Subscribe Here
Posts
All Comments
Friday 29 January 2016
Thursday 28 January 2016
Need for Speed Most Wanted Game Free Download
Need for speed is a racing video game developed by EA and published by Electronic Arts. Need for speed most wanted has been released for Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 2 and xBox.
Snow Bros 2 Game Free Download
The game snow bros 2 is released in 1986.there are two characters in this game one is Nick and other is Tom.In this game a player throw snow on an enemy until it is completely covered.
Wednesday 27 January 2016
SD MAID PRO - SYSTEM CLEANING TOOL V4.0.4
This is a most powerful tool! Use at own risk!
Nobody is perfect & Android neither.
Apps you have already deleted, sometimes leave data behind.
The system constantly creates logs, crash reports and debug files you don't really need.
Your SD-card is collecting files and directories you don't recognize.
Lets not go on here...
Why not get a maid to clean it all up?
SD Maid will help you keep your device neat, clean and tidy :-)!
Give it a try, you won't find a more thorough cleaning tool!
Choose a tab, press start & then either click a single item to delete or press the clean all button. It's just that easy.
WHAT'S NEW
v3.1.4.5(382)
Database updates.
Changelog: http://goo.gl/QQ5guU
Help me test and improve SD Maid v4:
http://sdmaid.darken.eu/beta
GOOGLE PLAY
APK
Tuesday 26 January 2016
STREET FIGHTER (FREE DOWNLOAD PC GAME)
STREET FIGHTER
Welcome to Street Fighter V carries on the side-scrolling fighting game play of its predecessors,in which two fighters use a varity of attacks and special abilities to knock out their opponent .The game features in street Fighter III which builds as the player lands attacks can be used to either power special moves or perform super combos known as critical arts.Although the focus attacks from the previous games have been removed.New to this game "V-Gauge" which builds as the player receives attacks and add three new techniques.FEATURES
Support: It will not be limited for play station 4.We can play this game on our PC'S.Capcom has revealed on the capcom unity blog that the upcoming phase of Street Fighter V beta will support play between PC and Play station.In order of PC users to prepare for the beta ,Capcom has also revealed minimum and recommended requirements for Street Fighter V.Expansions:Street Fighter V, game play expansions and changes will not come in new installments but rather gradually be added to the game over the long term .Players will have the choice of paying for new characters as they are added via in game.
GAME SCREEN SHOTS
SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
CPU: Pentium Dual core E660PROCESSOR: 3.06 GHz
RAM: 2GB
DIRECT X: 9X
SPACE NEEDED: 4GB
DISC DRIVER: DVD-ROM
SOUND CARD: YES
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD
CUE CLUB (FREE DOWNLOAD PC GAME)
CUE CLUB GAME
CUE CLUB is the most exciting billiard snooker game.While playing this game we got a wonderful experience which we have not before.Thanks to stunning hd graphics ,fantastic playability and ultrarealistic ball physics.challange a varitey of new opponents of different ability from begginer to upto pro level.By playing this sought of game you can increase your skills,improve your game and defeat your opponents you will enter into new level.When you win the whole game and becomes the champion of CUE CLUB you will be rewarded with trophies and finally you becomes a champ.if you are lover of 8 ball pool try this ball you'll surely forget 8 ball pool...
CUE CLUB SCREEN SHOTS
PROJECT IGI 7 (FREE DOWNLOAD PC GAME WITH CHEAT)
PROJECT IGI 7
Project IGI 7 is the most popular game.Developers had made new and user friendly features for progect IGI 7 to play in easy and fast way.The project IGI 7 to play in easy and fast way.The project IGI 7 characters have been developed.The project IGI 7gameplay is very easy to understandand and to play frequently.Gameplay,trainer,cheats,and review can also be search out for more details.We have just provide system requirements,cheats and project IGI 7 free dpwnload link to our visitors.
SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
PROCESSOR:
Core 2 Duo,INTEL CPU,Pentium iv,1.4 GHz,AMD CPU.V.G.A:
1 GB(NVIDIA CPU).
RAM:
3 GB OR HIGHER.
DX:
DirectX 9.0c
DISC DRIVER:
DVD-ROM at 8x speed
OPERATING SYSTEM:
Windows 7,8,10
REQUIRED SPACE:
40 GB ATLEAST
CHEATS
In order to read PROJECT IGI 7 CHEATS,just visit cheatbook database and download this from www.cheatbook of PROJECT IGI 7 2015.COM
PROJECT IGI 7 SCREENSHOTS
CRACK DOWN 3 (FREE DOWNLOAD PC GAME)
CRACK DOWN 3
CRACK DOWN 3 is sandbox third person shooter gameby.It is developed British developer reagent games,a studio led by former Real time worlds head and series creator named DAVID JONES and it is published by MICROSOFT STUDIOS.DAVID JONES is very well known developer of games.From last 6 years he was developing great entertaining games.This version of CRACK DOWN is far better than the others and you people enjoying alot while playing this game.
FEATURES
ENVIRONMENTAL DESTRUCTION:
The main feature of CRACK DOWN 3 is revealing that environmental destruction will play a significant role in the games multiplayer component.
ENVIRONMENT FOR PLAYERS:
It will use the Xbox Ones cloud computing functionality to calculate and render real time to damage buildings, creating a fully destructive environment for players.
ANNOUNCEMENT BY MICROSOFT:
These features will not be found in CRACK DOWN 3 single player mode.MICROSOFT announced recently that this destruction is only possible only in case of multiplayer component.the earlier CRACK DOWN was not such featurized like this one.
CRACK DOWN 3 SCREEN SHOTS
SYSTEM REQUIRMENTS
CPU:
Pentium Dual Core E6600
PROCESSOR:
3.06 GHz
RAM:
3GB
DIRECT X:
9/11 Compatible
SPACE NEEDED:
5 GB
DISC DRIVER:
DVD-ROM
SOUND CARD:
YAS
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD
CALL OF DUTY BLACK OPS 3 (FREE DOWNLOAD PC GAME)
CALL OF DUTY BLACK OPS 3
Welcome to CALL OF DUTY OPS 3,a dark twisted future where the new breed of black soldiers emerge and the lines are blurred between our own humanity and the technology we created to stay ahead, in the world where robotic soldiers do their work.
FEATURES
GAME MODES:
CALL OF DUTY BLACK OPS 3 has three unique game modes.
1) Campaign
2) Multi player
3) Zombies
They provide their fans with the deepest and most ambitious CALL OF DUTY ever you seen.
Campaign:
Campaign is designed as a co-op game that can be played upto 4 players.We can play this game online by sending requests to the people on Google.We can play this game with in home also as offline.
Multiplayer:
Multiplayer will be the franchise's deepest, most rewarding and most engaging to date, with new ways to rank up your game.You can customize yourself by downloading this game and gear up for battle.
Zombies:
In CALL OF DUTY BLACK OPS 3 zombies play very important role during play.They delivers all new mind blowing experience with its own dedicated narrative.
SCREEN SHOTS
SYSTEM REQUIRMENTS
- INTEL CPU: Core I3 -530
- PROCESSOR: 2.99 GHz
- RAM: 6 GB
- DIRECT X: 9/11 X
- HARD DISK NEEDED: 55 GB
- DISC DRIVER: DVD-ROM
- SOUND CARD: YES
FIFA 2015 FOR PC LAPTOPS AND TABLETS (FREE DOWNLOAD)
FIFA 2015 GAME
Is football is your hobby?Do you love playing football games?Are you fan or may be a player?Lets free download the full version of Fifa 2015 and get interaction with the best players from all around the world.This great series was developed by EA GAMES which is known by all over the world as great gaming company.This is the same as previous versions first you have to select the team .Each match lasts for 90 minutes and your only goal is to win.In this game you got many football playing skills.It is the best way to learn how to be a good football player and planer.during the game you can control only one player which is shown by a coloured mark circle.
SYSTEM REQIUREMENTS
INTEL CPU:
Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.2GH.z
RAM:
4 GB
DIRECT X:
DX 9
SPACE NEED:
15 GB atleast
DISC DRIVER:
DVD-ROM at 8X
V.G.A:
1 GB
OPERATING SYSTEM:
Windows 7,8,10 XP
FIFA 2015 GAME SCREEN SHOTS
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD
A Life Line
Our attempts to understand, debate, and improve the education system continue to rely on categories of analysis which have origins elsewhere. The power differential between the global north and south constitutes the research methodologies and categories of analysis used in the north as general enough to talk about the social realities in the south.
