All living things

All living things use some way to survive and defend themselves. Frogs use their skin in many ways for these reasons. So how do frogs use their skin, color and poison to survive and defend themselves? In this paper you will learn how frogs use their skin to live, survive and defend themselves. Frog skin is thin and naked. It has no scales, no hair, and no feathers. However, the skin of a frog is critical to their survival. Through it, they both drink and breathe. They also use their skin to absorb all the moisture they need through their skin because they do not swallow. Although frogs do have lungs, they rely on the extra oxygen they absorb through their skin, especially when theyre underwater. Frogs must keep their skin moist. Otherwise, oxygen cant pass easily through their skin and they suffocate. Frog skin secretes a mucus that helps them keep moist. Even so, their skin tends to dry out which is why they usually stay near bodies of water. They rely on dew for moisture or burrow themselves underground in moist soil. Although they rely on their skin for a lot of purposes they do rejuvenate themselves by shedding their skin once a week. This process consists of a lot of twisting, bending and stretching to loosen the skin. Once the frog has loosened ! it enough it pulls the skin over its head like a sweater and usually eats it. I have been describing simple and logical reasons for the importance of frog skin. However, there are more reasons to make it all the more fascinating. In frogs, pigmentation or skin color depends on the presence of specialized cells and the resulting optical phenomena. These cells are differentiated from the so-called neural crest during the stage when the brain and the spine are being formed and then migrate to the surface of the skin. The evolutionary history of the biology of pigmentation may be dry material, but it is the basis for the dazzling ...

Development of the theory of public administration

Development of the theory of public administration Introduction The fifties (and especially late fifties) of the twentieth century were marked by certain shift in public administration theory in the USA. Theorists in this field focused on human resources and people’s behavior within organizations. Leadership and decision-making were regarded as some of the most important components of public administrators’ functioning (Cox et al., 2010).Advertising We will write a custom critical writing sample on Development of the theory of public administration specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Some of the most prominent public administration theorists of that period were Philip Selznick, Douglas McGregor and Charles E. Lindblom. These theorists contributed greatly to the field of public administration as they developed certain approaches which became the basis for further research. The Theorists and Their Contribution Selznick was one of the proponents of organizational approach. One of his major contributions was his attention to the goals set by the organization and employees’ goals (Shafritz Hyde, 2012). The theorist noted that people often had different goals and this dichotomy often led to poor performance. Thus, according to Selznick, employees, who did not share the organization’s values and set goals which differed from the ones, set within the organization, could not function effectively (Shafritz Hyde, 2012). Furthermore, the theorist also stressed that it was crucial to develop proper environment within the organization to enable employees to cooperate and be efficient. Thus, communication was one of the keys to success. Another prominent theorist of that period was Douglas McGregor. He also focused on the environment within the organization. The theorist claimed that motivation, control and leadership play essential role in the development of proper environment (Shafritz Hyde, 2012). Thus, McGregor emphasized that leadership was imp ortant as employees needed support and control. Inspiring leaders could motivate public administrators, which could improve performance of the latter. Effective cooperation between employees could be achieved with the help of control. Noteworthy, the researcher stated that public administrators had to know the organization’s goals to be able to perform effectively. The theorist also paid specific attention to motivation as he believed public administrators (as well as any other employees) needed motivation to perform properly and achieve the goals set. Finally, Charles E. Lindblom also considered the human component of public administration. However, the theorist focused on the process of decision-making. Noteworthy, Lindblom was an advocate of democratic approach and stressed the importance of leadership. However, when it came decision-making, the theorist stressed the importance of cooperation. Lindblom claimed that the government consisted of a number of elites that cooper ated (Shafritz Hyde, 2012).Advertising Looking for critical writing on public administration? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More This cooperation was necessary for proper functioning of public administration. The researcher also noted that public administrators had to be aware of peculiarities of decision-making processes (Shafritz Hyde, 2012). He noted that it was essential to analyze the process of decision-making to enable public administrators to function effectively. Conclusion On balance, it is possible to note that Philip Selznick, Douglas McGregor and Charles E. Lindblom contributed greatly to the development of the theory of public administration in the field of human resources. The theorists exploited behavioral approach and provided valuable insights into the processes of cooperation and decision-making. It was acknowledged that public administrators needed motivation and leadership to ensure effective work of the US government. More importantly, the researchers developed specific tools which could be used by public administrators. Thus, communication, leadership and decision-making acquired the necessary attention and became central to further research. Reference List Cox, R.W., Buck, S.J., Morgan, B.N. (2010). Public administration in theory and practice. New York, NY: Longman Publishing Group. Shafritz, J.M., Hyde, A.C. (2012). Classics of public administration. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.

Discuss a contemporary problem in penolog Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Discuss a contemporary problem in penolog - Essay Example According to Pollock (2005), the Big House was depicted as a world inhabited by individuals who appeared deceased than alive. This maximum-security prison emerged in 1920s as well as 1930s. This system developed as an uncomfortable transition following the collapse of â€Å"factory† prison, which dominated the last part of 1800s. The Big House prison being a walled institution often contained several thousand inmates who were idle from decreased industrial work (Johnson, n.d). From plantation prisons, which were agrarian comparable to industrial prisons, emerged the Big House to offer discipline to inmates unable to work in the road works and in the fields. Plantation prisons had gross population of black prisoners since they were newly emancipated and were prone to being arrested for the flimsiest pretext to work in hard labour in prisons usually called chain gangs. The shackled prisoners were used to construct several public works like railroads and roads (Pollock, 2005). The Big House gave way to correctional Institution, which was the new prison system that first emerged in 1940s as well as 1950s. These prisons were typically large cell blocks with shops and a yard as well as industrial workstations. About 2,500 prisoners from rural and urban areas spend their time in every institution (Pollock, 2005). During the 1960s and 1970s, treatment programs were established in the correctional institution with the aim of establishing security, order, and discipline. As the number of offenders increased in the last 30 years, so was the prison population. The number of inmates from urban and rural areas greatly increased with many of them engaging in violent offenses. The shift from crime control that emphasized on the significance of incarceration in the previous establishments meant an increase of inmates in the correctional institutions (Cole, Smith &