Lesson Plan Kindergarten Essay Example for Free

Lesson Plan Kindergarten Essay Lesson plan Pre-K/Kindergarten Objectives: Children will learn their ABCs by picture association and also learn the words that go along with it. Students use spoken, written and visual language to accomplish their own purposes (learning, enjoyment, persuasion and the exchange of information). GLE: . Demonstrate understanding of alphabetic principle by doing the following: †¢identifying own first name in print †¢identifying at least eight uppercase or lowercase letters, focusing on those in the student’s name (PK-LL-L3) (ELA-1-E1) Materials: Alphabet cards with pictures on the front and the word on the back Introduction: Start out by going through the ABCs in different manners (songs, videos). Methods/Procedures: Once the children are clear on their alphabet, start with the cards. Each card should have a letter with a word on the other side. On the side with the letter there should a picture of what the word is on the other side. Have the students say the letter and then try to guess what the picture is. Once they have guessed the picture, show them the word and go through the spelling. With this lesson students will learn not only new words and picture recognition. Plans for individual differences: I would take the special needs children to my desk one at a time so they could get a fair shot at recognizing the letters, pictures and words. They should still try with the whole class though. Also I will follow any accommodations listed on their IEP. Assessment/Evaluation: I would evaluate this activity by watching each child in the class. I would also set aside time to take each child to the side and go over a few words with them by themselves.

Attitude of Unlisted Companies Towards IFRS

Attitude of Unlisted Companies Towards IFRS SECTION I INTRODUCTION The adoption of international financial reporting standards across the European Union from 1st January 2005 is one of the biggest events in the accounting history. This is especially important after the capital markets were rocked by some big accounting frauds in recent years. In the first phase, 7000-plus listed European companies will have to implement new financial reporting standards from January 2005 (Fuller, Jan 2005). When European Union moved towards one market across Europe, it faced the prospect of different financial reporting regimes across EU participants. To achieve true scale of financial integration, it has become necessary to adopt common financial reporting standards. In June 2002, the European Commission adopted a regulation requiring all listed EU companies in regulated markets to prepare their financial statements in accordance with International Accounting Standards (IAS) or International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). The regulation is applicable only on consolidated accounts and companies are free to choose their national GAAPs for subsidiaries and associate companies. The regulation came into force from January 2005. Companies Act 1985 governs the use of UK GAAP by UK based companies. Similarly other EU states have their own laws for accounting standards. The EU states have now modified their national laws to include IFRS regulation to offer a common financial reporting standard. Companies Act 1985 (International Accounting Standards and Other Accounting Amendments) Regulations 2004 has extended the application, on a non-compulsory basis, of the EU IFRS regulation to all non-charitable organisations. In the last quarter of previous century, the world economies have moved towards globalisation. Multinational companies are manufacturing and selling across the world and many of these firms are listed at foreign stock exchanges. Globalisation of markets and establishment of multinationals led to increased desire and awareness about international markets. This was soon followed by globalisation of financial markets which increased the value of understanding of international financial results and reporting formats. Rapid improvement in communication technologies and easy access through internet has further spread the profile of international investor. Now a day international investors are not limited to some portfolio managers in big banks. International investors are now as diverse as sophisticated equity manager to a small investor in a remote town. Investors too have diversified their portfolio by international equities and bonds. This rapid globalisation has fuelled the desire to h ave common international standards that could be understood and followed across nations. The ever increasing network of investors has not only opened new financing sources to countries, it has also put some pressure on the financial regulatory authorities to design and improve their financial reporting systems in a manner that is easily understood by wider audiences. The regulatory authorities have on one hand evolve the financial reporting system to match the ever increasing demands of international investors and on the other hand make sure that companies in their countries are not faced with sudden increase in time, resources and knowledge needed to cope with new regulations.   In 1973, 9 countries included UK formed International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) with an aim to develop common accounting standards. The membership has now grown well over hundred countries with each country, especially bigger economies, bringing in their own perspectives of accounting standards. IASC had to deal with accounting conflictions in coming up with common acceptable accounting standards. One would immediately think whether IASC has been successful in resolving all the conflicts with all member countries and the answer would easily be no. To fully satisfy more than hundred accounting bodies from across the world is almost an impossible task. Yet IASC has done a commendable job and from 1 January 2005, International Accounting Standards (IAS) or International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) is applicable in more than 90 countries. In EU, IFRS is compulsory only for listed companies. The standards that UK listed companies will follow are not those issued directly by the International Accounting Standards Board, but are those that have been endorsed by the European Commission. EU has now endorsed IFRS, except for IFRS 6 and some of the IFRIC interpretations, and some changes in IAS 39 relating to the fair value of financial instruments (PwC, 2005a). While the EU regulation is only enforceable on listed companies, it also says that a member state has an option to extend the use of IFRS to unlisted companies within their jurisdiction. Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), the government trade body responsible for company regulation in UK, has said that while there is no mandatory move to IFRS for unlisted companies, the unlisted companies would still be allowed to adopt IFRS over UK GAAP from 2005 onwards. The basic aim of new financial reporting standards is same as that of existing standards – to provide information about financial performance and position of a company to different stakeholders. Internal stakeholders – management – normally have a good grip of what’s going in the business. It is external stakeholders like investors, auditors, suppliers and creditors who need to be informed in a succinct and clear manner about financial implications of business decisions. The IFRS would aim to present a more complete picture of a business by making operating income a more encompassing number. As an example, the financial implications of stock options were kept out of income statements. Companies merely mentioned the number of stock options granted. But now onwards, companies will have to incorporate the fair costs of granting stock options in their income statements. This will allow investors to assess the true costs of executive remuneration. Though the overall aim is same, the differences in implementation and financial reporting do occur due to social, economic and political backgrounds of different nations. Will it be a good policy to allow two different accounting standards in UK – one standard for listed companies and another for unlisted companies. UK’s Accounting Standard Board clearly sees there is no merit in having two separate standards. ASB issued a Discussion Paper in March 2004 highlighting its strategy for convergence with IAS and says that convergence of UK accounting standards to IAS is a foregone conclusion. It has already introduced many changes in recent past to bring UK’s GAAP in line with IFRS. Smaller companies, even listed ones, will find it difficult to cope with extra work due to IFRS. Alternative Investment Market (AIM) realises that most of its companies won’t be in a position to meet IFRS requirements soon. So it changed its regulatory status in October 2004 and is now an â€Å"exchange regulated market† and out of purview of European Commission regulation on regulated markets. Now companies listed on AIM have time until January 2007 to implement IFRS. Accounting Standards Board is also sensitive to the needs placed on business in making a transition from UK accounting standards to IFRS. Big businesses probably have sufficient resources to cope with the change in one year. But the smaller businesses will find it difficult to make all required changes in one year. ASB has proposed a series of changes that would be implemented in 2005 and 2006 which will bring UK financial reporting standards more in line with IFRS. Thereafter ASB will carry out a series of step changes by replacing one or more UK standards. So by the end of 2005-2006, UK standards will almost be in line with IFRS and unlisted companies transition to IFRS in 2007 would be smooth. This research analyses the attitude of unlisted companies towards IFRS. Many research and surveys have been carried out on the acceptance and readiness of listed companies for transition to IFRS. But the issue has not been explored in depth with respect to unlisted companies. The research is based on primary and secondary data. Primary data is collected via interviews and questionnaires with companies and their auditors. A total of [34] interviews – [20] with companies and [14] with their auditors – were conducted to obtain primary data. [52] questionnaire responses by postal survey were also analysed. The results show that there is definitely a much scope in