Such innocuous terms such as standards, standards-based reforms, child-centred learning, systemic reforms are grounded in particular local discourses of the global north. The meanings they assume in our context may diverge from the ones they were originally assigned.
It may do us some good to be more mindful of the language we use and not be mindlessly tossed around by words that reach our shores.
Let us take the idea of education reforms. It would be useful to see how the term ‘reform’ was used in other societies. It may help us see the way in which the language of education reforms created in a different context affects our ability to understand and resolve the problems rooted in our context.
Education reforms have assumed many different names in Pakistan. Let us consider standards-based reforms to illustrate the point I am trying to make.
We keep talking about the need for standards-based education reforms in Pakistan. This term standards entered education reform talk in Pakistan in the mid-2000s. However, it has been around in the US and the OECD countries since the mid-1980s. It originated in the wake of a report on the state of education in the US commissioned in 1983. The commission gave its report a rather provocative title of A Nation At Risk (ANAR).
ANAR was the first anywhere in the world to call for the use of rigorous standards in education.
Today, many in the field of education think that standards are indispensable to education. But before the 1980s, the states have successfully, if not perfectly, universalised education and run common schools without the use of standards.
In fact, standards are part of a larger package of reforms usually referred to by education scholars as the Global Managerial Education Reforms (GMERs). These reforms use standards, together with a potpourri of the market and managerialist policy solutions together with such ideas as the choice, competition, incentives, and accountability.
Now let us look at the motives for education reforms. The current trend has been to measure the success of each and every reform initiative by looking at the learning gains. But it has not always been so in the so-called developed societies.
The early reforms that involved setting up of a functional and effective system of universal schooling did not employ these terms. It may be said that the reforms language of GMER is part of reforms that allegedly aim at dismantling the well-established public education systems.
Regardless of the political aims of the GMER, the predominant meaning assigned to the word standards in the education discourse within the OECD countries was measurable statements about what children must know and be able to do. Accordingly, standards-based reforms aimed at defining curriculum standards and ensuring that instruction and assessment were aligned with them and with each other.
However, in most conversations that I have had about ‘standards’ in education in Pakistan, the word is used interchangeably with ‘quality’. When utilised in this way, standards are expected to be high but not rigorous or measurable. Thus, we have been using standards-based reforms without debating and adapting its core premises.
Now let us look at the motives for education reforms. The current trend has been to measure the success of each and every reform initiative by looking at the learning gains. But it has not always been so in the so-called developed societies. The reformers did not always refer to declining test scores as justification for standards-based reforms.
The reference to student learning is a very recent insertion in the reform discourse. For example, the sweeping education reforms undertaken in the United States in the 1950s had no reference whatsoever to student learning but had everything to do with security. The launch of Sputnik, the first artificial satellite, by the Soviet Union was seen in the United States as a threat to its security and superiority in science and technology. It sent the latter into a frenzy of education reforms. It was not declining student learning but the feeling of lost pre-eminence that prompted these reforms.
The early policies to put in place a functional system of universal education at the state’s expense anywhere in the world were justified on the basis of a political need for such a system.
As I have mentioned in an earlier article on the same pages, the societies have not always held themselves up to the ideal universal education. Massive education systems are very recent and have emerged in tandem with the emergence of a peculiar kind of state called nation-state. The nations are imaginary communities, which can only be rendered ‘real’ through universal education. It is only through regular indoctrination that children born within the boundaries of a nation-state assume the identity of its citizens.
The universal common school was established as an instrument to establish the writ of the nation-state. There are no insurgencies in countries with universal systems of education. The effectiveness of universal education as a tool of public order increased the stake of state in it. Consequently, universal education was conceptualised as a public service. This happened regardless of the relative superiority of private over public schools.
Since the nation building, security, and stability provided the primary rationale for universal education, the state and society could not help but establish it as part of the public sector. It did not require systemic reforms to put national systems in place but a deep recognition that there was no nation without universal common education.
When this recognition was expressed through a strong political will everything else more or less fell in place. The idea of subsequent education reforms as organised efforts to improve the performance of education systems have emerged in countries that already had a well established and functioning public school systems.
