Terrier wanting to rid the baby, as he felt Grenouille had violated him, almost as if he had the ability to penetrate his innermost thoughts, as if he could see what was within Father Terrier with his nose. Grenouille was thrown around for the way he made people feel, however he never brought no harm upon people this early in the book. Father Terrier then puts him in Madame Gaillard’s orphanage. Here he was given a roof for a long time, however he was not welcome by the other children. Many attempts were made at his life, bricks were piled on him, in attempt to suffocate him, however Grenouille managed to survive each and every one of these attempts. Grenouille’s presence made the children feel uncomfortable, just as Father Terrier had felt. There was a coldness, a darkness about Grenouille. However the attempts at murdering him, were made only on the basis of how Grenouille’s presence made the other children feel. Grenouille up till this point had not done anything wrong; he had caused no harm to any of those around him. A few years later however, Madame Gaillard no more received money on Grenouille’s behalf, and so sent him off to work for a man under harsh conditions. Here he contracted a disease leaving him a cripple, bearing permanent scars. Grenouille withstood all these things, a child should never deserve. What is the significance about the context in which Grenouille is introduced in Part One Pg 16. Why does Father Terrier refuse the wet nurses accusations of Grenouille being a devil? â€Å"He’s possessed by the Devil† â€Å"Impossible! It is absolutely impossible for an infant to be possessed by the devil. An infant is not a human being, it is a pre-human being and does not yet possess a fully developed soul. Which is why it is of no interest to the devil. Does some evil stench come out from him? † These are the words Father Terrier speaks in retort of Jeane Beusse, the wet nurse’s accusations. According to Father Terrier, a devil would only possess one with a fully developed soul and has no interest in possessing an infant due to its lack of one. Father Terrier also believes in the devil carrying a foul odor, and hence the nurse’s claims of the baby being odd in that, his flesh carries no scent, only re-affirms his stand on the baby being ordinary, and unaffected whatsoever by the devil. Terrier believes, that the baby not smelling at all, a sign of good health. Father Terrier is also a strong believer of children being God sent, and hence them being possessed is completely out of the question. Terrier also claims the olfactory sense a primitive one, a sense that cannot be trusted. â€Å"The fool sees with his eyes rather than his nose†. Pg 18. Is Father Terrier responsible for Grenouille? Father Terrier is not officially given the responsibility of taking care of little Grenouille, however takes it upon himself to care for him. In some ways he is responsible for Grenouille, as he took him in from the wet nurse, and so in a way is making a commitment towards caring for him. Therefore it is his duty to take care of him to the best of his ability. Father Terrier also sympathizes with Grenouille as he believes a child should not be treated the way Grenouille was. Father Terrier also imagines himself being the child’s father, he feels sentimentally connected to the baby, adding to the responsibility he has over him. Pg 18. What do you make of the actions of the baby and Terriers   response to it? The child awoke, his nose first. Little Grenouille perceived Terrier through his nose. It seemed almost as if the little infant was scrutinizing Father Terrier. The baby’s actions seem as though he can penetrate Father Terrier’s innermost thoughts, as if he can see through Father Terrier’s exterior, see what he really is. Father Terrier feels violated, and feels ashamed, as this baby with no scent, who is innocent, sees through Father Terrier, a man with odor, as everyone at the time. The odor is used as a metaphor for what Father Terrier has to hide. The baby in his arms has no odor, and so has nothing to hide, however Father Terrier is odorous, hence explaining his sense of being violated. Forever crinkling, and puffing and quivering†. These are the words used to describe the baby’s nose after smelling Father Terrier. One crinkles their nose, and puffs air outwards, upon smelling something foul. As smell is used here as a metaphor of who Father Terrier really is, as the baby perceives him through his nose, the baby perceives him as someone who is foul and repulsive. Father Terrier is threatened by the baby , and feels uncomfortable in its presence leading to his hurried notion to find another to take care of the child. Pg 20. ‘Gone was the homely thought that this might be . Explain what happens. 1. Pg 24. This is a challenging page. What does it infer about the teller of Grenouilles tale and his attitude towards him? How do you feel about Grenouille after this? 2. Pg 28-29. These pages relate to Grenouilles language acquisiton. What is particularly noticeable about his vocabulary growth? 3. Pg 35. What happens to Madame Gaillard? What is ironic about this? Look particularly at the last sentence of Chapter 5.

