PENGARUH STRATEGI SCAFFOLDING KONSEPTUAL BERBASIS GROUP INVESTIGATION DALAM PEMBELAJARAN FISIKA TERHADAP KREATIVITAS DITINJAU DARI PENGETAHUAN AWAL SISWA

Student’s creativity has important effect in physics learning. During this time, school undeveloped creativity so it needs a theoretical study on the effect of scaffolding-conceptual strategy based on creativity GI terms of prior knowledge. The method used was a study that resulted in the theoretical literature. The results of the literature study found that: (1) Strategy conceptual scaffolding-based GI is able to develop student’s creativity; (2) The quantity and quality of initial knowledge positively affect students' creativity in providing answers was varied; (3) Creativity students with high prior knowledge will grow exponentially, whereas the creativity of students with low prior knowledge will grow slowly. This theoretical study needs to be followed up by empirical research to obtain compliance with the study of theory.

Aging Prisoners: A Brief Report of Key Legal and Policy Dilemmas

Background: The social phenomenon of the aging of the prison population has raised various legal and policy challenges. Objective: The goal of this brief report is to describe the current key legal-policy dilemmas in this field. Methods: A computerized search for legal documents, articles and studies using relevant key words was conducted in computerized databases. Results: Five key dilemmas were found: (1) Early and compassionate release of older prisoners; (2) Segregation or integration of older prisoners; (3) Heaven or hell? The meaning of imprisonment in old age; (4) Fixed v. tailored sentences to older offenders; and (5) Is prison the right place to send older offenders? Conclusion: Evidence regarding the unique socio-medical needs of older prisoners does not provide easy or simple answers to the legal-policy dilemmas in this field. Hence, as of today, the scholarly discussions in this field seem to be more normative (what "should" be the solution) rather than empirical (what "is" the evidence-based solution). Therefore, more empirical evidence is needed in order to design old-age based legal-policies towards older prisoners

Thinking Locally: Law, Aging and Municipal Government: Findings from a National Survey

Municipal law, which has been largely ignored in the body of elder-rights scholarship, often plays a far more important role in the everyday lives of older persons than the principally aspirational concepts of international law. Accordingly, this article examines how well modern cities have fulfilled their potential role in assuring the civil and human rights of older persons. The author concludes, based on the results of a national study, that local law is not currently fulfilling its potential as a means to expand the rights of older citizens. Few cities across the country appear to have taken more than minor steps in the direction of developing clear, ordinance-based policies that will truly foster age-friendly cities. Finally, the article makes three recommendations: First, that elder-rights advocates should participate in the legislative process at the municipal level; second, that attorneys who represent older clients should better utilize local legislation that exists, and should assist in the proposing, drafting, and implementing of local ordinances pertaining to older persons; and third, that municipal leaders and administrators should be educated on the potential economic benefits of using local law as a vehicle for social change in this field, especially in light of the growing political power of older residents

Actual Versus Perceived Performance of Judges

Perceptions of judges ought to be based on their performance. Yet, few studies of the relation between perceived and actual judicial performance exist. Those claiming judicial bias should be especially sensitive to the relation between perception and performance. Judges perceived by the public or by the legal community as disfavoring a group may be regarded as biased, but that perception is unfair if the judges’ votes in cases do not disfavor the group. For example, it may be unfair to accuse an appellate judge of pro-state bias in criminal cases if the judge votes for defendants at a higher rate than several other judges on the same court. This article addresses whether perception matches reality. Several studies have examined perceptions of judges and courts by surveying the public about its confidence in a particular court.1 Our study differs because it compares perceptions of individual justices with their actual voting patterns. Incomplete samples are one source of distorted claims about judicial behavior. Excluding a particular group of outcomes, such as unanimous decisions, can lead to questionable results.2 Studies regularly report that a judge’s political affiliation, race, or sex is associated with case outcomes—results that sometimes raise inferences of bias.3 At the trial-court level, most studies are limited to available opinions, a known source of possible distortion.4 These studies also tend to exclude cases that end via settlement, which is the modal outcome in civil litigation.5 Several trial-court-level studies that use complete case samples and find no political or other effects suggest the importance of complete case samples.

