The UK’s best selection of online tutors

Get help

Choose from
hundreds of approved
online tutors

Get help

Get help
on any subject
and any topic

Get help

Arrange
a 1-on-1 online lesson
when it suits you

Why use Tutorhub

How it works

Illustration

It’s dead easy. Find a tutor, get in touch using our secure website, arrange a lesson, top up your minutes and get started using our very clever online tutoring classroom.

Tutorhub stories

Who it works for

Online tutoring suits anyone studying inside or outside formal education. Our customers include everyone from those at school or univerisity through to home schoolers, overseas students and adult learners.
Illustration
Special event

Tutorhub masterclass

Your chance to be part of our online masterclasses. The timetable of masterclasses covers all the main topics and revision which we know students look for help with.

Illustration

Led by academic experts, this is your chance to learn from a leading light without having to leave home.

Unlike video masterclasses, it’s just like being in a lecture hall. You can ask questions, be part of a discussion, and access the notes electronically afterwards. But you can do it all in your pyjamas, without having to leave home. Register your interest and we’ll keep you informed of what’s happening when.

Q&A hub

Ask a question

Our free-to-use Q&A hub lets students ask questions of other students and tutors. All you have to do is ask a question and then wait to see what the online community has to say.

Question What impact has social policy in Britain had on minority ethnic groups?

One of the greatest challenges for social policy in Britain has been to encompass minority ethnic groups, and in many ways it has failed to achieve this. Bochel points out that for many years social policy has been reluctant to recognize ethnic diversity, intending to be universal in character, so the issue of race has long been overlooked. This has had a significant impact on minority ethnic groups as the discrimination that they most definitely suffer in the labour market and in the community has not been properly addressed. Research has shown that men and women from ethnic minority groups are twice as likely to be unemployed as white Britons, and other social indicators echo this pattern. Ethnic minorities are also more likely to undertake low-paid, low-skilled work, and the vicious circle that stems from this – inferior housing, poorer living standards, and substandard schools in deprived areas – is actually partly caused by the welfare state system, which institutionalises this discrimination. The unique problems faced by ethnic minorities must be addressed individually, and until recently social policy has failed to do this. Furthermore, the emphasis on tackling crime that has underpinned New Labour's social policy and that of the previous Conservative governments has impacted on ethnic minorities due to the often discriminatory nature of initiatives to cut crime. The ‘stop and search' programme is unfairly targeted toward black youths, to the extent that many believe being black is tantamount to a social problem (McGhee, 2005). Such flaws in British social policy have undoubtedly contributed to a growing sense of isolation amongst ethnic minority groups, and thus it could be argued that social policy is often more harmful than beneficial.

Joshua Aadi A. in Sociology 13 days ago
Question Critically discuss - childhood experiences of children & effect on future development

John Bowlby produced a report in 1951 about the effects of institutional life on social, emotional and intellectual development of children and whether maternal deprivation had a permanent negative effect on a child. Bowlby used research from other studies as well as his own, such as Goldfarb (1943) in which he compared two groups of children. Group A had lived in an institution until they were three years old, and then they were then fostered. Group B were fostered immediately after leaving their mother. He found that Group A scored lower than group B in their ability to keep rules, make friends and IQ scores at age 9.

However, this may be due to two reasons. First, some in group A may have been socially withdrawn, and therefore they were never fostered. Second, maybe the less bright children at one year may continue to be disadvantaged regardless of their upbringing.

Bowlby himself compared a group of forty-five juvenile thieves with a group of emotionally disturbed juveniles, by looking back at their case histories. He found that eleven of the 'thieves' had been separated from their mothers at an early age, but only two from group B had a similar experience. Thus he concluded from this that maternal separation in early age could have serious long term effects.

However, relying on memories is not logical and when a 'pre-selected' group is used, scapegoating tends to occur. Also, he doesn't account for what happens to the juvenile after five years.

Douglas and Turner supported Bowlby's conclusions when they linked the stress of going into hospital (and therefore being separated from a mother) with bed-wetting in children. Nevertheless the child may not be simply suffering maternal separation but other factors which may cause bed-wetting such as fear, strange feelings and strange surroundings.

Again in 1963 Bowlby conducted another study in which sixty children who spent time in a sanatorium , being separated from their families for between five months and two years were studied (all separations happened before the child was four years old). They were compared with children in the same classes. He found the children from the sanatorium had lower scores on IQ tests and tended to daydream. However, these differences were not statistically significant, and only when averages were taken did differences occur.

