Read the text below to answer the question.

Information Communication Technology in Education

Abstract: Information communication technologies (ICT) at present are influencing every aspect of human life. They are playing salient roles in work places, business, education, and entertainment. Moreover, this article recognizes ICTs as catalysts for change; change in working conditions, handling and exchanging information, teaching methods, learning approaches, scientific research, and in accessing information communication technologies. In this digital era, ICT use in the classroom is important for giving students opportunities to learn and apply the required 21st century skills. It has been observed that ICT improves teaching and learning and is important for teachers in performing their role of creators of pedagogical environments. ICT helps teachers to present teaching attractively. Today in India teaching training programmes are made useful and attractive in terms of ICT. Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) exemplified by the internet and interactive multimedia are obviously an important focus for future education and need to be effectively integrated into formal teaching and learning – especially in teacher education institutions.

Keywords: communications, technologies, education.

(Available: https://www.researchgate.net. Access on: 12/02/2020.)

Read the text below to answer the question.

Killing scientists won’t stop Iran’s nuclear work. Diplomacy can.

Over the past two decades, the United States and its allies have tried two very different strategies for containing Iran’s nuclear program. One has been to apply crushing sanctions to the regime, launch covert operations to disable key facilities or kill scientists, and threaten overt military action. The other has been to negotiate deals with Tehran that freeze key activities, such as uranium enrichment, and provide for international inspections. It is now apparent which works better. The 2015 nuclear accord, though flawed, had succeeded in rolling back and freezing Iran’s uranium enrichment. In contrast, sanctions and sabotage, even when successful, have failed to stop Iran from advancing toward nuclear weapons production — much less toppled its Islamist regime. That record won’t be altered by the assassination last week, reportedly by Israel, of the Iranian nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh who headed its work on a bomb before the project was suspended in 2003.

Yet, since May 2018, when Mr. Trump withdrew the United States from the multilateral nuclear accord, Iran has increased its stockpile of enriched uranium to 12 times the total. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who campaigned against the 2015 agreement, remains wedded to the strategy of pressure, and after Mr. Trump was defeated in last month’s election by Joe Biden, declared that “there must be no return to the previous nuclear agreement,” Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, whose government negotiated the nuclear deal, reportedly is seeking to restrain any retaliation for the assassination pending Mr. Biden’s inauguration. That would benefit both sides. The president-elect will hardly be a pushover for Tehran — he has linked a return to the accord to follow-on agreements on issues such as Iran’s development of long-range missiles and exports of weapons around the region. But he offers the prospect of a return to a diplomacy-focused Middle East strategy that, unlike the hard line of Mr. Trump and Mr. Netanyahu, has a record of positive results.

(Available: https://www.washingtonpost.com. Access on: 12/03/2020.)

Read the text below to answer the question.

Killing scientists won’t stop Iran’s nuclear work. Diplomacy can.

Over the past two decades, the United States and its allies have tried two very different strategies for containing Iran’s nuclear program. One has been to apply crushing sanctions to the regime, launch covert operations to disable key facilities or kill scientists, and threaten overt military action. The other has been to negotiate deals with Tehran that freeze key activities, such as uranium enrichment, and provide for international inspections. It is now apparent which works better. The 2015 nuclear accord, though flawed, had succeeded in rolling back and freezing Iran’s uranium enrichment. In contrast, sanctions and sabotage, even when successful, have failed to stop Iran from advancing toward nuclear weapons production — much less toppled its Islamist regime. That record won’t be altered by the assassination last week, reportedly by Israel, of the Iranian nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh who headed its work on a bomb before the project was suspended in 2003.

Yet, since May 2018, when Mr. Trump withdrew the United States from the multilateral nuclear accord, Iran has increased its stockpile of enriched uranium to 12 times the total. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who campaigned against the 2015 agreement, remains wedded to the strategy of pressure, and after Mr. Trump was defeated in last month’s election by Joe Biden, declared that “there must be no return to the previous nuclear agreement,” Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, whose government negotiated the nuclear deal, reportedly is seeking to restrain any retaliation for the assassination pending Mr. Biden’s inauguration. That would benefit both sides. The president-elect will hardly be a pushover for Tehran — he has linked a return to the accord to follow-on agreements on issues such as Iran’s development of long-range missiles and exports of weapons around the region. But he offers the prospect of a return to a diplomacy-focused Middle East strategy that, unlike the hard line of Mr. Trump and Mr. Netanyahu, has a record of positive results.

(Available: https://www.washingtonpost.com. Access on: 12/03/2020.)

Read the text below to answer the question.

Killing scientists won’t stop Iran’s nuclear work. Diplomacy can.

