Complete a map of core operational processes appraisal and report for your school. The appraisal and report
are an analysis of your school’s core processes regarding a) Facilities Maintenance, b) School Safety and c)
School Climate. The area of a). Facilities Maintenance is reviewed, mapped, and
analyzed using a K-12 fulton county district level perspective. The areas of b). School Safety and c). School Climate are
completed at the school level.
(II) Data Collection
Collect data from internal stakeholders, including document reviews, interviews, observations, and web
resources, among others. You must collect data from the district for the Facilities Maintenance area. Collect
school level data and support with district level data as appropriate for the areas of School Safety and School
Climate. Compare and contrast differences you find in written policy or procedures with the way
requirements are actually implemented. Consider interviewing school or district leaders responsible for
oversight of each policy area.
(III) Document Reviews
Review and analyze documents relevant to each area. Review of the district’s long-term facilities plan
(Facilities Maintenance), school-level safety plan (School Safety), and student handbook (School Climate) is
required. You must upload a copy of these three documents in Course Den or provide an active, working link
to the online source. Other documents to consider are schedules (academic and exploratory classes, lunch
schedules, bell schedules, etc.), school improvement plans, technology plans, the student management system,
and others. Make sure to review documents from all levels of the school system.
(IV) Report Contents
Complete a written report to deliver to your principal. Include key findings, recommendations for
improvement, and areas for celebration in each of the three investigated areas. Make sure to explain all of the
methods that you used to collect data, the documents that you reviewed, the questions that you asked
stakeholders, and how you analyzed the data. Make sure to identify areas of possible improvement and discuss
the possible impact on instruction and student learning. Connect your work to instruction, student learning, and
professional development whenever possible. While it is not necessary to provide a transcript of interviews,
you may want to include the data collection instruments and questions asked as appendices.
Would it be advisable for us to be permitted to take our own lives? In numerous societies old and not all that old suicide has been viewed as the best choice in specific conditions. Cato the Younger conferred suicide instead of live under Caesar. For the Stoics there was nothing essentially unethical in suicide, which could be reasonable and the best alternative (Long 1986, 206). Alternately, in the Christian custom, suicide has generally been viewed as unethical, resisting the will of God, being socially hurtful and contradicted to nature (Edwards 2000). This view, to take after Hume, disregards the way that by dint suicide being conceivable it isn't against nature or God (Hume 1986). In any case, being permitted to take our own particular lives encroaches on the morals of open strategy in an assortment of ways. Here we will quickly inspect the instance of doctor helped suicide (PAS) where a person's desire to kick the bucket might be supported by the activity of another. Hume viewed suicide as 'free from each ascription of blame or point the finger at' (Hume 1986, 20) and in fact suicide has not been a wrongdoing in the UK since 1961 (Martin 1997, 451). Helping, abetting, guiding or securing a suicide is however a unique statutory wrongdoing, albeit couple of indictments are brought. As of late the issue of PAS has achieved the level headed discussion 'whether and under what conditions people ought to have the capacity to decide the time and way of their passings, and whether they ought to have the capacity to enroll the assistance of doctors' (Steinbock 2005, 235). The British Medical Association contradicts willful extermination (leniency executing) yet acknowledges both lawfully and morally that patients can reject life-drawing out treatment – this that they can submit suicide (BMA 1998). Neglecting to forestall suicide does not constitute abetting (Martin 1997, 451) in spite of the fact that PAS 'is the same in law to some other individual helping another to submit suicide' (BMA 1998). In Oregon, be that as it may, PAS, limited to skilled people who ask for it, has been authorized (Steinbock 2005, 235, 238). A qualification ought to be kept up amongst suicide and (benevolence) slaughtering, acts in which the operators contrast, however obviously precisely where the line ought to be drawn is a piece of the issue. The moral contentions in help of PAS include enduring and independence (Steinbock 2005, 235-6). The primary declaration is that is barbarous to drag out the life of a patient who is in torment that can't be therapeutically controlled; the second, in the expressions of Dr Linda Ganzini in light of her investigation in Oregon, includes the possibility that 'being in charge and not subject to other individuals is the most vital thing for them in their withering days' (cited in Steinbock 2005, 235). The coherent result of these contentions is that, if PAS can be legitimized on the grounds of agony or self-sufficiency, for what reason would it be a good idea for it to be confined to able people or the at death's door? In fact the judge in Compassion in passing on v State of Washington (1995) expressed that 'if at the core of the freedom ensured by the Fourteenth Amendment is this uncurtailable capacity to accept and follow up on one's most profound convictions about existence, the privilege to suicide and the privilege to help with suicide are the right of no less than each normal grown-up. The endeavor to confine such rights to the critically ill is deceptive' (Steinbock 2005, 236). As noted above, religious objection to suicide has turned out to be less important an as referee of morals and approach. In fair social orders that may best be portrayed as common with a Christian legacy, the perspectives of religious gatherings ought not confine the freedom of people in the public eye (Steinbock 2005, 236). Others contend that the part of the doctor is to recuperate and cause and not to hurt, however supporters of PAS would state that demise isn't generally destructive and helped suicide is an assistance. To be sure, in a nation where PAS isn't legitimate individuals who wish to pass on without criminalizing the individuals who aid their suicide might be driven abroad, as on account of Reginald Crew who was kicking the bucket of engine neurone illness and set out to Switzerland for AS, biting the dust in January 2002 (English et al. 2003, 119). This may cause more damage through the worries of disengagement and stress than enabling the PAS to occur. The two most genuine concerns are that PAS would be mishandled and would prompt negative changes in the public eye. This could occur from various perspectives through defenseless gatherings, for example, poor people, the elderly and so forth, being forced into picking PAS (Steinbock 2005, 237). The BMA underscores a worry for the message that would be given to society about the estimation of specific gatherings of individuals (BMA 1998). This is a piece of a more extensive concern likewise communicated in a Canadian Senate enquiry of 1995 (BMA 1998) which focuses to an approach of suicide counteractive action among some defenseless gatherings that would be rendered peculiar by trying to ease suicide among the crippled. In any case, the introduction is marginally deceitful, since there is a distinction in the explanation behind potential suicide that must be examined. For instance, trying to counteract suicide among the young may include projects of social incorporation or expanding life prospects, and this style of arrangement isn't pertinent on account of the individuals who may look for PAS. In Oregon at any rate, it appears that feelings of dread about PAS have not emerged, and one specialist speculates that the moderately low utilization of PAS is characteristic of it being excessively prohibitive (Steinbock 2005, 238). Clients of PAS, instead of being poor people and socially powerless as anticipated, had a tendency to be white collar class and instructed, with more youthful patients more prone to pick it than the elderly, and most were selected in hospice mind. Issues about PAS and willful extermination should be illuminated and contended independently. With regards to this issue in any event, the subject of whether suicide ought to be permitted is the wrong one to inquire. A beginning stage is to ask how skillful people can be permitted to satisfy their desires as to life and demise issues without imperiling other individuals, regardless of whether specialists or friends and family and whether sweeping enactment is possible.>GET ANSWER