Les Miserables :: essays papers

Les Miserables "Les Miserables" is about a man, Jean Valjean, who has just been released from the galleys after 19 years of imprisonment. He is in search of food and shelter, but all the taverns and inns in D----- have rejected him, because he is a former convict. He then meets a woman in front of the church who tells him to go to the house where the bishop lives. Although the bishop knows Valjean is a convict, he takes him in, and gives him food and shelter. However, Valjean is still tempted to steal from the bishop. He takes his silverware, and flees. Valjean is caught by the police, and forced to return to the bishop's house. The bishop gives Valjean a second chance, by telling the police that the silverware was a gift, and giving him the silver candlesticks in addition. Valjean is instructed to start a new life as an honest man. In M---- sur M----, Valjean invents a new manufacturing process, and earns a great fortune. He has his own factory, and has been elected Mayor Madeline, a new name, to begin a new life. In his factory, works a woman, Fantine, who has given up her child so that she could work to begin a new life, as well. Her daughter, Cosette, was left with the Thenardiers. She was treated terribly, and was forced to eat under the table, with the dog. Meanwhile, Javert, an officer in the galleys where Valjean served, denounces Valjean, because he claims he recognizes him as a former convict. However, he later changes his point of view, claiming that he has found the real Valjean, who is being charged with stealing a branch off an apple tree. Valjean could not live knowing that someone else may be charged more harshly because of the crimes he had committed in the past. Valjean announced his true identity to save the man. He returned to his factory to collect all his money, and then to escape from the police. Javert eventually caught Valjean. At this time, Fantine, who was deathly sick, thought that Valjean had brought Cosette to her. When Javert arrested Valjean, Fantine died. Valjean was sent to the galleys again, but escaped, by faking his death.

Accountability in the Us Army

In the US Army, accountability is a key factor that everyone should be aware of. To be accountable means to be dependable. In order to be accountable, you must arrive on time to PT, formation, work, appointments, etc. It is mainly concentrated on three things: custody, care, and safekeeping. If you make it a point to be accountable 100 percent of the time, then there should be no worries of where you are, if you are in trouble, or if anything is wrong. Accountability is something that the Army does not take lightly. It should never be taken lightly due to the fact that it is a possibility your life could be at stake.What is accountability? â€Å"Accountability is the obligation of an individual or organization to account for its activities, accept responsibility for them, and to disclose the results in a transparent manner. † The DOD definition states that accountability is the obligation imposed by law or lawful order or regulation on an officer or other person for keeping ac curate record of property, documents or funds. This may include the responsibility of money, property, documents, NVG's, clothes, a vehicle, TA-50, a field manual, medication, etc.Not only is it considered that, it is also knowing that a soldiers physical and mental needs are taken into consideration so they are able to be more functional as a unit. It is taking responsibility for your actions. Meaning what you say and doing what you say. Why is accountability important to the Army? It is important to the Army because it allow people to know where you are. When you have accountability for everyone, it is easier to track down people when they are needed to do a certain task. Not only is accountability important for people, but it is also important for the safekeeping of documents, gear, weapons, etc.If someone or something is not accounted for, then there is a possibility that something serious could be wrong or something could have happened. This is the reason why the Army has accou ntability formations; so that everyone and everything is safe and accounted for. The Army wants to make sure their soldiers are safe at all times whether it be in the states or over seas which is why they do not take accountability lightly. As an enlisted soldier, it is my responsibility to keep track of all items that are issued to me.An NCO on the other hand is responsible for making sure that soldiers and equipment. A lot of money is spent on military equipment, so the Army expects to know where it is at all times. Without accountability, things could turn into complete and utter chaos. There are many ways to establish accountability. Having everyone’s phone number is the main one. When you have everyone’s phone number, then you have a way of getting in contact with someone. Therefore, it makes accountability a lot easier than it would be if you did not have a way of keeping in contact.Another way to establish accountability is the buddy system. When someone is assi gned a buddy, then they are in charge of that certain person to make sure everything is going as planned and to keep track and make sure everything is ok. Accountability does not stop with the Army. It is essential in the civilian life also. When you have a job as a civilian, you are still expected to be on time for work whether it be when you first get there or after you take a lunch break, etc. In order to be successful in the civilian world, you have to be depended on to be accountable at work.