Does Herodotus believe in Cultural Relativism Essay Example for Free

Does Herodotus believe in Cultural Relativism Essay For its time and place, The Histories of Herodotus is a work of remarkably expansive scope. To set the stage for the wars between Greece and Persia ( 490-479 B. C. ), Herodotus describes the geographical and cultural background and reviews the political history of Lydia, Media, Babylon, Egypt, Persia, Scythia, Libya, Ionia, and various Greek city-states in Asia Minor, on the Aegean islands, and on the European mainland. To record the results of his research (historie, in Greek) with the greatest vigor and accuracy, Herodotus traveled to many of these places and gathered firsthand data from native informants. For this type of research, in the words of a modern commentator, Herodotus merits the title not only of the father of history; he is also the father of comparative anthropology. Among the various classes of information which Herodotus seems to have emphasized, thus suggesting a pattern for later descriptions, were marriage customs, religious rites, burial practices, and food habits. The description of these four categories of traits, or social institutions, were not necessarily executed in the round for every tribe that happened to stroll across the pages of the Histories; but they were mentioned often enough to indicate the direction taken by his curiosity, and the content of the questions he probably put to informants. Herodotus, the ancient Greek, was a cheerful, inquisitive, rationalistic extrovert who traveled over his world to discover the facts, who took delight in telling a good story but usually avoided the temptation to wander very far from sober common sense. His cultural relativism is well known and much discussed, but it is particularly noteworthy that Greeks and barbarians are placed on a equal footing at the outset. Distinctions between Greek and non-Greek break down as the work progresses: the first barbarian for whom we get any detailed information is the Hellenized Lydian king, Croesus; the divisions of lands customary among the Greeks that separate Greek and non-Greek peoples are purely arbitrary; we learn of the Phoenician descent of Spartas kings; and Herodotus states that the descendants of Perseus came to be counted as Greeks. The key dichotomy is not the Hellenic-barbarian bipolarity, but rather the opposition of the ordered society based on law and the arbitrary rule of the despot. But political and social institutions are fragile structures, and Herodotus gives no guarantee that the Greek superiority at the time of the Persian Wars, which was based upon those institutions, will last. In fact his work closes on an ominous note that appears to warn imperial Athens that it is in danger of becoming, if it has not already become, the barbarian. We are presented with the gruesome picture of the crucifixion of the Persian satrap Artayctes at the command of the Athenian commander Xanthippus, father of Pericles, and a piece of wisdom from the Persian founding father, Cyrus, on the dangers of success and affluence. And it is well to remember that Herodotus wrote long after the Persian threat had passed, when Athenian imperial power was at its apogee. Herodotos interest in reciprocity is symptomatic of contemporary philosophy, not least in Ionia. Moreover, Herodotos very project, his attempt to explain and explore the Persian Wars, can be considered as a study of reciprocity in cross-cultural interaction, not least because those wars were for Herodotos a stage in a reciprocal, cross-cultural process, as he asserts in the proem. Indeed, war itself may be seen as an exchange, a reciprocal undertaking: the tactics of the Skythian Idanthyrsos allow him to wage war while explicitly rejecting the relationship that war usually entails. Herodotos origins in western Asia Minor, a key area of interface between Greek and non-Greek culture, may have led him to give particular thought to the issue of cross-cultural reciprocity, as also to the Persian Wars, for which the Ionian Revolt had been the catalyst, if not the cause. At the same time, the justice and injustice of imperialism remained a burning issue through the fifth century into the fourth, and not only Persian imperialism, but also Athenian, Spartan, and Macedonian. The Persian Wars were the great antecedents of the Peloponnesian War, in the early years of which Herodotos seems to have completed his work. The Persians themselves continued to play a major role in the politics of the Greek world: the onset of the Peloponnesian War seems to have inspired new attempts to deal with them, and with other non-Greeks, as indicated in comic style in Aristophanes Akharnians of 425 BC. 25 This is understandable, for it was to be Persian resources that would give ultimate victory to the Spartans in that war. Thus, it is quite possible that crosscultural reciprocity was a topical concern in Athens and elsewhere when Herodotos completed his work, though the issue had been close to the centre of Greek preoccupations at least since the time of the Persian Wars, Herodotos subject. The Persian Wars had reinforced a Hellenic self-image, defined by contrast with the barbarian identity, and had thereby further problematized relationships between Greek and non-Greek. In particular, Greeks (especially Athenians, perhaps) could and did use their defeat of Persia as confirmation of a broader superiority over the barbarian. In exploring the difficulties of forming relationships with the other, Herodotos Histories present readers with failures and disasters, arising primarily from ignorance, over-confidence, and cultural chauvinism. There is a definite element of pessimism in the Histories, for the inability to penetrate beyond contingent nomoi and thereby to see other as self is taken to be an observable feature of human nature, as manifested throughout the narrative. In particular, wars are seen to be the products of injustice and attendant ignorance. But there is also hope; for the author claims for himself the ability to rise above commonplace failings and offers to provide his readers with a better understanding of themselves, of others, and of reciprocity. Like Kroisos, the reader may pass into a state of deeper understanding through advice confirmed by experience. Where Kroisos had the advice of Solon and suffered personal disaster, the reader has the advice of Herodotos the author and suffers vicarious disaster, experiencing experiences. Baldry notices that Herodotos calls into question the whole dichotomy between Greek and barbarian, when he presents the Egyptian perspective, according to which barbarians are not those who do not speak Greek, but those who do not speak Egyptian. At the same time, as Laurot has shown, Herodotos displays no interest in condemning barbarians as such, nor in subordinating them to Greeks. Rather, his presentation in the Histories of nomoi of the barbarian other offers insights into the nomoi of the Greek self (or better, selves), insofar as the various Greek nomoi constitute Herodotos principal frame of reference and benchmark. However, as Rosellini and Said valuably stress, Herodotos does not present the barbarian other as a monolithic unity, any more than he presents the Greeks themselves as a unity: rather he ranges across the different nomoi that exist among barbarians and through the complexities of interaction between various barbarian peoples. The Histories are not so much a mirror, as Hartog would have it, but a hall of mirrors with multiple reflections. The key point is that in the Histories cultural differences, however profound they may be, are presented as secondary to a common human nature and a common human condition: in that sense too Greek is barbarian, self is other. The categories of Greek and barbarian are familiar to Herodotos, but on his view, as the proem indicates, they need not entail the subordination of the barbarian, whose achievements are to be celebrated also. For Herodotos, it is humanness that is the natural identity and the group identity that matters, and man-made variations are merely contingent, for all their exotic character and interest. Confirmation of such a view of Herodotos may be found in the condemnatory response of Plutarch, for whom Herodotos is far too positive about barbarians. The ferocity of Plutarchs response (indeed, his very decision to write a response at all) further indicates the strength of the challenge that Herodotos case presented to the smug asseverations of Greek specialness that seem to have developed through the fifth century and which Plutarch in his day assumed to be right and proper. Cross-cultural interaction was central to Herodotos project in the Histories. At the same time, the problematic nature of reciprocity the uncertainty that arises from its under-negotiation is particularly apparent in interaction across cultures. Indeed, Herodotos concern with the problematics of reciprocity as a phenomenon can be seen as intimately bound up with his concern with cross-cultural interaction. Of course, Herodotos starting-point is a matter of mere speculation. But we can and should observe the organic relationship between cross-cultural interaction, crosscultural reciprocity, and the problematics of reciprocity as a phenomenon. It is precisely within the problematics of cross-cultural reciprocity that the appreciation of cultural relativism is particularly necessary. Therefore, if we move from the claim, already mentioned, that there is a strong sense in which the Histories are about reciprocity to ask why Herodotos should be so interested in the phenomenon, I would suggest that an answer is to be found not in the topicality of reciprocity as a theme in the later fifth century, but in the rationale of Herodotos very undertaking. A broadlybased treatment of the Persian Wars by its very nature invites a simultaneous and inherent treatment of reciprocity as a phenomenon. To examine societies is to explore forms of reciprocities. All the more so, when societies invite comparisons through their It also seems clear that Herodotus approached the task of describing manners and customs with a fairly definite idea of what constituted a culture, and a fairly specific set of questions for evoking details from informants. The criteria which separated one group from another and gave individuality to his descriptive portraits were common descent, common language, common religion, and the observance of like manners in the smaller details of living, such as dress, diet, and dwellings. The Argippeans, who lived at the foot of the Ural Mountains, were presented vividly