Group work in Primary Schools

Group work in Primary Schools Group work, known to others as collaborative or cooperative learning, is defined as a situation in which, two or more people learn or attempt to learn something together [Wikipedia Contributors, 2010]. This paper focuses on how working collaboratively impacts both teaching and learning in primary schools. It describes the background to the development of collaborative learning and highlights the techniques often employed. The principles to effective group work are explained, with both advantages and disadvantages noted. Collaborative learning is a pedagogical strategy which utilizes a variety of learning activities to enhance a students understanding of a particular topic. This is an improvement to traditional learning models also defined as non-interactive lectures, where knowledge is gained from direct lectures or the reading of books and articles. Traditional learning commands very little interaction or participation from the students, therefore a lot or very little may be learnt depending on the individual. Collaborative learning consequently stands as a constructivist approach to learning, and is identified as originating from a constructivist epistemology, as students are asked to participate and contribute to their own learning and development. The ideas of scholars such as Burner, Kohlberg, Piaget and Vygotsky are used in the development of collaborative learning, which essentially implies that both the student and the environment are actively dynamic entities in the learning process as the student tries to impersonate the lessons. This process requires that knowledge be discovered and translated using language and other learning aides to which the students can actively relate. Lawrence Kohlberg researched the moral decisions made by children. His investigation is such that he developed an interview process offering a number of scenarios, each with a moral dilemma for which he had pre-determined answers. He realized that six stages of moral development existed and that some people are unable to reach most advanced levels of ethical interpretation. He thereby concluded that; the development of moral reasoning happens in a particular sequence, and that each step of the way is a precursor to the next [KidsDevelopment.co.uk, 2010]. Jean Piagets theory of Cognitive Development suggests that individuals go through a series of stages on their way to independent thinking. Piaget states that all knowledge concerning reality results from actions or operations upon it, which makes it change, revealing its stable and variational properties (Piaget, 1980 p222). Lev Vygotsky believed that socialization increases knowledge and often time changes a childs thoughts and behaviours. Vygotsky suggests that learning is achieved in three ways; imitative, instructed and collaborative. Imitative learning involves the student simply copying what was taught and instructed learning involves the student following directions previously given. Vygotskys work was focussed on two important ideas. First being the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD); this describes the level of differentiation between a problem that a student can solve independently and a problem in which a student will require the assistance of others. ZPD is often identified as an individuals level of actual competency relative to their level for potential development. The second idea is known as scaffolding and describes the aspect of support given to students when it is desired. Group work allows students to work together in small teams, combining people with varying backgrounds, experiences, technical and intellectual competencies, towards the attainment of a specific objective. Each member of the team has the responsibility of learning the material for himself, while also helping other members to clearly understand the lesson thus creating an atmosphere of achievement (Palmer, Peters and Streetman. 2008). Students thereby gain both knowledge and social skills. The use of group discussions helps students to explain concepts and ideas by providing immediate feedbacks. Students learn how to troubleshoot cooperatively in order to find the best solution to a problem. When students formulate their own solutions in this manner, they are truly thinking critically (Davis, Mahler Noddings, 1990). Swortzel expresses that there are two major theoretical approaches to group work Motivational and Cognitive (Swortzel, 1997). Group work is seen as motivational because students recognize that their success or failure in the attainment of the specified goal is dependent on them being able to work together as a team. They thereby encourage each other to get the assigned tasks done properly and on time, in so doing cooperative learning increases students motivation to do academic work (Johnson, Johnson Holubec, 1986). The cognitive approach suggests that through group work students become more critical with their thinking. Students are stimulated to think outside the box, thus acquiring increased levels of perception, awareness, and reasoning and judgment abilities. Group discussions are very interactive with each individual expressing their viewpoint. Within a diverse group, there will be undoubtedly varying opinions consequently highlighting approaches to the same topic. A collaborative framework must first be established before the implementation of collaborative learning techniques. The teacher should research collaborative learning and observer other teachers who have already implement the use of group work. The teacher should grasp a good understanding of the advantages and disadvantages to group work and must develop a keen appreciation for the technique of scaffolding. The teacher then needs to decide if collaborative learning is ideal for the subject being taught, the type of students and take into account classroom restrictions, if any. Teachers implementing collaborative learning are expected to be competent in the following areas: Specifying instructional objectives Determining group size and assign students to groups Determining Group Size and Assign Students to Groups Classroom arrangement Planning instructional