All Bowlby's work suggests that once a child has suffered maternal deprivation the damage done can never be reversed. In fact several studies show that this is not necessarily the case. Davis (1947) reported the case of Isabelle who when found aged six and a half behaved like a wild animal because she had been isolated by her deaf-mute mother. She was placed in a skillful training programme, and by fourteen she was normal, bright and worked well.

Clarke and Clarke also summarised several studies which show that given enough love, an enriched environment and stimulation, a child which suffers deprivation may make considerable gains later.

This leads to the concept of enrichment. This occurs when a child's environment is improved so that the child benefits socially, emotionally and intellectually. Deakin (1973) gives evidence in his study that enrichment is successful even when it occurs in an isolated environment. Also, supporters of 'hot housing', which is a formal intensive educational regime, believe that all children have potential.

White (1971) has observed that giving a child a stimulating environment is not enough to ensure that the child will gain from it. Project Headstart, which used a variety of teaching methods, proved this wrong. Children who participated in the project were more self-confident and scored higher on the Stanford-Binet or WISC tests [of intelligence]. Both enrichment and enhancement involve manipulation of the child's environment to create positive effects.

These days, many child psychologists support the view that a child's physical and intellectual development is influenced by many factors and is affected more by a few misfortunes throughout childhood than by a single misfortune during a critical period of infancy, as this can be reversed.

Joshua Aadi A. in Psychology 13 days ago
Question Using suitable examples, describe and comment upon some of the reasons for language change.

Language changes, as do all things in the living world, as language reflects and affects the society which uses it. The mechanics of language change show language as a system with larger and larger scale trends, which allows us to examine the conditions necessary for change.

The process of change occurs gradually, and the rate of this change does conform to a pattern. For instance, if you get an influx of foreign words, few people use them, and they spread slowly until people have become familiar with them. When they have, the word usage stabilizes.

Another factor affecting language change is hyper-correction. This occurs when a sentence is corrected so frequently that the deviant form becomes the norm in spoken English. For example, the sentence Jill and me went to the fair is often corrected to Jill and I went to the fair. The result of this is that the phrase and me has become disdainful and unacceptable. The ultimate effect of this is an exaggerated use of the term and I. For example, Mother gave the book to John and I is a deviant form which has become the norm in spoken English.

Research has also discovered many other reasons why language changes. William Labov conducted a study in America investigating the use of the letter r. He used three sets of shop assistants from high-class, middle-class, and lower-class stores and found that all three sets consciously used the more prestigious pronunciation of r. This was a conscious speech act, because in a more relaxed context the same people dropped this particular usage. Labov called this 'change from above', as the speakers were motivated to move up the social scale.

Labov also did some research on Martha's Vineyard, an island in the United States which is slowly changing from a quaint fishing village into a bustling tourist centre. In response to this the younger inhabitants of the island were changing their pronunciation towards that used by the elderly inhabitants. Labov called this 'an unconscious gesture of solidarity', to prevent their identity from changing due to the unwanted influx of tourists. Labov called this 'change from below', because the younger inhabitants of the island were changing their speech to emulate those from a lower social class.

There are many utterances in use today that lie on the borders of comprehensibility. For instance, the sentence Did she not get the dress then? almost conforms to linguistic rules but contains many grammatical errors. These errors indicate the reason why there is a constant, ongoing language change.

The lexicon of a language has a great effect on language change, as new lexical items are constantly being added, and those words which are no longer needed are discarded. Compounding is one of these processes. This occurs when two words are bound together to form a single new word, whose meaning can differ from the original. For example railway and railroad.

Derivation is another way in which new lexical items are added to a language. For instance, the word parent which normally functions as a noun is adapted to use as a verb. It has now been given a participle form and expressed as parenting. The word visual, which is mainly used as an adjective, has gained an additional function as the verb visualise, created by derivation.

Foreign influences constantly change the lexicon of a language. The English language contains many words which have been 'borrowed' at various stages of its history. A recent one would be the example parenting, which is a word commonly used in America, but due to our close links with the country via television, we have now 'adopted' this word.

Historical evidence shows that during invasions the lexicon of a language changes constantly. There are many reasons for this. The native inhabitants of Britain were Celts, but they were driven out by the German invaders. Now only place names and a handful of words remain to remind us that the Celts were once the native inhabitants, for example ass, bannock, and binn are Celtic words that were absorbed into the English language.

The Scandinavian invasion in 851AD caused a fusion of both Anglo-Saxon and Danish cultures. Place names ending in -by such as Whitby and Derby were all imported by the Scandinavians. The vast number of ordinary terms adopted from Scandinavian compared with the relatively few technical terms shows that there was an easy settlement between the two nations.

