Inservice Attendance Sheet: Fill & Download for Free

Nurses are always attending inservices and conferences to learn more about the human body and diseases. We do a lot of reading as well. My first job as a nurse was on the maternity wing. We were told who was in L&D as well as what was going in the nursery. That was a lot to track and I designed my own form so, at a quick glance, I knew what was happening in each area. I did the same thing every where else I worked. At one hospital the doctors used my sheet to see what was going on with their patients.On my Home Health job we had information for nurses to use in teaching patients how to do their care. I made copies of those so they had something to help them remember what I said. Everyone loved that idea, especially the patients. They gave my idea to another nurse to work on. That was okay with me since she put pictures with hers.

It is really surprising that we have not yet identified the best IPS officer who is an epitome of secularism,patriotism and a crusader for justice especially of the downtrodden, exploited and the marginalized. This hero is none but Shri R B Sreekumar, the retired DGP of Gujarat.Born on February 12, 1947 at Ooruttambalam, Trivandrum district, Kerala in a middle class Hindu family, his life is a story of great challenges and struggles which are really a source of inspiration to new generation of civil servants who desire to uphold true values and ethics of civil service as envisaged by the iron man of India Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel. Sreekumar is the grandson of great Indian revolutionary freedom fighter, nationalist and patriot Balaramapuram Raman Pillai, a pioneer of print media in Kerala, who conducted heroic struggles against the British.Sreekumar, a Post Graduate in History, Gandhian philosophy, Law and Literature was inducted into IPS in 1971 after his brief stint as a College Lecturer in Kerala.. Apart from these academic distinctions, he has vast knowledge on Epics, Puranas, Classics, Vedas/Upanishads, Islam, Christianity and other religions.As a Gujarat cadre officer, he has proved his mettle . As ASP/SP, Bhuj during 1970s, he was successful in nabbing a number of notorious smugglers and gangs operating across Indo-Pakistan borders. His uncompromising approach against communal and rabid elements in the region cutting across political or religious lines created more enemies than friends. But his style of functioning helped to maintain communal peace in the region otherwise sensitive from communal angle.Significantly, his fight against corruption and other unethical practices in police and bureaucracy started even at the beginning of his IPS career. As SP/ AIG at Gujarat police Hqrs in Ahmedabad, he formally lodged complaint against his senior bosses who resorted to corruption /malpractices in the recruitment of constables to Gujarat armed police. This case continued for many years when the involved officers made all efforts to get out of the dragnet. The words of one of the CBI officers associated with the case , during my train journey from Ahmedabad to New Delhi in 1998 still echo in my ears," Seldom had I seen such a police officer highly committed to truth and least concerned about his career while fighting against corruption in his own department"This commitment to truth and justice brought Sreekumar to Intelligence Bureau on deputation. No less a person than Mr. MK Narayanan, who was then in the Bureau played a key role on his induction to IB. For the first time in late 1980s, while attending an inservice course in New Delhi. I had opportunity to listen to his talk on some topic related to Communist movement. His earthly approach on sociopolitical issues, entirely different from the same class of officers in Bureau really attracted me. After his tenure in IB hqrs, he joined Kerala set up of IB as a Deputy Director, second-in command of the set up in the State.His tenure in Kerala IB was remarkable in many respects. Through his earthly and highly practical approach, not only that he could win over the heart of the majority of his officers and staff in the set up but also could establish rapport with a number of senior politicians and religious heads of different parties and religions who otherwise have reservations to have contacts with senior IB officers for obvious reasons. It was during his tenure the most dependable and analytical data-base on a number of National security related issues relevant to Kerala could be built up through arduous field oriented exercises and tasks without any bias or prejudice to any community or group.Unfortunately, much mud-slinging had been done against Sreekumar from certain corners in respect of his role in the sensational ISRO case of 1994. Many of these allegations are without knowing the real facts/ truth behind