as being bald from birth, speaking a language of their own, using no weapons, dispensing justice in the quarrels of their neighbors, and dressing after the manner of the Scythians. They lived on the juice of a species of cherry, making the lees into a solid cake which they ate instead of meat. They dwell each man, he said, under a tree, covering it in winter with a white felt cloth, but using no felt in summer. For each group, in other words, seven categories of cultural fact are given. We are told their geographical location and something of their environment. We are told of their language, their dress, their food, their dwellings, their form of self-defense, or their lack of it, their prestige as judges among other peoples. On the other hand, concerning Egypt, one of the more important culture areas, Herodotus says at the outset that he will have to extend his remarks to some length. This countryits climate, its people and animalswas a constant surprise and challenge to the observer, very much as Japan with its customs and Australia with its fauna have challenged the modern traveller. For the Egyptians the number of cultural categories evoked far exceeds the seven used in describing the Argippeans. As for history, Bodins belief in its power to confer knowledge concerning the ways of mankind was unfaltering; and much of both the Methodus and the Republique is devoted to the assemblage of documentation to support this contention. Never before perhaps had a writer on politics or ethnography amassed so large a body of dated materials or laid so large a literature under tribute. He was well-read, not only in the law and the Bible, but in the Talmud and the Cabala; in the ancients, including Herodotus, Strabo, Cicero, Tacitus, and Caesar; in the modern historians, such as Joinville, Froissart, Monstrelet, Commines; and in the travelers, Marco Polo, Leo Africanus, and Las Casas. As they err, said he, who study the maps of regions before they have learned accurately the relation of the whole universe and the separate parts to each other and to the whole, so they are not less mistaken who think they can understand particular histories before they have judged the order and sequence of universal history and of all times, set forth as it were in a table.

Why is Frankenstein Guilty?

Why is Frankenstein Guilty? I may die; but first you, my tyrant and tormentor, shall curse the sun that gazes on your misery. Beware; for I am fearless, and therefore powerful. -The Monster, Ch. 20 I, the miserable and the abandoned, am an abortion, to be spurned at, and kicked, and trampled on. In Waltons final letter to his sister, he recounts the words that the monster speaks to him over Victors dead body. This eruption of angry self-pity as the monster questions the injustice of how he has been treated compellingly captures his inner life, giving Walton and the reader a glimpse into the suffering that has motivated his crimes. This line also evokes the motif of abortion: the monster is an unwanted life, a creation abandoned and shunned by his creator. Frankenstein was a man whose ambition led to a disaster; His actions led to evil. Is Frankenstein an innocent? In my opinion, he was not an innocent. The meaning of innocent is to free from evil or guilt. The word Frankenstein is defined in the dictionary (Encarta Dictionary) as a creator of something that causes ruin or destruction, or brings about a personal downfall, showing a well suited name. A common quotation is that One is innocent until proved guilty, If this quotation is applied to Victor Frankenstein, he would be innocent, for creating a human, which was morally and contextually incorrect; He would be innocent for allowing the murders of William, Justine, Elizabeth and Clerval to take place. It may be true that Frankenstein did not physically murder, however, he is the main cause, and the reason they died. Frankenstein never admitted to his families what he had done; he never took responsibility for his actions. The so called monster murdered for companionship, not to seek revenge from his victims, but to seek revenge from Frankenstein. The circumstances forced Frankensteins monster to do so, Victor was the instigator of these circumstances. My first thought was to discover what I knew of the murderer and cause instant pursuit to be made. But I paused when I reflected on the story I had to tell.(Frankenstein, Mary Shelley), This shows that Victor had the knowledge that he was the reason William was dead. Frankenstein didnt need to know about the murderer, because he indirectly was the murderer, through the circumstances he created for the monster, as I mentioned briefly before. Frankensteins reason for creating the creature was his interest in his studies, which led him to the idea of bettering mankind. Victor thought he was doing a service to humanity by creating a new human. A new species would bless me as its creator and source; many happy and excellent natures would owe their being to me. I might in process of time (although I now found it impossible) renew life where death had apparently devoted the body to corruption. This quote shows his ego behind these plans. He wanted to conquer death, something the average human could not do. He wanted to be revered highly by this so called perfect and beautiful creature. According