Actual Versus Perceived Performance of Judges

Perceptions of judges ought to be based on their performance. Yet, few studies of the relation between perceived and actual judicial performance exist. Those claiming judicial bias should be especially sensitive to the relation between perception and performance. Judges perceived by the public or by the legal community as disfavoring a group may be regarded as biased, but that perception is unfair if the judges’ votes in cases do not disfavor the group. For example, it may be unfair to accuse an appellate judge of pro-state bias in criminal cases if the judge votes for defendants at a higher rate than several other judges on the same court. This Article addresses whether perception matches reality.Part II of this Article provides background information about the Israeli judiciary. Part III presents survey results regarding the Israeli legal community’s perceptions of sixteen ISC justices’ tendencies in criminal cases. The survey asked respondents the degree to which they believe individual justices are favorable to the state or to defendants. Part IV compares the survey results with justices’ actual voting patterns in criminal cases. Part V explores the differences between perceptions reported in Part III and the reality reported in Part IV. Part VI concludes

Israel\u27s Supreme Court Appellate Jurisdiction: An Empirical Study

This Essay reports the results of an empirical study of the Israel Supreme Court (ISC). It covers the outcomes of 3,562 cases (as of this writing), all decided in 2006 and 2007, and describes the cases by subject area, litigant-pair characteristics, and source of jurisdiction - mandatory or discretionary. In mandatory-jurisdiction cases ending with clear affirmances or reversals, the ISC affirmed lower court rulings in about 75% of district court criminal case appeals and about 67% of district court civil case appeals. In discretionary- jurisdiction cases, the ISC rarely granted review. It agreed to review about 6 % of petitions in criminal cases and about 15 % of petitions in civil cases. In discretionary cases in which the ISC did grant review, it tended to reverse at a much higher rate than in mandatory-jurisdiction cases, with an affirmance rate of 55 % in criminal cases and 31 % in civil cases. Combining denials of review with affirmances resulted in criminal case litigants obtaining relief from the ISC in 2.3 % of appellate filings, and civil case litigants obtaining relief in 11.0% of appellate filings. The government fared far better than other litigants in obtaining reversals of lower court rulings and in securing review of those rulings. Sentencing issues dominated the criminal docket, and criminal cases predominated over civil cases. Reversal rates were not substantially different from those in cases with analogous jurisdiction in U.S. state courts of last resort except in discretionary-jurisdiction civil cases. The ISC tended to reverse such cases at a higher rate than U.S. courts

Does the Judge Matter? Exploiting Random Assignment on a Court of Last Resort to Assess Judge and Case Selection Effects

We study 1,410 mandatory jurisdiction and 48 discretionary jurisdiction criminal law case outcomes in cases appealed to the Israel Supreme Court in 2006 and 2007 to assess influences on case outcomes. A methodological innovation is accounting for factors - case specialization, seniority, and workload - that modify random case assignment. To the extent one accounts for nonrandom assignment, one can infer that case outcome differences are judge effects. In mandatory jurisdiction cases, individual justices cast 3,986 votes and differed by as much as 15 percent in the probability of casting a vote favoring defendants. Female justices were about 2 to 3 percent more likely than male justices to vote for defendants but this effect is sensitive to including one justice. Defendant gender was associated with outcome, with female defendants about 17 percent more likely than male defendants to receive a favorable vote on appeal. Our data\u27s samples of mandatory and discretionary jurisdiction cases allow us to show that studies limited to discretionary jurisdiction case outcomes can distort perceptions of judges\u27 preferences. Justices\u27 ordinal rank in rate of voting for defendants or the state was uncorrelated across mandatory and discretionary jurisdiction cases. For example, the justice who sat on the most criminal cases was the fourth (of 16 justices) most favorable to the state in mandatory jurisdiction cases but the 12th most favorable in discretionary jurisdiction cases. This result casts doubt on some inferences based on studies of judges on discretionary jurisdiction courts, such as the U.S. Supreme Court, in which only discretionary case outcomes are observed