Creating Curriculum Cartographers to Instruct English Language Learners and Support Heritage Languages

Students learning English as a second language are using the ESL teacher’s curriculum and instruction as their primary means for becoming privileged bilinguals. However, teachers are being provided textbooks with little direction as to how to build an inclusive curriculum plan that supports their English language learners in meeting their goals. As ELLs, students’ goals include reaching a certain level of proficiency in English, but more importantly, they also aim to maintain an equivalent proficiency in their primary languages as they strive for bilingualism. Teachers are often unwilling or unable to incorporate ELLs into their class curriculum, and therefore do not honor students’ heritage languages. This leads to first language loss and ultimately limited English proficiency and bilingualism. The purpose of this project is to support teachers in meeting the many needs of their classroom through effective curriculum planning. A more comprehensive ESL curriculum includes students as resources and honors their L1 because it supports English language development. Effective instruction addresses the many varied needs ELLs have for success, which are far more diverse than a textbook can predict. This project is significant because it utilizes the ESL teacher’s textbook to create a curriculum and instruction plan that will challenge and develop students’ English skills but also honor their L1 skills and abilities in order to maintain both languages. Ideas behind bilingual education, communicative language teaching, and participatory approaches manifest in a contextual approach to planning and instruction in this project

Patent Drafter Estoppel: Why Didn\u27t Sage Products Create a New Foreseeability Limitation on the Application of the Doctrine of Equivalents?

This article reviews the 1997 Federal Circuit Case of Sage Products v. Devon and the case law that has followed it. There is some belief among patent practitioners that Sage Products created a new legal doctrine limiting the application of the doctrine of equivalents in patent infringement cases. The new doctrine, sometimes referred to as “patent drafter estoppel,” would bar the application of the doctrine of equivalents any time an accused equivalent structure should have been foreseen by a reasonable patentee. Federal Circuit case law since Sage Products has diverged into two lines of thought: one that supports the thinking that Sage Products did create a new limitation on the doctrine of equivalents, and one supporting the belief that Sage Products was an unremarkable decision merely applying existing limiting doctrines to the doctrine of equivalents. The distinction is not unimportant, since the doctrine of equivalents is used very frequently—in fact, almost universally—in patent infringement litigation. Thus, the existence of a new and poorly understood legal doctrine barring the application of the doctrine of equivalents in many cases would have an extraordinary impact on the practice of patent law. This article reviews the cases decided since Sage Products and determines that the Federal Circuit has not actually created any new foreseeability limitation on the doctrine of equivalents. Further, the article analyzes the purported new doctrine in light of United States patent law policy and determines that the patent system is better off without such a doctrine

Medical issue or policy? a framing analysis of the medical marijuana issue in U.S. newspapers

This study conducted a framing analysis of the medical marijuana issue in United States print media. In addition, this analysis investigated whether the medical marijuana issue was portrayed as a policy issue or a medical issue, and based the inquiry in public opinion and health communication literature. This analysis extracted a sample (N=240) from newspaper stories that reported the issue within the past five years in states that have enacted medical marijuana legislation. The framing analysis measured the occurrence of frames in three different categories: gain vs. loss, types of frames, and policy vs. medical. Furthermore, this analysis determined if a relationship occurred between the use of a policy context and the conflict frame, and the medical context and the human interest frame. Findings indicate that a majority of the medical marijuana conversation is framed as policy related, as a loss, and as a conflict. This study also uncovered that print media pair the use of conflict and policy frames together, and likewise for human interest and medical frames

Do rBST-Free and Organic Milk Stigmatize Conventionally Produced Milk?

Producers are continually seeking to differentiate their products in the marketplace. A common approach is via labeling where differences in production methods are marketed. Yet, positive labeling for the new product has the potential to stigmatize the conventionally produced product by highlighting perceived problems with the product. The net economic result can be negative to producers as the conventional product that dominates the market is stigmatized by the new product that has little market share, and this leads to consumers decreasing their willingness to pay for the conventional product. This experimental research identifies this stigma effect in the case of milk, where the presentation of rBST-Free milk reduces consumers' willingness to purchase conventional milk.Demand and Price Analysis,

Logic of complementarity in science and theology

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre- DSC:D92427 / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo

Take It or Leave It: \u3cem\u3eMonsanto v. McFarling\u3c/em\u3e, \u3cem\u3eBowers v. Baystate Technologies\u3c/em\u3e, and the Federal Circuit\u27s Formalistic Approach to Contracts of Adhesion

The Federal Circuit has been widely criticized for unrelenting formalism. Perhaps because Congress charged the court with establishing national uniformity in areas of the law where uniformity was lacking, the Federal Circuit has often expressed a significant preference for bright-line rules. According to many critics, this preference has come at the expense of fairness. In two relatively recent decisions, the Federal Circuit has expanded its formalism into the area of contracts of adhesion, a topic it had not had the opportunity to consider before. This Note examines those two decisions, the formalistic approach taken by the Federal Circuit, and the less formal approaches taken by other courts. By examining those other approaches and taking into account relevant intellectual property policy, the Note proposes a less formal, factor-based approach to cases dealing with contracts of adhesion