Effects of Radiation in Biological Systems

Effects of Radiation in Biological Systems As stated in the oxford concise colour medical dictionary radiobiology is the branch of science dealing with the effects of radiation on biological systems. It is further stated that a sequence of events that deals with the absorption of energy from ionizing radiation to the efforts of the organism in order to compensate for the effects of this energy absorption and the damage to the organism that may be produced. There are a number of topics of study in radiobiology. The effect of ionizing radiation together with how it affects living cells will be further explained. Bushong (1998:29-32) states that the biologic effects of ionizing radiation represent the efforts of living things to deal with energy absorbed by them, after an interaction with such radiation. Maintained by the author it is stated that when ionizing radiation interacts with a cell, ionization and excitations are produced in either critical biologic macromolecule called targets e.g. DND, or in the medium which cellular organelles are suspended eg. Water. Based on the site of these interactions, it can be classified as either direct or indirect. The effects of radiation on living cells vary, depending on the type, intensity of exposure and the cell as discussed by Tubiana and Dutreix (1990:22). Radiation is an emission of ionising radiation. Maintained by the above authors, at low levels, radiation damage can be repaired by living cells with no effects, however, higher doses leas to sterility, mutation, which confuses cells resulting in the reproducing rapidly cell death. Cell damage can result in two ways namely direct radiation action, which harms molecules directly and indirect, by ionizing molecules turning them into toxic compounds causing damage. Some of the other aspects that are going to be discussed and explained below are cell structure, cycle and death; irradiation of cells; direct and indirect effects of radiation; interactions of gamma rays with matter; foetal irradiation; cell survival curves; properties of cell survival curves; therapeutic implications; oxygen effect; factors influencing oxygen effect; the five Rs of radiobiology and lastly radiation protection. CELL STRUCTURE, CELL CYCLE CELL DEATH: Discussed by Ford (2001:5) Atoms form molecules which make macromolecules, then build complex organic structures, and then cell which are the main structural component of tissues as well as reflects all features of life. They have similar structures but specialize according to their location. Cells contain inorganic compounds as well as organic compounds. Henry and Suntharalingam (2006:12) explain that there are two categories of cells namely prokaryotic and eukaryotic. Maintained by the above author . Prokaryotic cells have no nucleus and are surrounded with a nuclear membrane. They do not contain any membranous organelles e.g. Mitochondria. However. On the other hand, eukaryotic cells have membranous organelles as well as a real nucleus. They are more highly developed compared to prokaryotic cells. The cell cycle is defined as the interval between the midpoint of mitosis in a cell and the midpoint of the subsequent mitosis in both daughter cells according to Millar and Levine (1998:102). Maintained by the above authors it describes the stages through which a cell passes through as it replicates. The length of time a cell may take to complete the cell cycle is highly variable. The basic division of the cell cycle is mitosis and interphase. Cells may also be in a special state known as the resting phase when not making any effort to divide and cells in this phase are mostly terminally differentiated cells. According to Tubianna and Dutreix (1990:86) the M phase is the period where the cell actively divides into two daughter cells. There are two related events namely mitosis and cytokinesis. The synthesis and mitosis of the cell cycle are separate by two gaps, G1 and G2 when respectively, DNA has not been synthesised or DNA has been synthesised but other metabolic processes are taking place. Elizabeth (2003:1) explains that cells are generally most radio-sensitive in the mitosis and G2 phases and most radio-resistant in the late S phase. Maintained by the above author Cytokinesis completes the M phase, however cells do not always undergo cytokinesis, instead forming multinucleate giant cells. This can either be normal or can be due to errors in mitosis. Explained by Tubiana and Dutreix (1990: 89) Cell death of static cells is defined as the loss of specific function. For stem cells and other cells capable of many divisions, cell death is defined as the loss of reproductive integrity (reproductive death).the above authors further explain that when cells are exposed to ionising radiation, the biological effects of radiation results mainly from damage to the DNA, however there are also other sites within the cell that, when damaged may lead to cell death. The capability of a single cell to grow into a large colony shows that the cell has retained its reproductive integrity. IRRADIATION OF CELLS: Elizabeth (2003:10) explains that when cells are exposed to ionizing radiation the standard physical effects between radiation and the atoms or molecules of the cell. The biological effects of radiation result mainly from damage to the DNA; however, there are also other sites within the cell that, when damaged, may lead to cell deaths occur. Maintained by the above author a surviving cell that maintains its reproductive integrity and proliferates almost indefinitely into a large number of progeny is said to be clonogenic. Sensitive component for radiation-induced cell killing rests in the cell nucleus and not in the cytoplasm. When ionizing radiation is directly absorbed in biological material, the damage to the cell may occur in either a direct or indirect mechanism. DIRECT INDIRECT EFFECT OF RADIATION: According to Bomford and Kunkler (2006: 265) in direct action, the radiation interacts directly with the critical target in the cell. The atoms of the target itself may be ionized or excited, leading to the chain of physical and chemical events that eventually produce the biological damage. It is the dominant process in the interaction of high linear energy transfer particles such as neutrons or alpha particles with biological material. In direct action, caused by x-ray or gamma ray photons, the photon interaction with an atom in the cell produces a charged particle (electron) which subsequently interacts with DNA directly as discussed by Hendry and Suntharalingam (2006:24). Hall and giaccia (2006:44) explain that in indirect action, the radiation