to him, it may have been acceptable to play the role of god; maybe his being a scientist is why he didnt think of what was morally correct. However, the quote shows that right from the start, Victor had an idea of how he would somewhat be stepping into the shoes of a godlike figure, he outlines the fact that he would be superior, and he would have the power to renew the dead. This proves that he had no innocence, or naivety in terms of knowing precisely what he was doing and what it would lead to. After creating his creature, on the basis of aesthetics, he shunned it. He may also have shunned it because he already conquered death, so in his view, he may have already obtained the status of god, or a superior power, something no one had achieved. He didnt think about anything past the ugliness of the creature, or his personal benefits. His selfishness is what ultimately destroyed him and others as well. The creature he created is more like a project to Frankenstein, his aim is to conquer death, and once he has done so, the project is over. Not once does he consider the fact that he has simply given birth to a new human being, with feelings and emotion, a live creature who has to be taught the ways of life as if it is a baby. Frankensteins abandonment of the creature is another factor that proves him guilty, and not innocent. Frankenstein was wrong for being irresponsible, short sighted, and neglecting his creature. He didnt give his creature anything he needed. Its his own fault that the creature comes back saying I may die; but first you, my tyrant and tormentor, shall curse the sun that gazes on your misery. Beware; for I am fearless, and therefore powerful. The creature was deprived of the companionship, which he could only get from his creator. The creature figures that the only way he can get some attention, is by threatening his creator. This could be compared to a situation with a child and a parent. Frankenstein is somewhat the parent of his creature. His job is to nurture him, but because of his own ego, he runs away. If it were a parent and a child, the child would be defenceless because it hasnt even developed physically, however the creature is an example where he is an uneducated child, with a higher physical strength. Frankensteins creature thinks through intuition, as any child who hasnt learnt anything would do. He doesnt know whats right and wrong, so he doesnt know its wrong to threaten; he doesnt know its wrong to kill. Blaming him is like blaming a child for breaking a valuable, such as a vase. You cant blame the child because their knowledge hasnt developed, they havent yet learnt. However in the childs case, after making such a mistake, the child would be taught not to do so again, creating a basis of how it is wrong, this does not take place for the creature. It could be argued that the creature shou ld know through Victors fear, but does a child learn anything when it senses fear? No, it anything, it will only learn to keep intimidating. Frankensteins faults of his creation, or you could say his faults in parenting, in fact started from the very beginning. Frankensteins creature is described as having dark black hair, yellow skin, black lips and eyes sunk into his sockets (Shelly 56). Its quite ironic that Frankenstein feared his own creation, he is the one who hand-picked the features his so called perfect man would have. For him to say breathless horror and disgust filled my heart(56), towards a creation of his own, just shows his tendency towards aesthetics, and how backward he is in terms of being accepting, yet how forward he is in terms of doing something new. He is responsible for the way the creature turned out. This once more, proves his irresponsibility, and his view to the creation as a project. His attitude towards the creature is why he was irresponsible. He wasnt serious enough, or perhaps he wasnt ready to face negative consequences, seeing as he was a perfectionist. The background Frankenstein created in terms of nurture is what caused his creature to murder. Victor admitted to creating the monster, but he denied that he drove the monster to commit murder. He wouldnt admit to anyone; not himself, not his family, that he was the one who allowed the murders to take place. He allowed Clerval, his wife Elizabeth, his brother William and Justines death to take place because he didnt take the blame for his actions. If he had admitted to his actions earlier, less deaths would have been caused, if he had been responsible, and given the creature what it needed, he would not be guilty of four murders. In the end, Frankenstein was at loss of everything close to him, he blamed the monster, but it was his fault. He had a faint idea that it was his fault, although no one could possibly be able to admit to murdering the people close to you. The only way he could be innocent, is for not literally taking a knife and stabbing his relatives. However the pain he got from his creature was his own fault. Innocence lies in having no sense of guilt for any action of yours, this, Victor did clearly not have. The creature couldnt stop himself from destroying Victor, because Victor couldnt stop himself from creating the creature. The creature was an innocent; it only reacted to the actions of society. Victor was guilty in every way.

