Answer:
The Ghanaian example has shown that the issue of "personnel not facilities being the bane of quality public primary education" is very much debatable. Ab initio, the two contributors are important in the delivery of quality public primary education. Therefore, I will allocate the importance and the bane of quality education 50/50 to each of these aspects of education delivery.
Educational success cannot be achieved without the personnel being themselves of the highest quality, not only in terms of learning, but also in moral and ethical character formation and standing. This is important because education cannot be received without someone imparting it, and even some other persons helping the teachers to impart the desired knowledge and learning. A teacher or support staff who is morally depraved cannot impart quality education, especially at the primary level with pupils in their formative and tender years.
In the same light, nobody can expect the personnel to deliver quality education in a vacuum. The infrastructure or facilities are key in the delivery of quality education by quality personnel. These facilities are all-embracing and include many of the teaching aids required for successful education delivery, including the remuneration of the personnel. This makes this subject intricately intertwined. One cannot discuss an aspect without touching the other. The two must be effectively balanced in order to produce good results.
Explanation:
Pupils at the primary education level need teachers who will bear witness to what they teach and not just talkers. Good example teaches better than words. In the same way, good learning and teaching facilities aid in learning. That is why they are called learning aids. Education should not only be informative but should equally be "performative."
I think that this is a very hard question to answer. I think that many kings, fictional or not, possess both the bad and good traits of being a king.
In regards to Macbeth, he certainly possessed the ambition many would wish for a king. He was brave, as noted by Duncan and the title of the Thane of Cawdor. He was protective, as noted by his murder of Banquo. Macbeth was even proud, as seen by his desire to keep the new title of Thane before taking the crown.
Unfortunately, many of the characteristics one would align with being a good king made Macbeth a bad king as well. Macbeth was too ambitious--as seen by his murdering Duncan. He was too protective--as seen by his inability to interpret the apparitions warnings in the correct way. Lastly, he was too proud--as seen by his refusal to leave the castle as Birnam Wood "moved" against him.
Like anything, one must always have control. Too much of anything normally turns out to be a bad thing. Therefore, depending upon one's individual views, Macbeth could be both a bad king or a good one.
BTW: It's free real estate.
Answer:
A possible theme could be growing apart
Explanation:
the oak is a tree that will continue to grow and become very tall and will be able to see the view from the top
while the rose will only grow about like 8 inches and stay closer to the ground and won't get the same view as the tree causing it to get a limited view of what it will be able to see
I hope this right and will help you out a little bit.I read this like 3 years ago and just remember writing something like this in my notes.
Answer:
Whatever you read on you got to put it in a essay or paragraph.
Explanation:
Answer:
option 1 is an opinion because it is not a fact. Option 2 is a fact therefore option 1 ( we would be lost with out English) is an opinion
Explanation:
