Suppose you were told that the horizontal resolution of a digital photograph taken is stored as a 16bit number at offset 434. Suppose you were told that the file format dictates big endian ordering. What is the horizontal resolution of the digital photograph in hex and decimal?
Again, suppose you were told that the horizontal resolution of a digital photograph taken is stored as a 16bit number at offset 434. But this time, suppose you were told that the processor is Intel x86 and that the file format does not “trump” the normal little endian ordering that would then be presumed. What is the horizontal resolution of the digital photograph in hex and decimal?
What if you were told that the horizontal resolution is stored as a 32bit number, presuming big endian ordering? What is the resolution in hex and decimal?
What if you were told that the horizontal resolution is stored as a 32bit number, presuming little endian ordering? What is the resolution in hex and decimal?
‘A pupil seeking admission who has Tourette’s syndrome is being interviewed for a place at the school. He makes inappropriate comments during the interview and for this reason is not selected for admission. The fact that the school did not know that the pupil had Tourette’s syndrome may not be a defence because no attempt was made by the school to establish if there was a particular reason for this behaviour. His could constitute unlawful discrimination arising from a disability’. This case study and that the C of P clearly state that all SEN students must be treated fairly within schools’ admissions policies and without discrimination as described in the Equality Act. What actions stated in the EA have an effect on SEN students in schools? As previously mentioned the EA (2010) brought together the numerous anti-discrimination laws and the EA makes it illegal to discriminate against a person with a disability. Within schools it is illegal to adopt policies which maybe illegal against students with a disability. Direct discrimination as described under the EA would involve less favourable treatment ‘because of a protected characteristic’. The EA (2010) is clear that any form of direct discrimination cannot be justified. Direct discrimination can arise from unconscious prejudice.Schools under the EA, cannot make assumptions about individual students within protected characteristic groups. ‘Within schools direct discrimination is related to a child’s disability, for example, not allowing a child with a disfigurement to appear in a school play because of their looks. Direct discrimination is unlawful, irrespective of the schools motives or intentions, and regardless of whether the less favourable treatment of the child was conscious or unconscious’. (Hills 2012 p14).>GET ANSWER