improving International Financial Reporting Standards for unlisted companies. Respondents were concerned about the costs associated with transition to IFRS and also the additional burden that will come with regular enhanced reporting. That IFRS will help in globalisation of capital markets and probably cheaper costs of capital is not of much significance for unlisted companies registered in UK. This research would be useful for institutes and associations framing accounting standards for unlisted companies. Mostly accounting standards have been framed with an eye for listed and large companies. But unlisted companies have much lesser resources to spend on large regulatory requirements and hence should have different reporting requirements that match the benefits obtained from such reporting. The time limitation and resource constraint mean that the primary data via interviews and questionnaire surveys could only be collected through a limited number of respondents. It would be useful to cover a larger data base before implementing the changes. Also more users of data in unlisted companies like banks and creditors should be contacted before policy formulation. The remaining paper is divided in the following sections. Section II is a literature review on justification and applicability of IFRS, and state of readiness in companies. Section III discusses the methodology used in this research. Section IV covers analysis of data obtained through the primary data collection and its interpretation. The paper concludes with section V. SECTION II LITERATURE REVIEW In June 2000, the European Commission proposed a new directive requiring that all publicly traded companies in the member states to adopt International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) standards by no later than January 2005. On 19 July 2002, the European Parliament and the Council approved the IAS regulation (EC) 1606/2002 which said ‘For each financial year starting on or after 1 January 2005, companies governed by the law of a Member State shall prepare their consolidated accounts in conformity with the international accounting standards adopted †¦ if, at their balance sheet date, their securities are admitted to trading on a regulated market of any Member State’ (EU, 2002). Rationale for EU’s adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards The main aim of International Financial reporting Standards is to bring convergence among different national financial reporting standards. Over time, the evolution of different national financial reporting standards has been influenced by local social, political and economic environments. Some of the major reasons for differences in accounting standards are: Political – Capitalist or Communist. Capitalist and communist countries have almost contrasting fundamental economic approach and their accounting standards reflect the same. Stage of economic development. Developed countries generally have better accounting standards in terms of transparency and clarity. Corporate finance – debt or equity. Companies in continental Europe are financed more by debt than the companies in UK. Accounting standards have over time evolved to reflect the importance placed by different sources of financing on different aspects of financial statements. Legal and taxation systems. Convergence will help investors and analysts to compare companies across borders in a better way. But it also implies that either member countries will lose their independence to make national accounting standards that reflect local economic conditions or if they start introducing some changes, IFRS may slowly lose its main strength of common standard. Local, political and economical conditions may force national accounting bodies to introduce variations in IFRS. EU has already introduced some changes in the IAS 39 dealing with financial instruments. It is beyond the scope of this research to see which member countries have introduced variations in IFRS. Convergence between UK GAAP and IFRS ASB has declared its intention to converge UK GAAP with IFRS. It has issued a number of new standards in December 2004 to speed up the convergence of UK GAAP with IFRS. So sooner, even unlisted companies would be following a substantial portion of IFRS due to this convergence. Comparison of UK GAAP and IFRS Similarities The ultimate goal of UK GAAP and IFRS is same – to present information about financial performance and position to all concerned stakeholders. If the aim is same, then should be the main approach adopted by both accounting standards. The UK’s Accounting Standard Board’s Statement of Principles for Financial Reporting is a vital contributor at macro level standard setting. It plays almost same role as International Accounting Standards Committee’s ‘Framework for the Preparation and Presentation of Financial Statements’. ‘It is a description of the fundamental approach that the Accounting Standards Board (ASB) believes should, in principle, underpin the financial statements of profit-oriented entities’ (ASB, 1999). The Statement of Principles has true and fair concept at its core, much like the focal point in International Accounting Standards. Also like IAS, Statement of Principles insists on financial information being relevant and comparable. It is beyond the scope of this research to highlight each and every similarity between UK GAAP and IAS. Differences Though the overall aim is same, the differences in implementation and financial reporting do occur due to social, economic and political backgrounds of different nations. Main concepts behind UK GAAP and IFRS are same, but when we look at micro level, we see many differences at the individual standards level. Following are the main differences between UK GAAP and IFRS: The Statement of Principles allows use of both historical cost and current value approaches in measuring balance sheet categories. The dual use of historical and current value methods is known as modified historical cost basis (ASB, 1999). Under historical cost, the carrying values of assets and liabilities are stated at the lower of cost and recoverable amount. This approach is more conservative as compared to IAS approach which uses fair value method. Also the choice of historical or current value method is based on subjective analysis of a company’s management and hence it is open to some manipulation. Fair value. If we look at global level, both UK GAAP and IFRS have adopted fair value method as the foundation of their accounting standards. IFRS takes fair value adoption even higher when it says that income statement will include the changes in the fair value of items that have not been yet traded like derivatives. The emphasis in new accounting standards is on mark-to-market fair value of assets and liabilities rather than on actual market price based fair values. Now both realised and unrealised changes in fair values would be incorporated in income statements. The first year of transition will see high volatility in earnings and balance sheet statements. Though this brings higher volatility, it will also test the management skills in proper presentation and explanation of changes. It may also change the benchmarks of success for managements. Acquisitions. Acquisition accounting will change under new accounting standards. Under UK GAAP, companies can choose between purchase and merger accounting. Under IFRS, companies will have to account under purchase method only. Goodwill. UK GAAP allowed amortisation of goodwill and companies had the option of not segregating intangible assets from goodwill. Under IFRS, intangible assets have to be separated from goodwill. Goodwill can not be amortised now but companies will have to undertake annual impairment tests to justify the value of goodwill on the balance sheets. BAT’s profits for year 2004 increased by  £454m because it no longer had to amortise goodwill of that amount (AccountancyAge, 2005b). Consolidation of accounts. Under new accounting rules, companies may have to consolidate certain additional subsidiaries into group accounts. On the other hand companies will have to exclude certain subsidiaries or special purpose vehicles which were not included till now. Research and development costs. Under IAS 39, research costs can’t be carried on the balance sheet and would have to write them off as incurred. Companies would still be allowed to capitalise development in line with UK GAAP. Stock options. Internet and share market last boom in late 1990s led to rapid increase in share options as a way to reward employees. The new requirements to record an expense on income statement for the value of share options granted to employees could have a significant impact on earnings. AstraZeneca said in its pro forma 2004 IFRS numbers that new accounting rules on stock options has made it re-consider the use of stock options in rewarding its employees (Tricks, 2005). Distributable profits. Organisations ability to pay dividends is dependent on their distributable profits. Following are some of the major impacts of IFRS on distributable profits Inability to discount deferred tax liabilities, higher provisions for deferred tax when companies move from historical costs to fair value and inclusion of pension deficits in income statement. All of the above will reduce distributable profits. Many companies would have to financially restructure themselves in order to have sufficient distributable profits to meet dividends paid in last year. Deferred tax credit. Deferred tax credit is available under UK GAAP but not under IFRS. GlaxoSmithKline’s restated its 2004 earning per share by (1.9p) due to non-availability of deferred tax credit under IFRS (AccountancyAge, 2005a). Inclusion of business disposals gains in profits from operations. BAT’s profits for year 2004 increased by  £1.3bn after it included gains from disposals to operating profits (AccountancyAge, 2005b). Adding disposal gains to operating profits will make it harder for investors and analysts to separate the earnings from continuing businesses. Derivative contracts. Under IFRS, some derivative contracts will not qualify as hedges as they wont meet the criteria. UK GAAP allowed deferment of such contracts until transaction took place. IFRS won’t allow the deferment of such contract and would impact the profit and loss account even before the transaction took place. It is better in a way that investors will know the current value of the firm as on date rather than historical costs of such instruments, especially if the duration of financial instruments was long. At the same time, it would increase the burden on the company to calculate the fair value of all such transactions. Agricultural. UK GAAP allowed companies to use a cost model for biological assets and all agricultural produce. But under IAS companies would have to use mark to market method for valuing such assets. Now companies would have to use market valuation even for assets in far off countries. Advantages of IFRS over UK GAAP Common financial language. Adopting common financial reporting standards will open up a company to more markets and investors. The growth in telecommunications has made it easier for smaller investors to invest across physical boundaries. Such investors are normally not as financially sophisticated as some big financial institutions. They would also not like to understand more than one accounting standards as they don’t have required resources in hand to do so. With one common accounting standard, more investors would like to explore companies across nations. Acquisitions. IFRS 3 is more open and transparent than UK GAAP on acquisitions. It will allow investors and analysts to judge faster the success of an acquisition. Many of the companies that have relied on acquisition as a key cornerstone for growth would now come under intense scrutiny and may have to develop a new strategy for growing business.    