University Tuition Costs are Too High Essay -- College Costs Are Out O

The cost of tuition for higher education is quickly rising. Over half of college freshmen show some concern with how to pay for college. This is the highest this number has been since 1971 (Marill and O’Leary 64-66, 93). The amount of college graduate debt has been rapidly increasing also. With limited jobs available because of the high unemployment rate, college graduates find themselves staying in debt even longer. Although grants and financial aid are available to students, students still struggle to pay for their college tuition. Higher education costs are prohibitively expensive because the state’s revenue is low, the unemployment rate is high, and graduates cannot pay off their student loans. One reason that higher education is not affordable is that the states’ revenue is low and the states are in debt. Because of their decreasing tax revenues, many states need to make cuts in their budget. As a result of this, tuition is rising and other changes are happening throughout colleges. Some of these changes include: higher student to faculty ratios, less but larger classes, and fewer on-campus jobs that normally support students (Hulsey 24). These changes affect students and impact their view and decisions of certain colleges. The tuition rate has also â€Å"been rising at about 6 percent a year for most of the past ten years† (Marill and O’Leary 64-66, 93). This percent inevitably makes it harder for students to find an affordable college. High tuition prices also keep some people from attending their dream college. All of these changes have an effect on the students and the rising tuition prices. Another result of the different states being in debt is that they are giving colleges less financial help. â€Å"Prior to ... ...or all students. One reason for this is that the states’ revenue is low. High unemployment rates also contribute to this problem. Another cause of this is the inability of students to pay off their loans. Nearly two-thirds of college freshmen feel concerned about how to pay for college and almost the same amount graduate with debt (Marill and O’Leary 64-66, 93). Since high tuition and loans drastically affect a person, many students feel forced to take this into consideration when making plans for their future. Many plans and dreams that high school students have become altered when reality hits them about the cost of continuing their education. Therefore, students just cannot afford higher education.

The Civil Rights Movement Essay -- peaceful protests, civil disobedien

The civil rights movement in the middle of the 20th century marked an important point in the changing of race relations in the United States. Prior to and during the civil rights movement, African-Americans faced legally sanctioned persecution and Jim Crow justice at the hands of white Americans. Peaceful protests and other methods of civil disobedience were often met with aggression and violence from whites. Although legally having the right to vote since the 19th century, many African-Americans were unable to practice their right. Poll taxes and often outright violence made exercising their right to vote difficult and dangerous. In 1961, Robert Parris Moses worked to register fellow African-Americans to vote, and he and his coworkers were met with much resistance from the white community. "Along with other SNCC workers who subsequently joined him and local blacks who supported them, Moses was harassed and beaten; he was jailed several times. The threat of violence discouraged most blacks from registering" (Albert, 69). In the result of Brown vs. the Board of Education, the Supreme Court ruled that segregation was unconstitutional. This decision reversed the previous decision in the case of Plessy vs. Ferguson, ruling in favor of the legality of the separation of races, as long as the facilities were equal. After the legal ending of segregation, one of the major focuses of African-Americans was to integrate schools. They wanted their children to benefit from the better facilities of the schools for white children. Unfortunately, the integration of schools was also met with resistance and violence from white communities. The experience of Fred Schuttlesworth, shown left, and his wife, while trying to enroll in a white high s... ... by local police departments. Even if the local police departments were forced into action, it is easy to imagine how few faced jail time suitable punishment when being tried in front of a jury of their white peers. Local police forces even encouraged vigilante justice by turning prisoners over after their release, another act for which participants were surely not held accountable. The violent stories that can be told of events during the civil rights movement illustrate the manner in which race, violence and crime combine, in a way that is difficult for many young Americans to relate with. Works Cited Albert, Peter J. and Ronald Hoffman Ed. We Shall Overcome: Martin Luther King, Jr. and the Black Freedom Struggle. New York: Da Capo Press,c. 1990 Branch, Taylor. Pillar of Fire: America in the King Years 1963 - 65. New York: Simon and Schuster. c. 1998.