Pudd?nhead Wilson Essay -- essays research papers

A Character Analysis of Tom Driscoll   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  In Pudd’nhead Wilson by Mark Twain, the story of two boys, who were switched at early childhood, is told. One of these boys, Tom Driscoll, displays many characteristics in the novel. Tom shows how he is rude and a liar, but he also exhibits his ability to change his ways.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  From his childhood to his later years, it was evident that Tom Driscoll was a rude character. For example, during his childhood, Tom and Chambers (the boy with whom Tom was switched with and who was also Tom’s slave) always went an â€Å"played† together. On such instance was when they went swimming with Tom’s friends and were diving off of canoes. Chambers was an excellent diver, however, Tom could not dive for it gave him splitting headaches. And for this reason (Chambers could do something that Tom could not do), Tom pushed the canoe under Chambers as he was in a mid-air dive. The result was that Chambers was unconscious and Tom’s spirit was gratified. Later on, when they were about fifteen, the boys were swimming in the river as usual, Tom fell ill to a cramp in the water and Chambers saved his life. Instead of being grateful to Chambers and thanking him, Tom said that â€Å"anybody but a blockheaded nigger would have known he was funning and left him [Tom] alone† (23). Furthermore, after Tom had gone to college (Yale) and returned back to Dawson’s Landing, he still carried this trait. This was evident when he was h...

Teachers Attitudes Towards Interactive Whiteboards Teaching Tool Education Essay

Current UK governmental policy enterprises, such as Harnessing Technology: Transforming Learning and Children ‘s Servicess recommend that instructors increase their usage of engineering to better pupil academic growing ( Department for Education and Skills, 2005 ; Loveless, 2010 ; P. Smith, Rudd, & A ; Coghlan, 2008 ) . This has lead to increasing synergistic whiteboard ( IWB ) usage in UK primary and secondary schools ( Becta, 2008 ; Department for Education and Skills, 2005 ; Madden, Prupis, Sangiovanni, & A ; Stanek, 2009, p. 15 ; H. J. Smith, Higgins, Wall, & A ; Miller, 2005, p. 91 ) . Using an IWB enriches a schoolroom with images, sound, pre-prepared lessons, and entree to the Internet in multiple modes ( G. Beauchamp & A ; Parkinson, 2005, p. 97 ; Lewin, Somekh, & A ; Steadman, 2008, p. 292 ) . What makes the synergistic whiteboard so potentially utile is that instructors can utilize this engineering from a learning place in the schoolroom instead than sitting at a computing machine ( S. Kennewell, Tanner, Jones, & A ; Beauchamp, 2008, p. 64 ) . IWB ‘s are thought to better pupil motive, engagement, coaction, deepness of acquisition, every bit good as addition pupil-teacher interaction ( G. Beauchamp & A ; Parkinson, 2005, p. 97 ; Gillen, Staarman, Littleton, Mercer, & A ; Twiner, 2007, p. 11 ; S. Kennewell, et al. , 2008, p. 64 ) .Literature ReviewOne manner to believe about engineering in general and synergistic whiteboards specifically is to see the IWB a tool for people to utilize ( Gillen, et al. , 2007, p. 12 ; Lewin, et al. , 2008, p. 293 ; G. Beauc hamp & A ; Parkinson, 2005, p. 101 ; Jonassen, 2006 ; S Kennewell, 2001 p107 ; S. Kennewell, et al. , 2008, p. 65 ; Lewin, et al. , 2008, p. 295 ; Loveless, 2010, p. 9 ; Zevenbergen & A ; Lerman, 2008, p. 124 ) . Harmonizing to research, teacher attitude toward technological tools is the most of import factor in the successful execution of engineering in the school system ( Efe, 2011, p. 229 ; Teo, Wong, & A ; Chai, 2008, p. 128 ; Watson, 2001, p. 259 ) . Research workers have been analyzing this issue from a theory known as the Technology Acceptance Model ( Pynoo et al. , 2010, p. 569 ; Teo, et al. , 2008, p. 129 ) . Basically this theory suggests that people accept engineering based upon the sensed utility and perceived easiness of usage. Most surveies have found that the more utile a individual believes the engineering is ( sensed utility ) , the more likely a individual will try to utilize it ( Pynoo, et al. , 2010, p. 569 ; Teo, et al. , 2008, p. 129 ) . Versatility, shorter readying clip, ability to salvage lessons, better schoolroom direction with improved pupil behavior, improved lesson pacing, more multisensory lessons with multimedia, expanded interactivity throughout lessons, the possible to make more pupils with increased pupil success are all facets of sensed utility ( G. Beauchamp & A ; Parkinson, 2005p. 312 ; Gillen, et al. , 2007, p. 12 ; Gray, Hagger-Vaughan, Pilkington, & A ; Tomkins, 2005, p. 38 ; S. Kennewell, et al. , 2008, p. 62 ; Moss et al. , 2007, p. 