interacts with other molecules and atoms (mainly water) within the cell to produce free radicals which can, through diffusion in the cell, damage the critical target within the cell. It can be modified by chemical sensitizers of radiation protectors. Further explained by the above authors, Basic radiochemical reactions that may occur in water molecules disrupt by the passing of an ionizing particle which are highly reactive species that are produced in water, through the radiochemical reactions. These reactive species bring about the indirect radiation damage to biological systems by reacting and damaging the molecules in the cell. The free radicals that break the chemical bonds and produce chemical changes that lead to biologclcal damage are highly reactive molecules because they have an unpaired valence electron. About two-thirds of the biological damage by low linear energy transfer radiations e.g. X-rays , is due to indirect action and one-third due to direct action. INTERACTIONS OF GAMMA RAYS WITH MATTER: Discussed by Johnston and Fauber (2012:63)The steps involved in producing biological damage by the indirect action of x-rays are the primary photon interaction which includes he photoelectric effect, Compton scatter and pair production produces a high energy electron, high energy light charged particle in moving through tissue produces free radicals in water. Maintained by the above author the free radicals may produce chemical changes in DNA from the breakage of chemical bonds and the changes in the chemical bonds results in biological effects. FOETAL IRRADIATION: According to Isaac (2009:26) Foetal radiation is known as teratogen (causes birth defects). Between conception and birth, the foetus passes through different stages of development. When a mother is pregnant, the unborn child can be harmed by radiation which could result in the child having cancer and genetic defects. Due to the fact that the foetus would be highly sensitive to radiation, they are rapidly dividing, undifferentiated and have a long mitotic future. Elizabeth, M (2003:16) a human embryo exposed to a large amount of radiation before 2-3 weeks of gestation could result in a miscarriage. 4-11 weeks could result in severe abnormalities of organs and 11-15 weeks in mental retardation. However, after the 20th week, the human foetus is more radiosensitive and functional defects may occur. Effects of radiation on the foetus depends on two factors namely the dose to the foetus and secondly is the stage of development at the time of exposure. An important factor to note is that an abortion should be considered only when the foetal dose has exceeded 10 cGY. The principle effects of radiation on a foetus are foetal or neonatal death, malformations, growth retardation, congenital defects and cancer induction as maintained by the above author. CELL SURVIVAL CURVES: Discussed by Hall and Giacca (2006: 67) Cell survival curves which is the surviving fraction against the absorbed dose describes the relationship between the surviving fractions of cells that is the fraction of irradiated cells that maintain their integrity. Maintained by the above author, the cell survival against dose is graphically represented by plotting the surviving fraction on a logarithmic scale on the ordinate against dose on a linear scale. Typical survival curves for cells irradiate by densely ionizing radiation (low linear energy transfer). Tubiana and Dutreix (1990: 26) the type of radiation influence the shape of the survival curve. For densely ionizing radiation (high linear energy transfer) the cell survival curve is almost an exponential function of dose which is shown by an almost straight line on a log-linear plot. However, for sparsely ionizing radiation (low linear energy transfer) the survival curves show an initial slope followed by a shoulder region and then becoming nearly straight at high doses as retained by the above authors. The currently used model for describing the cell survival curve is the linear-quadratic model with constants Alpha and Beta. The ratio alpha/beta gives the dose at which the linear and quadratic components of cell killing are equal. PROPERTIES OF CELL SURVIVAL CURVES: Adhikar (2003:2) explains that for late responding tissues the survival curves are more curved than those for early responding tissues. For early effects the ratio is large and dominates at low doses however for late effects it is small and has an influence at doses lower than for early responding tissues. The above mentioned author goes on to explain that the effects of radiation on tissue as a function of dose are measured with assays and the measured results are presented in the form of cell survival curves and dose response curves. THERAPUTIC IMPLICATIONS: Bomford and Kunkler (2003:99) state that DNA being the target of ionizing radiation leads to several important therapeutic implications. The radiation damage that occurs in clusters that match the size of a DNA strand may be more effective in causing damage. The above authors further explain that drugs target DNA have synergistic effects with radiation whilst people with genetic defects due to radiation damage response may exhibit increased levels of DNA mutation or cell death. Points in cell cycle where the DNA is more susceptible to damage are also more sensitive to radiation and the cycling of cells has an impact on the radio sensitivity of the cell type. OXYGEN EFFECT: Franckowiak (2008:2) explains that when ionizing radiations transverse through matter, they gradually loose energy through various interaction processes along their path. For certain absorbers the rate of energy loss depends on the type of radiation as well as the density of the material. Maintained by the above author the rate at which energy is deposited as a charged particle travels through matter by a particular type of radiation is known as linear energy transfer which is a function of the mass and charge of the radiation. Carlton and Adler (2006:344) explain that Electromagnetic radiation, having no mass or charge produces fast electrons with negligible mass and a negative charge. Due to this, the probability of an electron interacting with an atom is relatively small resulting in the ionizations produced being distant and far from each other hence terming electromagnetic radiation as linear energy transfer radiation. In contrast to electromagnetic radiation, highly ionizing radiations e.g. Alpha-particles that have a predictable mass, have a greater chance of interacting with matter, producing short distance ionizations. Different linear energy transfer radiations produce different degrees of the same biologic response. However, equal