Another foreign influence on language was the Norman conquest of 1066AD The Normans formed the upper class and therefore created a whole range of lexical items. Examples of these are crown, state, government, sovereign, country, power, and chancellor.

Military matters were taken over by the French and so most of the Anglo-Saxon terms were displaced by the French. The following examples illustrate how many of the borrowed terms remain today: war, peace, battle, assault, and lieutenant. There are also many terms that were originally military but now are in general use: for example, challenge, enemy, and company.

All legal matters were taken over by the French after the Norman conquest, the result of this being that many of the legal terms we use today originate from the French, such as Justice, court, suit, sue, and plaintiff.

There are many other examples of the massive influence the Norman conquest had upon the English language. These include culinary and ecclesiastical terms, but alongside the specialised terms there are also many general terms which have a general meaning such as air, age, arrive, and cry. The influx of French was slow to make a permanent effect on English. It was during the years 1251 to 1400 that the French borrowings formed a part of the English language permanently. These borrowings will continue, as links with other countries become easier to obtain, so therefore language will also continually change. In the future these borrowings will probably increase due to technological advances and the rising number of people who travel abroad.

Another reason why language changes is 'coinage'. This occurs when a completely new word is created to serve a specific purpose. Sales promoters use this linguistic facility in their persuasiveness to sell cosmetics, by creating scientific sounding terms to impress their prospective customers. Words such as Bio-performance are currently being used to advertise facial products. In the textile industry, Nylon and Crimpelene are similar coinages.

Brand names such as Hoover and Biro have, during the past fifty years come into general usage as general nouns or verbs, so that the use of to Hoover the carpet for example, is accepted as a normal expression. This particular example is called an eponym.

Acronyms can be used as normal words if the structure of the word conforms with the English pronunciation system, as does the word 'AIDS' which means 'acquired immune deficiency syndrome'.

Elimination is another example of a reason why language changes, as sometimes lexical terms are eliminated when the words come into disuse. An example of this is the Shakespearian word behoves (from Hamlet) which means 'as is fitting for'. This is still used, but not frequently.

There are many different attitudes to language change, many of these are negative and are voiced via the press and other media outlets. Many believe that borrowings have contaminated the English language.

The anti-racist and anti-sexist movements have strong views about the English language and how it affects the deeper feelings of an individual. This has caused many changes, for example, chairman has until now been used as a common noun by many people, but due to the campaigners this term has been replaced by chairperson or just chair to eliminate the potentially sexist meaning of the original word. This is a conscious lexical change and illustrates how words are thought to be capable of affecting the ideas and attitudes of society.

Many of the prescriptive rules which derive from Latin do not easily fit the English language. It is for this reason that we have plenty of irregularities in English, for example the rule 'never end a sentence with a preposition' is adhered to in formal writing but not in speech.

There are two main views on language change. The prescriptive attitude is one which reflects an active attempt to resist change. For instance by resisting the use of racist or sexist terms it is hoped that attitudes will be significantly changed. Those who hold this view believe that the speech act is part of a person's behaviour and not something abstract and meaningless.

A descriptive attitude is one which reflects a passive acceptance of language change, that rules are patterns of language development observed over time. They believe language change is an inevitable process which holds no substance, it does not affect the individual.

The reasons why language changes are not easily accessible, despite research, is because our language changes as quickly as time goes by, so it is difficult to pinpoint patterns. From the research that has been done we can assume that changes will continue to take place. However it is difficult to work out which words will undergo a semantic shift, as psychological and physiological impulses make it difficult to predict. From studying linguistics findings we can describe how developments occur in language, but we cannot say why, as language changes because it is living.

In conclusion, it seems that language change is both natural and inevitable, and there is no evidence of improvement or decay. Many believe that over time the English language has changed and become more efficient, but there is very little evidence available to support this opinion. Finally because linguistics is a new subject there will be many things that are yet to be discovered, but from the start the basic nature of language has remained fixed.

Question Tips for writing A* psychology A level essays

A good essay on a topic within Psychology has many positive attributes. These guidelines will provide you with a clear idea of what these attributes are, in order to achieve your full potential with your studies.

  1. Relevance

Not only should all material be relevant to the question/statement to be evaluated, but the way in which it is relevant should be made clear and precise. A good starting point is to read the question and underline the key words. Try and include these key words in both your introduction and concluding paragraph.