6 ; Slay, SiebE† rger, & A ; Hodgkinson-Williams, 2008, p. 1335 ; H. J. Smith, et al. , 2005, p. 92 ; Teo, et al. , 2008, p. 267 ; Wood & A ; Ashfield, 2008, p. 84 ; Zevenbergen & A ; Lerman, 2008, p. 110 ) . Perceived easiness of usage is defined as a instructor ‘s expectancy of troubles connected with utilizing the engineering ( Pynoo, et al. , 2010, p. 569 ; Teo, et al. , 2008, p. 129 ) . Learning and implementing the usage of IWBs takes considerable attempt ( Borghans & A ; Weel, 2006, p. 1 ; Lewin, et al. , 2008, p. 239 ; Miller, Glover, & A ; Averis, 2009, p. 3 ; H. J. Smith, et al. , 2005, p. 98 ) . It is complicated to incorporate this tool into their personal teaching method and lesson planning ( Moss, et al. , 2007, p. 4 ; Slay, et al. , 2008, p. 1332 ) . This requires a important investing of clip non available to most instructors ( Efe, 2011, p. 229 ; Watson, 2001, p. 260 ) . Teachers need unrestricted entree to IWB ‘s in order to get the hang the engineering and go comfy with its usage ( Gray, et al. , 2005, p. 38 ) . Some schools do non hold adequate engineering for this to go on ( Efe, 2011, p. 229 ; Madden, et al. , 2009, p. 25 ; Watson, 2001, p. 257 ; Zevenber gen & A ; Lerman, 2008, p. 110 ) . Synergistic Whiteboards have important possible to alter the manner instructors teach at a really basic degree ( Gray, et al. , 2005, p. 43 ; Higgins, Beauchamp, & A ; Miller, 2007, p. 221 ; Watson, 2001, p. 252 ) . Teachers have the ability to see the full scope of potencies offered by the IWB or they can use this new resource harmonizing to their criterion and usual mode of instruction ( Bateson, 1972 ; G. Beauchamp & A ; Parkinson, 2005, p. 306 ; Gillen, et al. , 2007, p. 12 ; S. Kennewell, et al. , 2008, p. 71 ; Knight, Pennant, & A ; Piggott, 2004, p. 4 ; Miller, et al. , 2009, p. 4 ; Teo, et al. , 2008, p. 265 ; Watzlawick, Weakland, & A ; Fisch, 1974 ; Wood & A ; Ashfield, 2008, p. 86 ; Zevenbergen & A ; Lerman, 2008, p. 109 ) . This can be a considered both an indicant of usefulness and/or a trouble connected to IWBs ( Lewin, et al. , 2008, p. 295 ) . Teacher ‘s beliefs sing teaching method will find their position on this issue ( Gary Beauchamp & A ; Kennewell, 2008, p . 306 ; S. Kennewell, et al. , 2008, p. 65 ; Zevenbergen & A ; Lerman, 2008, p. 124 ) .MethodologyThis research was basic qualitative research that was trying to measure instructor ‘s feelings and attitudes toward the use of Synergistic Whiteboards. Questions were developed harmonizing to the above literature and these constructs. Forty secondary school instructors were asked to make full in respond to a 10 inquiry multiple-choice questionnaire. This questionnaire is attached in Appendix 1. Out of those who answered, five instructors were selected for farther interview. The extra interview inquiries can be found in Appendix 2. A chart of the replies and their dislocation are listed in Appendix 3. This research was conducted with an consciousness of the duty to teacher-respondents harmonizing to the values described in the British Revised Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research Data ( 2004 ) . Questionnaires were distributed and interviews conducted without favoritism against anyone for any ground, demoing regard for single differences. Teachers who participated understood that their engagement was wholly voluntary. They were informed of the nature of this research and the grounds for it. Complete privateness and confidentiality of their engagement and their responses was assured. No personal information was collected. All questionnaires were returned without names or any identifying features. Questionnaires were kept in a unafraid cabinet with no entree except for this research worker. Those involved in this research were non antecedently known by this research worker, nor were there any double relationships with them other than research worker and participant. No misrepr esentation was involved in any facet of this research. Participants were assured that they could reply the inquiries in the questionnaire in full, in portion, or non at all. They could alter their heads about take parting at any clip with no reverberations. No vulnerable people were included in this undertaking. No inducements were offered or given to convert people to take part. Participants were advised that they could talk to this research worker sing their reactions to the inquiries involved if they so desired. This research was conducted in a nonbiased format in order to get at honest consequences. There was no effort to pull strings, turn out or confute an docket. Data was collected, collated and analysed harmonizing to frequence of each response. Because some replies were given in both the interview and