The Correlations Between Alumni Giving Rates And Graduations Finance Essay - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 4 Words: 1134 Downloads: 8 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Education Essay Type Analytical essay Did you like this example? The data suggests that the distribution of percentage Alumni donation rate is normally distributed with estimated mean of 29 and standard deviation of 13.44. Scatter plot of Alumni giving rate and Graduation rate. The plot suggests a statistically significant [F(1,46) = 61.3, P lt; .001) positive correlation of .756 between graduation rate and alumni donation rate. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "The Correlations Between Alumni Giving Rates And Graduations Finance Essay" essay for you Create order The higher the graduation rate, the higher the alumni donation rate. The alumni donation rate ranged from 7% (University of California Davis of CA) to 67% (Princeton University of NJ) with a mean of 29.3% (SD 13.4) whereas graduation rate ranged from 66% (University of Texas Austin of TX) to 97% (Harvard University of MA) with a mean of 83% (SD 8.6). The regression equations giving the average relationship between the variables are: Alumni donation rate: -68.8 + 1.2 times graduation rate. I.e. Donation rate increases 1.2% on an average for every 1% increase in graduation rate. Variation in graduation rate could explain 57% variation in Alumni giving rate. Scatter plot of Alumni giving rate and percentage of classes under 20 The percentage of classes under 20 ranged from 29 (U. of Illinois-Urbana Champaign of IL) to 77 (Yale University of CT) with a mean of 55.7 (SD13.2). There is positive correlation (r = .646, F(1,46) = 32.9, P lt; .001) between the variables and the average relationship is expressed as: Alumni giving rate (%) = -7.4 + 0.66 times percentage of classes under 20. i.e. every 1% increase in percentage of classes under 20 increase the Alumni donation rate by 0.66%, on an average. Variation in percentages of classes under 20 explains 41.7% variation in Alumni donation rate. Relationship between Alumni donation rate and student/faculty ratio The Student/Faculty ratio ranged from 3 (California Institute of Technology of CA) to 23 (University of Florida of FL) with an average of 11.5 (SD 4.9). The observed correlation coefficient of -.742 does suggests a negative association between the variables at the population level [F(1,46) = 56.5, P lt; .001). Mathematical expression modeling the average relationship between the variables is: Alumni donation rate = 53 2.1 times Student/faculty ratio. Every unit increase in the student/faculty ratio brings down the alumni donation by 2.1%, on an average. Variation in st udent/faculty ratio could explain 55.1% variation is Alumni donation rate. Distribution of Alumni giving rate (%) in colleges from the East and the West The difference in the mean of percentage of Alumni donation rate in colleges from the East (n= 25, Mean = 35.0, SD = 11.7) and the West (n = 23, Mean = 23, SD = 12.5) is statistically significant (t(46) = 3.44; P = .001). Thus, the alumni from colleges in the East donate more often than their counterparts from colleges in the West. Question 2 The correlation between student/faculty ratio and Alumni giving rate (%) is strongly correlated (r = -.742). The estimated regression equation is: Alumni giving rate = 53.014 2.057  ´ student/faculty ratio. Regression equation gives the mean of alumni giving rate for a given value of student /faculty ratio. Therefore, at a student/faculty ratio of 15, the average alumni giving rate = 53.014 2.057  ´15 = 22.159. Standard error of this estimate is given by and has 46 (48 2) d.f. Here, sy.x = = 9.1 and x = 15. Hence SE = = 9.1  ´ 0.178 = 1.62. [Since variance = 23.53, = 47 ´23.53)}. The question whether by keeping student/faculty ratio at 15, we could make the alumni giving rate at 50% is equivalent to testing whether the estimated mean alumni rate at student faculty ratio of 15 = 50 (H0:  Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ­ =  Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ­0) against H1:  Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ­Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¹50. Therefore