Over the past two decades, the United States and its allies have tried two very different strategies for containing Iran’s nuclear program. One has been to apply crushing sanctions to the regime, launch covert operations to disable key facilities or kill scientists, and threaten overt military action. The other has been to negotiate deals with Tehran that freeze key activities, such as uranium enrichment, and provide for international inspections. It is now apparent which works better. The 2015 nuclear accord, though flawed, had succeeded in rolling back and freezing Iran’s uranium enrichment. In contrast, sanctions and sabotage, even when successful, have failed to stop Iran from advancing toward nuclear weapons production — much less toppled its Islamist regime. That record won’t be altered by the assassination last week, reportedly by Israel, of the Iranian nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh who headed its work on a bomb before the project was suspended in 2003.

Yet, since May 2018, when Mr. Trump withdrew the United States from the multilateral nuclear accord, Iran has increased its stockpile of enriched uranium to 12 times the total. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who campaigned against the 2015 agreement, remains wedded to the strategy of pressure, and after Mr. Trump was defeated in last month’s election by Joe Biden, declared that “there must be no return to the previous nuclear agreement,” Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, whose government negotiated the nuclear deal, reportedly is seeking to restrain any retaliation for the assassination pending Mr. Biden’s inauguration. That would benefit both sides. The president-elect will hardly be a pushover for Tehran — he has linked a return to the accord to follow-on agreements on issues such as Iran’s development of long-range missiles and exports of weapons around the region. But he offers the prospect of a return to a diplomacy-focused Middle East strategy that, unlike the hard line of Mr. Trump and Mr. Netanyahu, has a record of positive results.

(Available: https://www.washingtonpost.com. Access on: 12/03/2020.)

Read the text below to answer the question.

Nobody but you

(James Taylor.)

Everybody knows that I'm just a Joe That likes to hang around Talking about my problems Bringing other people down Well this may be so, but not long ago I was sitting on the top of the world Sure is strange how things can turn themselves around

When I'm in need of a little bit of consultation Used to call on my Uncle John Took a trip down to West Virginia Found him dead and gone And as some sort of silly little consolation They gave me my ticket back What you gonna do with folks like that?

You come on talkin' about angel bands You think that you come with your soul in your hands Just to set their children free But you talk about a little bit of understanding Things that happen day to day Someone has been good to me, yeh.

Nobody but you, nobody but you, nobody but you, nobody but you (repeat)

(Available: https://www.allthelyrics.com. Access on: 12/02/2020.)

Read the text below to answer the question.

Nobody but you

(James Taylor.)

Everybody knows that I'm just a Joe
That likes to hang around
Talking about my problems
Bringing other people down
Well this may be so, but not long ago
I was sitting on the top of the world
Sure is strange how things can turn themselves around

When I'm in need of a little bit of consultation
Used to call on my Uncle John
Took a trip down to West Virginia
Found him dead and gone
And as some sort of silly little consolation
They gave me my ticket back
What you gonna do with folks like that?

You come on talkin' about angel bands
You think that you come with your soul in your hands
Just to set their children free
But you talk about a little bit of understanding
Things that happen day to day
Someone has been good to me, yeh.

Nobody but you, nobody but you, nobody but you, nobody but you (repeat)

(Available: https://www.allthelyrics.com. Access on: 12/02/2020.)

Diversity is the one true thing we have in common. Celebrate it every day.

I often listen to books on tape with my children while I do errands and drive them to their activities. When my daughter was four years old and we were listening to a story, she said, “Mom, when I listen to the stories, I see pictures in my head. Do you see the same pictures?” This was a thought-provoking question for a number of reasons. First, she was describing what good readers do — visualize the story as they read while the details add up to a mental picture. Second, I was reminded that we all create mental pictures while reading, and that our pictures may vary greatly. For example, when my children and I read the Harry Potter books, we discussed our different ideas about what Harry, Hermione, and Ron looked like. (Now that I've seen the movie, I can't seem to remember what I thought they looked like!) Perhaps what is most interesting about the visualization that takes place as we read, is that the pictures in our minds reflect our own experiences. We connect what we read to our context, and we comprehend new ideas more deeply if we can relate to them.

In a 1979 study on cross-cultural comprehension, subjects from the U.S. and India read letters about an American and an Indian wedding and recalled them following interpolated tasks. When subjects read the passage about the wedding from their own culture (“the native passage”), researchers observed the following behaviors: subjects read the passage more rapidly, recalled a larger amount of information, and produced more culturally appropriate elaborations of the content. When the subjects read the “foreign passage” about the other culture's wedding, they read the passage more slowly, recalled much less information, and produced more culturally-based distortions. The results indicated that cultural context influences comprehension, and that this phenomenon occurs regardless of an individual's background. (Steffensen, Joag-Deve, & Anderson, 1979).

(Available: https://www.readingrockets.org. Access on: 12/02/2020. Adapted.)