questionnaires, the figure of replies to different inquiry varies slightly. As basic research, this type of analysis provides farther waies for extra research.FindingssTeachers who believe that engineering will be utile to them are more likely to do the effort to utilize IWBs. In this research, instructors assert that the primary ground they use an IWB is that it offers a assortment of uses and makes their lessons less nerve-racking as represented in the diagram to the right. For some, the newness of this technique makes their undertaking more interesting. The grounds instructors give for trying to use IWBs include it ‘s assortment of educational utilizations ( 32 % of the instructors ) , decrease of emphasis ( 25 % of the instructors ) , a new attack to learning ( 22 % of the instructors ) , to develop their ICT accomplishments ( 17 % o f the instructors ) and the IWB is their lone available board ( 4 % of the instructors ) . Question # 2, â€Å" do you utilize an synergistic whiteboard as portion of your instructor tool, † was chosen as one method of sing the issue of sensed utility. A tool is utile. Eighty per centum of the instructors who participated viewed the usage of IWBs as one facet of their instructor repertory instead than as somehow distant from them. Most of the instructors involved in this research did believe that an IWB was a tool for them to utilize. Merely 5 % of the instructors did non utilize an IWB as portion of their instructor tool. Technological attitude can be seen to some extent by how frequently a instructor uses an IWB. Thus, inquiry # 4, on mean how many lessons per twenty-four hours do you interact with the whiteboard? Peoples who use their engineering more often are assumed to believe it is utile. In this instance, about tierce of the instructors used their IWB for 1-2 lessons each twenty-four hours and about tierce of the instructors used their IWB for 3-4 lessons per twenty-four hours. This information implies that instructors are utilizing their engineering on a regular footing. Teachers seem to see IWB ‘s as a helpful tool in many countries of instruction. The information split closely with 22 % of instructors admiting their belief that IWBs better planning, 20 % describing their belief that an IWB improves gait, 26 % coverage that they believe IWBs aid develop a better lesson flow and 24 % believe that their administration is helped by the usage of an IWB. Fewer instructors have seen an betterment in pupil behavior. On the other manus, 95 % of the instructors perceive the IWB as utile for bettering pupil comprehension of new constructs. Teachers continue to see value in IWB, with sentiments moderately equally split between believing that this engineering increases pupil motive ( 18 % ) , pupil engagement ( 25 % ) , teacher motive ( 15 % ) , and teacher engagement ( 17 % ) . Research strongly suggests that if a instructor believes that any troubles inherent in engineering are greater than what they perceive as its utility, that instructor will non utilize the engineering. When the IWB is non easy available, instructors are unable to entree it and go familiar plenty with it to go comfy. Therefore, inquiry # 1 was asked to measure IWB entree, a strong issue of sensed easiness of usage. In this research the bulk of respondents answered yes. Educational research workers stressed the doctrine of pedagogical alteration as a consequence of engineering. If instructors are utilizing their IWBs as an interaction instructor tool, they are thought to be trying pedagogical alteration. Are instructors utilizing IWBs from their old teaching method or are they incorporating this new engineering and making new ways of learning? Most of the instructors who answered this inquiry are utilizing their IWB as an synergistic instruction tool. The literature on engineering execution stresses the importance of instructor preparation. Most research emphasizes the deficiency of preparation as a barrier to positive integrating of new engineering. Yet more than half of the instructors take parting have had no formal preparation in the usage of an Interactive Whiteboard. The issue of salvaging lessons can mention to sensed easiness of use. The inquiry efforts to understand how instructors are accommodating to the new engineering. Teachers who do non salvage their work have n't yet realized this clip salvaging value built-in in engineering. These instructors are in the minority. A removable memory stick allows instructors to salvage their lessons but non to portion with one another. This could be another clip salvaging mechanism and an experience that increases teacher engineering accomplishment. The same is true of a personal web country. These instructors are in the bulk. A full two-thirds of the