doses of linear energy transfer do not produce the same biologic response. This was retained by the above authors. Travis (1989:207) explains that the ability of radiation with different linear energy transfers produce a specific biologic response called the relative biologic effect. It is a comparison of a dose of test radiation that produces the same biological response. Maintained by the above author ,when comparing the two types of radiation that differ in nature or energy, the relative biological effectiveness when compared, represents the absorbed dose which results in a given biological effect. Therefore the concept must refer to a well-defined biological effect of a particular level. FACTORS INFLUENCING OXYGEN EFFECT: Ford (2001:10) discusses that some of the factors that influence the oxygen effect are chemical, biological and technical. In chemical, the oxygen concentration may be increased by internal or external methods. In biological, if the patient suffers from chronic airways disease or other problems with oxygen transport, then the oxygen concentration will be lower and prevalence of hypoxic cells will be increased. However, in technical, these have minimal impact on the oxygen effect, maintained by the above author. THE FIVE RS OF RADIOBIOLOGY: Bomford and Kunkler (2003:236) explain that there are five Rs in the radiotherapy process namely; repair, redistribution, reoxygenation, repopulation and lastly radio sensitivity and these will be further explained below. REPAIR: This is one of the primary reasons to fractionate radiotherapy and there are three types of damage that ionizing radiation can cause to cells. These are lethal, sub lethal and potentially lethal damages. Maintained by the above authors, by splitting radiation dose into smaller parts cells are allowed to repair sub lethal damage depending on the ability to recognize damage, repair pathways and cell cycle arrest. However, normal cells with intact repair pathways are able to repair the sub lethal damage by the time the next fraction is delivered. However, if the dose rate is sufficiently low, repair may be able to take place during radiotherapy treatment which reduces the cell death and is one reason low dose treatment show reduces effectiveness to high dose rate treatment as stated by Isaac (2009:20). REDISTRIBUTION: Sunthalingam and Hendry (2006:12) state that redistribution occurs during low dose rate which may increase cell killing, although it is minimal compare to the increased repair. When radiotherapy is given to a population of cells, they may be in different parts of the cell cycle. A small dose of radiation delivered over a short time period will kill a lot of sensitive cells and less of the resistant cells. REOXYGENATION: Oxygenation status may change during treatment due to tumours being acutely or chronically hypoxic. Acute hypoxia is due to the closure of capillaries or arterioles supplying parts of the tumour. While closed, tumour cells become hypoxic and resistant to the indirect action of radiation. These vessels are usually closed for a short time but may occur during a fractionated dose of radiation. Splitting dose into fractions raises possibility of closed vessels being opened the next time, hence allowing the tumour cells to be killed as explained by Sunthalingam and Hendry (2006:13). Maintained by the above authors, chronic hypoxia is due to the poor vasculature of tumours and oxygen has to travel far to reach cells that are far. These cells are resistant to radiation, fractionated radiation therapy kills cells that lie close to capillary more effectively thus being able to move closer to their nutrition source becoming relatively toxic and these cells can be killed. REPOPULATION: Bomford and Kunler (2003:237) explain that repopulation is the increase in cell division that is seen in normal and malignant cells at some point after radiation is delivered. Repopulation of normal tissues occurs at different speeds depending on the tissue. Maintained by the above authors, early responding tissues begin repopulation and by increasing treatment over a certain time period reduces early toxicity in that tissue. However late responding tissue only begin repopulation after the radiation cause has being completed and therefore repopulation has minimal effects. Adhikar (2003:4) explains that repopulation of malignant tissues are when some tumours exhibit accelerated repopulation which is a dangerous phenomenon that must be counted if treatment time extends. Methods to do this include accelerated treatment with hyper fractionation to minimise late effects. RADIOSENSITIVITY: Radio sensitivity cells include haematological cell. Radio resistant cells include myocytes, neurons and tumour cells such as melanoma and sarcoma as explained by Adhikar (2003:4). RADIATION PROTECTION: As discussed by Carlton and Adler (2006: 153-155) there are three principles of personnel exposure reduction namely time distance and shielding. A decrease in time working with or in the vicinity of radiation will increase exposure and decrease the dose. Maintained by the above author increasing the distance between the source of radiation and the individual will decrease exposure. Bushong (1998:54) also mentions that shielding decreases the exposure that is used when time and distance cannot be implemented. Examples of shielding are gonad shields, lead aprons, lead line doors etc. CONCLUSION: As we all know now know, radiobiology deals with the effects of radiation in biological systems. Radiation is energy in the form of waves and particles that are emitted from a source that comes in many forms however it may not always be a dangerous thing. The forms of radiation that are especially dangerous to living things are those with energy sufficient to penetrate tissues and then ionize the atoms they pass along the way which damage tissues by disrupting normal cellular chemistry and are mutagenic and carcinogenic. Cell damage can result in two ways namely direct radiation action, which harms molecules directly and indirect, by ionizing molecules turning them into toxic compounds causing damage. Discussed above and throughout the assignment we see how a cell together with their structure until death occurs due to irradiation of cells by either direct or indirect effects of radiation. We also looked at interactions of gamma rays with matter as well as effects of foetal irradiation. Cell survival curves together with their properties as well as theraputic implications and oxygen effect were explained. The five Rs in radiobiology play an important aspect together with ways of protecting yourself and others from the harmful effects of radiation.