So the massive education systems were set up because the modern nation-state was inconceivable without them. Subsequent education reforms show the concern and commitment of the society to its schools and also its dissatisfaction with them if they are not producing the desirable outcomes. Also, education reforms in these systems have not always used student learning for their justification. This is not to say that the student learning has not been a focus of attention, but that it has not been necessarily used as a rationale for reforms.
In fact, educators, particularly in the United States, assumed that the learning was distributed on a Bell (or Normal) Curve. Bell curve was used to ensure that excellence and mediocrity clustered around average as a norm. Thus, the education system was not to distribute learning equitably but to sort people in ways that suited an unequal society. It was only in the early 1980s that decline in student achievement and learning gaps between different socio-economic and racial groups became political flashpoints.
Systemic reforms is another term that is finding its way into education debates in Pakistan recently. This word was also first used about 25 years ago in the United States and has taken about as much time as the standards-based reform to travel to our shores. The early standards-based education reforms were quite piecemeal in the sense that they narrowly focused on improving one or the other aspects of the education system. The idea of systemic reforms emerged in the early 1990s as a call for coherence and alignment.
Systemic reforms were based on the hypothetical argument that schools were not likely to improve unless systemic barriers to change were removed. However, the notion of system within systemic reform remained up for grabs and different people with different vantage points saw the system differently.
Why should we engage in a conversation about the language of reforms? We should, because education reforms are contingent and deeply embedded in unique contexts. Even words such as standards or systems or even reforms adapt and assume new meanings when implanted in new contexts with different histories and characteristics.
What education reforms might mean in a country with little political will and recognition that a common education is essential for its survival as a nation-state? We have already privatised education even before we had a functioning system of education. The only systemic reform that has been in operation for the past many years has been gradual dismantling of whatever dysfunctional system of education we were given by the British Empire. That system, as Tim Allender has observed, had already collapsed in the mid-1880s just as soon as it was put in place.
It is also instructive to note that British started a state-sponsored system of education in India much earlier than they did on the Isles. We should ask why did the public education refuse to grow in India and what is now Pakistan, and what made it flourish in Britain and other OECD countries?
A lesson in the history of education systems may teach us that political will and deep recognition of education as a lifeline for the nation-state was the single most important determinant of successful education systems than anything else.
Such innocuous terms such as standards, standards-based reforms, child-centred learning, systemic reforms are grounded in particular local discourses of the global north. The meanings they assume in our context may diverge from the ones they were originally assigned.
It may do us some good to be more mindful of the language we use and not be mindlessly tossed around by words that reach our shores.
Let us take the idea of education reforms. It would be useful to see how the term ‘reform’ was used in other societies. It may help us see the way in which the language of education reforms created in a different context affects our ability to understand and resolve the problems rooted in our context.
Education reforms have assumed many different names in Pakistan. Let us consider standards-based reforms to illustrate the point I am trying to make.
We keep talking about the need for standards-based education reforms in Pakistan. This term standards entered education reform talk in Pakistan in the mid-2000s. However, it has been around in the US and the OECD countries since the mid-1980s. It originated in the wake of a report on the state of education in the US commissioned in 1983. The commission gave its report a rather provocative title of A Nation At Risk (ANAR).
ANAR was the first anywhere in the world to call for the use of rigorous standards in education.
Today, many in the field of education think that standards are indispensable to education. But before the 1980s, the states have successfully, if not perfectly, universalised education and run common schools without the use of standards.
In fact, standards are part of a larger package of reforms usually referred to by education scholars as the Global Managerial Education Reforms (GMERs). These reforms use standards, together with a potpourri of the market and managerialist policy solutions together with such ideas as the choice, competition, incentives, and accountability.
Now let us look at the motives for education reforms. The current trend has been to measure the success of each and every reform initiative by looking at the learning gains. But it has not always been so in the so-called developed societies.
The early reforms that involved setting up of a functional and effective system of universal schooling did not employ these terms. It may be said that the reforms language of GMER is part of reforms that allegedly aim at dismantling the well-established public education systems.
Regardless of the political aims of the GMER, the predominant meaning assigned to the word standards in the education discourse within the OECD countries was measurable statements about what children must know and be able to do. Accordingly, standards-based reforms aimed at defining curriculum standards and ensuring that instruction and assessment were aligned with them and with each other.