Consolidation. In IFRS, all entities will have to provide a cash flow statement. Additionally there would be more transparency within the group companies and this should make the consolidation process more straight-forward. Securitisation by businesses is likely to be impacted by the new ways governing how companies can show assets and liabilities on their financial statements. Companies have used securitisation to cash in assets like trade receivables sitting on their balance sheets. Securitisation helps companies to slim down their balance sheets and hence allows companies to show higher return on assets at same earnings. And it was one of the reasons why companies went for securitisation. But stringent criteria for moving assets and liabilities off balance sheet will threaten securitisation. Sue Harding, chief accountant at Standard Poor’s in Europe said that new international accounting standards were sweeping a lot of securitised assets back on to balance sheets (Jopson, Feb 2005). This will help investors compare like to like and avoid companies that have used securitisation only to make-up their balance sheets. There is no harm in using securitisation if used in a proper way and not to deceive stakeholders. But we have seen how corporations like Enron had used securitisation to disguise their true financial position. Annual impairment review. Annual impairment review will benefit investors because the companies then won’t like to take big goodwill cuts in one year and not do anything for years. Annual reviews would help investors judging whether the amount paid by companies in acquiring other company was justified or not. Access to cheaper capital. Increase in investor profile diversification would most probably lower the cost of capital for most of the companies. This is especially true for smaller companies which don’t have financial muscles and resources to tap international investors. Expensing research costs gives better information to investors and other stakeholders because at research stage the chances of success are quite uncertain. Investors can only be sure of development costs bringing in some returns in future. Also by segregating research and development costs, external stakeholders will now have a better chance to differentiate the suitability of costs incurred in developing new products. Multiple listings. Many companies now have multiple listings across different countries. Companies need to prepare financial statements as per each local accounting standard to meet listing requirements. With one accounting standard only it will save a lot of botheration for companies with multiple listings. Dividends. Under IFRS dividends are not provided for until the dividend recommended by the Board is approved by shareholders. This move will bring more convergence between accounting profits and cash flows. Disadvantages of IFRS Fair value. While fair value in a way conveys more up to date value of a company as compared to historic costs, it also puts a question mark on the methods used and the reliability of fair value. Derivative instruments which are commonly traded on various stock exchanges can be easily assigned value. So while valuing some of the assets or liabilities may not be difficult, the question still remains what impact such valuations will have on companies’ business models. Many companies use hedging instruments as a strategic tool rather than for intentional gains. Any short-term swings in such instruments may have a significant impact on income statement and probably adverse market reactions may deter companies’ from using such instruments. Then comes the more important issue of valuing assets and liabilities that don’t have a proper market. The companies may use some valuation model, which itself may not be the right way, to value an asset or liability. The model will incorporate some subjective assumptions. An example would be brand value. A same brand can have two different values for two different companies because of its strategic importance. So at one hand, investors and other external stakeholders are getting more objective information about a companies’ assets and liabilities, they are also getting valuation based on more subjective assessments. Only time will tell whether some individuals or companies will use it to manipulate results. An interesting thing to observe would be the treatment and importance given by analysts to unrealised fair value of assets and liabilities. Some investors may try to separate unrealised gains and losses from other operational performance. It may also prompt companies to issue adjusted earnings excluding unrealised gains and losses. An important point to note about fair value principle is that the financial statements should not be seen as perfect prediction of things to come. That depends on the strategic and business decisions management will take in future. Just having a fair value of assets and liabilities doesn’t mean that the company will be able to extract those values in future.    Dividend. New accounting standards promote payment of dividend from distributable reserves. With the inclusion of unrealised gains and losses and pension deficits, the first few years of new accounting standards may not leave enough of distributable reserves for dividend payments. Securitisation. Securitising assets into special purpose vehicles and re-financing them through had also helped companies raise funds at lower costs. The new accounting standards by restricting the use of special purpose vehicles, would diminish some sources of cheap financing. It is question yet to be fully tested in the practical world that since the assets are same, change in financing options shouldn’t change the returns on total assets. By refinancing at lower rates through securitisation should result in higher financing cost for remaining assets such that the overall costs remain same. But examination of this hypothesis is beyond the scope of this dissertation. But what is mostly observed in capital markets is that when companies announce refinancing, the share price rises. How much of the rise is from relief that company will survive and how much from the fact that the overall costs have lowered is not known. Annual impairment tests. Annual impairment tests are easier said than done. Companies would not only have to devote substantial resources to do that first would have to train its personnel to do that. Assessing true value of a goodwill is not easy. If there is a comparable market then companies can easily value it. Even then it may differ from case to case as it would be very unusual to see exactly two similar companies. Goodwill is very different from tangible assets or technologies and depends a lot on market perception and strategy. Companies would have to review the whole process of valuing goodwill and would have to review the valuation process at constant intervals. Net pension liability. The inclusion of net pension liability on the balance sheet may have severe impact on the shareholders funds. Companies will be required to have annual actuarial valuation of their pension liabilities and the same would be reflected in financial statements. Most of the pension funds invest in equity markets, which have been quite volatile in the recent years. So though over a longer period, the movements in pension liabilities may even out but in short to medium term, it may have a dramatic effect on balance sheets and earning statements. Segmental information. IAS 14 requires companies to report information on their business segments and on a scale more detail than UK GAAP. As of date, no agreed accounting practices have emerged on how much should be disclosed because companies may end up revealing sensitive information to its competitors. If companies disclose the turnover, earnings and expenditure for each segment, its profitable operations may come under intense competition. Ian Dilks of PwC said that â€Å"some companies have found they’re giving much more information than they’re comfortable with on sales and the profitability of product areas† (Tricks, 2005) Expensing research costs may result in listed companies focusing more on products in development stage than in research stage. This will keep their balance sheets healthy but may harm long term prospects. Complex and long IFRS compliant reports. PricewaterhouseCoopers estimates that an IFRS compliant financial report for insurance companies could be up to twice as long as those prepared under existing UK GAAP (Finn Zoon, 2004). The requirement for other industry sectors though may not be as intensive as for insurance sector, their IFRS compliant financial may also be longer and resource intensive than under UK GAAP. Any company that has makes an acquisition will have to do annual goodwill impairment analysis and most of them would like to explain the results also. Comparable formats. IAS 1 is less prescriptive than the UK GAAP when it comes to the format of the balance sheet and