instructors use a memory stick or a personal web country to salvage their work. Merely one-forth of the instructors are salvaging their work to their section ‘s resort bank where instructors could easy portion their work with each other.DiscussionGovernmental policy encourages the increased usage of IWB and other engineering in instruction to better p upil success over clip. The literature reappraisal addressed engineering as a tool to be utilized by instructors harmonizing to the perceived utility and perceived easiness of usage. In the ideal, harmonizing to governmental policies, learning would alter and accommodate with the consequence being greater pupil success. This will merely go on if instructors can see that the utility of IWBs outweighs the troubles involved in using them. A simple study was administered to 40 instructors and interviews were conducted with five more instructors. The instructors believe that using IWBs will better pupil motive, motive, engagement in acquisition, teacher-student interaction and ability to larn new constructs. Most instructors do see the IWB as a tool for them to utilize in their instruction. Teachers are utilizing their IWBs on a moderately regular footing. They view this tool as utile for instructors every bit good as pupils. Teachers believe that IWBs make their occupation easier in footings of lesson planning, pacing lessons, lesson flow, administration, and ability to orchestrate schoolroom interaction. While IWBs are readily available for usage, there is a major job with instructor preparation for their usage. As more than one-half of the instructors in this research undertaking had no formal preparation in the usage of synergistic white boards, it is improbable that the coveted governmental educational alterations could reasonable be expected to happen. Equally long as instructors are being given engineering without the preparation to give them a deepness of understanding, they will reasonably implement this engineering from the pedagogical cognition they have.Decisionâ€Å" Teacher ‘s attitudes and experiences towards the usage of Synergistic Whiteboards ( IWBs ) † as instruction and larning tool was conducted to measure how current secondary school instructors match the research literature. Research workers and governmental policy shapers suggest that IWB ‘s can alter teaching method for the better, bettering pupil attainment. Many articles mentioned the deman d for instructors to accommodate themselves to the technological progresss in order to carry through this alteration. However, research besides carefully explained that if the sensed utility did non outweigh the sensed easiness of usage, instructors would non do the attempt to change their thought and learning behavior. For the most portion, the instructors who participated in this survey are utilizing IWBs on a regular footing. The engineering is available. However, without the designated preparation that allows pedagogues to understand engineering at a deep degree, engineering will merely be funnelled through the bing teaching method. This was illustrated by the simple inquiry about salvaging their work. Few instructors take advantage of the chances to portion work by salvaging on a school-wide waiter. Hopefully, future research will measure what needs to happen for instructors to be given engineering preparation that would let them to utilize the full resources of available engineering.Appendix 1: Questionnaire for instructorsDo you hold an synergistic whiteboard available every bit frequently as you would wish? Yes No Make you utilize an synergistic whiteboard as a instructor tool? ( Please tick merely one ) Yes No Sometimes As portion of your learning how make you utilize the whiteboard? ( Please tick merely one ) As an synergistic board ( You touch it with you pen or finger, write on it, etc ) As a show board ( Just to project work for the projector with no interaction ) Both On mean how many lessons per twenty-four hours do you interact with the synergistic whiteboard? No lessons 1 – 2 lessons 3 – 4 lessons 5 – 6 lessons Have you had formal whiteboard preparation? ( Please tick merely one ) Yes No On a instructor ‘s perceptive which of these characteristics do you believe synergistic whiteboards can better? ( More than one can be ticked ) Planing Pace Flow of lessons Do you believe utilizing an synergistic whiteboard better apprehension of new constructs? ( Please tick merely one ) Yes No Do you believe synergistic whiteboards additions: – ( Please click one or more ) Pupil ‘s motive Pupil ‘s engagement Teacher ‘s motive Teacher ‘s engagement What has encouraged you to utilize an synergistic whiteboard? ( Please click one or more ) A new attack to learning Its assortment of use To