Research Spotlight on Homework Essay

Some researchers are urging schools to take a fresh look at homework and its potential for engaging students and improving student performance. The key, they say, is to take into account grade-specific and developmental factors when determining the amount and kind of homework. So, what’s appropriate? What benefits can be expected? What makes for good homework policies? Research doesn’t have all the answers, but a review of some existing data yields some helpful observations and guidance. How Much Homework Do Students Do? Survey data and anecdotal evidence show that some students spend hours nightly doing homework. Homework overload is the exception rather than the norm; however, according to research from the Brookings Institution and the Rand Corporation (see the Brown Center 2003 below). Their researchers analyzed data from a variety of sources and concluded that the majority of U.S. students spend less than an hour a day on homework, regardless of grade level, and this has held true for most of the past 50 years. In the last 20 years, homework has increased only in the lower grade levels, and this increase is associated with neutral (and sometimes negative) effects on student achievement. How Much Is Appropriate? The National PTA recommendations fall in line with general guidelines suggested by researcher Harris Cooper: 10-20 minutes per night in the first grade, and an additional 10 minutes per grade level thereafter (e.g., 20 minutes for second grade, 120 minutes for twelfth). High school students may sometimes do more, depending on what classes they take (see Review of Educational Research, 2006). What are the benefits? Homework usually falls into one of three categories: practice, preparation, or extension. The purpose usually varies by grade. Individualized assignments that tap into students’ existing skills or interests can be motivating. At the elementary school level, homework can help students develop study skills and habits and can keep families informed about their child’s learning. At the secondary school level, student homework is associated with greater academic achievement. (Review of Educational Research, 2006) What’s good policy? Experts advise schools or districts to include teachers, parents, and students in any effort to set homework policies. Policies should address the purposes of homework; amount and frequency; school and teacher responsibilities; student responsibilities; and, the role of parents or others who assist students with homework. Reference: Cooper, H. (2003). A synthesis of research. Review of Educational Reseach, volume 76, Retrieved January 09, 2013, from http://www.nea.org/tools/16938.htm Reasons why students should not have homework Homework is supposed to ensure that all students retain the material covered in the classroom, but for many children it is an unnecessary chore and actually hinders their learning. Children learn best when they are interested in the subject. Positive mental attitude makes learning even challenging things much easier. Negative mental attitude, however, makes retaining knowledge harder and creates stress in a learner. It also takes much longer periods of time to complete. As a result children hardly have any time to develop their talents through extracurricular activities, or to spend adequate time with family and friends. Instead of being burdened with much resented huge loads of homework, children should have the opportunity for more self-directed and interactive learning at school to generate their interest and build in them positive attitude towards learning. Teachers should be more creative and use multimedia like computers and video presentations to make covered subjects more engaging involving children’s input more. Students should be allowed to suggest activities and projects they would like to do. In the present school system it is usually the teacher who decides what and how children should learn in class and at home. This promotes passivity and a sense that learning is a necessary evil rather than exiting opportunity to learn about the world we live in. This is very ineffective, making kids bored, stressed, and frustrated. Not to mention that it is often parents who do the reluctant kids’ homework therefore homework doesn’t help them to learn at all. They get their grades, but end up having learning gaps that will come out later on and hinder their success. Children who are struggling themselves with loads of homework lack the time to develop other than academic passions and experience very unhealty stress that cen result even in a depression. The numbers of children who take antidepressants is rapidly growing. Students who are defiant about their homework often have very strained relationship with their parents. It is a source of contention in too many families and contributes to deep emotional problems in these children and also inevitably may cause depression and substance abuse. The age of kids taking street drugs is getting lower and lower. Children as young as ten in some countries have a drinking problem and homework overload can be an indirect cause of that. That is why I think students should not have homework, but be able to have enjoyable learning experience at school and freedom to be encouraged by the teacher to expand their knowledge on their own terms at home, and to be rewarded for the extra effort instead of being forced to do homework they don’t like. Reference: Tehrani, E. (2009). Reasons why students should not have homework. Retrieved January 09, 2013, from http://www.helium.com/items/1309973-why-students-shoul-not-have-homework The Truth About Homework In high school, some studies do find a correlation between homework and test scores (or grades), but it’s usually fairly small, and it has a tendency to disappear when more sophisticated statistical controls are applied. Moreover, there’s no evidence that higher achievement is due to the homework even when an association does appear. It isn’t hard to think of other explanations for why successful students might be in classrooms where more homework is assigned—or why they might spend more time on it than their peers do. The results of national and international exams raise further doubts. One of many examples is an analysis of 1994 and 1999 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study, or TIMSS, data from 50 countries. Researchers David P. Baker and Gerald K. LeTendre were scarcely able to conceal their surprise when they published their results last year: â€Å"Not only did we fail to find any positive relationships,† they wrote, but â€Å"the overall correlations between national average student achievement and national averages in [amount of homework assigned] are all negative.† Consider the assumption that homework should be beneficial just because it gives students more time to master a topic or skill. (Plenty of pundits rely on this premise when they call for extending the school day or year. Indeed, homework can be seen as a way of prolonging the school day on the cheap.) Unfortunately, this reasoning turns out to be woefully simplistic. Back â€Å"when experimental psychologists mainly studied words and nonsense syllables, it was thought that learning inevitably depended upon time,† the reading researcher Richard C. Anderson and his colleagues explain. But â€Å"subsequent research suggests that this belief is false.† The statement â€Å"People need time to learn things† is true, of course, but it doesn’t tell us much of practical value. On the other hand, the assertion â€Å"More time usually leads to better learning† is considerably more interesting. It’s also demonstrably untrue, however, because there are enough cases where more time doesn’t lead to better learning. In fact, more hours are least likely to produce better outcomes when understanding or creativity is involved. Anderson and his associates found that when children are taught to read by focusing on the meaning of the text (rather than primarily on phonetic skills), their learning does â€Å"not depend on amount of instructional time.