income statement. It just distinguishes current and non-current assets and liabilities. Investors, when faced with different formats, may find it difficult to compare companies. Modify organisation structures. Meall (2003) suggested that the additional burden of more financial reporting along different segments may force companies to modify their existing organisational structures within their financial systems to collect and analyse data. Impact of IFRS on different industries IFRS will have different impact on different industries. For some, most of the applied UK GAAP is almost same as IFRS and won’t feel the difference. But for some industries, the difference in accounting standards may have a substantial impact. Financial services and insurance companies are among them. Financial services companies would be affected by substantial change in recognition and measurement of financial instruments under IAS 39. UK GAAP has no equivalent to IAS 4 which deals with insurance contracts. Insurance companies would now have to account for this in their financial statements. Under IFRS, insurance companies would have to book financial instruments such as derivatives at market value rather than historical value allowed under UK GAAP. Many insurers have said that this will distort their earnings (Reuters, 2005a). IFRS will put more stringent criteria for classification of insurance products and this may lead to reclassification of some insurance products as investment products. Other industries that might face higher impact are the ones that heavily use hedging instruments in their day to day operations. Mostly companies using commodity materials like oil as a significant part of their input costs use hedging to smooth over the volatile changes in commodity markets. New accounting standards will reduce Tesco’s projected annual profit of  £2,000m by  £30m only, a reduction of 1.5%. But for some companies the impact would be much more. Royal Sun Alliance said that new accounting rules would reduce its net assets by  £400m (Reuters, 2005a). This is a big number by any standards and shareholders Attitude of Unlisted Companies Towards IFRS Attitude of Unlisted Companies Towards IFRS SECTION I INTRODUCTION The adoption of international financial reporting standards across the European Union from 1st January 2005 is one of the biggest events in the accounting history. This is especially important after the capital markets were rocked by some big accounting frauds in recent years. In the first phase, 7000-plus listed European companies will have to implement new financial reporting standards from January 2005 (Fuller, Jan 2005). When European Union moved towards one market across Europe, it faced the prospect of different financial reporting regimes across EU participants. To achieve true scale of financial integration, it has become necessary to adopt common financial reporting standards. In June 2002, the European Commission adopted a regulation requiring all listed EU companies in regulated markets to prepare their financial statements in accordance with International Accounting Standards (IAS) or International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). The regulation is applicable only on consolidated accounts and companies are free to choose their national GAAPs for subsidiaries and associate companies. The regulation came into force from January 2005. Companies Act 1985 governs the use of UK GAAP by UK based companies. Similarly other EU states have their own laws for accounting standards. The EU states have now modified their national laws to include IFRS regulation to offer a common financial reporting standard. Companies Act 1985 (International Accounting Standards and Other Accounting Amendments) Regulations 2004 has extended the application, on a non-compulsory basis, of the EU IFRS regulation to all non-charitable organisations. In the last quarter of previous century, the world economies have moved towards globalisation. Multinational companies are manufacturing and selling across the world and many of these firms are listed at foreign stock exchanges. Globalisation of markets and establishment of multinationals led to increased desire and awareness about international markets. This was soon followed by globalisation of financial markets which increased the value of understanding of international financial results and reporting formats. Rapid improvement in communication technologies and easy access through internet has further spread the profile of international investor. Now a day international investors are not limited to some portfolio managers in big banks. International investors are now as diverse as sophisticated equity manager to a small investor in a remote town. Investors too have diversified their portfolio by international equities and bonds. This rapid globalisation has fuelled the desire to h ave common international standards that could be understood and followed across nations. The ever increasing network of investors has not only opened new financing sources to countries, it has also put some pressure on the financial regulatory authorities to design and improve their financial reporting systems in a manner that is easily understood by wider audiences. The regulatory authorities have on one hand evolve the financial reporting system to match the ever increasing demands of international investors and on the other hand make sure that companies in their countries are not faced with sudden increase in time, resources and knowledge needed to cope with new regulations.   In 1973, 9 countries included UK formed International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) with an aim to develop common accounting standards. The membership has now grown well over hundred countries with each country, especially bigger economies, bringing in their own perspectives of accounting standards. IASC had to deal with accounting conflictions in coming up with common acceptable accounting standards. One would immediately think whether IASC has been successful in resolving all the conflicts with all member countries and the answer would easily be no. To fully satisfy more than hundred accounting bodies from across the world is almost an impossible task. Yet IASC has done a commendable job and from 1 January 2005, International Accounting Standards (IAS) or International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) is applicable in more than 90 countries. In EU, IFRS is compulsory only for listed companies. The standards that UK listed companies will follow are not those issued directly by the International Accounting Standards Board, but are those that have been endorsed by the European Commission. EU has now endorsed IFRS, except for IFRS 6 and some of the IFRIC interpretations, and some changes in IAS 39 relating to the fair value of financial instruments (PwC, 2005a). While the EU regulation is only enforceable on listed companies, it also says that a member state has an option to extend the use of IFRS to unlisted companies within their jurisdiction. Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), the government trade body responsible for company regulation in UK, has said that while there is no mandatory move to IFRS for unlisted companies, the unlisted companies would still be allowed to adopt IFRS over UK GAAP from 2005 onwards. The basic aim of new financial reporting standards is same as that of existing standards – to provide information about financial performance and position of a company to different stakeholders. Internal stakeholders – management – normally have a good grip of what’s going in the business. It is external stakeholders like investors, auditors, suppliers and creditors who need to be informed in a succinct and clear manner about financial implications of business decisions. The IFRS would aim to present a more complete picture of a business by making operating income a more encompassing number. As an example, the financial implications of stock options were kept out of income statements. Companies merely mentioned the number of stock options granted. But now onwards, companies will have to incorporate the fair costs of granting stock options in their income statements. This will allow investors to assess the true costs of executive remuneration. Though the overall aim is same, the differences in implementation and financial reporting do occur due to social, economic and political backgrounds of different nations. Will it be a good policy to allow two different accounting standards in UK – one standard for listed companies and another for unlisted companies. UK’s Accounting Standard Board clearly sees there is no merit in having two separate standards. ASB issued a Discussion Paper in March 2004 highlighting its strategy for convergence with IAS and says that convergence of UK accounting standards to IAS is a foregone conclusion. It has already introduced many changes in recent past to bring UK’s GAAP in line with IFRS. Smaller companies, even listed ones, will find it difficult to cope with extra work due to IFRS. Alternative Investment Market (AIM) realises that most of its companies won’t be in a position to meet IFRS requirements soon. So it changed its regulatory status in October 2004 and is now an â€Å"exchange regulated market† and out of purview of European Commission regulation on regulated markets. Now companies listed on AIM have time until January 2007 to implement IFRS. Accounting Standards Board is also sensitive to the needs placed on business in making a transition from UK accounting standards to IFRS. Big businesses probably have sufficient resources to cope with the change in one year. But the smaller businesses will find it difficult to make all required changes in one year. ASB has proposed a series of changes that would be implemented in 2005 and 2006 which will bring UK financial reporting standards more in line with IFRS. Thereafter ASB will carry out a series of step changes by replacing one or more UK standards. So by the end of 2005-2006, UK standards will almost be in line with IFRS and unlisted companies transition to IFRS in 2007 would be smooth. This research analyses the attitude of unlisted companies towards IFRS. Many research and surveys have been carried out on the acceptance and readiness of listed companies for transition to IFRS. But the issue has not been explored in depth with respect to unlisted companies. The research is based on