Children learn Essay Example for Free

Children learn Essay The Guidance for the Foundation Stage Curriculum (2001) suggests that an appropriate curriculum for young children is a play-based curriculum, offering children a choice of play based activities and experiences. Siraj-Blatchford and Clarke (2000) agree that play has been well documented as a means by which young children learn.  Play is highly valued in the Early Years for its ability to stimulate and integrate a wide range of childrens intellectual, physical, cultural, social and creative abilities. (Siraj-Blatchford and Clarke 2000, p.76) However, unstructured play, in its purest sense, may cause a number of problems when providing suitable provision for children demonstrating hyperactive, impulsive or inattentive behaviour due to lack of structure and continual distraction. Kewley (1999,p.151) would agree when stating,   Unstructured situations such as playtime often cause problems for children with ADHDbecause of the over-reaction to the stimulus and their impulsive behaviour. Ballard (1997) defines an inclusive setting as one where differentness is an ordinary part of human experience. Indeed, differentiation is the key to effective teaching and learning. However, problems arise when the whole structure of the curriculum is inappropriate for the needs of a particular child. Cooper (1999) would agree that it is invaluable for the practitioner to be aware of the specific circumstances in which individual children perform best in order to plan for the learning needs of these children and suggests that some aspects of an Early Years curriculum may aggravate symptoms of ADHD when stating, Children with ADHD can become overwhelmed by the massive over stimulation they experience in a group situation and through free-play activity. (Cooper 1999, p.144)  In addition,  Barrow (in: Merton 1998) and Toothhill and Spalding (in: Sefton 2000) also found that children with ADHD responded better in highly structured lessons than less organised ones.  Children with ADHD are often hypersensitive to distraction. It is important, therefore, to ensure that they are seated in a place that is relatively free from distraction. (Cooper 1999, p.146) Thus, making the task of suitable inclusive provision difficult for practitioners in Early Years settings. However, many opportunities for structured, adult-directed play do exist within the Early Years. (Siraj-Blatchford and Clarke 2000) Games such as those with rules, card games, matching games, and outdoor games with balls all provide opportunities for adult-directed play and provide the child with instructions and guidance for playing the game, rules of turn taking and developing new information. In addition a play-based curriculum offers opportunities for high levels of adult support and encouragement and a kinaesthetic based approach to learning, which is a preferred style of learning for many children with ADHD. Kewley (1999,p.146) concurs, stating, Children with ADHD tend to be intuitive and need a practical approach to learning rather than a highly theoretical approach.  Research suggests however, that a high number of children with ADHD are not acknowledged as having SEN and instead their inappropriate behaviour highlighted as unsuitable candidates for mainstream settings. Hayden (1997) suggests that this attitude does not improve as the children enter formal education. Hayden researched children who had been excluded from primary school and found that children with ADHD are more likely that most to be excluded from school for behavioural reasons. This does appear at first glance to be surprising, when considering the evidence to suggest that a structured environment is more appropriate for a child with ADHD. Cooper (2005) offers an explanation for this however, and suggests that when considering the constructions of ADHD that, it is influenced by both biology and the social environment. Cooper infers that school plays a major part in the process of social constructions and indicates that children with ADHD are expected to conform to an unsuitable and ridged social framework and inappropriate curriculum when stating, Pupils from an early age are expected to internalise and behave in accordance with a set of rules that derive from constraints imposed by a teacher-centred, curriculum-focused method of teaching pupils in age related groups. (Cooper 2005,p.128)  Cooper also suggests that inappropriate teacher/child ratios may create social disorder problems that are met by a set of lineal rules, designed to regulate peer interaction and movement around school. Concluding that the majority of problems arise from an externally imposed age determined curricula as apposed to a negotiated curriculum. These findings are alarming when considering recent developments, legislation and guidance relating to children with SEN and may indicate that the behaviour aspect of children with ADHD is being used as a scapegoat strategy for settings who are not meeting the needs of these children.  