materials to promote Interdependence Assigning group roles Assigning tasks Structuring positive interdependence and accountability Explaining the criteria for success Specifying desired behaviours Before implementing collaborative learning the teacher should explain to the students their decision for the use of group work and explain the advantages and disadvantages. The determination of group sizes may vary depending on the nature of the task and the workload. Groups can be homogeneous or heterogeneous, grouping students with similar interests and strengths or they may be totally randomly selected. Once groups are established they usually do not change very often, so as to allow students to develop a constructive working relationship with each other. It is important that the furniture in the classroom be organized in a way which allows the students to work as a unit, preferably facing each other, whilst allowing for their flexible movements. Teachers should take into account the existing resources needed for successful task completion and ensure that they are readily accessible by the groups. The instructions and materials a teacher chooses for a group should ensure that each member of the group makes a meaningful contribution and that individual assignments within the group will be evenly distributed. Teachers should structure positive interdependence and accountability by regularly testing both the groups and the members of the group for understanding of the subject matter. Members should be encouraged to be able to actively defend the stance of the group and their own. The criteria for success of the group should be clearly communicated and measures put into place to evaluate the groups performance as a unit as well as the individual performances of the members. Once the groups have been established, teachers need to monitor the behaviour of the students and assist with needs while monitoring. In so doing, teachers may assist with the answering of questions and provide and alternate point of view or opinion. Teachers may also provide feedback on the work completed or the progress made. Should conflicts arise within the groups, teachers should intervene to ensure that such conflicts are quickly resolved and explain the implications of undesirable behaviours. It is also very important that teachers provide approbation and, or motivation where it is deserved. Students play the most important role in the art of collaborative learning. Their roles include and are not limited to, working together, actively listening to each other, keeping records of work and progress, questioning each other, assuming personal responsibility and completing the assigned task. An article written by Dillenbourg and Schneider states that there are a few mechanisms to collaborative learning: Conflict or Disagreement, suggesting that when peer to peer conflicts arise, social factors cause learners to ignore the disagreement and to some extent forces them to find a feasible solution to the problem. One aspect of this theory states that diverging viewpoints usually lead to academic gains, while the other states that when conflicts are not verbalized they do not predict positive outcomes (Dillenbourg and Schneider, 1995). This article draws two conclusions relative to this mechanism one being that slight misunderstandings can be as efficient as a clear conflict between two agents who respectively believe P and not P and the second being that verbal interactions generated to solve conflict are related to learning outcomes (Dillenbourg and Schneider, 1995). Alternative Proposal also referred to as the confirmation biases by Dillenbourg and Schneider (1995). In so doing students actively develop ideas that support their suggestions and completely disregard ideas that do not. They often times cannot abandon their idea or suggestion because another suggestion may not be forthcoming; however other group members make alternate suggestions. (Self-) explanation; the Self-Explanation effect, as it is in known in many cognitive science literature, describes that in a situation where one student is more knowledge that the other, the latter will automatically learn from the form, and also that the former will grasp a better understanding of the topic being explained as he endeavours to translate into to terms to with the latter student can actively relate. Having successfully explained the more knowledgeable student would have improved upon his skills to interrelate and gained improved confidence. Had there been any uncertainties in the explanation, someone even more knowledgeable might be able to clarify. Internalization; the article explains this mechanism as one in which students explain or justify their suggestions to each other, the verbalization of such impacts all involved and that the concepts communicated are integrated into the listeners reasoning. Thinking is viewed a discussion that one has with oneself and which develops on the basis of discussions we had with others (Dillenbourg and Schneider, 1995). The article also states that for this mechanism to be effective a few conditions must be met, One condition is that subjects can only assimilate concepts which are within their zone of proximal development, i.e. within the neighbourhood of the current cognitive level. Another condition is that the less able peer is not left as a passive listener, but participates into the joint problem solving strategy (Dillenbourg and Schneider, 1995) Appropriation, this is explained as one student observing the ideas or explanations of another and taking those ideas or explanations and building on it to make their own. Learning is two-fold as the first student reinterprets his actions relative to that of the second, and the second student got a sound foundation on which to build. Shared Cognitive Load, this involves the distribution of tasks which will come together to achieve the overall objective of the group. When the workload is even shared between students, each student can work meticulously on the assigned task, thereby eliminating redundancies and improving the efficiency of the group. Mutual Regulation, by employing any of or a combination of the mechanisms previously