primary and secondary data. Primary data is collected via interviews and questionnaires with companies and their auditors. A total of [34] interviews – [20] with companies and [14] with their auditors – were conducted to obtain primary data. [52] questionnaire responses by postal survey were also analysed. The results show that there is definitely a much scope in improving International Financial Reporting Standards for unlisted companies. Respondents were concerned about the costs associated with transition to IFRS and also the additional burden that will come with regular enhanced reporting. That IFRS will help in globalisation of capital markets and probably cheaper costs of capital is not of much significance for unlisted companies registered in UK. This research would be useful for institutes and associations framing accounting standards for unlisted companies. Mostly accounting standards have been framed with an eye for listed and large companies. But unlisted companies have much lesser resources to spend on large regulatory requirements and hence should have different reporting requirements that match the benefits obtained from such reporting. The time limitation and resource constraint mean that the primary data via interviews and questionnaire surveys could only be collected through a limited number of respondents. It would be useful to cover a larger data base before implementing the changes. Also more users of data in unlisted companies like banks and creditors should be contacted before policy formulation. The remaining paper is divided in the following sections. Section II is a literature review on justification and applicability of IFRS, and state of readiness in companies. Section III discusses the methodology used in this research. Section IV covers analysis of data obtained through the primary data collection and its interpretation. The paper concludes with section V. SECTION II LITERATURE REVIEW In June 2000, the European Commission proposed a new directive requiring that all publicly traded companies in the member states to adopt International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) standards by no later than January 2005. On 19 July 2002, the European Parliament and the Council approved the IAS regulation (EC) 1606/2002 which said ‘For each financial year starting on or after 1 January 2005, companies governed by the law of a Member State shall prepare their consolidated accounts in conformity with the international accounting standards adopted †¦ if, at their balance sheet date, their securities are admitted to trading on a regulated market of any Member State’ (EU, 2002). Rationale for EU’s adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards The main aim of International Financial reporting Standards is to bring convergence among different national financial reporting standards. Over time, the evolution of different national financial reporting standards has been influenced by local social, political and economic environments. Some of the major reasons for differences in accounting standards are: Political – Capitalist or Communist. Capitalist and communist countries have almost contrasting fundamental economic approach and their accounting standards reflect the same. Stage of economic development. Developed countries generally have better accounting standards in terms of transparency and clarity. Corporate finance – debt or equity. Companies in continental Europe are financed more by debt than the companies in UK. Accounting standards have over time evolved to reflect the importance placed by different sources of financing on different aspects of financial statements. Legal and taxation systems. Convergence will help investors and analysts to compare companies across borders in a better way. But it also implies that either member countries will lose their independence to make national accounting standards that reflect local economic conditions or if they start introducing some changes, IFRS may slowly lose its main strength of common standard. Local, political and economical conditions may force national accounting bodies to introduce variations in IFRS. EU has already introduced some changes in the IAS 39 dealing with financial instruments. It is beyond the scope of this research to see which member countries have introduced variations in IFRS. Convergence between UK GAAP and IFRS ASB has declared its intention to converge UK GAAP with IFRS. It has issued a number of new standards in December 2004 to speed up the convergence of UK GAAP with IFRS. So sooner, even unlisted companies would be following a substantial portion of IFRS due to this convergence. Comparison of UK GAAP and IFRS Similarities The ultimate goal of UK GAAP and IFRS is same – to present information about financial performance and position to all concerned stakeholders. If the aim is same, then should be the main approach adopted by both accounting standards. The UK’s Accounting Standard Board’s Statement of Principles for Financial Reporting is a vital contributor at macro level standard setting. It plays almost same role as International Accounting Standards Committee’s ‘Framework for the Preparation and Presentation of Financial Statements’. ‘It is a description of the fundamental approach that the Accounting Standards Board (ASB) believes should, in principle, underpin the financial statements of profit-oriented entities’ (ASB, 1999). The Statement of Principles has true and fair concept at its core, much like the focal point in International Accounting Standards. Also like IAS, Statement of Principles insists on financial information being relevant and comparable. It is beyond the scope of this research to highlight each and every similarity between UK GAAP and IAS. Differences Though the overall aim is same, the differences in implementation and financial reporting do occur due to social, economic and political backgrounds of different nations. Main concepts behind UK GAAP and IFRS are same, but when we look at micro level, we see many differences at the individual standards level. Following are the main differences between UK GAAP and IFRS: The Statement of Principles allows use of both historical cost and current value approaches in measuring balance sheet categories. The dual use of historical and current value methods is known as modified historical cost basis (ASB, 1999). Under historical cost, the carrying values of assets and liabilities are stated at the lower of cost and recoverable amount. This approach is more conservative as compared to IAS approach which uses fair value method. Also the choice of historical or current value method is based on subjective analysis of a company’s management and hence it is open to some manipulation. Fair value. If we look at global level, both UK GAAP and IFRS have adopted fair value method as the foundation of their accounting standards. IFRS takes fair value adoption even higher when it says that income statement will include the changes in the fair value of items that have not been yet traded like derivatives. The emphasis in new accounting standards is on mark-to-market fair value of assets and liabilities rather than on actual market price based fair values. Now both realised and unrealised changes in fair values would be incorporated in income statements. The first year of transition will see high volatility in earnings and balance sheet statements. Though this brings higher volatility, it will also test the management skills in proper presentation and explanation of changes. It may also change the benchmarks of success for managements. Acquisitions. Acquisition accounting will change under new accounting standards. Under UK GAAP, companies can choose between purchase and merger accounting. Under IFRS, companies will have to account under purchase method only. Goodwill. UK GAAP allowed amortisation of goodwill and companies had the option of not segregating intangible assets from goodwill. Under IFRS, intangible assets have to be separated from goodwill. Goodwill can not be amortised now but companies will have to undertake annual impairment tests to justify the value of goodwill on the balance sheets. BAT’s profits for year 2004 increased by  £454m because it no longer had to amortise goodwill of that amount (AccountancyAge, 2005b). Consolidation of accounts. Under new accounting rules, companies may have to consolidate certain additional subsidiaries into group accounts. On the other hand companies will have to exclude certain subsidiaries or special purpose vehicles which were not included till now. Research and development costs. Under IAS 39, research costs can’t be carried on the balance sheet and would have to write them off as incurred. Companies would still be allowed to capitalise development in line with UK GAAP. Stock options. Internet and share market last boom in late 1990s led to rapid increase in share options as a way to reward employees. The new requirements to record an expense on income statement for the value of share options granted to employees could have a significant impact on earnings. AstraZeneca said in its pro forma 2004 IFRS numbers that new accounting rules on stock options has made it re-consider the use of stock options in rewarding its employees (Tricks, 2005). Distributable profits. Organisations ability to pay dividends is dependent on their distributable profits. Following are some of the major impacts of IFRS on distributable profits Inability to discount deferred tax liabilities, higher provisions for deferred tax when companies move from historical costs to fair value and inclusion of pension deficits in income statement. All of the above will reduce distributable profits. Many companies would have to financially restructure themselves in order to have sufficient distributable profits to meet dividends paid in last year. Deferred tax credit. Deferred tax credit is available under UK GAAP but not under IFRS. GlaxoSmithKline’s restated its 2004 earning per share by (1.9p) due to non-availability of deferred tax credit under IFRS (AccountancyAge, 2005a). Inclusion of business disposals gains in profits from operations. BAT’s profits for year 2004 increased by  £1.3bn after it included gains from disposals to operating profits (AccountancyAge, 2005b). Adding disposal gains to operating profits will make it harder for investors and analysts to separate the earnings from continuing businesses. Derivative contracts. Under