When examining the issues surrounding ADHD it is clear that successful inclusion both in the Early Years and Primary school settings is problematic. On the one hand a play-based curriculum is the most suitable form of learning for the majority of young children and is endorsed in Early Years Settings, whilst on the other the symptoms that children with ADHD display suggest that such a curriculum would exasperate these symptoms. However, as previously discussed, some aspects of a play-based curriculum are preferable to the more formal approach of primary school. The PLA (2001) suggest once children have been admitted to the setting, an environment that is created should be one that encourages all children to flourish. Furthermore, Kewley (2001, p6) states the inclusion of children with ADHD is a moral imperative, however, Farrell and Polat (2003) argue that the inclusion of children with EBD has the potential to cause barriers to the government implementation of their policy of social inclusion. This would suggest that although differing levels of ability can be quiet easily catered for, behavioural and emotional differences are not as easily accommodated in educational settings. Visser and Stokes (2003) found that many people agreed with the inclusion of children with SEN, however when it came to children with EBD they were often denied inclusion due to their SEN. This supports the research undertaken by Hayden (mentioned previously) that children with ADHD are excluded from primary school due to behavioural reasons. The DfES (2006, p.1) suggest that children with ADHD can have an overwhelming affect in the setting when stating, pupils with ADHD present challenges for teachers, both in effective behaviour management and in keeping them focused on the task in hand. [online]  Teachers may feel threatened by having to deal with a child with ADHD, particularly if they have no training in the area and lack confidence, in addition to having to give instruction to a further 30 children or more. The parents of other children may feel that the attention has been drawn away from their children as more time needs to be spent dealing with disruptive outbursts and one to one tuition. All these factors effect the successful inclusion of children with ADHD. Swinson, Wolf and Meling however, disagree that these childrens needs would be addressed more effectively in special schools and conclude that there is much evidence of mainstream schools successfully including children with EBD and there was no evidence to suggest children with EBD benefit from special school. Rose (2002) found that teachers felt they could successfully include children with EBD, but only with additional classroom support. This may suggest a lack of confidence in their ability to meet the needs of children with ADHD in their care. Swinson, Wolf and Meling (2002) suggest that this view is not uncommon, they found that many teachers felt they were not sufficiently trained to meet the needs of inclusion. Another reason that teachers insist on additional classroom support may be due to the time and attention children with ADHD need. Newelle (2001) agree that children with EBD take up a lot of time and resources. All of the barriers above are not isolated to ADHD or indeed EBD they are general inclusion issues that have been successfully addressed throughout a majority of mainstream settings, particularly Early years settings. Albeit ADHD may manifest itself in differing ways and appear to centre around continuous, disruptive behaviour, for some leading to exclusion, however, all children with SEN should have their needs met and advice given by the DfES (2000) should apply to all children when stating,  Children with special educational needs all have learning difficulties that make it harder for them to learn than most children at the same age. These children may need extra or different help from that given to children of the same age [online] According to the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) [online], ADHD can have long term effects on the childs ability to make friends and over time these children may develop emotional problems such as poor self-esteem and depression if the childs needs are not met. McEwan (1998) identifies emotional reactivity and conduct problems, which include symptoms such as a shot fuse due to getting easily frustrated, overreacting to things that happen, defiant behaviour, verbal hostility and angry outbursts. Fletcher-Campbell (2001) looks at the problems of children with EBD and suggests that these children alienate themselves from their peers, due to their behaviour. Thus, Some manifestations of the disorder tend to isolate children with ADHD from their peers, who will sometimes react with hostility to impulsive and hyperactive behaviour. This can result in long term difficulties in relation to other individuals and developing and sustaining relationships and the emotional problems that follow often exacerbate the struggle to learn. (Question Publishing 2003) [online] Effects of inattention and impulsivity causes children problems with turn taking and this suggests they often interrupt when others are talking or playing. (Cooper and ORegan (2001) In addition McEwan (1998) argues that children with ADHD can often be selfish and self-centred, which means they are likely to find it hard to make friends and build relationships. They are often unaware of social cues and do not worry about the consequences of their behaviour.