develop your ICT accomplishments It is the lone board in the schoolroom Make the lesson less nerve-racking How make you salvage the information created? ( Please click one or more ) Do non salvage work Department ‘s resort bank Removable memory stick Other methods Personal web infiniteAppendix 2: Interview inquiries for instructorsMake you utilize an Synergistic Whiteboard? If so how long have you been utilizing one? What do you utilize the Interactive Whiteboard for? Why? What type of interaction does the Interactive Whiteboard encourage? Why? How has the Interactive Whiteboard improved your instruction and acquisition? Why If you had the pick which medium ( Interactive or kick Whiteboard ) would you utilize as a learning tool? Why? What has been the cardinal influence ( s ) that has encouraged you to utilize the Interactive Whiteboard? What things would forestall you from desiring to utilize the Interactive Whiteboard?Appendix 3: Response Datas1. Make you hold an synergistic whiteboard available to utilize every bit frequently as you would wish? Yes 34 85 % No 6 15 % Entire 40 100 % 2. Make you utilize an synergistic whiteboard as portion of your instructor tool? Yes 32 80 % No 2 5 % Sometimes 6 15 % Entire 40 100 % 3. As portion of your learning how make you utilize the whiteboard? As an synergistic board 28 70 % As a show board 6 15 % Both 6 15 % Entire 40 100 % 4. On mean how many lessons per twenty-four hours do you interact with the whiteboard? No lessons 2 5 % 1-2 lessons 14 35 % 3-4 lessons 14 35 % 5-6 lessons 10 25 % 40 100 % 5. Have you has any formal whiteboard preparation Yes 18 45 % No 22 55 % 40 100 % 6. Think IW can better Planing 10 22 % Pace 9 20 % Flow of lessons 12 26 % Administration 11 24 % Behaviour direction 4 8 % Entire 46 100 % 7. Make you believe utilizing an synergistic whiteboard better apprehension of new constructs? Yes 38 95 % No 2 5 % Entire 40 100 % 8. Make you believe synergistic whiteboards additions Think IW additions Pupil ‘s motive 12 18 % Pupil ‘s engagement 16 25 % Teacher ‘s motive 10 15 % Teacher ‘s engagement 11 17 % Active student engagement 16 25 % Entire 65 100 % 9. What has encouraged you to utilize an synergistic whiteboard? Encourage to utilize IW A new attack to learning 9 22 % Its assortment of use 13 32 % To develop your ICT accomplishments 7 17 % Merely board in the schoolroom 2 4 % Make the lesson less nerve-racking 10 25 % Entire 41 100 % 10. How do you salvage the information created? How make you salvage the information created A new attack to learning 9 22 % Its assortment of use 13 32 % To develop your ICT accomplishments 7 17 % Merely board in the schoolroom 2 4 % Make the lesson less nerve-racking 10 25 % Entire 41 100 %

Mini-Case – Finance

In order to decide on an IPO price, we must look at the current financial position of the company, as well as make projections for possible future scenarios. From the data given, we know that Prairie Home Stores (PHS) has a current book value of $80,000,000. With 400,000 outstanding shares, the book equity per share is $200. There are two possible paths for future performance to consider. The first, a constant growth scenario, assumes that PHS will continue on its current trajectory of paying out 2/3 of its earnings as dividends, and retaining the other 2/3 to grow the business.In this scenario, we will continue the company’s growth rate of 5%, with no change in plowback or dividends. In this scenario, price per share is determined by the current dividends, divided by (r-g) The value of the company will be equal to the present value of all future cash flows ( i. e. dividend payments) that investors expect to receive. Constant growth scenario: EPS 2013 = $ 12,000,000 / 400,000 shares = $ 30. 00 Book equity per share in 2013 = $80,000,000 / 400,000 shares = $200. 00 per share Dividends paid out per share in 2013 = $ 8,000,000 / 400,000 shares = $ 20. 00 per share Payout ratio in 2013 = $ 20. 0 (DIV2013) / $ 30 (EPS 2013) = 0. 67 Plowback ratio 2013 = $10. 00 (RE per share 2013) / $ 30. 00 (EPS 2013) = 0. 33 Sustainable growth rate = 0. 15 (rate of return) x 0. 33 (plowback ratio) = 5 % Price per share 2012 = DIV2013/(r-g) = $20/(11%-5% ) = $ 333. 33 $ 333. 33 price per share x 400,000 shares = $ 133,333,333 – value of the company in 2012 P/E ratio = $ 333. 33( price per share) / 30 (EPS) = 11. 11 Rapid Growth Scenario: Since Price = DIV / r-g, and there are no dividends paid in the years 2013 – 2016, we can calculate the value of the company in 2016 and discount it to obtain the Present value in 2012.EPS 2017 = $21,000,000 / 400,000 shares = $52. 50 Book equity per share 2017 = $139,900,000 / 400,000 shares = $349. 75 Dividends paid out per s hare 2017 = $14,000,000 / 400,000 shares = $35. 