† In math, too, as another group of researchers discovered, time on task is directly correlated to achievement only if both the activity and the outcome measure are focused on rote recall as opposed to problem-solving. Carole Ames of Michigan State University points out that it isn’t â€Å"quantitative changes in behavior†Ã¢â‚¬â€such as requiring students to spend more hours in front of books or worksheets—that help children learn better. Rather, it’s â€Å"qualitative changes in the ways students view themselves in relation to the task, engage in the process of learning, and then respond to the learning activities and situation.† In turn, these attitudes and responses emerge from the way teachers think about learning and, as a result, how they organize their classrooms. Assigning homework is unlikely to have a positive effect on any of these variables. We might say that education is less about how much the teacher covers than about what students can be helped to discover—and more time won’t help to bring about that shift. Regardless of one’s criteria, there is no reason to think that most students would be at any sort of disadvantage if homework were sharply reduced or even eliminated. But even if practice is sometimes useful, we’re not entitled to conclude that homework of this type works for most students. It isn’t of any use for those who don’t understand what they’re doing. Such homework makes them feel stupid; gets them accustomed to doing things the wrong way (because what’s really â€Å"reinforced† are mistaken assumptions); and teaches them to conceal what they don’t know. At the same time, other students in the same class already have the skill down cold, so further practice for them is a waste of time. You’ve got some kids, then, who don’t need the practice, and others who can’t use it. Furthermore, even if practice were helpful for most students, that wouldn’t mean they needed to do it at home. In my research, I found a number of superb teachers (at different grade levels and with diverse instructional styles) who rarely, if ever, found it necessary to assign homework. Some not only didn’t feel a need to make students read, write, or do math at home; they preferred to have students do these things during class, where it was possible to observe, guide, and discuss. Finally, any theoretical benefit of practice homework must be weighed against the effect it has on students’ interest in learning. If slogging through worksheets dampens one’s desire to read or think, surely that wouldn’t be worth an incremental improvement in skills. And when an activity feels like drudgery, the quality of learning tends to suffer, too. That so many children regard homework as something to finish as quickly as possible—or even as a significant source of stress—helps explain why it appears not to offer any academic advantage even for those who obediently sit down and complete the tasks they’ve been assigned. All that research showing little value to homework may not be so surprising after all. Reference: Kohn, A. (2006). The truth about homework. Retrieved January 09, 2013, from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2006/09/06/02kohn.h26.html?tkn=RVRFTkNGGXy32nbQpdGsSFt01V8aHU5cZ3wG

Research Spotlight on Homework Essay

Some researchers are urging schools to take a fresh look at homework and its potential for engaging students and improving student performance. The key, they say, is to take into account grade-specific and developmental factors when determining the amount and kind of homework. So, what’s appropriate? What benefits can be expected? What makes for good homework policies? Research doesn’t have all the answers, but a review of some existing data yields some helpful observations and guidance. How Much Homework Do Students Do? Survey data and anecdotal evidence show that some students spend hours nightly doing homework. Homework overload is the exception rather than the norm; however, according to research from the Brookings Institution and the Rand Corporation (see the Brown Center 2003 below). Their researchers analyzed data from a variety of sources and concluded that the majority of U.S. students spend less than an hour a day on homework, regardless of grade level, and this has held true for most of the past 50 years. In the last 20 years, homework has increased only in the lower grade levels, and this increase is associated with neutral (and sometimes negative) effects on student achievement. How Much Is Appropriate? The National PTA recommendations fall in line with general guidelines suggested by researcher Harris Cooper: 10-20 minutes per night in the first grade, and an additional 10 minutes per grade level thereafter (e.g., 20 minutes for second grade, 120 minutes for twelfth). High school students may sometimes do more, depending on what classes they take (see Review of Educational Research, 2006). What are the benefits? Homework usually falls into one of three categories: practice, preparation, or extension. The purpose usually varies by grade. Individualized assignments that tap into students’ existing skills or interests can be motivating. At the elementary school level, homework can help students develop study skills and habits and can keep families informed about their child’s learning. At the secondary school level, student homework is associated with greater academic achievement. (Review of Educational Research, 2006) What’s good policy? Experts advise schools or districts to include teachers, parents, and students in any effort to set homework policies. Policies should address the purposes of homework; amount and frequency; school and teacher responsibilities; student responsibilities; and, the role of parents or others who assist students with homework. Reference: Cooper, H. (2003). A synthesis of research. Review of Educational Reseach, volume 76, Retrieved January 09, 2013, from http://www.nea.org/tools/16938.htm Reasons why students should not have homework Homework is supposed to ensure that all students retain the material covered in the classroom, but for many children it is an unnecessary chore and actually hinders their learning. Children learn best when they are interested in the subject. Positive mental attitude makes learning even challenging things much easier. Negative mental attitude, however, makes retaining knowledge harder and creates stress in a learner. It also takes much longer periods of time to complete. As a result children hardly have any time to develop their talents through extracurricular activities, or to spend adequate time with family and friends. Instead of being burdened with much resented huge loads of homework, children should have the opportunity for more self-directed and interactive learning at school to generate their interest and build in them positive attitude towards learning. Teachers should be more creative and use multimedia like computers and video presentations to make covered subjects more engaging involving children’s input more. Students should be allowed to suggest activities and projects they would like to do. In the present school system it is usually the teacher who decides what and how children should learn in class and at home. This promotes passivity and a sense that learning is a necessary evil rather than exiting opportunity to learn about the world we live in. This is very ineffective, making kids bored, stressed, and frustrated. Not to mention that it is often parents who do the reluctant kids’ homework therefore homework doesn’t help them to learn at all. They get their grades, but end up having learning gaps that will come out later on and hinder their success. Children who are struggling themselves with loads of homework lack the time to develop other than academic passions and experience very unhealty stress that cen result even in a depression. The numbers of children who