described, students often have to regulate the actions of each other to ensure that the stipulated guidelines are adhered to for the attainment of their goals. Social Grounding, described lucidly by Dillenbourg and Schneider as the mechanism by which an individual attempts to maintain the belief that his partner has understood what he meant, at least to an extent which is sufficient to carry out the task at hand (Dillenbourg and Schneider, 1995). This mechanism requires the speaker to check for understanding, and where misunderstand is visible to clarify, thereby building a share understanding of the problem. George W. Gagnon. Jr., and Michelle Collay developed another design for collaborative learning and in this model teachers develop a series of steps that their teaching structure follows as listed below: They develop a situation for the students to explain (Gagnon and Collay, 2004) They select a process for groupings of materials and students (Gagnon and Collay, 2004) They build a bridge between what students already know and what the teachers want them to learn (Gagnon and Collay,2004) They anticipate questions to ask and answer without giving away an explanation (Gagnon and Collay, 2004) They encourage students to exhibit a record of their thinking by sharing it with others (Gagnon and Collay, 2004), and They solicit students reflections about their learning (Gagnon and Collay, 2004). A comparison of there collaborative techniques, is illustrated in Appendix 1. Johnson, Johnson, and Smith (1991) highlights three key tasks teachers should follow for the evaluation of the efficiency and effectiveness after there group work is completed. Firstly, teachers should provide a closure through summarization. That is, to summarize the lessons important points or to have each group explain their work and the points they found of most significance. Secondly is to evaluate the students learning, by assessing how they have attained or failed to attain the desired outcome and providing the feedback required, allowing students to improve on their ability to work as a group and hence personal development. Thirdly, teachers should make note of the techniques that worked and why they worked and if necessary adjust their lessons. A popular definition of constructivism is that Constructivism is a theory of knowledge which claims that knowledge is not passively received but actively constructed by the learner, and that the function of cognition is adaptive, serving to organise experience, rather than discover reality(online, 2010) Group work has academic, social and physiological benefits to both students and teachers. Academic benefits include: the development of critical thinking and the active involvement of students in the learning process. The social benefits include: the development of social learning systems for students and builds diversity understanding among students and teachers. The physiological benefits include: increased self-esteem through peer-to-peer instructions and it reduces the anxiety of students. Although collaborative learning seems to be dependent on the actions and willingness to learn, which should for many be a natural process, there are many disadvantages as there are advantages to is implementation. A few of the obstacles faced are; some students prefer to work competitively rather that collaboratively, teachers lack the ability to readily assess the work produced, teachers sometimes do not know how to measure the effectiveness of their teachings in a collaborative setting, sometimes the assigned tasks are not applicable to a students goals or abilities, and sometimes the tasks are not difficult enough to challenge but not so difficult as to stonewall a conversation. Some groups may be comprised of slow learners who may be viewed as others as invaluable, thereby promoting superior behaviour by the fast learners. Table 1, Appendix 2, illustrated various group structures and the advantages and disadvantages to these groups. Nigel Hastings and Karen Chantrey-Wood from Nottingham Trent University explores the many strategies teachers utilize in group work activities, many of which are strongly endorsed by a committee known as the Plowden Committee. By spending time with groups of children, teachers could adjust their teaching to the needs of the individuals of that group to a greater extent than when working with an entire class of students as a whole. This also ensures that all children have a reasonable amount of direct contact with their teacher regardless of the fact that they are working in groups [Hastings Wood, 2002]. This suggests that collaborative learning enhances the occurrence of individualized attention given to students, by introducing one-on-one interactions between students and peers and students and teachers. The article also illustrates that classroom arrangement is very important in ensuring that collaborative learning is efficient and effective. It shows that collaborative learning in widely accepted and very commonly practiced across the globe; In primary classrooms throughout the UK, it is standard practice for children to sit around grouped tables usually with four to six children in each group. Such arrangements are also common in primary schools in other English-speaking countries, Australia and USA for example. Precisely because this configuration is so normal and so well established in our schools, it is unusual to ask about its rationale or to question its appropriateness [Hastings Wood, 2002]. An abstract written from an experiment conducted by Gillies and Ashman, One hundred and ninety-two Grade 6 children participated in a study which compared the effects on behavioural interactions and achievement of (a) cooperative learning in which group members were trained to collaborate to facilitate each others learning, and (b) cooperative learning in which members were not trained but were merely told to help each other. Stratified random assignment of participants occurred so that each gender-balanced group consisted of one high-, two medium-, and one low-ability studentà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦(Gillies Ashman, 1999). The observations showed that the students who