0

Adjunct Instructor – Remotely-Piloted Aircraft Systems

first_imgPosition Title: Adjunct Instructor – Remotely-PilotedAircraft SystemsSalary: Class/lecture – $53.96; Lab/practicum – $45.66Qualifications:Four years work experience with remotely-piloted aircraft systemsmaintenance and/or repair.Experience with training or classroom teaching preferred.Duties:The School of STEM Career at MVCC invites applications for AdjunctInstructors of Remotely-Piloted Aircraft Systems courses. Teachingfaculty at MVCC have the primary responsibility of fulfilling theCollege’s mission of providing high-quality educationalopportunities to meet the diverse needs of our students.Adjunct faculty members teach contracted classes in accordance withestablished policies, guidelines, and learning outcomes. Lecturesand labs may be taught in traditional classroom settings,virtually, or a combination. This position may include both daytimeand evening classes.Major Responsibilities: F acilitate classroom instruction;Teach assigned class in accordance with the learningobjectives;Develop and maintain syllabus materials;Evaluate student performance;Maintain grades, enter midterm and final grades;Respond promptly to student inquiries;Maintain attendance records according to MVCC standards;Integrate current and emerging instructional deliverytechnologies into the learning process;Maintain professional standards that protect studentconfidentiality;Communicate effectively, both orally and in writing usingdiscretion, patience, and courtesy. Special Instructions to Applicants:MVCC does not discriminate. MVCC is an affirmative action, equalopportunity employer. Women, minorities, veterans, and people withdisabilities are encouraged to apply. MVCC offers a comprehensiveemployee enrichment program. Official academic transcripts requiredupon hire.Review Start Date: 1/13/2020Review of applications will begin on the review start date andwill continue until successful candidates have beenidentified.last_img read more

0

Bob McCoskrie: The case for no in the cannabis referendum

first_imgNZ Herald 11 September 2019(In response to the promotion of cannabis legalisation by the Helen Clark Foundation)https://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=12266464The evidence is quickly building.Marijuana – which has skyrocketed in average potency over the past decades – is addictive and harmful to the human brain, especially when used by adolescents. In US states that have already legalised the drug, there has been an increase in drugged driving crashes, youth marijuana use, costs that far outweigh tax revenues from marijuana, a black market that continues to thrive, sustained marijuana arrest rates, and tobacco company investment in marijuana.Drug supporters argue that marijuana legalisation will increase social justice. But the District of Columbia, Colorado and Washington D.C. have seen disproportionately high  public consumption and distribution arrests amongst African-Americans and Hispanics.This is because, in a similar trend to alcohol outlets and pokie machine venues here in New Zealand, communities of colour and high deprivation areas in Los Angeles, Denver and Oregon are being subjected to disproportionate targeting by marijuana facilities.If you want to know how Big Marijuana will act, just look to the gambling, tobacco and alcohol industry’s behaviour.Another argument for legalisation is that the ‘war on drugs’ has been lost.The now-retired UK prison doctor and psychiatrist Theodore Dalrymple says that the ‘war on drugs is lost’ mantra is an unimaginative and fundamentally stupid metaphor – “If the war against drugs is lost, then so are the wars against theft, speeding, incest, fraud, rape, murder, arson, and illegal parking.  Few, if any, such wars are winnable.”This is not a ‘war on drugs’ – it is a defence of our brains. It is a fight for health and safety.Drug advocates want you to believe that ‘everybody is doing it’. But Ministry of Health statistics show that just 3.7% use cannabis on a weekly basis, 11% have used it in the last 12 months, and 42% will have tried it once at some time in their life.There is no adequate reason why governments can persistently and successfully target smoking and not do likewise with drugs. The end goal of the anti-smoking campaign has not been ‘slow down’ or ‘moderate’ but ‘quit’, with numerous strategies and support agencies assisting on the journey. The numbers overwhelmingly suggest that it is working.What’s also amusing is attempts by cannabis advocates to find a country that has had good outcomes from the experiment of legalising.In Colorado, marijuana-positive traffic fatalities, hospitalisations, marijuana use, and illegal market activity have all increased. Most disturbingly, Colorado toxicology reports show the percentage of adolescent suicide victims testing positive for marijuana has increased.Portugal is often referred to – but they didn’t legalise marijuana. They decriminalised all drugs. However, between 2012 and 2017, Lifetime Prevalence statistics for alcohol, tobacco and drugs have risen by 23%. Political parties in Portugal are now pushing for the legalisation of marijuana in their country because they wrongly believe it will combat current problems around organised crime, drug trafficking, increased consumption and the use of psychoactive substances.Others are pointing to Uruguay which is attempting to regulate the marijuana market under state control, despite strong public opposition. The data so far indicates that frequency of consumption has significantly increased, especially in the 15-24 age group. The perception of risk with drug use is low, and risky behaviours have increased with the frequency of consumption, including the use of marijuana during pregnancy. The black market is alive and well. And the recent Canadian federal study found a 27% increase in marijuana use among people aged 15 to 24 over the last year. Another study found that the black market in Canada is absolutely thriving.I visited Vancouver six weeks ago. Cannabis is easy to purchase – including the products like gummi bear edibles, which aren’t supposed to even be legal yet. You can see Big Marijuana already. You can smell it.It’s important to note that the Global Commission on Drug Policy – of which Helen Clark is a member – wants to legalise all drug use, and wants policies based on ‘human rights’ which remove the ‘stigmatisation’ and ‘marginalisation’ of people who use drugs.Drug users should receive all the help they can to overcome their addiction and to become drug-free, but the health, rights and protection of the general public should take precedence over the rights of individuals to live in a drug-friendly society. We were sucked in by Big Tobacco.Let’s not be sucked in again.last_img read more

