Work Force Education or Literacy Development: Which Road Should Adult Education Take? :: Adult Work Education Job Essays

Work Force Education or Literacy Development Which Road Should Adult Education Take? The dry land of work continues to change rapidly. Many workers go out need to upgrade their skills and some will need to be retrained for entirely new jobs. Providing teachingal opportunities to these adult workers will lengthen their productive years and will also benefit the economy by creating a more flexible and more highly trained workforce. (U.S. subdivision of Education Strategic Plan, 1998-2002, 1997, p. 39) Our democratic institutions depend upon and ar sustained by an educated citizenry. While moving from welfare to the workforce and creating economic advancement are valid outcomes of education, democracy demands much more. Democratic life requires critical inquiry, civic participation, and a commitment to the common good. (Auchter 1998, p. 2) During the past few years, the nations economic needs possess driven many of the policy discussions within education. At the federal level, Con gress has considered and debated bills that would consolidate a number of educational programs--including adult base education and vocational education--into omnibus work force development and training bills. Provisions for block grants that would allow states greater self-sufficiency and latitude in making decisions about how the finances are used have been included in these proposed acts. None of these education bills has passed, but the debate continues. In 1996, Congress passed the Personal Responsibility and Work hazard Reconciliation Act. More commonly known as the Welfare Reform Act, this legislation not only created sweeping changes in welfare policies that affected education and training, it also provided block grants that give states greater flexibility (Nathan 1997). A number of states have responded to the move at the federal level toward greater state autonomy and control by merging education, human services, and employment service agencies to create super agencies t o oversee state work force development efforts, including adult basic education, welfare reform, and vocational education (Jurmo 1996). The increasing emphasis on work force development as a policy goal is bringing to the vanguard a continuing debate within the field of adult basic education. Although adults frequently enroll in adult basic education for job-related reasons, the programs themselves have constantly had broader goals. In an effort to shed light on current perspectives about the goals and purposes of adult basic education, this Digest reviews recent literature and suggests solutions to what frequently becomes an either-or debate. The Current setting Its Impact on Adult Basic Education

The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) vs. P2P Essay

The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) vs. P2PIt began with the sacking of Napster, and has steadily grown to become an all-out offensive against participants of on-line Peer-2-Peer (P2P) file sharing networks. darn the Recording Industry, (RIAA), may have fired the first salvo, the Film Industry, be by the Motion Picture Association of America, (MPAA), from recently jumping into the litigious fray. On November sixteenth, 2004, the MPAA announced it would begin launching lawsuits against a select group of P2P users charge of possessing and/or transmitting copyrighted films. These lawsuits, in the same vain as the RIAAs ongoing legal offensive, are meant to intimidate other P2P users to cease and stop each illegal activities involving movies1. From a distance, this recent crack down appears to be not only acceptable, but also morally unquestionable. Upon closer inspection of the issue, it becomes quickly apparent that scapgoating P2P networks is no t only an unnecessary and unwinable battle, (as the RIAA can attest), but also a waste of anti-piracy resource away from real piracy threats. Before any discussion on the actions of MPAA can be broached, it is necessary to deliver a sketch historical primer on the intellectual property laws, in grouchy copyrights. To begin with, a copyright is used to protect creative rather than industrial forms. No formal registration is required to gain protection of a creation. The only requirement is that creation must be expressed, that is, an idea or familiarity in and of itself is not copyrightable, only the expression of the idea.2 The first form of world(prenominal) intellectual property protection came in 1886 ... ... Accessed on November 16th, 2004Taylor, Chris. Invasion of the Movie Snatchers. sentence Online Edition. November 2004. http//www.time.com/time/insidebiz/article/0,9171,1101041011-709042,00.html . accessed on November 16th, 2004 Jardin, Xeni. P2P i n the Legal Crosshairs. WIRED March, 2004. http//www.wired.com/ news program/digiwood/0,1412,62665,00.html . accessed on November 16th 2004Dean, Katie. Film Piracy Steals the Show. WIRED. December 2003 http//www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,61673,00.html . accessed Nov. 16, 20041 MSNBC, November 16th/20042 Attallah, Shade. 20023 Attallah, Shade. 20024 Attallah, Shade. 20025 Chris Taylor, TIME Oct. 20046 Taylor, 20047 Xeni Jardin, WIRED, may 20048 Taylor, 20049 Straubhaar, Media Now, 200210 Seradini, Video Age International, 200211 Dean, Wired, 2003 The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) vs. P2P EssayThe Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) vs. P2PIt began with the sacking of Napster, and has steadily grown to become an all-out offensive against participants of on-line Peer-2-Peer (P2P) file sharing networks. While the Recording Industry, (RIAA), may have fired the first salvo, the Film Industry, represented by the Motion Picture Association of Amer ica, (MPAA), from recently jumping into the litigious fray. On November 16th, 2004, the MPAA announced it would begin launching lawsuits against a select group of P2P users accused of possessing and/or transmitting copyrighted films. These lawsuits, in the same vain as the RIAAs ongoing legal offensive, are meant to intimidate other P2P users to cease and desist any illegal activities involving movies1. From a distance, this recent crack down appears to be not only acceptable, but also morally unquestionable. Upon closer inspection of the issue, it becomes readily apparent that scapgoating P2P networks is not only an unnecessary and unwinable battle, (as the RIAA can attest), but also a waste of anti-piracy resource away from real piracy threats. Before any discussion on the actions of MPAA can be broached, it is necessary to deliver a brief historical primer on the intellectual property laws, in particular copyrights. To begin with, a copyright is us ed to protect creative rather than industrial forms. No formal registration is required to gain protection of a creation. The only requirement is that creation must be expressed, that is, an idea or knowledge in and of itself is not copyrightable, only the expression of the idea.2 The first form of international intellectual property protection came in 1886 ... ... Accessed on November 16th, 2004Taylor, Chris. Invasion of the Movie Snatchers. Time Online Edition. November 2004. http//www.time.com/time/insidebiz/article/0,9171,1101041011-709042,00.html . accessed on November 16th, 2004 Jardin, Xeni. P2P in the Legal Crosshairs. WIRED March, 2004. http//www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,62665,00.html . accessed on November 16th 2004Dean, Katie. Film Piracy Steals the Show. WIRED. December 2003 http//www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,61673,00.html . accessed Nov. 16, 20041 MSNBC, November 16th/20042 Attallah, Shade. 20023 Attallah, Shade. 20024 Attallah, Shade. 20025 Chri s Taylor, TIME Oct. 20046 Taylor, 20047 Xeni Jardin, WIRED, may 20048 Taylor, 20049 Straubhaar, Media Now, 200210 Seradini, Video Age International, 200211 Dean, Wired, 2003