worked in the Trained groups where more responsive and helpful to each other, giving explanations where necessary to assist as they worked together. It showed that students in the untrained groups were a lot less helpful towards or cooperative with each other. From the results it was also concluded that the children in the trai ned groups exercised more autonomy with their learning and obtained higher learning outcomes than untrained peers (Gillies Ashman, 1999). This study is one of the many to attest to the success of group work. Despite some drawbacks Collaborative learning has numerous benefits, as is explained, ranging from academic to physiological and it implementation in primary schools is quite a positive move. Students at the primary school level are quite impressionable and there is no better time for them to develop the very valuable competences that working in a group has to offer. At the primary school level they are mature enough to have an understanding of what group work requires. Many of the studies conducted were centralized around childhood developments. Students who can successfully work in groups from the primary school level are usually better equipped for when entering higher level learning institutions. They would have learnt to comfortably relate with peers and adults, such as teachers or other authority figures, they would have learnt the value of self-expression and self-explanation, actively listen and respect the views of others. These students realize that as individuals we have d ifferent backgrounds, experiences and traditions and as such may have diverging approaches to the same problem. These students will also be better able to differentiate between the need to work collaborative and the need to work competitively and in so doing will know when best to apply the respective approaches. This research has revealed that both the teachers and the students play a pivotal role in the success of collaborative learning. Teachers are not expected to only assign tasks and sit back while the students work on their own. Teachers must play an active role throughout the process. They must plan for the assignment with clearly structured tasks that will promote collaborative interactions, promote interdependency and stimulate cognitive thinking among students. Teacher must monitor the process providing ongoing feedback and be readily able to resolve conflicts should they arise. Teachers should be able to actively scaffold their students, knowing when their support is needed and that it should gradually be withdraw. Students in order to successfully achieve their objectives in groups must appreciate the benefits of group work. They must have a clear understanding of the desired objective and the sub-task requirement to successfully achieve the objective. They must be able to actively and reflectively listen to each other and utilize creativity and objectivity to work positively together. In so doing they will learn to foster positive work attitudes with others, thereby improving on their interpersonal skills as they prepare for the work world. Appendix 1 Three Constructivist Design Models [1] 1. The Learning Cycle 2. The Learning Step developed by George W. Gagnon. Jr. and Michelle Collay 3. The Information Construction (ICON) model created by Robert O. McClintock and John B. Black, and is very similar to Dillenbourg and Schneider. Appendix 2 Table 1: Forms of Cooperative Groups[2] NAME OF GROUP WHAT IS THIS? WORKS BEST FOR BENEFITS DRAWBACKS Pair-share 2 students with one problem share their ideas or questions. Each person speaks, listens, gives feedback. Content that requires discussion, reflection, or explanation. Increased engagement time, Helps those who are shy Fewer perspectives and solutions Jigsaw Each member of the small group researches one part of the question /content for a certain amount of time. The members of the group come back together. Each member teaches his/her part to the rest of the group. Content with four or five parts to research. Students gain teaching and research skills Some students feel pressured by a time limit Split-class discussion The class is split into half. Each side discusses /debates their knowledge /beliefs, etc. Debates or discussions Students may change their opinion or develop a different perspective Some students may speak less with such a large group. Random groups of 3 Class is split into groups of 3. The groups discuss the topic. Predicting what will happen, responding to a situation. Receive a variety of feedback, group members are accountable Easy to leave out or team up against a shy student or one who has a different opinion Ability/Interest/Friendship Group Students are divided into groups based on some quality that they all have in common. Creating plays/skits or an activity in which students must work together outside of class. Students can work at a pace that best suits them, students are rarely bored and often motivated It is unrealistic to find a completely homogeneous group, weaker or unpopular students may be excluded. Diversity Groups Students are formed into groups where they come from a wide variety of backgrounds, interests, etc. Exploring geography, history, and diverse lifestyles. There are many opportunities to gain different perspectives Minorities may become alienated Multi-aged groups Students are divided into groups in which there are a mixture of ages Older students teaching younger students (i.e. science experiments). Older students- there is less pressure to compete with peers, Younger students fell important that an older person is spending time with them Older students may be a bad influence; Older students may not know how to work with a younger child or an at risk student Peer-led Conferences Students prepare and lead a discussion of material with parents, instructors, students, etc. A major project in which students set up stations for several intelligences. Students get the opportunity to authentically teach, students learn self confidence. Students whose parents are inactive in the school may be alienated from those whose parents participate; some students may not be involved in interactions. Notes: These diagrams were obtained from: http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/constructivism/implementation_sub1.html This table was obtained from: http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Cooperative_Learning#Frequently_Asked_Questions_about_Cooperative_Learning