0

Pardew ban could have been longer

first_imgNewcastle boss Alan Pardew could have been handed a five-match stadium ban and a bigger fine for his head-butt on Hull midfielder David Meyler. But the commission said: “In considering the sanction to be imposed, the commission considered initially a five-match stadium ban and a higher fine. “But, based on the mitigation presented together with the action taken by both the club and Mr Pardew, the regulatory commission came to the conclusion that the appropriate sanction set out below was fair, reasonable and proportionate and thus ordered as follows: Mr Pardew be warned as to his future conduct; be suspended immediately until such time as Newcastle United FC has completed seven first team matches. The first three matches imposed are a stadium ban with the remaining four a touchline ban from first team fixtures; Mr Pardew is fined the sum of £60,000.” Pardew, who served the first game of his stadium ban at Fulham last Saturday, was accompanied by legal counsel, club secretary Lee Charnley and Richard Bevan, chief executive of the League Managers’ Association, at the hearing. He had admitted the charge and later revealed he was prepared to accept whatever penalty came his way. In mitigation, the Magpies manager, who had already been fined £100,000 by his club, argued that he did not instigate the altercation with Meyler and meant no physical harm to the player, and had expressed his remorse. He also signalled his intention to enrol on an executive leadership and management programme with the LMA in an effort to address his behaviour. The commission, who took into account previous offences, viewed video footage of the incident and considered written reports from match referee Kevin Friend, his assistant John Flynn and fourth official Howard Webb before reaching its conclusion. It said: “The commission also considered the impact of this type of incident in football in general and could not escape from the fact that a vast number of people would have seen the incident on national and international television. “Bluntly, Mr Pardew had little option but to admit the charge and to apologise accordingly. “Mr Pardew is a high-profile and very experienced manager at a high-profile and well-respected club in a high profile league and where matches are watched worldwide. “This is, on any view, a serious incident which has to be sanctioned accordingly, but at the same time proportionately.” Press Association The independent regulatory commission before which Pardew appeared on March 11 released the written reasons for its decision on Wednesday, and revealed that its punishment might have been more severe. Pardew was ultimately handed a three-match stadium ban and four more from the touchline, as well as a £60,000 fine. last_img read more