00 Payout ratio in 2017 = $ 35. 00 (DIV per share 2017) / $ 52. 50 (EPS 2017) = 0. 67 Plowback ratio in 2017 = $ 17. 50 (RE in 2017) / 52. 50 (EPS in 2017) = 0. 33 Sustainable growth rate = 0. 15 (rate of return) x 0. 33 (plowback ratio) = 5 % Price per share in 2016= $35. 00 (DIV 2017) / 0. 06 (r – g)= $583. 33 Let’s discount it to 2012 value: Financial calculator: FV = 583. 33 N = 4, I/Yr = 11% PV = 384. 5 – price per share in 2012 384. 25 x 400,000 shares = 153,700,000 – value of the company in 2012 under rapid growth Conclusion: Rapid growth scenario promises higher stock price, so it should be chosen. PVGO between the previous example and this one: 153,700,000 – 133,333,333 = 20,366,667 Under both scenarios, current price per share is more than $200. Now here’s my calculations: Constant growth scenario: Assuming a 15% required return: P0 = DIV1 / (r-g) = $20 / (. 15 – . 05) = $20/. 1 = $200 Assuming an 11% required return, we’ll have: P0 = DIV1 / (r-g) = $20 / (. 11 – . 05) = $20/. 06 = $333. 33In the constant growth scenario, the stock is valued at $200 if we assume a 15% expected return, and $333. 33 if we assume 11% expected return. Now, in the rapid growth scenario, things get even more exciting. I think that 2017/2020 is the horizon year, because it’s AFTER that point when the growth goes down to 5%. In paragraph 6, the problem states â€Å"†¦ would require reinvestment of all of Prairie Home’s earnings from 2016 to 2019. After that the company could resume its normal dividend payout and growth. † your book’s years:20122013201420152016201720182019 my book’s years:20152016201720182019202020212022 year #01234567 arnings growth from previous year—4. 6%15%15%15%15%5%5% dividend0000$35$36. 75$38. 59 todayH NB: neither book shows 2019 or 2022, but we know that the beginning of the year figures are the same as the end of year figures for the previous year, so that’s where I got those. Ultimately, it doesn’t really matter – I’m just reinforcing the point that we turn into a constant growth scenario beginning with year 6. Our non-constant growth model says this: PV = D1/(1+r)1 + D2 / (1+r)2 + †¦ + DH / (1+r)H + PH / (1+r)H and we get PH with this formula: PH = Dt+1 / (r-g) The dividends for the foreseeable future (years 1 – 4) will all be 0, so hose first numbers will add up to 0. We know that the dividend at the horizon year – year 5 – is $35. The expected future price of the stock at year 5 will be: P5 = D6 / (r-g) Plugging in numbers there, we have: P5 = $36. 75 / (. 15 – . 05) = $36. 75/. 1 = $367. 50 Again, that’s assuming a 15% required return. Then the third part of the process is to add up all of those numbers, discounting them to the present value: P0 = D1 + D2 + D3 + D4 + D5 / (1. 15)5 + P5 / (1. 15)5 = 0 + (35 + 367. 5) / (1. 15)5 = 402. 5/(1. 15)5 Or on the calculator: FV = 402. 50, I/YR = 15, N=5, PV = $200. 11 Then we go to the 11% required return.There, we’ll see that: P5 = D6 / (r-g) = $36. 75 / (. 11 – . 05) = $612. 50 And then: P0 = D1 + D2 + D3 + D4 + D5 / (1. 11)5 + P5 / (1. 11)5 = 0 + (35 + 612. 50) / (1. 11)5 = †¦ (Calculator: FV = 647. 50, I/YR = 11, N = 5, PV = $384. 26) In the rapid growth scenario, the stock is valued at $200. 11 if we assume a 15% expected return, and $384. 26 if we assume 11% expected return. This is the point where I defer to you, or we can talk about this more tomorrow. Our math says to price the stock somewhere between $200 and $384, but how do we choose? I get the sense that you understand that better than I do, so I can use your input for sure.We believe that Prairie Home Stores should value the stock at $384. xx because we should choose the We recommend choosing the rapid growth scenario, plowback more earnings into growing the company, and set the IPO price as $384. whatever. Our prospectus will show that we intend to invest more of our earnings into growing the company over the next 4 years, and as a result investors and the market will support a price of $384. We chose to use 11% as our expected rate of return, because this is the rate shown in the Journal of Finance as being the rate offered by other, equally risky stocks in the same industry as Prairie Home Stores.The PVGO is $153,700,000 – 133,333,333 = $20,366,667. This indicates that the company has room to grow, which will be attractive to investors. Investors believe that under the rapid growth scenario. According to our calculations, Mr. Breezeway was wise to counsel his son( ) to not sell the stock for $200, as we believe that the company is worth more than current BOOK VALUE PER SHARE – include something about this. $200 per the current values (this is what the whoever dude offered the son), but our calculations show that th e company is more valuable than the $200 price indicates.

