1995 F1 Results
Margarita Lovvorn
TIMSS Results About Teaching and Learning
- Most countries reported that four years of post-secondary education, practice in teaching, and some form of examination were required for teacher certification.
In many countries, students generally were in mathematics and science classes of fewer than 30 students. Korea was a notable exception, with most students in classes of 40 or more.
Mathematics teachers in many countries reported a high frequency of calculator use in their classes, often for checking answers, routine computation, and solving complex problems. Again, Korea was the exception, where it was reported that calculators were seldom used.
Teacher demonstrations of experiments were common in science classes regardless of whether eighth graders were taught science as a single subject or as separate science subjects, as is done in much of Europe.
Notwithstanding a considerable range in student reports, eighth graders in about half the countries reported doing an average of 2 or 3 hours of homework each day. Most typically, students reported studying mathematics for roughly an hour each day, and science for somewhat less than that.
- Eighth graders in most countries reported spending as much out-of-school time each day in non-academic activities as they did in academic activities. Most frequently, students reported watching 1 or 2 hours of television each day as well as spending several hours playing or talking with friends, and nearly 2 hours playing sports. (Of course, for teenagers, these activities often occur simultaneously, such as watching television and talking with friends on the phone.)
The site is secure.
The ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.
Results from the 1995 National College Health Risk Behavior Survey, which monitored health risk behaviors among US college and university undergraduates, suggest that many students' behaviors increase their likelihood of adverse health outcomes. During the 30 days preceding the survey, 34% of the participants had consumed five or more alcoholic drinks on at least one occasion, and 27% had drunk alcohol and driven a car. Thirty-one percent had smoked cigarettes regularly during their lifetimes, 49% had ever used marijuana, 30% had used a condom during their last sexual intercourse, 21% were overweight, and 38% had participated in vigorous physical activity on 3 or more of the 7 days preceding the survey. These data were analyzed by gender, age group, race and ethnicity, and institution type. They can be used by those responsible for the health and education of college students to reduce risks associated with the leading causes of mortality and morbidity.
The 1995 Quebec referendum was the second referendum to ask voters in the predominantly French-speaking Canadian province of Quebec whether Quebec should proclaim sovereignty and become an independent country, with the condition precedent of offering a political and economic agreement to Canada.
The culmination of multiple years of debate and planning after the failure of the Meech Lake and Charlottetown constitutional accords, the referendum was launched by the provincial Parti Qubcois government of Jacques Parizeau. Despite initial predictions of a heavy sovereignist defeat, an eventful and complex campaign followed, with the "Yes" side flourishing after being taken over by Bloc Qubcois leader Lucien Bouchard.
Voting took place on 30 October 1995, and featured the largest voter turnout in Quebec's history (93.52%). The "No" option carried by a margin of 54,288 votes, receiving 50.58% of the votes cast.[1] Parizeau, who announced his pending resignation as Quebec premier the following day, later stated that he would have quickly proceeded with a unilateral declaration of independence had the result been affirmative and negotiations failed or been refused,[2] the latter of which was later revealed as the federal position in the event of a "Yes" victory.
Controversies over both the provincial vote counting and direct federal financial involvement in the final days of the campaign reverberated in Canadian politics for over a decade after the referendum took place. In the aftermath of the close result, the federal government, after unilaterally recognizing Quebec as a distinct society and amending the federal constitutional veto procedure, referred the issue to the Supreme Court of Canada, which stated that the unilateral secession contemplated in the referendum was illegal.
Quebec, a province in Canada since its foundation in 1867, has always been the sole majority French-speaking province. Long ruled by forces (such as the Union Nationale) that focused on affirmation of the province's Francophone and Catholic identity within Canada, the Quiet Revolution of the early 1960s prompted a surge in civic and economic nationalism, as well as voices calling for the independence of the province and the establishment of a nation state. Among these was Ren Lvesque, who founded the Parti Qubcois with like-minded groups seeking independence from Canada. After winning power in 1976, the PQ government held a referendum in 1980 seeking a mandate to negotiate "sovereignty-association" with Canada, which was decisively defeated.