Reflexive Substantion of an One-Way Ascendancy of Mathematics over Ethics :: Mathematics Math Papers

Reflexive Substantion of an One-Way Ascendancy of Mathematics over Ethics ABSTRACT: Russell and Popper are concordant with Plato with respect to the independence of mathematics upon the sensations. Beth shares the opinion of the complete independence between the world of science and mathematics and that of psychology. Essenin-Vol'pin's opinion is of an ascendance of ethics and jurisprudence over mathematics. For the first time, the position of Plato, Russell, and Popper are substantiated in this paper through Hegel's reflexive natural scientific method. The external activation of numbers into interaction through arithmetical operations, adopted by him, has been taken as a basis of this substantion. This is the reason why mathematical rules of reasoning are exact-they represent a pure product of the 'third world.' The rules of ethics and the related humanities are their reflective approximate reverberations. Ascendancy of the rules of such types of science over mathematics is impossible due to the irreversibility of the reflexion. The problem of the interaction between the psychical and the thinking worlds as reverberations of the material one has been treated much earlier by ancient philosophy. Plato excludes any dependence of mathematics, it being the most brilliant representative of the mental world, of the sensations. Russell [1] (I. pp. 237-238) is concordant with the above. He considers that the mathematical truth is "applicable solely to the symbols," the symbols being "words," that "do not signify anything in the real world." Thus, the correct opinion, pointed out, remains unsubstantiated, since nowhere is it related to the philosophical categories. In the substantion, offered by this paper, we proceed from the assumption that the variety of the mathematical symbols, at any rate, is reduced to and ensues from the aim: namely-to study the quantitative characteristics of "the qualities" from "the being." That connects the mathematical symbols with "the real world," i.e.-it reveals the possibility of a substantiating, since those characteristics interact. Following the construction of the foundations of mathematics, we should agree that the interaction among its concepts (i.e. the rules of the mathematical reasoning) is reduced to the interaction among the natural numbers. Hegel defines them reflexively [2], [3] ensuing from "the qualities" of "the beig" which (conversely) indicates that the mathematical truth denotes something "in the real world." Russell has pointed out that "Hegel's philosophy is very difficult-he is ...the most difficult to grasp of all great philosophers" [1] (III., p. 337), thus associating him with the philosophers "willing to spread confusion in mathematics" [1] (III. Reflexive Substantion of an One-Way Ascendancy of Mathematics over Ethics :: Mathematics Math Papers Reflexive Substantion of an One-Way Ascendancy of Mathematics over Ethics ABSTRACT: Russell and Popper are concordant with Plato with respect to the independence of mathematics upon the sensations. Beth shares the opinion of the complete independence between the world of science and mathematics and that of psychology. Essenin-Vol'pin's opinion is of an ascendance of ethics and jurisprudence over mathematics. For the first time, the position of Plato, Russell, and Popper are substantiated in this paper through Hegel's reflexive natural scientific method. The external activation of numbers into interaction through arithmetical operations, adopted by him, has been taken as a basis of this substantion. This is the reason why mathematical rules of reasoning are exact-they represent a pure product of the 'third world.' The rules of ethics and the related humanities are their reflective approximate reverberations. Ascendancy of the rules of such types of science over mathematics is impossible due to the irreversibility of the reflexion. The problem of the interaction between the psychical and the thinking worlds as reverberations of the material one has been treated much earlier by ancient philosophy. Plato excludes any dependence of mathematics, it being the most brilliant representative of the mental world, of the sensations. Russell [1] (I. pp. 237-238) is concordant with the above. He considers that the mathematical truth is "applicable solely to the symbols," the symbols being "words," that "do not signify anything in the real world." Thus, the correct opinion, pointed out, remains unsubstantiated, since nowhere is it related to the philosophical categories. In the substantion, offered by this paper, we proceed from the assumption that the variety of the mathematical symbols, at any rate, is reduced to and ensues from the aim: namely-to study the quantitative characteristics of "the qualities" from "the being." That connects the mathematical symbols with "the real world," i.e.-it reveals the possibility of a substantiating, since those characteristics interact. Following the construction of the foundations of mathematics, we should agree that the interaction among its concepts (i.e. the rules of the mathematical reasoning) is reduced to the interaction among the natural numbers. Hegel defines them reflexively [2], [3] ensuing from "the qualities" of "the beig" which (conversely) indicates that the mathematical truth denotes something "in the real world." Russell has pointed out that "Hegel's philosophy is very difficult-he is ...the most difficult to grasp of all great philosophers" [1] (III., p. 337), thus associating him with the philosophers "willing to spread confusion in mathematics" [1] (III.