  1. Structure

The essay should have a logical structure, which is clearly reflected in the paragraph structure. The opening paragraph should effectively set the framework for the rest of the essay. Avoid opening essays with overly general statements; focus immediately on the rest of the text. Points made within a particular paragraph should always be relevant to the essay question and be related to one another. The relationship between material in neighbouring paragraphs should be made clear, possibly by use of bridging statements such as 'Further evidence suggests...' and 'A contrasting view...'. Make sure that the reader is likely to know exactly what point is being made at any time. The final paragraph should provide a summary of the main conclusions of the essay, and may point to areas of future research which are likely to advance understanding of the specific topic addressed in the essay. 3. Literary Form

The writing style should be clear and straightforward, using good grammar and appropriate vocabulary.

  1. Use of Evidence

A key feature of Psychology is that independent observations of behaviour (often, although not always, provided by experiments) provide the basis for building and evaluating theories.

References to specific studies (i.e. names and dates) should be stated where possible to provide support for the argument. In a good essay, the relationship between data and theory should be made clear.

It is important to demonstrate an understanding that more than one theory can account for the same set of data, and to understand that no theory can ever be 'proved' although it may be preferred over other accounts by particular evidence.

  1. Critical Analysis

An excellent essay should evaluate data and theory, which goes beyond simple description.

Here are some ways in which this may be done:

A brief description of a key experimental finding may be followed by an analysis of the shortcomings of the method. Two theories may be briefly described and then contrasted with one another. Are they basically different or not, or are they formally equal? What are their distinguishing features? 6. References

Science is a social activity and knowledge is gained through two routes: a) data obtained from practical studies and (b) theoretical ideas developed to account for patterns in the practical data. As noted in section 4, references to specific studies must be provided to support all statements that make use of other people's ideas and data.

At the end of the essay there could also be a special reference section that collects together and identifies the sources for all the published material cited in the text, allowing the reader to access further information about the study or theoretical statement.

Joshua Aadi A. in Psychology 13 days ago
Question Contrasts between American and British political systems (A level politics)