take antidepressants is rapidly growing. Students who are defiant about their homework often have very strained relationship with their parents. It is a source of contention in too many families and contributes to deep emotional problems in these children and also inevitably may cause depression and substance abuse. The age of kids taking street drugs is getting lower and lower. Children as young as ten in some countries have a drinking problem and homework overload can be an indirect cause of that. That is why I think students should not have homework, but be able to have enjoyable learning experience at school and freedom to be encouraged by the teacher to expand their knowledge on their own terms at home, and to be rewarded for the extra effort instead of being forced to do homework they don’t like. Reference: Tehrani, E. (2009). Reasons why students should not have homework. Retrieved January 09, 2013, from http://www.helium.com/items/1309973-why-students-shoul-not-have-homework The Truth About Homework In high school, some studies do find a correlation between homework and test scores (or grades), but it’s usually fairly small, and it has a tendency to disappear when more sophisticated statistical controls are applied. Moreover, there’s no evidence that higher achievement is due to the homework even when an association does appear. It isn’t hard to think of other explanations for why successful students might be in classrooms where more homework is assigned—or why they might spend more time on it than their peers do. The results of national and international exams raise further doubts. One of many examples is an analysis of 1994 and 1999 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study, or TIMSS, data from 50 countries. Researchers David P. Baker and Gerald K. LeTendre were scarcely able to conceal their surprise when they published their results last year: â€Å"Not only did we fail to find any positive relationships,† they wrote, but â€Å"the overall correlations between national average student achievement and national averages in [amount of homework assigned] are all negative.† Consider the assumption that homework should be beneficial just because it gives students more time to master a topic or skill. (Plenty of pundits rely on this premise when they call for extending the school day or year. Indeed, homework can be seen as a way of prolonging the school day on the cheap.) Unfortunately, this reasoning turns out to be woefully simplistic. Back â€Å"when experimental psychologists mainly studied words and nonsense syllables, it was thought that learning inevitably depended upon time,† the reading researcher Richard C. Anderson and his colleagues explain. But â€Å"subsequent research suggests that this belief is false.† The statement â€Å"People need time to learn things† is true, of course, but it doesn’t tell us much of practical value. On the other hand, the assertion â€Å"More time usually leads to better learning† is considerably more interesting. It’s also demonstrably untrue, however, because there are enough cases where more time doesn’t lead to better learning. In fact, more hours are least likely to produce better outcomes when understanding or creativity is involved. Anderson and his associates found that when children are taught to read by focusing on the meaning of the text (rather than primarily on phonetic skills), their learning does â€Å"not depend on amount of instructional time.† In math, too, as another group of researchers discovered, time on task is directly correlated to achievement only if both the activity and the outcome measure are focused on rote recall as opposed to problem-solving. Carole Ames of Michigan State University points out that it isn’t â€Å"quantitative changes in behavior†Ã¢â‚¬â€such as requiring students to spend more hours in front of books or worksheets—that help children learn better. Rather, it’s â€Å"qualitative changes in the ways students view themselves in relation to the task, engage in the process of learning, and then respond to the learning activities and situation.† In turn, these attitudes and responses emerge from the way teachers think about learning and, as a result, how they organize their classrooms. Assigning homework is unlikely to have a positive effect on any of these variables. We might say that education is less about how much the teacher covers than about what students can be helped to discover—and more time won’t help to bring about that shift. Regardless of one’s criteria, there is no reason to think that most students would be at any sort of disadvantage if homework were sharply reduced or even eliminated. But even if practice is sometimes useful, we’re not entitled to conclude that homework of this type works for most students. It isn’t of any use for those who don’t understand what they’re doing. Such homework makes them feel stupid; gets them accustomed to doing things the wrong way (because what’s really â€Å"reinforced† are mistaken assumptions); and teaches them to conceal what they don’t know. At the same time, other students in the same class already have the skill down cold, so further practice for them is a waste of time. You’ve got some kids, then, who don’t need the practice, and others who can’t use it. Furthermore, even if practice were helpful for most students, that wouldn’t mean they needed to do it at home. In my research, I found a number of superb teachers (at different grade levels and with diverse instructional styles) who rarely, if ever, found it necessary to assign homework. Some not only didn’t feel a need to make students read, write, or do math at home; they preferred to have students do these things during class, where it was possible to observe, guide, and discuss. Finally, any theoretical benefit of practice homework must be weighed against the effect it has on students’ interest in learning. If slogging through worksheets dampens one’s desire to read or think, surely that wouldn’t be worth an incremental improvement in skills. And when an activity feels like drudgery, the quality of learning tends to suffer, too. That so many children regard homework as something to finish as quickly as possible—or even as a significant source of stress—helps explain why it appears not to offer any academic advantage even for those who obediently sit down and complete the tasks they’ve been assigned. All that research showing little value to homework may not be so surprising after all. Reference: Kohn, A. (2006). The truth about homework. Retrieved January 09, 2013, from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2006/09/06/02kohn.h26.html?tkn=RVRFTkNGGXy32nbQpdGsSFt01V8aHU5cZ3wG

Research Spotlight on Homework Essay

Some researchers are urging schools to take a fresh look at homework and its potential for engaging students and improving student performance. The key, they say, is to take into account grade-specific and developmental factors when determining the amount and kind of homework. So, what’s appropriate? What benefits can be expected? What makes for good homework policies? Research doesn’t have all the answers, but a review of some existing data yields some helpful observations and guidance. How Much Homework Do Students Do? Survey data and anecdotal evidence show that some students spend hours nightly doing homework. Homework overload is the exception rather than the norm; however, according to research from the Brookings Institution and the Rand Corporation (see the Brown Center 2003 below). Their researchers analyzed data from a variety of sources and concluded that the majority of U.S. students spend less than an hour a day on homework, regardless of grade level, and this has held true for most of the past 50 years. In the last 20 years, homework has increased only in the lower grade levels, and this increase is associated with neutral (and sometimes negative) effects on student achievement. How Much Is Appropriate? The National PTA recommendations fall in line