Focus Group Guide Essay

Lenora Lubega Introduction Hello, my name is Lenora Lubega and I would like to welcome all of you to our focus discussion group. I will be the moderator. Our purpose for meeting today is to discuss ‘hands-free’ cellular telephone use while driving in the State of Tennessee, and to get your feedback on how you feel about the driving while using a cellular device. This focus group’s intent is to openly and discuss the question: â€Å"Should the State of Tennessee require ‘hands-free’ cellular phone use in automobiles? Everyone here this evening is an automobile driver living in the State of Tennessee. This will be a short discussion that will require an hour and thirty minutes of your time to complete. Our time will be very limited; and we will not take a break. The restrooms are conveniently located at either end of the hall. I would like to remind you that this session is highly confidential. Once this session ends, no one’s name will be used in any way outside of this group. Everyone signed consent forms to participate in tonight’s discussion. If there is anyone here that has not signed a consent form, please do so before we began tonight’s discussion or you will not be allowed to participate in this discussion group. For transcription purposes of the discussion there will be an audio recording. I will listen to the recording and prepare my final summary of our focus group accordingly. This will be an informal discussion group. You are encouraged to ask any questions or make any comments that you feel are pertinent to our discussion. Please speak freely, and if anything is unclear, please ask. The intent of this focus group is to ask, listen, and observe. As stated in the consent, please keep everyone’s identities and response confidential once you leave the group. We want to encourage oneness and honesty for everyone involved. We will begin this discussion by finding out a little bit more about each another. If I could have everyone give their name or a nickname, your occupation, and the type of cell phone that you own. I will go first and we will proceed to my right. Data Collection Warm-up Discussion: If you could take out a piece of paper and write a short paragraph on an experience you have had in dealing with drivers who are distracted by the use of a cell phone. Next I will like to ask if you, yourself us a hands free device with your cell phone? Have you used any of the newer apps that allow you to talk and text? Is it burdensome or easy to do? Does your car have a synchronizing device? How often do you us it? Secondary Research: An estimated 3,092 traffic fatalities in 2010 were blamed on distracted drivers, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. More than one in six drivers send text messages while driving, and nearly half of drivers less than 25 years old are doing it, according to a NHTSA survey released last week. â€Å"This is becoming the new DUI,† said Robert Sumwalt, a member of the safety board. â€Å"It’s becoming an epidemic. † The District of Columbia and 35 states ban text messaging for all drivers, according to the Governors Highway Safety Association. They should be made to us a hands free device or something of the like Tasha Fider: I would create a standardized audio output jack, not unlike the one available for iPods and iPhones today (which is actually a data jack), and mandate that all mobile phone manufacturers have it on each new phone that is created. Moreover, I would mandate that all future automobiles have a docking system that is adaptable to any kind of phone whatsoever. I would even mandate that current cars still on the line right now be fitted for such a docking system. I know it would be a hassle, and would put a few more dollars on everyone’s monthly car note, but I am considering the safety of our future. Anything that saves lives is worth the effort as well as the money invested into creating the technology. Renee Partida: my opinion is simple, there is no need to be using your cell phone whether text or calling or face booking while driving. I think people should us a hands-free devices they were made for that reason. I’ve seen too many people hurt while driving using their cell phones. I was in the car with a girl that dropped her’s and while driving tried to pick it up. Ruth Ellen Galgano: Once I was driving down 65 north bound and saw this lady on her phone. She was clam but as soon as the kids started fighting she became very distracted with driving. There are so many things that can and will distract driving we don’t need to have one more and cells phones are adding another problem to the long list that already exist. I would love to see the law changed on this issue. Jessica McClanahan I use to live in NY, all use of cell phones while driving is against the law including calling and text. I just honestly want to be allowed to slap idiots that know it’s against the law yet do so and I see them make several driving mistakes that only underage drivers should make like cutting someone off and not making a complete stop at stop signs. They should get their licenses revoked and cell phones stomped on! Tabitha Jerome: (She did not show up. We waited for ? hour but she never came) Specific Discussion Richard Johnson 1. How do you currently view driving while talking on the cell phone without a hands-free device? Yes, I was planning to by one but have not gotten around to it. 2. Does talking on a phone while driving seem safe, or can it lead to low driving performance? Not all the time. Why? When I am dialing the number I often find that I am not in my lane and have come very close to having an accident from time to time. Why not? 3. Of the different things involved with making or receiving a call, which task contributes most to bad driving? Making the call. You must look at the phone to dial the number and that causes your attention to be taken off the road. 4. Is it searching for the phone? Not for me, I often have my phone in the middle of the car. What about dialing? Yes, that is my biggest issue. Talking? No, I use speaker phone. Is it hanging up? No I simply let the other person hang up and my phone will hang up automattly. Or receiving the call? Sometime. 