Audience Analysis Memo Essay

Per the week one assignment, I have reviewed and compared two Websites offering information on the same subject. My chosen subject is kidney disease and hemodialysis and the source Websites are: The National Kidney Foundation (http://www.kidney.org) and The Merck Manual-Professional (http://www.merckmanuals.com/professional). When reviewing the National Kidney Foundation site, I initially had difficulty determining who the intended audience actually was. You can’t help but notice, a significant goal of the page is to generate donations. The donations tab is highlighted with a blue border against an orange background. The information tabs are simply white print against the same orange background. That being said, there is also well prepared information regarding kidney disease and hemodialysis intended for the general public. The Website provides information regarding diagnosis, treatments and lifestyle changes. It appears, the primary purpose of the National Kidney Foundation Website is education and the secondary purpose is soliciting donations. The Merck Manual Professional site, appears to target healthcare professionals with a secondary audience of students in the medical and/or nursing fields. The National Kidney Foundation Website is very appealing with pictures, videos and banners. Two banner items that caught my eye were â€Å"the initial shock of the dialysis diet† followed by a chicken fajita recipe. It further incorporates information about coping with the diagnosis and treatment plan. The Merck Manual website is stark in comparison as it incorporates muted colors of gray, blue and green. The Merck Manual presents only related facts and treatment modalities. Advertising on each page is limited. The National Kidney Foundation’s Website advertisements are geared to generate donations, whereas, the advertisements on the Merck Manual site, offer additional ways to receive the Merck Manual information. Each site provides icons intended to provide the user with the option to share the Websites  with many of the social media networks. The Merck Manual Website is intended for information and education. The National Kidney Foundation site provides education in addition to soliciting donations. The National Kidney Foundation information is provided in a question and answer format with one or two sentence simple answers provided. The Merck Manual site utilizes headers with information ranging between one to three paragraphs. Links available on the National Kidney Foundation Website keep the reader on the site and frequently take them back to the donation page. The Website provides a section for â€Å"Professional† users, however, the majority of the area is again written for the general public. One area reviewed provides an â€Å"Education and Research† option that takes the professional reader to more technical writing sources contained within the National Kidney Foundation Website. The Merck Manual links allow the reader to visit other Websites for additional subject information. The National Kidney Foundation Website offers additional educational opportunities via Webinars and seminars. No such offerings were noted on the Merck Manual site. The Merck Manual is written with the professional audience in mind. The information is technical and clinical in its presentation. Whereas, the National Kidney Foundation Website, refers to the site visitor on multiple occasions as â€Å"family†. Visitors are encouraged to â€Å"join our family† and â€Å"be a part of the National Kidney Foundation family† with prom ises of â€Å"we will be there for you†. The information provided in a well written conversational form and would be easily understood by the nonprofessional general public wanting additional information about kidney disease and support services available. Newly diagnosed patients visiting the National Kidney Foundation Website would be provided with an additional source of information. In addition to the general diagnosis and treatment information provided, the Website offers encouragement and support to those effected by kidney disease. Patients, families and friends can find support information. The Merck Manual is intended to be used as a source of information and education for the healthcare professional and/or student. It represents a good source of information for research and/or bedside practice. Although both sites provide information on Kidney Disease and Hemodialysis, the content is presented in completely different ways. The National Kidney Foundation is written for the general public who may be effected by kidney disease. The  Merck Manual in professional in appearance and content. In conclusion, I feel each site is well developed for their intended audience and purpose. The National Kidney Foundation Website is easy to use and provides the reader with basic information regarding the diagnosis, treatment and necessary lifestyle changes. The Website offers support services and the opp  ortunity to donate if the reader so desires. The Merck Manual Website is intent is to provide educational information to the medical professional and students in the medical field.

Halfway House Essay