However, in most conversations that I have had about ‘standards’ in education in Pakistan, the word is used interchangeably with ‘quality’. When utilised in this way, standards are expected to be high but not rigorous or measurable. Thus, we have been using standards-based reforms without debating and adapting its core premises.
Now let us look at the motives for education reforms. The current trend has been to measure the success of each and every reform initiative by looking at the learning gains. But it has not always been so in the so-called developed societies. The reformers did not always refer to declining test scores as justification for standards-based reforms.
The reference to student learning is a very recent insertion in the reform discourse. For example, the sweeping education reforms undertaken in the United States in the 1950s had no reference whatsoever to student learning but had everything to do with security. The launch of Sputnik, the first artificial satellite, by the Soviet Union was seen in the United States as a threat to its security and superiority in science and technology. It sent the latter into a frenzy of education reforms. It was not declining student learning but the feeling of lost pre-eminence that prompted these reforms.
The early policies to put in place a functional system of universal education at the state’s expense anywhere in the world were justified on the basis of a political need for such a system.
As I have mentioned in an earlier article on the same pages, the societies have not always held themselves up to the ideal universal education. Massive education systems are very recent and have emerged in tandem with the emergence of a peculiar kind of state called nation-state. The nations are imaginary communities, which can only be rendered ‘real’ through universal education. It is only through regular indoctrination that children born within the boundaries of a nation-state assume the identity of its citizens.
The universal common school was established as an instrument to establish the writ of the nation-state. There are no insurgencies in countries with universal systems of education. The effectiveness of universal education as a tool of public order increased the stake of state in it. Consequently, universal education was conceptualised as a public service. This happened regardless of the relative superiority of private over public schools.
Since the nation building, security, and stability provided the primary rationale for universal education, the state and society could not help but establish it as part of the public sector. It did not require systemic reforms to put national systems in place but a deep recognition that there was no nation without universal common education.
When this recognition was expressed through a strong political will everything else more or less fell in place. The idea of subsequent education reforms as organised efforts to improve the performance of education systems have emerged in countries that already had a well established and functioning public school systems.
So the massive education systems were set up because the modern nation-state was inconceivable without them. Subsequent education reforms show the concern and commitment of the society to its schools and also its dissatisfaction with them if they are not producing the desirable outcomes. Also, education reforms in these systems have not always used student learning for their justification. This is not to say that the student learning has not been a focus of attention, but that it has not been necessarily used as a rationale for reforms.
In fact, educators, particularly in the United States, assumed that the learning was distributed on a Bell (or Normal) Curve. Bell curve was used to ensure that excellence and mediocrity clustered around average as a norm. Thus, the education system was not to distribute learning equitably but to sort people in ways that suited an unequal society. It was only in the early 1980s that decline in student achievement and learning gaps between different socio-economic and racial groups became political flashpoints.
Systemic reforms is another term that is finding its way into education debates in Pakistan recently. This word was also first used about 25 years ago in the United States and has taken about as much time as the standards-based reform to travel to our shores. The early standards-based education reforms were quite piecemeal in the sense that they narrowly focused on improving one or the other aspects of the education system. The idea of systemic reforms emerged in the early 1990s as a call for coherence and alignment.
Systemic reforms were based on the hypothetical argument that schools were not likely to improve unless systemic barriers to change were removed. However, the notion of system within systemic reform remained up for grabs and different people with different vantage points saw the system differently.
Why should we engage in a conversation about the language of reforms? We should, because education reforms are contingent and deeply embedded in unique contexts. Even words such as standards or systems or even reforms adapt and assume new meanings when implanted in new contexts with different histories and characteristics.
What education reforms might mean in a country with little political will and recognition that a common education is essential for its survival as a nation-state? We have already privatised education even before we had a functioning system of education. The only systemic reform that has been in operation for the past many years has been gradual dismantling of whatever dysfunctional system of education we were given by the British Empire. That system, as Tim Allender has observed, had already collapsed in the mid-1880s just as soon as it was put in place.
It is also instructive to note that British started a state-sponsored system of education in India much earlier than they did on the Isles. We should ask why did the public education refuse to grow in India and what is now Pakistan, and what made it flourish in Britain and other OECD countries?
A lesson in the history of education systems may teach us that political will and deep recognition of education as a lifeline for the nation-state was the single most important determinant of successful education systems than anything else.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)