5. How do you feel the state of Tennessee should respond? Laws must be made and enforced. The issue is most driving laws are never enforced here. 6. Should the state mandate hands-free devices for driving? Why do you feel the way you do? Yes, but the phone companies need to do something to help with the cost to the customer. 7. Do you think a hands-free device would make a difference in road safety? Not really. How so? Most people will not use it if it is user friendly. Tasha Fider 1. How do you currently view driving while talking on the cell phone without a hands-free device? Dangerous 2. Does talking on a phone while driving seem safe, or can it lead to low driving performance? No *she did not give any more info, she did not seem to want to be here* 3. Of the different things involved with making or receiving a call, which task contributes most to bad driving? Both 4. Is it searching for the phone? Yes What about dialing? Yes, I think so. Talking? Yes, for sure. Is it hanging up? Yes it can be. Or receiving the call? No 5. How do you feel the state of Tennessee should respond? It is hard to say, I don’t agree with making laws to do so. We are force to do everything. I think we should be able to drive safe. 6. Should the state mandate hands-free devices for driving? Why do you feel the way you do? No they should not. I don’t like the government telling me what I can or cannot do. 7. Do you think a hands-free device would make a difference in road safety? How so? Yes, it could help but only if it is used. Renee Partida 1. How do you currently view driving while talking on the cell phone without a hands-free device? I view it as a health hazard 2. Does talking on a phone while driving seem safe, or can it lead to low driving performance? It is not safe. It can and has killed people and I think a person doing it should be charged with murder. It is not safe. Why? It kills. Why not? 3. Of the different things involved with making or receiving a call, which task contributes most to bad driving? Making the call, although, answering the phone can be just as dangerous. 4. Is it searching for the phone? Yes What about dialing? Yes Talking? Yes Is it hanging up? Yes Or receiving the call? Yes, all these things contribute to unsafe driving. 5. How do you feel the state of Tennessee should respond? Laws need to be enforced. 6. Should the state mandate hands-free devices for driving? Why do you feel the way you do? Yes they should. I hate to see people killed by stupid things people do that are so very avoidable. 7. Do you think a hands-free device would make a difference in road safety? How so? I do. If people use them the danger would be lessened. Ruth Ellen Galgano 1. How do you currently view driving while talking on the cell phone without a hands-free device? I find that if a person is responsible they can do it without any issues. The problem comes in when you have people who are not responsible. Most of the time, I find that people will do one of two things, ignore the call or take it. If they take it, they will cause an accident. 2. Does talking on a phone while driving seem safe, or can it lead to low driving performance? Why? Why not? It seems safe as long as the person is paying attention to the road and not the call. A lot of what we do on the phone is for fun, it is only when the call is serious that it can be a problem. Their attention is turned to the call and not the road. 3. Of the different things involved with making or receiving a call, which task contributes most to bad driving? I would have to say, making the call. 4. Is it searching for the phone? Not really What about dialing? Yes, that is the big problem. You cannot watch the road and dial a number at the same time. Talking? Not really. Is it hanging up? I don’t think so. Or receiving the call? It can really be hard to take a call while driving. Sometime the phone can fall on the floor of the car and you try to pick it up. 5. How do you feel the state of Tennessee should respond? I think we should allow people to do what’s right and not make any new laws at this time. Although the statistic show more people die from using the phone I think it would be safe if we just use caution. 6. Should the state mandate hands-free devices for driving? No Why do you feel the way you do? I just don’t like it when I am told, by law, what to do. 7. Do you think a hands-free device would make a difference in road safety? It might if the person uses. How so? If the person never uses it what would be the point? Jessica McClanahan 1. How do you currently view driving while talking on the cell phone without a hands-free device? It is a dangerous practice, to say the least. I know different states are different, but I think TN says it is not legal to do it without a hands-free device. 2. Does talking on a phone while driving seem safe, or can it lead to low driving performance? Why? Why not? It does not seem safe, and it can lead to low driving performance, since full attention is not given to all the hands and foot motion of driving (not to mention attention to the surroundings) 3. Of the different things involved with making or receiving a call, which task contributes most to bad driving? I think making a call contributes most to bad driving 4. Is it searching for the phone? What about dialing? Talking? Is it hanging up? Or receiving the call? Dialing 5. How do you feel the state of Tennessee should respond? The state should mandate mobile phone manufacturers to make a safety modification to all new phones 6. Should the state mandate hands-free devices for driving? Why do you feel the way you do? Yes. It should also impose stiff penalties for those who do not comply. The state is responsible for the safety of its citizens. 