Defining Abuse

Defining Abuse Free Online Research Papers Have you have ever pushed, threatened, or touched someone inappropriately? If so, you have either physically, sexually or verbally abused someone. Generally speaking, the word â€Å"Abuse† means treatment of something, such as a person, or thing, that causes some kind of harm or is against the law or just plain wrong. Physical abuse is a form of abuse, which involves contact intended to cause pain, injury, suffering or harm. Sexual abuse is the forcing of non-wanted sexual acts by one person to another. Last, Verbal abuse is when a person uses foul language or says things that threaten or make a person feel scared, which gives the aggressor power over the victim. Sometimes the victim may even die of a severe injury, emotionally or physically, which the abuser has made occur. Physical abuse may occur anywhere from a high school to you own house. Between midnight and four am, 4 out of every 10 children in the world are physically abused. Striking, punching, pushing, slapping, pinching, kicking, tripping, and strangling are all forms of physical abuse. This form of abuse may cause shaking, scars, scratches or bruises. Physical abusers can be anybody not just dirty people who are perverts. They can be your parents to even your teachers. Physical abuse is one of the most dangerous form or abuse, and it is one of the leading causes of death. There are many ways to abuse people; sexual abuse is the second main form of abuse. Sexual abuse occurs when an adult or youth uses someone for sexual purposes when they don’t want it, such as rape. This form of abuse also includes oral, anal, genital, buttock, breast contact and sexual stimulation. When sexual abuse occurs, the victim is most likely a girl that is a child or adolescent, and a man or older boy is most often the abuser. One-third of all sex crimes, the victim are males, otherwise they are females. Sexual, unlike most forms of abuses are reported. In some cases, the sexual abuse isn’t even thrown into jail. If a person is verbally abused since he or she was a child, he or she can get long-term affects. The experiences you go through when you are a child provide a system for the expression of the children’s intelligence, emotions and personality. When those experiences are always negative, children may build up emotional, behavioral and learning problems that carry on during their lifetime. There are many different types of verbal abuses such as threatening, yelling, insulting, and many more. Some symptoms of verbal abuse are headaches, dizziness, and many more. Once this abuse gets to the victim, he or she will be emotional hurt. Once a person is emotionally hurt, he or she may feel that they are not wanted in this world, and may even kill themselves. Based an the information I have provided, you should realize that abuse can hurt you physically or mentally, and it could potentially scar you for life. Abuse can occur to any body, at any time, and at any place. If you know anyone who is being abused, you might want to help him or her out and try to understand what he or she is going through. By talking to the school guidance councilors, they may offer some suggestions, or even speech to higher authorities. Sometimes talking things though with your family members may even resolve matters. Everyone goes though it once in there life, so if it happens too you don’t worry about it because you’re not alone. Research Papers on Defining AbuseArguments for Physician-Assisted Suicide (PAS)The Relationship Between Delinquency and Drug UsePersonal Experience with Teen PregnancyCapital PunishmentInfluences of Socio-Economic Status of Married MalesRelationship between Media Coverage and Social and19 Century Society: A Deeply Divided EraHip-Hop is ArtEffects of Television Violence on ChildrenStandardized Testing

Living in a Frictionless World Essays

Living in a Frictionless World Essays Living in a Frictionless World Paper Living in a Frictionless World Paper Problems that could occur in a frictionless world: One of the most known problems would be that everything will slip; there will be no friction helping the object to stay in place. One example is when you are walking, you will slip a lot because there is no friction between the ground and your foot (or what you are wearing on your feet). Another example Is that you cannot hold anything; everything you try to hold will slip off your hand. Another very dangerous Issue would be when you are driving a vehicle; the vehicle will never stop moving unless It crashed Into something. There will no longer be any alarm resistance If friction does not exist on Earth. Thus, any meteorite that Is falling towards Earths surface will have no alarm resistance to create friction which generates heat. Henceforth, the meteorite will not lose any volume. This will make life a lot more dangerous when a meteorite Is crashing onto Earth. Another concern will be that you cannot digest any of your food; this Is because it requires friction for your body to digest food. Also, whatever you digest in your body will immediately exit your body because there is no friction to hold it in your body. Thus, human will not be able to survive for too long without friction. 2. Steps to help humankind to survive and function: As stated above, human will not be able to survive for so long without friction due to he fact that their body cannot digest food or store any ingested solid or liquid. Thus, it is require that they move to another area (parts of the world where there is still friction). Or what human could do is build restaurant in that area where there is friction for people to eat. This way, if the people eat there, their food could be digested. They should stay in that area for a couple of hours (long enough for their food to be digested).