‘Aadhe Adhure’ or ‘Halfway House’ has often been described as a cross between Naturalist Theatre and Theatre of the Absurd. Interestingly, both these elements actually undercut each other as theatrical movements and are said to have polarized western theatre. Naturalism argues for heredity and a global perspective on human behavior, which is said to develop out of the social environment in which a particular individual lives. On the contrary, Absurdism believes that there are no solutions to the mysteries of existence because ultimately man is alone, forced to perform repetitive actions in a world without meaning. This play has many elements of Naturalist theatre, including a linear movement, a limited time span, an in-depth psychological characterization and a defined beginning, middle and end. However, the opening line– â€Å"Once again, the same thing all over again†¦Ã¢â‚¬  firmly typecasts it as a part of Absurdist theatre, as from the start itself there is a hint at circularity of events and a hopelessness and banality defined by the repetition of the word ‘again’ in the short sentence. Mohan Rakesh borrowed a common device from the theatre of the Absurd and in ‘Aadhe Adhure’, for the first time in Indian theatre the same actor was used to play five characters. According to Rakesh, â€Å"The woman is the central character and I want the four men to be played by the same actor. What I want to indicate by that is that it’s not the individual who’s responsible for his situation, for he would have made the same choice no matter what, regardless of the situation. Any choice anyone makes has a certain irony in it, for things turn out the same regardless of the choice.† Though it was passed off by some critics as a gimmick employed by the playwright, its thematic relevance came to the fore when Rajinder Nath, contrary to his own views on the importance of the technique, directed the play using five different actors for the roles. The conclusion was felt to be severely lacking as the notion of inherent ‘similarity’ in all the men which underlines the climax of the play failed to have the same impact. Interestingly, though Savitri implies that it is beneath their appearance, that this ‘same man’ exists, the implication is only forceful for the audience because of the simultaneous visual impact of one man playing different roles. According to Nath himself it was a powerful theatrical device â€Å"to show how according to one’s convenience the same man can put on different masks depending on the situation in which he is placed†. That the authorial view corroborates with this statement is clear from the prologue where the ‘Man in the black suit’ equates identity with fluidity and calls himself undefined. Each character, given a certain set of circumstances, can occupy the place of another. This also follows the assumption that there is no real development or evolution of character; the character at the beginning of the play will not be shaped differently by the situation, enforcing the idea of a universality of experience, that â€Å"things turning out the same regardless of choice†. The prologue defines the play as ‘amorphous’. The audience is told that there is a bit of each character in all of them. Those watching the play and even those outside the theatre. The characters are said to be people â€Å"you bump into by chance in the street† stressing the alienation of urban crowd from one another as the source of difference as well as similarity, since they are all nameless, faceless people who can easily get lost in a crowd comprising of the same. Therefore, one man can play five characters because they are, in essence, the same man. This likeness is reiterated by the naming of the characters in their dialogues, not individually, but rather as First Man, Second Man, etc. According to the Hindi version of the play, the Man in the Black Suit â€Å"has a look of civility with a touch of cynicism†; the face of the First man â€Å"expresses the helpless anguish of having lost the battle of life†; the Second Man is â€Å"self-satisf ied and yet a little insecure†; the Third Man â€Å"projects an air of someone who is committed to a life of convenience†; and the Fourth Man â€Å"looks older, quite mature and shrewd†. They have different characteristics, lifestyles and manners of speech, yet according to critics Nita Kumar and N. S. Dharan, this device makes use of the inherent notion of playacting which includes the concept of freedom; to pretend and be whatever one likes. Every man remains an actor and therefore, it is easy for him to put up a faà §ade and to hide his interiority according to the demands of the situation. This concept is emphasized not by the fact that the same man plays all the characters, but rather by the fact that it is possible for the same man to play all the characters. Simply by changing his costume and facial expression, he manages to change into a different person entirely. Therefore, the assertion of the prologue of the interchangeability of these characters is understandable. The problematic element in the play arises out of the contention of the Man in the Black Suit that interchange of roles can take place not only between the men in the play but also between the man and the woman. This strikes a discordant note as, according to critic Arti Mathur, it negates Savitri’s gender-specific struggle against social constraints. One of the biggest contributions to the ‘sameness’ of the multiple characters is that they are all men. And men, by the patriarchal definition especially prevalent in urban middle-class India, have a certain societal role which leads to their convergence into one man. Irrespective of circumstances their position in society is defined while that of the woman is defined in relation to the man. However, the statement is not entirely wrong either as Savitri, as the breadwinner of the household is actually the ‘man of the house’. Every society has an economic base and a cultural superstructure, which is derived from the base. In Halfway House, the base has shifted and it is the wife who is economically independent, however, the tragedy of the ironically named Savitri lies in the fact that the superstructure has not shifted in accordance with the base. Mahendranath has not become the domestic centre just because of his confinement to the house; Savitri is still required to fulfill her ‘womanly’ domestic duties. She is defined by the context of what it means to be a woman and has internalized the patriarchal system. This is also made clear by Savitri’s contempt of what she believes is Mahendranath’s lack of manliness. She despises his dependency on herself as well as Juneja and constantly searches for escape routes through other, more sui table men. An element of unrealism is brought in, in which even the characters seem to be aware of an underlying similarity between the men, a device not available to them as characters. Askok’s sketch of Singhania leads Savitri to ask Binni if the portrait reminds her of someone, and on being asked, â€Å"Whom†, she replies â€Å"Your father.