7. Do you think a hands-free device would make a difference in road safety? How so? Yes I do. It would save lives. Tabitha Jerome (She did not show up. We waited for ? hour but she never came) 1. How do you currently view driving while talking on the cell phone without a hands-free device? 2. Does talking on a phone while driving seem safe, or can it lead to low driving performance? Why? Why not? 3. Of the different things involved with making or receiving a call, which task contributes most to bad driving? 4. Is it searching for the phone? What about dialing? Talking? Is it hanging up? Or receiving the call? 5. How do you feel the state of Tennessee should respond? 6. Should the state mandate hands-free devices for driving? Why do you feel the way you do? 7. Do you think a hands-free device would make a difference in road safety? How so? Summary We are at the end of our discussion. Today we have shared our personal views in detail on this topic. With all our newly acquired information, together with our personal feelings, let us imagine the president of AAA entering this room. Let us each give 30 seconds of advice his company should consider regarding support of a law requiring hands-free devices for cell phones while driving in the state of Tennessee. If in favor of the law, state what elements of law you think should be included in the law and which should not. If opposed to the law, do likewise, and give personal reasons why. Now is your chance to make a big difference in something you believe in. Please write this brief statement to AAA. Include what you think of legislation and the specific elements of law that should be involved. If against it, please speak out. List reasons either way. This legislation could make all the difference for you or your family, so please answer honestly. Summary of Metting Our focus group was held at the La Vergne, TN public library. The date was Sunday, March 4, 2012 at 4 p. m. Most of the participants arrived on time, but one did not come at all. Another one arrived extremely late, and with an irritable attitude. Refreshments were served. Everyone seemed okay with the idea of being there, and light, friendly chit chatter occurred. The meeting was called to order, and everyone eagerly participated. Ideas flowed freely. There were opinions the entire spectrum. Some were in agreement with the state of Tennessee coming up with moderate laws governing cellular phone usage while driving. Others were diabolically opposed to the idea. One person became feisty and almost bellicose in her expression of her view. She said she had a ‘real problem’ with the government trying to ‘run her life’. We all understood what she meant. When we were able to calm her down, the discussion continued without incident. Each person felt that something was needed but no one really could agree on what that â€Å"something† should be. It seems that much more discussion is needed on the topic. I would recommend that the state fund more groups meetings and have a smaller group to find a solution to the matter. It is my recommendation that we all meet again in a month to see if any opinions have changed. The meeting was closed, and everyone politely bid each other adieu, and we went home.

What Does a Canadian Cabinet Minister Do

The Cabinet,  or Ministry, is the center of the Canadian federal government and the head of the executive branch. Led by the countrys prime minister, the Cabinet directs the federal government by determining priorities and policies, as well as ensuring their implementation. The members of the Cabinet are called ministers, and each has specific responsibilities affecting critical areas of national policy and law. Appointment The prime minister, or premier, recommends individuals to the Canadian governor-general, who is the head of state. The governor-general then makes the various Cabinet appointments. Throughout Canadas history, each prime minister has considered his or her goals, as well as the countrys current political climate, when deciding how many ministers to appoint. At various times, the Ministry has consisted of as few as 11 ministers and as many as 39.   Length of Service A Cabinets term begins when the prime minister takes office and ends when the prime minister resigns. The individual members of the Cabinet remain in office until they resign or successors are appointed.   Responsibilities Each Cabinet minister has responsibilities aligned with a particular government department. While these departments and corresponding minister positions can change over time, there will usually be departments and ministers overseeing a number of key areas, such as finance, health, agriculture, public services, employment, immigration, indigenous affairs, foreign affairs  and the status of women. Each minister might oversee an entire department or certain aspects of a particular department. Within the Health Department, for example, one minister might oversee general health-related matters, while another might concentrate only on childrens health. The Transport ministers might divide the work into areas like rail safety, urban affairs, and international issues. Colleagues While the ministers work closely with the prime minister and Canadas two parliamentary bodies, the House of Commons and the Senate, there are a few other individuals who play important roles in the Cabinet.   A parliamentary secretary is appointed by the prime minister to work with each minister. The secretary assists the minister and acts as a liaison with Parliament, among other duties. Additionally, each minister has one or more opposition critics appointed to her or his department. These critics are members of the party with the second-largest number of seats in the House of Commons. They are tasked with criticizing and analyzing the work of the Cabinet as a whole and individual ministers in particular. This group of critics is sometimes called the shadow Cabinet.