IFRS, some derivative contracts will not qualify as hedges as they wont meet the criteria. UK GAAP allowed deferment of such contracts until transaction took place. IFRS won’t allow the deferment of such contract and would impact the profit and loss account even before the transaction took place. It is better in a way that investors will know the current value of the firm as on date rather than historical costs of such instruments, especially if the duration of financial instruments was long. At the same time, it would increase the burden on the company to calculate the fair value of all such transactions. Agricultural. UK GAAP allowed companies to use a cost model for biological assets and all agricultural produce. But under IAS companies would have to use mark to market method for valuing such assets. Now companies would have to use market valuation even for assets in far off countries. Advantages of IFRS over UK GAAP Common financial language. Adopting common financial reporting standards will open up a company to more markets and investors. The growth in telecommunications has made it easier for smaller investors to invest across physical boundaries. Such investors are normally not as financially sophisticated as some big financial institutions. They would also not like to understand more than one accounting standards as they don’t have required resources in hand to do so. With one common accounting standard, more investors would like to explore companies across nations. Acquisitions. IFRS 3 is more open and transparent than UK GAAP on acquisitions. It will allow investors and analysts to judge faster the success of an acquisition. Many of the companies that have relied on acquisition as a key cornerstone for growth would now come under intense scrutiny and may have to develop a new strategy for growing business.    Consolidation. In IFRS, all entities will have to provide a cash flow statement. Additionally there would be more transparency within the group companies and this should make the consolidation process more straight-forward. Securitisation by businesses is likely to be impacted by the new ways governing how companies can show assets and liabilities on their financial statements. Companies have used securitisation to cash in assets like trade receivables sitting on their balance sheets. Securitisation helps companies to slim down their balance sheets and hence allows companies to show higher return on assets at same earnings. And it was one of the reasons why companies went for securitisation. But stringent criteria for moving assets and liabilities off balance sheet will threaten securitisation. Sue Harding, chief accountant at Standard Poor’s in Europe said that new international accounting standards were sweeping a lot of securitised assets back on to balance sheets (Jopson, Feb 2005). This will help investors compare like to like and avoid companies that have used securitisation only to make-up their balance sheets. There is no harm in using securitisation if used in a proper way and not to deceive stakeholders. But we have seen how corporations like Enron had used securitisation to disguise their true financial position. Annual impairment review. Annual impairment review will benefit investors because the companies then won’t like to take big goodwill cuts in one year and not do anything for years. Annual reviews would help investors judging whether the amount paid by companies in acquiring other company was justified or not. Access to cheaper capital. Increase in investor profile diversification would most probably lower the cost of capital for most of the companies. This is especially true for smaller companies which don’t have financial muscles and resources to tap international investors. Expensing research costs gives better information to investors and other stakeholders because at research stage the chances of success are quite uncertain. Investors can only be sure of development costs bringing in some returns in future. Also by segregating research and development costs, external stakeholders will now have a better chance to differentiate the suitability of costs incurred in developing new products. Multiple listings. Many companies now have multiple listings across different countries. Companies need to prepare financial statements as per each local accounting standard to meet listing requirements. With one accounting standard only it will save a lot of botheration for companies with multiple listings. Dividends. Under IFRS dividends are not provided for until the dividend recommended by the Board is approved by shareholders. This move will bring more convergence between accounting profits and cash flows. Disadvantages of IFRS Fair value. While fair value in a way conveys more up to date value of a company as compared to historic costs, it also puts a question mark on the methods used and the reliability of fair value. Derivative instruments which are commonly traded on various stock exchanges can be easily assigned value. So while valuing some of the assets or liabilities may not be difficult, the question still remains what impact such valuations will have on companies’ business models. Many companies use hedging instruments as a strategic tool rather than for intentional gains. Any short-term swings in such instruments may have a significant impact on income statement and probably adverse market reactions may deter companies’ from using such instruments. Then comes the more important issue of valuing assets and liabilities that don’t have a proper market. The companies may use some valuation model, which itself may not be the right way, to value an asset or liability. The model will incorporate some subjective assumptions. An example would be brand value. A same brand can have two different values for two different companies because of its strategic importance. So at one hand, investors and other external stakeholders are getting more objective information about a companies’ assets and liabilities, they are also getting valuation based on more subjective assessments. Only time will tell whether some individuals or companies will use it to manipulate results. An interesting thing to observe would be the treatment and importance given by analysts to unrealised fair value of assets and liabilities. Some investors may try to separate unrealised gains and losses from other operational performance. It may also prompt companies to issue adjusted earnings excluding unrealised gains and losses. An important point to note about fair value principle is that the financial statements should not be seen as perfect prediction of things to come. That depends on the strategic and business decisions management will take in future. Just having a fair value of assets and liabilities doesn’t mean that the company will be able to extract those values in future.    Dividend. New accounting standards promote payment of dividend from distributable reserves. With the inclusion of unrealised gains and losses and pension deficits, the first few years of new accounting standards may not leave enough of distributable reserves for dividend payments. Securitisation. Securitising assets into special purpose vehicles and re-financing them through had also helped companies raise funds at lower costs. The new accounting standards by restricting the use of special purpose vehicles, would diminish some sources of cheap financing. It is question yet to be fully tested in the practical world that since the assets are same, change in financing options shouldn’t change the returns on total assets. By refinancing at lower rates through securitisation should result in higher financing cost for remaining assets such that the overall costs remain same. But examination of this hypothesis is beyond the scope of this dissertation. But what is mostly observed in capital markets is that when companies announce refinancing, the share price rises. How much of the rise is from relief that company will survive and how much from the fact that the overall costs have lowered is not known. Annual impairment tests. Annual impairment tests are easier said than done. Companies would not only have to devote substantial resources to do that first would have to train its personnel to do that. Assessing true value of a goodwill is not easy. If there is a comparable market then companies can easily value it. Even then it may differ from case to case as it would be very unusual to see exactly two similar companies. Goodwill is very different from tangible assets or technologies and depends a lot on market perception and strategy. Companies would have to review the whole process of valuing goodwill and would have to review the valuation process at constant intervals. Net pension liability. The inclusion of net pension liability on the balance sheet may have severe impact on the shareholders funds. Companies will be required to have annual actuarial valuation of their pension liabilities and the same would be reflected in financial statements. Most of the pension funds invest in equity markets, which have been quite volatile in the recent years. So though over a longer period, the movements in pension liabilities may even out but in short to medium term, it may have a dramatic effect on balance sheets and earning statements. Segmental information. IAS 14 requires companies to report information on their business segments and on a scale more detail than UK GAAP. As of date, no agreed accounting practices have emerged on how much should be disclosed because companies may end up revealing sensitive information to its competitors. If companies disclose the turnover, earnings and expenditure for each segment, its profitable operations may come under intense competition. Ian Dilks of PwC said that â€Å"some companies have found they’re giving much more information than they’re comfortable with on sales and the profitability of product areas† (Tricks, 2005) Expensing research costs may result in listed companies focusing more on products in development stage than in research stage. This will keep their balance sheets healthy but may harm long term prospects. Complex and long IFRS compliant reports. PricewaterhouseCoopers estimates that an IFRS compliant financial report for insurance companies could be up to twice as long as those prepared under existing UK GAAP (Finn Zoon, 2004). The requirement for other industry sectors though may not be as intensive as for insurance