THE CONSTITUTION

Perhaps the most fundamental difference between the American and British political systems is the constitution - or the lack of one. The United States has a written constitution as does the vast majority of nation states. The UK does not have a single document called the constitution but instead its constitutional provisions are scattered over various Acts of Parliament. The American constitution is hard to change and, in current political circumstances, perhaps impossible to change in any meaningful respect. The Equal Rights Amendment - which sought to provide equal rights for women - failed and there has been no succesful amendment of the US Constitution - except for one technical measure - since 1971. What for practical purposes constitutes the British Constitution - various Acts of Parliament - can be changed by a simple majority in the legislature. For instance, the current Coalition Government introduced fixed terms for the House fo Commons by passing the necessary legislation. In the United States, political discourse frequently makes reference to the constitution - typically Republicans arguing that Democratic initiatives are 'unconstitutional'. Besides the fact that the UK does not have a constitution as such, it is rare for British politicians to argue that the actions or proposals of their opponents are illegal or ultra vires. A defining feature of the American constitution is the strict separation of the powers of the executive, the legislature and the judiciary. The British political system has no such formal separation of the powers - indeed until recently one person was a member of all three arms of government, since the Lord Chancellor was a member of the Cabinet (the executive), a member of the House of Lords (the legislature) and the head of the legal system (the judiciary). In the United States, because of the separation of the powers, no Cabinet member is allowed to be a member of the Congress. In Britain, every Government Minister must be a member of one of the two Houses of Parliament and, if he or she is not already in the Parliament, he or she is made a peer. THE EXECUTIVE The most obvious - and certainly the most visible - of the differences between the American and British political systems is that the USA is a presidential system, with the apex of power in a directly-elected President, whereas the UK is a parliamentary system, with the Prime Minister holding office and power only so long as he or she commands a majority of votes in the House of Commons. In theory then, the American President has much more power than the British Prime Minister - he is the commander-in-chief and has the power to issue executive orders which have the full force of law. However, the constitutional system of 'checks and balances' seriously circumscribes the power of the US President who often finds it really difficult to push legislation through Congress. By contrast, a British Prime Minister usually heads a government with a majority of seats in the House of Commons and the ability to pass almost any legislation that he wishes. In the United States, the transition period between the election of a new president and that person's inaugration is two and half months. In Britain, the changeover of Prime Ministers is virtually immediate - within hours of the election result, one person leaves 10 Downing Street and within the following hour the successor enters it. In the US, government is highly partisan with the President appointing to the executive colleagues who are almost exclusively from within his own party. In the UK, government is normally equally partisan with all Ministers coming from the governing party but, in 2010, exceptionally the Conservatives were required to go into a coalition with the Liberal Democrats and grant them 17 ministerial positions. In the United States, the incoming President and his aides make a total of around 7,000 political appointments. In Britain, the Prime Minister appoints around 100 members of the Government and members of the Cabinet each appoint a couple of Special Advisers, so the total number of political appointments is around 150. In the United States, all the most senior appointments are subject to confirmation hearings and votes in the Senate. In Britain, there is no procedural method of challenging the appointment of a particular Minister although, in theory, the Opposition could move a vote of no confidence in the appropriate House of Parliament. In the USA, the Secretary of State is (arguably) the most senior member of the Cabinet and in many countries would be known as the Foreign Secretary. In Britain, the political head of each Government Department is called Secretary of State and so almost every member of the Cabinet is a Secretary of State. In the United States, the incoming President's inaugural address is a highly public and prestigious affair. In Britain, the new Prime Minister simply sets out his or her vision for the country in a speech to the House of Commons on the subject of the Queen's Speech which opens the new session of Parliament. In the United States, the President each year gives a high-profile 'State of the Union Address'. In Britain, there is no equivalent occasion, the nearest event being the Prime Minister's introduction to the Government's legislative intentions for the next year or so after the State Opening of Parliament each session. As a result of the separation of the powers, the US President does not attend or address Congress except for the annual 'State of the Union Address'. Since there is no separation of the powesr in the UK system, the Prime Minister is a member of one of the Houses of Parliament - these days, invariably the House of Commons - and regularly addresses the Commons, most notably once a week for Prime Minister's Question Time (PMQ). When the President addresses Congress, he is given a respectful hearing. When the Prime Minister addresses Pariament, he is barracked and interrupted and Prime Minister's Question Time in particular is a gladitorial affair. THE LEGISLATURE In the USA, both houses of the legislature - the Senate and the House of Representatives - are directly elected. In the UK, the House of Commons is directly elected, but the House of Lords is largely appointed (making it unique in the democratic world). In the States, as a consequence of the separation of the powers, all legislation is introduced by a member of Congress, so even the signature legislation attributed to President Obama on healthcare reform was actually introduced by a Congressman (Democratic member of the House of Representatives Charles Rangel). In total contrast, almost all legislation in Britain is introduced by the Government with only a very small number of Bills - usually on social issues with minimal implications for the public purse - introduced by individual Members of Parliament (they are called Private Members' Bills). Senate rules permit what is called a filibuster when a senator, or a series of senators, can speak for as long as they wish and on any topic they choose, unless a supermajority of three-fifths of the Senate (60 Senators, if all 100 seats are filled) brings debate to a close by invoking what is