In response to the referendum result, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau said that he would seek to patriate the Canadian Constitution and institute what would eventually become the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. During tense negotiations in November 1981, an agreement was reached between Trudeau and nine of the ten provincial premiers by Trudeau, but not Lvesque. The Constitution Act of 1982 was enacted without the Quebec National Assembly's approval,[3] after the Supreme Court of Canada ruled against the Quebec government that its consent was not necessary for constitutional change.
New Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Quebec Liberal premier Robert Bourassa sought a series of constitutional amendments designed to address Quebec's concerns. In the Meech Lake Accord, the federal government and all provincial premiers agreed to a series of amendments that decentralized some powers and recognized Quebec as a distinct society. The Accord, after fierce debate in English Canada, fell apart in dramatic fashion in the summer of 1990, as two provinces failed to ratify it within the three-year time limit required by the constitution. This prompted outrage among Quebec nationalists and a surge in support for sovereignty. While the Accord was collapsing, Lucien Bouchard, a cabinet minister in Mulroney's government, led a coalition of six Progressive Conservative members of parliament and one Liberal MP from Quebec to form a new federal party devoted to Quebec sovereignty, the Bloc Qubcois.
Following these events, Bourassa said that a referendum would be held in 1992, with either sovereignty or a new constitutional agreement as the subject.[4] This prompted a national referendum on the Charlottetown Accord of 1992, a series of constitutional amendments that included the proposals of the Meech Lake Accord as well as other matters. The Accord was rejected by a majority of voters both in Quebec and English Canada.
In Quebec, the 1994 provincial election brought the Parti Qubcois back to power, led by Jacques Parizeau. The party's platform promised to hold a referendum on sovereignty during the first year of its term in office.[5] The PQ won a majority government with 44.75% of the popular vote, just ahead of the Liberals' 44.4%.
In preparation for the referendum, every household in Quebec was sent a draft of the Act Respecting the Future of Quebec (also referred to as the Sovereignty Bill), with the announcement of the National Commission on the Future of Quebec to commence in February 1995. The commission was boycotted by the Liberal Party of Quebec, the Liberal Party of Canada, and the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada.[6]
The primary issue of debate within the sovereignty movement became on what terms sovereignty would be put before the electorate. Parizeau, long identified with the independantiste wing of the party, was opposed to the PQ's general historical preference for an economic relationship with the rest of Canada to be offered alongside sovereignty, as he thought this would encourage the Federal government to simply refuse to negotiate and cast the project as doomed, as had happened in 1980. As a practical matter, Parizeau believed that given the emotional circumstances of separation a special partnership was unlikely, and that given free trade agreements and other multilateral institutions it was unnecessary.
Parizeau's stance created opposition in the sovereignty movement, which coalesced around Bloc Qubcois leader Lucien Bouchard. A popular and charismatic figure, Bouchard had come close to death from necrotizing fasciitis and lost his left leg. His recovery, and subsequent public appearances on crutches, provided a rallying point for sovereigntists and the public at large.[7][8] Bouchard thought a proposal lacking a partnership would doom the project among soft nationalists (such as himself) who worried about the economic consequences of separation.
As polls showed Parizeau's approach as highly unlikely to even exceed 40% support in a referendum,[citation needed] leaders of the movement engaged in a heated public debate. After Parizeau moved the planned referendum date to the fall, Deputy Premier Bernard Landry aroused ire by stating he would not want to be involved in a "charge of the light brigade." During the Bloc's April conference, after a speech demanding a change in direction, Bouchard expressed ambivalence to a radio show about participating if a partnership proposal was not included.[9] Mario Dumont, leader of the new Action dmocratique du Qubec, also stated that he would only consider participation in the referendum if a partnership was made part of the question.[10]
c80f0f1006