† This intermingling of the play and the outside elements draws attention to this device. There is irony in the fact that one of the ways in which these men are actually the ‘same’ is in their exploitation of Savitri. According to critic Veena Das, these characters are seldom all of a piece, they are the broken images of a decomposing society. Mahendranath is a self-described ‘parasite’ and is later shockingly revealed to be a former wife-beater. His inability to hold the position of the ‘head’ of the family has made him bitter and suspicious; suspecting his wife of illicit liaisons, which, although hinted at are never confirmed by the text. His ‘unmanliness’ makes Savitri lose all respect for him, till their marriage is reduced to a sham of public expectations. Singhania treats Savitri with condescension and his ‘favors’ are granted with an obvious air of patronization. His pompous manner and speech is calculated to make the listener feel inferior, a fact that is explicitly stated by Ashok. However, in Savitri’s eyes his position as her boss and his salary makes him ‘superior’ and she remains silent in face of his thinly-veiled innuendos and his humiliation positioning of her as â€Å"one of his child’s ‘aunties’†. His crude behavior is a caricature of the sexual exploitation that women have to deal with in work places. Jagmohan is introduced almost an antithesis of Mahendra. He is suave, successful, with a man-of-the-world air and is presented as the eleventh hour rescuer. He is the only outcome available to her from the â€Å"hell† that her house has become to her. However, this apparent proactive position loses much of its worth as it is weakened by the fact that she waits for Jagmohan to ‘fetch’ her. She overlooks his barbs at her expense and goes with him willingly, an act in defiance of society which is only rewarded by rejection. Again, this seemingly perfect man is unable to provide her with emotional support or security. Her disillusioned return drives home the point that there is no escape route left available for her. The point of concern becomes the fact that though Savitri is an economically independent woman, her means of ‘escape’ from the house is linked to a man. Savitri, in her search for the â€Å"complete man† speaks in the language of patriarchy, as the concept of ‘masculinity’ is a derivative of society. Even though she is a ‘modern, independent’ woman, she is unable to cut off the suffocating patriarchal bonds of the environment in which she lives. The Fourth Man, Juneja is introduced onto the stage around this point. He gains the sympathy of the audience by showing kindness towards Kinni, a character who is almost absolutely neglected in the play. He comes as a voice of rationality; as an almost omniscient character. He seems to have intimate knowledge of both Savitri and Mahendranath, as well as their circumstances. His seems to be the projected authorial voice in the play. His looks and manner of speech is structured so as to make the audience favor his point-of-view and assessment of character. Juneja espouses the belief that to Savitri the meaning of life is â€Å"how many different things you can have and enjoy at the same time.† He lays the blame for the current situation of hopelessness squarely on her shoulder and her quest for the â€Å"complete man†. According to him the problem is not a social reality, but instead lies in the psychological realm. All of the men she encounters are incomplete and therefore her solution is multiplicity. Her way of filling her void is â€Å"excess†. And she is only attracted to men because, â€Å"they are not Mahendra.† According to Juneja, if she had married one of the men whom she is attracted to she would have still felt she had married the wrong man. Juneja brings in another element of unrealism by accurately recounting the encounter between Jagmohan and Savitri because â€Å"in his place I would have said the same†. Once again this brings forth the ‘sameness’ of these characters, as Juneja’s claim is validated by Savitri’s shattering realization- â€Å"All of you†¦every one of you†¦all alike! Exactly the same. Different masks, but the face†¦? The same wretched face†¦every single one of you!† The tragedy of the realization is heightened by Juneja’s ruthless perusal- â€Å"And yet you felt you had a choice†¦? Was there really any choice? Tell me, was there?† In the above dialogues lies the greatest significance of that particular theatrical device. It brings out a clear dichotomy between the ideal and the real. What Savitri has been pursuing all along, the ‘ideal man’ does not in fact exist. The notion of her having had a ‘choice’ has been illusory all along; she is trapped in a world with no exit. The play shifts focus to lack of freedom for a female in urban, middle-class India. The tragedy is that Juneja’s speech provides a dual closure for Savitri; both in her search for the ‘perfect’ man who can â€Å"fill her void†, as well as an acknowledgment that she shall never gain satisfaction, and related to that, happiness. In naturalism, free will is not denied but is contained and confined within the environment in which the individual lives. Savitri’s free will is her ability to choose but the fulfillment of that choice depends on the context. Her freedom is linked to a man. She is free to choose which man, but it has to be a man. The illusion of choice arises from the four men and her ‘independence’ is related to shifting from one man to the other. In the prologue, the Man in the Black Suit had asked the existentialist question of ‘who am I’. This is now problematized, as the dramatic innovation of using the same man for multiple characters casts doubt on whether there is an ‘I’ at all. ‘I’ refers to individuality, the existence of a self different from the ‘other’, a projection that the men in the play are all different which is negated through Juneja’s speech. Savitri uses the language of social realism to justify her belief that she moves on to other men because Mahendra is not the right man. Juneja uses the language of absurdism to articulate that there is no ‘right man’; her search is futile because such a man does not exist. All the men in her life are essentially the same man and can only satisfy her for a limited period of time. Surprisingly, the text does not lead up to its realist conclusion; that she is trapped because of the prohibitions of the society in which she lives, a world in which a woman has no choice in her own destiny. It, in fact, veers from its apparent initial realist stance of ‘all men are the same in a patriarchy’ and seems to suggest that all men are the same only to Savitri. Halfway House has often been described as a woman-centric misogynistic play. â€Å"Even as the play builds up a dark vision of trapped humanity, it weakens the force of its statement by simultaneously cutting Savitri’s credentials.