called cloture (taken from the French term for closure). There is no such filibustering provision in either House of the British Parliament. In both the House of Representatives and the Senate, the majority party chairs all committees which have considerable power. In the two chambers of the British legislature, committee chairperships are allocated between the different parties, roughly in proportion to the size of the party in the House, and the committees are much less powerful than in the US Congress. In the House of Representatives, the Speaker - chosen by the members of the largest party - has considerable power and acts in a highly partisan fashion. In the House of Commons, the Speaker - chosen by the whole House - only has procedural responsibilities and acts in a non-partisan manner (usually he is not opposed in a General Election). THE JUDICIARY In America, the Supreme Court is an intensely political institution - its members are appointed by the President on a partisan basis and its decisions are often highly political and highly controversial. By contrast, in Britain the Supreme Court is not appointed on a political basis and, like all British courts, avoids making decisions which it regards as proper to politicians and Parliament. POLITICAL PARTIES In the the USA, the Republicans are the Right of Centre party and the Democrats are the Left of Centre party. In the UK, the Conservatives are the Right of Centre party and Labour is the Left of Centre party. However, the 'centre' in American political is markedly to the Right of the 'centre' in British or most of European politics. This means that the policies espoused by Tea Party candidates would not be supported by any political party in Britain, while the policies supported by an American politician like Bernie Sanders, the Independent senator from Vermont, would be mainstream in the British Labour Party. In the USA, there is no centre party in this sense of one positioned politically between the Republicans and the Democrats. In Britain, there is a Liberal Democrat Party which ideologically sees itself as between Conservative and Labour. In the USA, there are only two parties represented in Congress and both are federal parties; there is no political party that only seeks votes in one state or a selection of states. In the UK, as well as political parties that seek votes throughout the entire country, there are nationalist political parties that field candidates only in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland respectively. In the United States, the Democratic and Republican Parties absolutely dominate federal and state elections with independents securing only small proportions of the vote. In the United Kingdom, the two main political parties - Conservative and Labour - win a smaller and declining share of the total vote, with a growing share being taken by the likes of the Liberal Democrat Party and the UK Independence Party at national level and by the likes of the Scottish and Welsh Nationalist Parties at the devolved level. In American politics, the two main political parties are loose coalitions with individual candidates or Congressmen adopting varying positions on many issues (although, in recent years, the Tea Party movement has forced Republican politicians to proclaim more consistently conservative positions). In British politics, all political parties have much tighter rein on the policies promoted by candidates and the voting by elected representatives. (In the House of Commons, each week a 'whip' is issued which sets out how the Member of Parliament should vote on each major issue before the legislature that week). The major parties in the USA have a large-scale congress every four years to choose their candidate for the forthcoming presidential election and ostensibly determine the policy platform of that candidate. All the political parties in the UK hold annual conferences where they debate the policy positions to be adopted by the party, but these conferences do not choose the party leader (which is done through a separate and broader process varying from party to party). In illustrations and promotional material, the Democratic Party is often represented as a donkey, while the Republican Party is featured as an elephant - symbols that date back to the 1870s. British political parties regularly change their symbols and very few electors have any idea what they are. ELECTIONS AND CAMPAIGNS In the USA, the term of a President, Senator or Congressman is known precisely as four years, six years and two years respectively and the dates of the elections are fixed. In the UK, the term of members of the House of Commons - and therefore of the Government - is legally a maximum of five years but traditionally a Prime Minister could call a general election whenever he or she wished and it has been considered 'cowardly' to wait the full five years and so the election has been more typically after around four years. However, the current Coalition Government has enacted legislation to provide for a fixed five-year term except for special circumstances. Candidates for the Presidency, the Senate and the House of Representatives - plus a host of other positions below federal level - in the US political system are chosen by a system of primaries in which (usually) all registered Democratic and Republican voters participate in the choice of the candidate for 'their' party in the main election. Britain does not have a system of primaries and the selection of candidates is normally confined to actual members of the relevant political party in the constituency in question. The filling of vacancies varies between and within the two political systems. The US Constitution states that special elections will be held to fill vacant Senate seats, but that state legislatures may empower the governor of the state to fill the seat by an appointment between the time that it becomes vacant and the time that the winner of the special election is certified. Most states allow the governors to pick the replacement who serves until the next general election when the voters decide who will serve the remainder of the term. Several states, however, require that a special election be held with the governor certifying the winner as the Senate member. By contrast, the Constitution requires that governors call special elections to fill a vacancy in the House of Representatives. They are usually held within three-six months of a vacancy because the entire election process must be followed: nominating conventions or primary elections plus a general election. In the UK, vacancies in the House of Commons are filled by a by-election in the relevant constituency which is usually held within three or four months. Since members of the House of Lords were not elected in the first place, there is no by-election when a peer resigns or dies. The American general election effectively lasts almost two years, starting with the declaration of candidates for the primaries. The British general election lasts around four weeks. American elections depend on vast sums to purchase broadcasting time. Parties and candidates in British elections cannot buy broadcasting time. As a consequence