Identifing the North American Gums

Identifing the North American Gums The tupelos, or sometimes called pepperidge tree, are members of a small genus called Nyssa. There are only about 9 to 11 species worldwide. They are known to grow in mainland China and eastern Tibet and North America. The North American tupelo has alternate, simple leaves and the fruit is a single drupe containing seed. These seed capsules float and are distributed over major wetland areas where the tree regenerates. Water tupelo is especially adept at seed dispersal along waterways. Most, especially water tupelo, are highly tolerant of wet soils and flooding, some needing to grow in such environments to ensure future regeneration. Only two important species are native to eastern North America and none live naturally in the Western states. Black Tupelo or Nyssa sylvatica is the most common true gum in North America and grows from Canada to Texas. Another common tree that is called a gum is sweetgum and is actually an entirely different tree species classification called Liquidambar. The fruit and leaves of sweetgum look nothing like these true gums. Water tupelo or Nyssa aquatica is a wetland tree living mostly along the coastal plain from Texas to Virginia. Water tupelos range reaches far up the Mississippi River to southern Illinois. It is most often found in swamps and near perennial wet areas and a companion tree to baldcypress. Tupelos are highly valued honey plants in the Southeastern and Gulf Coast states, producing a very light, mild-tasting honey. In northern Florida, beekeepers keep beehives along the river swamps on platforms or floats during tupelo bloom to produce certified tupelo honey, which commands a high price on the market because of its flavor. Interesting Facts About Gums Black gum can be a slow grower but does best on moist, acid soils. Still, its persistence in cultivation can make for one of the most beautiful fall red leaf colors. Purchase a proven cultivar for the best results including Sheffield Park, Autumn Cascade and Bernheim Select. The water tupelo is also called cotton gum for its cottony new growth. It is just as hearty on wetland as baldcypress and ranked as one of the most flood-tolerant tree species in North America. This gum can become huge and sometimes exceed 100 feet in height. The tree can, like baldcypress, grow a grand basal trunk buttress. One species that I have not listed here is the Ogeechee gum that grows in parts of South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida. It is of little commercial value and has a limited range. The Gum Tree List Black Tupelo GumWater Tupelo Leaves: alternate, simple, not toothed.Bark: deeply furrowed.Fruit: elliptical berry.

Goals of Punishment Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Goals of Punishment - Essay Example Among these have been punishments aimed at shaming individuals into avoiding to commit crimes which they had committed before (Word, 2007). An example of these shaming punishments has been the requirement for first time DUI offenders to wear a yellow license plate when they are on suspension. This requirement has ensured that the rates of imprisonment for DUI offenders, which takes a huge chunk off state budgets, have been reduced. It has been found that this is the most cost effective way for the achievement of deterrence as well as the satisfaction for the demands of retribution.While this requirement had been legislated in the 1960s; it was rarely used until the state of Ohio declared it mandatory for all those found committing the DUI offense. One would say that this is a reasonable punishment because it achieves the goal of punishing the individual through being exposed to the public throughout his or her suspension period. The shame derived from this exposure ensures that the individual involved does not repeat the same offense. In fact, the fear of going through the same experience for a second time will act as deterrence from committing future offenses. This measure has seen a level of success in the last few years as seen through the reduction of the number of r estricted number plates from over 10000 in the first year of it implementation to 5270 a year later. In the New York area of Bronx, the most frequently used method of deterrence to crime is the stop and frisk method. This is the case where police officers stop anyone whom they suspect of having criminal intentions and searching them. Despite the good intentions that were intended when this practice was instituted, it has come to be extremely unpopular with the residents, especially those from minority groups. Statistics show that while African Americans only make up 23% of New Yorkers, they are the victims of 53% of the stop and