the test statistic t = (22.159 50)/9.1 = -3.06 follows t distribution with 46 d.f. The two tailed probability (P-value) for |t| = 3.06 is .0037. Since the P-value is less than the conventional level of 5%, we reject the null hypothesis. i.e., by keeping student/faculty ratio at 15, we cannot make the alumni giving rate at 50%. Alternatively, the inference can be made from the scatter plot of alumni giving rate with student / faculty ratio with fitted regression line (average alumni rate for the student / faculty rate) and the 9 5% CI for the estimate. The value 50 for alumni giving rate is way outside the confidence interval at student/faculty ratio of 15. hence Prof Jimmys claim that alumni giving rte of 50% could be achieved by keeping student/faculty ratio at 15 could easily be rejected. In fact, even for the lowest student/faculty ratio reported in the study of 3, the estimated alumni giving rate is only 46.8%. The estimated alumni giving rates for student/faculty ratio of 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 are 42.7, 32.4, 22.2, 11.9 and 1.6, respectively. Question 3 The location was coded as East = 1 and West = 0 for doing regression. The regression coefficient of location is the average difference in the alumni giving rate of East compared to West. The estimated regression equation is: Alumni giving rate = -16.47 + 0.689  ´ graduation rate + 0.018  ´ % of classes under 20 1.192  ´ student/faculty ratio + 2.526  ´ location. The contribution of graduation rate (+) and student /faculty ratio (-) towards alumni giving rate is statistically significant and all the variables together explains 70.7% variation in alumni giving rate.. Question 4 Executive summary Alumni donations are an important source of revenue for privately funded Universities. It is important to study factors that could enhance the percentage of alumni who make a contribution and implement policies accordingly. Previous studies indicated that students with good contact with teachers have better chances of graduation. Prof Jimmy Michael, President of the University, collected data from 48 top Universities in US to study relationship between alumni giving rate (AGR) and factors like student/faculty ratio (SFR), % of classes under 20 (PC20), graduation rate (GR) and location of the University. The Universities in the East and West was almost equally represented in the sample (25 from East and 23 from West). The AGR ranged from 7% (University of California Davis) to 67% (Princeton University) with a mean of 29.3% (SD 13.4). GR ranged from 66% (University of Texas Austin) to 97% (Harvard University) with a mean of 83% (SD 8.6) and was positively correlated (r = .756) w ith AGR. Simple regression analysis suggested that AGR increases by 1.2% on an average for every 1% increase in GR and the contribution was statistically significant. PC20 ranged from 29% (U. of Illinois-Urbana Champaign) to 77% (Yale University) with a mean of 55.7 (SD13.2). The data showed a positive and statistically significant correlation (r = .646) with AGR. The contribution of PC20 to the AGR estimated from simple linear regression was 0.66% for every 1% increase in the PC20. SFR ranged from 3 (California Institute of Technology) to 23 (University of Florida) with an average of 11.5 (SD 4.9). The observed correlation coefficient of -.742 with AGR was statistically significant and simple regression analysis suggested every unit increase in the SFR brought down AGR by 2.1%, on an average. The data suggested that alumni from colleges in the East (mean AGR 35%, SD 11.7) donated more often than their counterparts from colleges in the West (mean AGR 23%, SD 12.5) and the d ifference was not a chance finding. The individual contribution of the four factors was assessed by multiple regressions. Statistically significant contributions came from GR and SFR. Higher GR and lower SFR increased AGR with similar relative importance. The estimated AGR (%) with SFR of 10 and GR (%) of 70, 75, 80, 85, 90 and 95 was 21.3, 25.1, 28.9, 32.7, 36.5 and 40.2, respectively. With an SFR of 15, the figures were 15.1, 18.9, 22.7, 26.4, 30.2 and 34.0, respectively. It may not be economically feasible to bring down the SFR beyond say, 10 and it is more important to increase the GR.