of the Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United case, effectively there are no limitations on expenditure in American political elections. There are statutory limitations on expenditure for all elections in the UK. In the States, almost 40 million television viewers watched the Convention speeches of Barack Obama and Sarah Palin in 2008. No party conference speech in Britain would attract more than a few million. American presidential candidates have been taking part in televised debates since 1960. British political leaders only agreed to televised debates for the first time in the General Election of 2010. The first televised debate between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney in 2012 attracted almost 70 million viewers. Even allowing for the difference in population, the televised debates between the British party leaders do not attract the same level of interest. In an American presidential election, turnout is typically around 50% (although in the 2008 election it was over 60%) and, in the case of mid-term Congressional elections, turnout typically falls to around 40%. In the UK, turnout in General Elections used to be around 75% but more recently has fallen to around 60%. In the USA, blue signifies states held by the Democratic Party, the more left-wing. In the UK, blue identifies the Conservative Party, the more right-wing. In the USA, red signifies states held by the Republican Party, the more right-wing. In the UK, red identifies the Labour Party, the more left-wing. In an American general election, the states that might go to one party or the other are known as 'purple states' or 'swing states' or simply 'competitive'. In a British general election, constituencies that might go to one party or another are called 'marginal constituencies' (where three parties are each in contention - which is not unknown - it is called 'a three-way marginal'). American general elections are often so raw and vitriolic that candidates make spurious claims about themselves or their opponents that need to be analysed for the truth and whole web sites are devoted to fact checking. While British politicians are certainly not beyond exaggeration or obfuscation, they are rarely guilty of the blatant truth-twisting that one sadly sees in the US. In the United States, certain families have provided a number of very promiment politicians: such as the Kennedys and Clintons for the Democrats and the Bushs and Rands for the Republicans. Furthermore a significant number of members of Congress are relatives of someone who has previously served in Congress or high office. Name recognotion is very important in American elections. By contrast, in Britain sons (and sometimes daughters) have followed fathers (or even mothers) into the House of Commons but less frequently and less prominently than is the case in the USA. In British elections, the party is usually much more important than the individual. STYLE OF POLITICS In America, the term 'conservative' means really right-wing, especially on social issues. In Britain the name 'Conservative' means mainstream right-wing, especially on economic issues. In America, the term 'liberal' generally means quite left-wing. In Britain, the name 'Liberal' means broadly centrist. In the States, it is considered necessary for a politician to emphasize their patriotism. In Britain, it is assumed that anyone who wants to run for national office cares for his or her country. In the United States, the flag holds special place in the political heart of the nation, people sing to it while placing a hand over their heart, and many people would like to make burning it a criminal offence. In Britain the flag is rarely prominent at political events. In the United States, since 9/11 most politicians wear a pin depicting the stars and stripes. In Britain, no politician would wear a badge displaying the union jack. So many political speeches in the US include the phrase "my fellow Americans". In British political terminology, there is simply no equivalent phrase. In the States, virtually every political speech seems to mention God, especially in the final call "God bless America". In Britain, no politician mentions God and none would think of inviting Him to show a special preference for his or her nation state. In the US, politicians frequently refer to their position on social issues like abortion and homosexuality. A British politician would think it unnecessary and inappropriate to talk about such issues unless asked. In the US, politicians constantly talk about the problems and the aspirations of the middle class. In the UK, politicians tend to talk more about the needs of the working class. They mean something similar but the language is different because the perceptions are different. In America, the working class is seen as the poor and most citizens perceive themselves as middle-class or aspiring to be so. In Britain, the middle-class is seen as a comfortable minority with the majority of the population perceiving themselves as working class. Although taxes are never popular, the issue of taxation is much more emotive in American politics than in British (or European) politics and the terms of debate on taxation are much more hostile. The United States was born in a revolt against paying taxes and many Republicans are against any tax increases and believe that low taxation stimulates economic growth, whereas many British (and European) politicians see taxation as a social instrument as well as a fiscal one with the power to bring about redistribution in society. American political speeches do not tend to make much use of facts and figures (those of former President Clinton tend to be an exception) but appeal more to broad values which do not lend themselves to quantification. Many British political speeches focus on practical issues and use figures to highlight problems and make comparisons with the policies or the performance of one's opponents. In the States, there are currently some outstanding political speakers, led by Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. In Britain, there is no politician who can be so inspirational, although Tony Blair at his best came close (but he's gone). On the other hand, British politicians tend to be better debaters because of the more confrontational style of discussion in the House of Commons, especially Prime Minister's Questions. In US political theory and discourse, there is a notion called 'American exceptionalism'. There are several versions of this nebulous concept, perhaps the most common being that the United States has a special 'superiority' in the world because of its history, size, wealth and global dominance plus the 'sophistication' of its constitution and power of its values such as individualism, innovation and entrepreneurship. Many American politicians refer to the USA being "the greatest country on earth" or even "the greatest nation in history". Although Britain fairly recently ruled over the largest empire in world history and has other claims to 'greatness' - not least its political system and cultural reach - there is no concept in British political discourse which compares to 'American exceptionalism'.