† (Nita Kumar). The play does not imply that if the only conditions were different or could be changed then Savitri would be able to escape from the ‘trap’, instead her sexuality is morally condemned, she ought not be able to escape. Juneja contends that all the men who had come into her life were different. They were individuals with their own diverse characteristics and, according to critic Veena Das, what made Savitri see them as parts of the same fractioned entities was her own â€Å"diseased imagination†. Juneja, in saying that all men are the same, is trying to define the essential nature of desire. Desire is always in excess of the individual and can never be completely satiated. The frightening aspect of desire lies in its limitlessness. All men are the same because they are looked at through Savitri’s desire, the fact that they will all eventually be unable to satisfy her is the reason for their ‘sameness’. Their amorphousness derives from the fact that they change in accordance with Savitri’s assessment of them. The transcendental nature of desire will always make her move on to other men and search for completeness. It seems to suggest that every being is half-incomple te, it is not a tragedy, but rather a fact of existence, and Savitri, in her search for masculine perfection and inability to accept this fact, is herself responsible for her ruination. Unexpectedly again, the play doesn’t build up even to the absurdist conclusion; it does not suggest that everybody in essentiality is like Savitri, because desire is universal, exceeding every individual. Instead, the elements of Naturalism as well as Absurdism are developed only to lay the blame on Savitri’s inherent nature, which is considered responsible for the destruction of this particular family. She stands the last accused and the play ends before there can be any possibility of defense on her behalf. Interestingly, though certain relationships in life are deterministic, including that of a mother-daughter, sister-brother, etc, the same cannot be said about spouses; however, in this very context the language used by Juneja is the final language of containment, of absolute, rigid determinism. As earlier mentioned, the device of one man playing multiple roles is that of the actor and is not available to the character, and therefore it is significant that the visual of the play itself shows that nothing can be changed. Juneja’s speech corresponds to the structure of the play, which has to come from without and therefore indicates a concurrence with the playwright’s view. According to critic Kirti Jain, this device loses a little of its relevance in the actual stage performance as the focus of the audience is drawn primarily towards the clothes, mannerisms and voice of that one actor rather than the thematic import. However, there is no ambiguity on the fact that the nature of the play cannot be understood without a reference to this particular device. Through this, the area of thrust changes entirely from the ‘universality of human experience’, and the ultimate censure is not of society, or even the circumstances, but rather of Savitri’s desiring nature. Her lack of constraint and implicit sexuality stand accused as the essential reasons for what makes her home an incomplete, halfway house.

The Possible Emergence Of A Cold War With Russia - 2423 Words

Article 1: Summary: This article from The Post and Courier discusses the possible emergence of another Cold War with Russia. Concerns regarding the emergence of such a war arose following a meeting that occurred in mid-April between Russia and NATO. During this meeting, Russia reportedly condemned the actions taken by NATO in order to strengthen its defenses in Eastern Europe by stating that they were â€Å"a threat to Russia.† Concern has also risen after Russia’s talk regarding the use of nuclear weapons. Additionally, Russia’s significant â€Å"improvements† to its military over the past three years have further increased fear regarding their future intentions. Defense Secretary Carter released a statement to the press regarding Russia’s†¦show more content†¦MAD was the idea that if one country attacked using nuclear weaponry, the other country would respond and begin a nuclear war that would, in effect, lead to the destruction of both countries. As a resul t, Americans became paranoid over the possibility of a nuclear attack from Russia. Reaction I was deeply concerned by what I read in this article. Technology has become significantly advanced since the days of the Cold War, and an attack from Russia with this new technology could obliterate the entirety of the American population. As a result of this, Americans would yet again become paranoid over the possibility of a deadly attack from Russia which would directly lead to another â€Å"Red Scare.† During the years of the â€Å"Red Scare†, the fear of communism became the primary concern of Americans and it completely consumed their minds. If we were to become engaged in another Cold War, Americans would become consumed by their fear of Russia and it would deter progress in the United States because the minds of Americans would be solely focused on Russia rather than progress and reform at home. Additionally, it could lead to an increase in both international and domestic terrorism which would only further increase paranoia. Article 2: Summary: This article from The New York Post discusses the allegations made against Ted Cruz’s father for