sector, their IFRS compliant financial may also be longer and resource intensive than under UK GAAP. Any company that has makes an acquisition will have to do annual goodwill impairment analysis and most of them would like to explain the results also. Comparable formats. IAS 1 is less prescriptive than the UK GAAP when it comes to the format of the balance sheet and income statement. It just distinguishes current and non-current assets and liabilities. Investors, when faced with different formats, may find it difficult to compare companies. Modify organisation structures. Meall (2003) suggested that the additional burden of more financial reporting along different segments may force companies to modify their existing organisational structures within their financial systems to collect and analyse data. Impact of IFRS on different industries IFRS will have different impact on different industries. For some, most of the applied UK GAAP is almost same as IFRS and won’t feel the difference. But for some industries, the difference in accounting standards may have a substantial impact. Financial services and insurance companies are among them. Financial services companies would be affected by substantial change in recognition and measurement of financial instruments under IAS 39. UK GAAP has no equivalent to IAS 4 which deals with insurance contracts. Insurance companies would now have to account for this in their financial statements. Under IFRS, insurance companies would have to book financial instruments such as derivatives at market value rather than historical value allowed under UK GAAP. Many insurers have said that this will distort their earnings (Reuters, 2005a). IFRS will put more stringent criteria for classification of insurance products and this may lead to reclassification of some insurance products as investment products. Other industries that might face higher impact are the ones that heavily use hedging instruments in their day to day operations. Mostly companies using commodity materials like oil as a significant part of their input costs use hedging to smooth over the volatile changes in commodity markets. New accounting standards will reduce Tesco’s projected annual profit of  £2,000m by  £30m only, a reduction of 1.5%. But for some companies the impact would be much more. Royal Sun Alliance said that new accounting rules would reduce its net assets by  £400m (Reuters, 2005a). This is a big number by any standards and shareholders

Effects of Temperature on Enzyme Amylase

Effects of Temperature on Enzyme Amylase Introduction Enzymatic reactions are very paramount in the body and in nature too as they ensure that any reactions including Biological processes are hastened in order to achieve the results within the shortest time possible. In the body, there are many enzymes and enzyme amylase is one of the most significant as it aids in degradation of complex carbohydrates into glucose molecules which are absorbable. Apart from natural salivary amylase, there are also industrial amylases which catalyze processes at different ecological environment varying from the body environments. However, whether natural or synthetic amylase, their catalysis is affected by temperatures and they only yield maximally at optimal temperature. The following report will discuss effects of different range of temperatures on synthetic reactions. Aims The aims of this practical were to investigate the effects of temperature on reaction of enzyme amylase. In addition, the practical investigated the possibility of industrial enzyme amylase to function at higher temperatures. Materials The materials and apparatus used included Spotting tile, water bath, test tube, starch solution amylase, iodine, and test tube rack. Procedure Two drops of iodine into each well put test tube.   2ml starch placed over water bath that was set at three different temperatures 40, 60, 80 degrees was allowed to remain there for 5 minutes. First tube contained 2ml of starch, second tube 4ml of amylase, and then they were mixed together. Finally, was introduced into few drops of the mixture into the well already containing iodine Results The results obtained indicated that industrial amylase functioned well at 40 degree Celsius. Starch was degraded into glucose hence the color of Iodine changed to blue-black when the test tube containing amylase at 40 degree Celsius. However, the color of iodine remained brown after introduction of amylase enzymes heated at 60 and 80 degree respectively. Discussion Amylase whether natural or industrial is proteins in nature. They are responsible for the breakdown of carbohydrates into its smallest units called glucose. However, temperature has a very significant role in the reactions involving these enzymes . Lower temperatures deactivate the reaction of enzymes while higher temperatures above optimal temperatures destroy the enzymes by denaturing them hence reducing their reactions and eventually bring it into a halt . In this practical, the industrial amylase was found to function better at 40 degree which is optimal. This therefore did not denature the enzymes nor did this temperature deactivate them. The reactions here were constant and rapid. The enzyme amylase was able to work on starch solution in the well whereby it reduced the starch into glucose. Eventually, the color of resulting iodine remained brown. This indicated that there was no starch present in the solution. Iodine is the reagent that is commonly used to test the presence of starch in a food sample. Presence of starch is portrayed by the change of Iodine color from brown to blue-black Consequently, the amylase heated at 60 and introduced in other wells containing starch did not catalyze any reaction. This is because the high temperatures had already denatured the enzymes and completely destroying them. This led to changes in the color of iodine from brown to blue-black since the solutions contained starch. On the other hand, the reaction at 80 degree too did not show signify degradation of starch by enzyme amylase. Therefore, the color of iodine changed to blue-black from brown as it was evident in previous reaction at 60 degree. This therefore confirmed the denaturation of enzymes by high temperatures hence acted as a confirmatory test. Industrial amylase can withstand higher temperature hence optimal temperature was beyond the 37 degree which is the maximum optimal temperature in the human body where natural amylase if found . Conclusion In conclusion, the practical found that enzyme amylase is capable of degrading starch at optimal temperature. Enzymes are very important in many Biological reactions which are important in the production of important and helpful products. Knowledge about the optimal requirements is paramount in enzymatic reactions since its only at necessary environment that an enzyme is able to catalyze a reaction.

The British Colonies in the New World Essays -- United States History

The British Colonies in the New World Several historians often examine significant points in history in attempt to discover the reasons the events occurred. The aforementioned statement applies to the American Revolution as countless number of books has been written concerning the American colonies decision to declare independence from England. Woody Holton and Bernard Bailyn are two historians who have probed the subject and reached two separate decisions about the revolution. Focusing on the fears and threats the colonists felt, Bailyn identifies England as the threatening force against the colonists, while Holton gears towards those within the colonies. Before examining the two authors’ views, exploring the terms liberty and power are essential in comprehending the colonists’ fe...

Who Are the Women in Shakespeares Macbeth? Essay -- Macbeth essays

Who Are the Women in Macbeth? Â   Shakespeare in his tragedy Macbeth has a very limited assortment of women characters. In fact, there is only one who has a sizeable role - Lady Macbeth; the other, Lady Macduff, makes only a brief appearance, and the witchesare questionable as females. In his book, On the Design of Shakespearean Tragedy, H. S. Wilson mentions the very wife-like manner in which the queen fulfilled her essential role in the tragedy: It requires an extraordinary exertion of will and persuasion from Lady Macbeth to strengthen his wavering purpose. Professor Kittredge used to point out to his classes that Lady Macbeth, in urging Macbeth to act, uses the three arguments that every wife, some time or other, uses to every husband: "You promised me you'd do it!" "You'd do it if you loved me!" "If I were a man, I'd do it myself!" But Macbeth's mind is made up by her assurance that they may do it safely by fixing the guilt upon Duncan's chamberlains. (72) Blanche Coles states in Shakespeare's Four Giants that Macbeth's wife had considerable leverage over her husband's mind: This was her opportunity to do as she had promised herself she would do after she had read the letter - to pour her spirits into his ear, to chasten with the valor of her tongue all that might impede him from the golden crown. We may be sure she took this opportunity to use all her monstrous powers of persuasion. Thus he goaded himself, or was goaded by his wife, into searing the terrible oath, whether he had any clear purpose of keeping it or not. (48-49) In Fools of Time: Studies in Shakespearean Tragedy, Northrop Frye shows that a lady is the actual driving force in the play: That Macbeth is being hurried into a premature ac... ...900. Ann Thompson and Sasha Roberts, eds. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, 1997. Kermode, Frank. "Macbeth." The Riverside Shakespeare. Ed. G. Blakemore Evans. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1972. Knights, L.C. "Macbeth." Shakespeare: The Tragedies. A Collectiion of Critical Essays. Alfred Harbage, ed. Englewwod Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1964. Shakespeare, William. The Tragedy of Macbeth. http://chemicool.com/Shakespeare/macbeth/full.html, no lin. Siddons, Sarah. "Memoranda: Remarks on the Character of Lady Macbeth." The Life of Mrs. Siddons. Thomas Campbell. London: Effingham Wilson, 1834. Rpt. in Women Reading Shakespeare 1660-1900. Ann Thompson and Sasha Roberts, eds. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, 1997. Wilson, H. S. On the Design of Shakespearean Tragedy. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press, 1957.