Joshua Aadi A. in Politics 13 days ago
Question how do you structure an essay ? please help

Structuring an essay

A burger made up of several layers representing introduction, paragraphs and conclusion when structuring an essay. It can be useful to think of your essay as a layered sandwich or burger to make sure you include all the main parts An essay should include: a brief introduction (which focuses on the question) the main body (four or five paragraphs) a short conclusion (which focuses on the question) Structuring an essay - Writing an introduction

Your essay should begin with an introduction. The first sentence of your essay sums up your answer to the question. Make a positive statement that relates to the question. Use key words from the question to demonstrate your understanding. Example

Dance featuring Anna Chancellor as Miss Bingley from BBC adaptation of Pride and Prejudice (1995) Anna Chancellor as Miss Bingley from BBC adaptation of Pride and Prejudice (1995) How does Jane Austen present the character of Miss Bingley in this extract? ‘When dinner was over, she returned directly to Jane, and Miss Bingley began abusing her as soon as she was out of the room. Her manners were pronounced to be very bad indeed, a mixture of pride and impertinence; she had no conversation, no style, no taste, no beauty. Mrs. Hurst thought the same, and added, "She has nothing, in short, to recommend her, but being an excellent walker. I shall never forget her appearance this morning. She really looked almost wild." "She did indeed, Louisa. I could hardly keep my countenance. Very nonsensical to come at all! Why must she be scampering about the country, because her sister had a cold? Her hair so untidy, so blowsy!" "Yes, and her petticoat; I hope you saw her petticoat, six inches deep in mud, I am absolutely certain; and the gown which had been let down to hide it, not doing its office." "Your picture may be very exact, Louisa," said Bingley; "but this was all lost upon me. I thought Miss Elizabeth Bennet looked remarkably well, when she came into the room this morning. Her dirty petticoat quite escaped my notice." "You observed it, Mr. Darcy, I am sure," said Miss Bingley; "and I am inclined to think that you would not wish to see your sister make such an exhibition." "Certainly not." "To walk three miles, or four miles, or five miles, or whatever it is, above her ankles in dirt, and alone, quite alone! what could she mean by it? It seems to me to shew an abominable sort of conceited independence, a most country town indifference to decorum."’ Pride and Prejudice, Jane Austen, Chapter 8 Suggested introduction

Austen uses a variety of techniques to present the character of Miss Bingley in this extract. She uses language and structural devices to create humour and creates a character that the reader will not necessarily like. This: specifically answers the question rather than just rephrasing it says what the text is effective in doing (by creating an amusing description) says in general how that effect is created (using structural and language devices) [14/08/2015 15:35:01] joshuatutor2015: Structuring an essay – Writing the main body

Use each paragraph to make one main point. A paragraph should contain: a link to the previous idea a statement of the main point in this paragraph some evidence from the text to support what you think - this will probably include something on language or structure a discussion of the evidence, and links to any other possible evidence a link back to the question, or to the next point Start each paragraph with a link to the essay as a whole, and the part which came immediately before. This way you are able to make a chain of your different paragraphs. Connectives help to show the relationship between them: Firstly.... Secondly.... On the one hand.... On the other hand... Similarly... In contrast... However... Alternatively… Finally…. [14/08/2015 15:35:45] joshuatutor2015: Using quotations and close analysis

To support your points you need to use quotations and examples. Quotations should be kept short and to the point. Using just a few words is more powerful than copying out chunks of text: it shows you are being selective in what you say. You should also be careful to copy accurately. Put the quotation inside your own sentence, rather than putting it in the middle of a page and then commenting on it. This is called embedding a quotation. Three jigsaw pieces attached together displaying part of a sentence: flying 'like a butterfly' to convey... So rather than: ‘He flew like a butterfly.’ This is an example of a simile, which shows that he was light and graceful. Or: The author uses similes, eg ‘he flew like a butterfly’. You would write: The author uses the simile of the boy flying ‘like a butterfly’ to convey the impression that he is light and graceful. The words from the text are embedded as part of your sentence – they make sense as a whole. Making the most of quotations

You should make a close analysis of the language in the quotation and use that to support your point. There are several ways you can do this: Pick out a word from the quotation and think about what the choice of that word means. The connotations of a word are the things or ideas it reminds you of, rather than its meaning. Some words might have connotations which are important to the point you are making, eg the word ‘scythe’ has connotations of death and it might be being used to create an ominous atmosphere. The quotation may have a metaphor, simile, or other devices in it – what is the effect of that technique? Make sure that if you use a quotation with a literary technique in it, you name the technique in whatever comment you make about it. Link the quotation to another example in the extract, if there is one. Or show how it is similar to another point you’ve made. This shows an overview of the text, rather than being focused on individual examples. [14/08/2015 15:36:29] joshuatutor2015: Structuring an essay – Writing the conclusion

To conclude, sum up the points you have made so far. Finally, write a single sentence which answers the question again – it will be quite like your opening sentence, but don’t repeat the same words. Example

If the question is: How does Jane Austen present the character of Miss Bingley in this extract? The conclusion could be: In conclusion, Miss Bingley is presented as a proud and arrogant character. The writer uses narration and dialogue to show that Miss Bingley is unkind to Elizabeth Bennet, the main character. As readers, our sympathies are with Elizabeth and the structural device of dialogue here adds to our dislike of Miss Bingley.

Joshua Aadi A. in English 13 days ago