with general guidelines suggested by researcher Harris Cooper: 10-20 minutes per night in the first grade, and an additional 10 minutes per grade level thereafter (e.g., 20 minutes for second grade, 120 minutes for twelfth). High school students may sometimes do more, depending on what classes they take (see Review of Educational Research, 2006). What are the benefits? Homework usually falls into one of three categories: practice, preparation, or extension. The purpose usually varies by grade. Individualized assignments that tap into students’ existing skills or interests can be motivating. At the elementary school level, homework can help students develop study skills and habits and can keep families informed about their child’s learning. At the secondary school level, student homework is associated with greater academic achievement. (Review of Educational Research, 2006) What’s good policy? Experts advise schools or districts to include teachers, parents, and students in any effort to set homework policies. Policies should address the purposes of homework; amount and frequency; school and teacher responsibilities; student responsibilities; and, the role of parents or others who assist students with homework. Reference: Cooper, H. (2003). A synthesis of research. Review of Educational Reseach, volume 76, Retrieved January 09, 2013, from http://www.nea.org/tools/16938.htm Reasons why students should not have homework Homework is supposed to ensure that all students retain the material covered in the classroom, but for many children it is an unnecessary chore and actually hinders their learning. Children learn best when they are interested in the subject. Positive mental attitude makes learning even challenging things much easier. Negative mental attitude, however, makes retaining knowledge harder and creates stress in a learner. It also takes much longer periods of time to complete. As a result children hardly have any time to develop their talents through extracurricular activities, or to spend adequate time with family and friends. Instead of being burdened with much resented huge loads of homework, children should have the opportunity for more self-directed and interactive learning at school to generate their interest and build in them positive attitude towards learning. Teachers should be more creative and use multimedia like computers and video presentations to make covered subjects more engaging involving children’s input more. Students should be allowed to suggest activities and projects they would like to do. In the present school system it is usually the teacher who decides what and how children should learn in class and at home. This promotes passivity and a sense that learning is a necessary evil rather than exiting opportunity to learn about the world we live in. This is very ineffective, making kids bored, stressed, and frustrated. Not to mention that it is often parents who do the reluctant kids’ homework therefore homework doesn’t help them to learn at all. They get their grades, but end up having learning gaps that will come out later on and hinder their success. Children who are struggling themselves with loads of homework lack the time to develop other than academic passions and experience very unhealty stress that cen result even in a depression. The numbers of children who take antidepressants is rapidly growing. Students who are defiant about their homework often have very strained relationship with their parents. It is a source of contention in too many families and contributes to deep emotional problems in these children and also inevitably may cause depression and substance abuse. The age of kids taking street drugs is getting lower and lower. Children as young as ten in some countries have a drinking problem and homework overload can be an indirect cause of that. That is why I think students should not have homework, but be able to have enjoyable learning experience at school and freedom to be encouraged by the teacher to expand their knowledge on their own terms at home, and to be rewarded for the extra effort instead of being forced to do homework they don’t like. Reference: Tehrani, E. (2009). Reasons why students should not have homework. Retrieved January 09, 2013, from http://www.helium.com/items/1309973-why-students-shoul-not-have-homework The Truth About Homework In high school, some studies do find a correlation between homework and test scores (or grades), but it’s usually fairly small, and it has a tendency to disappear when more sophisticated statistical controls are applied. Moreover, there’s no evidence that higher achievement is due to the homework even when an association does appear. It isn’t hard to think of other explanations for why successful students might be in classrooms where more homework is assigned—or why they might spend more time on it than their peers do. The results of national and international exams raise further doubts. One of many examples is an analysis of 1994 and 1999 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study, or TIMSS, data from 50 countries. Researchers David P. Baker and Gerald K. LeTendre were scarcely able to conceal their surprise when they published their results last year: â€Å"Not only did we fail to find any positive relationships,† they wrote, but â€Å"the overall correlations between national average student achievement and national averages in [amount of homework assigned] are all negative.† Consider the assumption that homework should be beneficial just because it gives students more time to master a topic or skill. (Plenty of pundits rely on this premise when they call for extending the school day or year. Indeed, homework can be seen as a way of prolonging the school day on the cheap.) Unfortunately, this reasoning turns out to be woefully simplistic. Back â€Å"when experimental psychologists mainly studied words and nonsense syllables, it was thought that learning inevitably depended upon time,† the reading researcher Richard C. Anderson and his colleagues explain. But â€Å"subsequent research suggests that this belief is false.† The statement â€Å"People need time to learn things† is true, of course, but it doesn’t tell us much of practical value. On the other hand, the assertion â€Å"More time usually leads to better learning† is considerably more interesting. It’s also demonstrably untrue, however, because there are enough cases where more time doesn’t lead to better learning. In fact, more hours are least likely to produce better outcomes when understanding or creativity is involved. Anderson and his associates found that when children are taught to read by focusing on the meaning of the text (rather than primarily on phonetic skills), their learning does â€Å"not depend on amount of instructional time.† In math, too, as another group of researchers discovered, time on task is directly correlated to achievement only if both the activity and the outcome measure are focused on rote recall as opposed to problem-solving. Carole Ames of Michigan State University points out that it isn’t â€Å"quantitative changes in behavior†Ã¢â‚¬â€such as requiring students to spend more hours in front of books or worksheets—that help children learn better. Rather, it’s â€Å"qualitative changes in the ways students view themselves in relation to the task, engage in the process of learning, and then respond to the learning activities and situation.