Marilyn Monroe Speech

My name is Amor Serrano and today I will speak to you about the life of Marilyn Monroe. She was one of America’s most famous idols. Mrs. Monroe was a huge Civil Rights Movement// Ella Fitzgerald was one of Marilyn’s idols and inspiration. The Mocambo nightclub in West Hollywood (famous at the time) would refuse to allow Ella to perform there because she was black. ////// Marilyn, extremely upset, told the owners that if they allowed Ella to perform, she would be front tow every time Ella was onstage. When she did this the two women became good friends.Ella said, â€Å"I owe Marilyn Monroe a real debt†¦it was because of her that I played the Mocambo, a very popular nightclub in the ’50s. She personally called the owner of the Mocambo, and told him she wanted me booked immediately, and if he would do it, she would take a front table every night. She told him – and it was true, due to Marilyn’s superstar status – that the press would go wi ld. The owner said yes, and Marilyn was there, front table, every night. The press went overboard. After that, I never had to play a small jazz club again. She was an unusual woman – a little ahead of her times.And she didn’t know it. † American model turned actress, she was famous for her seductive blonde persona on and off camera from the late 1940s to the early 1960s. Monroe appeared in a few popular movies, but remembered as an international sex symbol that died at age 36. Today// I will inform you of her childhood, her pathway to fame, and ultimately her death. Marilyn was an important idol. She is extremely inspiring and I find that women coming of age should look at her with aesthetics. First, I will discuss her childhood, then her pathway to fame Then ultimately her deathHer birth-name is Norma Jeane Mortenson. She was considered an illegitimate child because she did not know her father. Monroe spent two years at the orphanage and in and out of a successi on of foster homes. It is believed that during this time, Monroe was molested. Monroe and Dougherty were married on June 19, 1942. At age 16, the arrangement was made. I’ve now discussed Marilyn’s childhood, I will now discuss her road of fame. Marilyn started off as a model/// World War II was when her husband Dougherty joined the Merchant Marine in 1943 and was shipped out to Shanghai.Monroe had found a job at Radio Plane Munitions Factory. She was discovered by a photographer named David Conover. Her first appearance was on Yank magazine in 1945 The photos were sent to Potter Hueth, a commercial photographer. Hueth and Monroe soon struck a deal: Hueth would take pictures of Monroe but she would only be paid if magazines bought her photos. Monroe caught the attention of Miss Emmeline Snively she who ran the Blue Book Model Agency, the largest model agency in Los Angeles. Dougherty, still overseas, was not happy about his wife modeling. Marilyn Monroe Signs With a Mov ie StudioIn August of 1946///20th Century Fox offered Monroe a six-month contract with the studio having the option of renewing it every six months. When Dougherty returned, he was even less happy about his wife becoming a starlet. The couple divorced in 1946. Transforming From Norma Jeane to Marilyn Monroe 20th Century Fox helped her create a screen name. //First called, Marilyn Miller, a popular 1920s stage performer. Monroe chose her mother’s maiden name for her last name. †¢Scudda Hoo! Scudda Hay! (1948) †¢Ladies of the Chorus (1948) †¢Marilyn Monroe Poses Nude- Tom Kelly 6. Marilyn Monroe’s Big Break Love Happy (1949) – Asphalt Jungle (1950) – All About Eve (1950) – Don't Bother to Knock (1952) The Public Finds Out About Marilyn Monroe's Nude Pictures. Fans only found to love her more. – Niagara (1953), Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (1953), How to Marry a Millionaire (1953), River of No Return (1954), and There’s No Bus iness Like Show Business (1954 Marries multiple men James Dougherty (m. 1942–1946) Joe DiMaggio (m. 1954–1954) Arthur Miller (m. 1956–1961) Rumors of Affairs Marilyn Monroe Dies of Overdose Monroe was depressed and continued to rely on sleeping pills and alcohol.Yet it was still a shock when 36-year-old Monroe was found dead in her Brentwood, California, home on August 5, 1962. Monroe’s death was marked â€Å"probable suicide† and the case closed. DiMaggio claimed her body and held a private funeral. Many people have questioned the exact cause of her death. Some speculate it was an accidental overdose of sleeping pills, others think it may have been purposeful suicide, and some wonder if it was murder. For many, her death remains a mystery. In conclusion, we should remember the remarkable woman Marilyn Monroe had been, and how inspiring she is to others. She is a figure of beauty.

Enlightment Age

Enlightenment Age The Puritans believed that the sole purpose of writing was to bring the writer to debase themselves before God. And teach them the true importance of humility. Puritans wrote mainly memoirs and sermons. Puritans thought the church did have errors, but could be reformed. Growing up in the Colonial days meant strict, and God fearing obedience; education and religion were very important to them. In Mary Rowlandson writing, she was able to write about her Indian captures as somewhat kind and friendly.This is far from what we have perceived of them. Mary Rowlandson believed what most Puritans did, that God was testing her faith and humbleness. Mary believed that her final escape was a lesson to â€Å"make us the more knowledge his hand and to see that our help is always in him† (American Literature). Puritans saw God in everything; God gave them trials and tribulations so they could learn to be humble and meek. From the capture of Mary Rowlandson, to Anne Bradstre et’s personal poems, we can see how much God had influence on their every thought, and every action.The Fundamentalist thinkers of the Enlightenment saw things quite differently. They believed that writing was a method for recording logical reasoning, and often provoked rational thought. The Enlightenment era was a new intellectual movement that stressed reason and thought and the power of individuals to solve problems. Even though different philosophers approached their goals differently, they achieved it none the less. They all approached their goal differently due to their different upbringings, their different backgrounds, and most importantly their different environments.The Enlightenment period was known as the Age of Reason. Deism was a belief that God was impartial and there was no revealed religion to select body of people. Many believed that the rights belonged to the people. For example, John Locke believed that citizens were entitled to set of natural rights. John Locke’s philosophies and the ideas of the Enlightenment influenced Thomas Jefferson to write the Declaration of Independence. The document uses the idea of the Natural Law and justifies the reasons for escaping Great Britain’s rule.Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Paine wrote volumes on topics that questioned life, and the means by which one should live. Though there are a few small similarities between the writings of the two periods, there are considerably greater numbers of differences. Though the views of Puritans and Fundamentalists were dramatically different, they both believed in a certain code of morals and ethics. In both the Common Sense and The Crisis, No. 1. Thomas Paine uses metaphors to persuade the American Public to continue supporting the Revolutionary war in The Crisis.Thomas Paine implements powerful metaphors to achieve the effect. In the Common Sense used literary style intended to appeal to the broad masses of people rather than the elect few. Throu ghout his writing there is an emphasis upon the independence of the individual. In the beginning of the Crisis #1 the document begins with the telescopic sentence: â€Å" THESE are the times that try men’s souls,† which is contrary to the rest of the sentence lengths he uses.This makes the beginning omnipoint and interest the reader right off the get go. He uses capital letters to emphasize words such as freedom, tax, and bind when first presenting his argument. He also introduces strong negative diction, such as celestial and impious, that will continue throughout his writing. Paine’s writing was simple and direct, and his arguments turned on one or two accessible principles and pursued persuasion through clarity and repetition. j