† In turn, these attitudes and responses emerge from the way teachers think about learning and, as a result, how they organize their classrooms. Assigning homework is unlikely to have a positive effect on any of these variables. We might say that education is less about how much the teacher covers than about what students can be helped to discover—and more time won’t help to bring about that shift. Regardless of one’s criteria, there is no reason to think that most students would be at any sort of disadvantage if homework were sharply reduced or even eliminated. But even if practice is sometimes useful, we’re not entitled to conclude that homework of this type works for most students. It isn’t of any use for those who don’t understand what they’re doing. Such homework makes them feel stupid; gets them accustomed to doing things the wrong way (because what’s really â€Å"reinforced† are mistaken assumptions); and teaches them to conceal what they don’t know. At the same time, other students in the same class already have the skill down cold, so further practice for them is a waste of time. You’ve got some kids, then, who don’t need the practice, and others who can’t use it. Furthermore, even if practice were helpful for most students, that wouldn’t mean they needed to do it at home. In my research, I found a number of superb teachers (at different grade levels and with diverse instructional styles) who rarely, if ever, found it necessary to assign homework. Some not only didn’t feel a need to make students read, write, or do math at home; they preferred to have students do these things during class, where it was possible to observe, guide, and discuss. Finally, any theoretical benefit of practice homework must be weighed against the effect it has on students’ interest in learning. If slogging through worksheets dampens one’s desire to read or think, surely that wouldn’t be worth an incremental improvement in skills. And when an activity feels like drudgery, the quality of learning tends to suffer, too. That so many children regard homework as something to finish as quickly as possible—or even as a significant source of stress—helps explain why it appears not to offer any academic advantage even for those who obediently sit down and complete the tasks they’ve been assigned. All that research showing little value to homework may not be so surprising after all. Reference: Kohn, A. (2006). The truth about homework. Retrieved January 09, 2013, from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2006/09/06/02kohn.h26.html?tkn=RVRFTkNGGXy32nbQpdGsSFt01V8aHU5cZ3wG

Paramedic Essay

â€Å"People don’t care how much you know, they want to know how much you care.† –John C. Maxwell I am attending Fortis College to become a paramedic. I want to become a paramedic not only to make a difference, but to help others in their time of need. I think of this degree as a passion not just a career. As a paramedic there is always room for continuing your education. You learn from your co-workers and the runs you go on. As early as 1500 B.C. there has been some kind of EMS. In those days it was a Good Samaritan act and completely voluntary. Moving up the time line in 1767, the Greeks and Romans took soldiers off of the battlefield by chariots. In the same time period a chief physician in the Napoleon’s army, Baron Dominique-Jean Larrey, started the first pre-hospital system used to triage and transport injured soldiers from the battlefield to aid station. In 1865-1869 the first ambulance service was started in the United States. Interns of the hospital used horse drawn carriages made specifically in taking the sick and injured to the hospital. And modern day today, there are many ambulance companies including fire houses and private ambulances. As knowledge of science and the anatomy of humans grows the knowledge of what paramedics can do grows. I have experience in the fire and EMS world. I was an explorer at the Fairfield Township Fire Department in Fairfield Township, Ohio. I was an explorer for four years. In that four years I did ride-a-longs, scenarios, and class room training. We also did competitions with other departments. In my last year at the department I interviewed and obtained the position of captain of the explorer program. The first year that my explorer post did competitions that I was attending, we placed 2nd overall and placed in 3 competitions; of those 3 I was involved in 2. This was a very exciting time of my life. I also attended the week long Fire/EMS academy at Hocking College as an explorer. I learned a lot from both programs. In conclusion, I can’t wait to start my career at Fortis College. I am excited to further my knowledge in the EMS field. Upon graduation at Fortis College, I plan to work as a paramedic at a private ambulance company and in the ER of a hospital, to only further on as a care flight medic in Columbus.

Avoid Over-Fertilizing Your Trees

Well-meaning homeowners who want to stimulate growth or promote health in their landscape trees often feed them with fertilizers. Unfortunately, too much of a good thing can have the opposite effect and can actually harm your trees. In normal landscape soils, many trees require no feeding at all, and if you do feed them, its critical that you use the right fertilizers in the right ratios.   The Right Fertilizer With the Right NPK Ratio Trees are usually grown for the appeal of their green foliage, so the best fertilizer is one with a relatively high ratio of nitrogen, which promotes green growth. Unless your soil is deficient in potassium or phosphorus (a soil test can tell you this), fertilizers for trees should have a high nitrogen number in the N-P-K designation.   A good choice is a fertilizer with an N-P-K (nitrogen-potassium-phosphorus) ratio of 10-6-4, preferably in a slow-release formulation.  Slow-release formulations are usually non-liquid products that use granules that are released gradually into the soil.   Although balanced fertilizers, such as 10-10-10 products, can be helpful for many flower and vegetable gardens when used with discretion, such fertilizers can have a bad effect when applied to the soil beneath trees. Excessive amounts of these nutrients can create too much mineral salt in the soil, which will harm the beneficial soil microorganisms  necessary to healthy trees.   Stay at less than .20 pounds of nitrogen per 100 square feet of root zone application area, depending on tree species and size. Any time you exceed this recommendation, you will create a situation for on-site contamination or the potential for runoff pollution into lakes and streams. Extreme contamination of soil can harm the site for a very long time. The Effects of Excessive Fertilization on Trees You can actually kill a tree if you apply too much fertilizer. Applying high levels of quick- release nitrogen can burn the roots when applied to the soil and can burn the foliage when applied as a foliar spray or drench. And if the fertilizer contains too much potassium and phosphorus, it creates excessive soil salts that trees may be unable to tolerate.   The most common ways to over-fertilize a tree include: Over-use of fertilizers that contain an equal ratio of all three essential nutrients (nitrogen, potassium,  and phosphorus)Applying more fertilizer than the standard recommended application rate suggestsUsing fast-release rather than time-release fertilizers Any or all of these mistakes will increase the chance of root damage to your tree. Too much fertilizer introduces toxic salt levels that not only harm the tree  but also make the site unsuitable for future planting.   Symptoms and Treatment for an Over-Fertilized Tree Symptoms of a tree that has been over-fertilized include: A crust of fertilizer visible on soil surface beneath the tree drip zone (the area of the ground beneath the spread of the branches)Yellowing, wilting, and browning on the trees foliage, starting at tree leaf tips and marginsA tree that starts to drop leaves before dormancy  begins.   The tree may survive and the site can be much improved if you do a fairly simple, three-part treatment as quickly as possible: Remove the dying or wilting leaves, if you have any, to reduce fertilizer remnants in the tree itself.Water the fertilized area of the soil thoroughly to a flushing point. Copious supplies of water will be necessary to flush excess fertilizer from the soil.  Cover the critical root zone with a natural plant-based mulch—preferably composted leaves and grass.  Perform a second water flush over the composted mulch.