the entire episode. As already indicated, he as the Second in Command of the then IB set up in Kerala had officially or technically no powers to take any independent decision or action in respect of the areas of functioning or the tasks to be performed. Secondly, the entire ISRO case was initiated, guided, directed and monitored by the separate cell in IB Hqrs whose officers were present in all the crucial phases of the case including interrogation of suspects including Nambi Narayanan. Thirdly, as per IB charter, the organization has absolutely no investigation or police powers as alleged from certain corners. Fourthly, such powers were extensively used by the IPS officer who headed the Special Investigation team (SIT) of ISRO case who was instrumental for the arrest of Nambi Narayanan, on the basis of the available evidence collected by him /team. Fifthly, Sreekumar was not associated with the interrogation of Nambi Narayanan. Sixthly, the MHA charge sheet against Sreekumar and others on the basis of a special report by CBI team was basically erroneous and lacked legal validity on many grounds such as misinterpretation of the powers of IB, no specific charge against the erred officers vetted by documents or witnesses etc. Thus, the Departmental Inquiry Committee exonerated all the officers including Sreekumar from all charges. This was not challenged by the CBI or aggrieved parties. If that being the truth of ISRO case, there is no justification on the attempts of certain elements to crucify Sreekumar after a gap of over 20 years.Truly speaking what provoked such elements was the historic struggle launched by Sreekumar for ensuring justice to the victims of Gujarat genocide 2002 by bringing the perpetrators of those dastardly crimes before justice. I can say for certain that no civil servant of independent India had launched such heroic struggle against the State establishment for justice to the victims, as Sreekumar had done during the last one decade. He could suo-motto counter the temptations of power, position and prestige during this fight.In fact, his crusade in Gujarat started since he was repatriated to the state cadre from IB in early 2001. Initially, he had to fight with the natural calamity- the earthquake of 2001 which had virtually shattered the entire State. As an Officer on Special duty to the earthquake-devastated Bhuj, he worked day and night and effectively conducted difficult relief and rehabilitation operations. As an officer deeply committed to secular values, he tactfully dealt with the mischievous and motivated moves of rabid elements to deny relief and rehabilitation to minorities. Irony was that those elements wished the elimination of such minorities even during natural calamitiesThen attempts were made by the State to woo him to their camp highlighting the fraternity of his religion. He was elevated to the cozy and powerful post of ADG/Intelligence anticipating that he would fall in line with the communal agenda of the all powerful State administration. But without yielding to such offers and temptations, he performed his tasks as a true professional objectively assessing the dangerous signals emanating from rabid communal and revivalist elements in the State bent upon 'teaching a lesson to the minorities' . Had the State apparatus took such assessments and reports in true spirit and initiated timely preventive steps, tragedies like burning of Sabarmati Express or Godhra carnage could have been avoided. Then, Narendra Modi, who assumed the mantle of CM in Gujarat after the exit of Keshubhai Patel should have been hailed as a great administrator committed to 'Raj dharma'!But, nothing of that sort was happened. The rest was the most sad history that Independent India had witnessed after Jalinwalawagh: Godhra genocide, burning live human beings in the streets, mass rape of young and old girls and women, cold-blooded and gruesome killings of pregnant women and exhibiting fetus in open, arson, looting and massive destruction of assets and properties belonging to particular community. The police and the entire bureaucracy/civil service became senile silent spineless creatures dancing to the tune of State terror! Then followed the unending saga of fake encounter-killings, liquidation of political opponents, image building exercise of the rulers, emasculating judiciary and all State super structures as a result of which justice to the victims became a mirage, a myth, when perpetrators of dastardly crimes were rewarded with plum postings and cozy assignments.It was in such a tragic and bizarre scenario virtually reflecting all the trends of fascism, Sreekumar started his heroic struggles for justice. He checkmated the designs of the State apparatus to conduct a hasty Assembly polls to reap the rich sentiments of sections of masses during the post Godhra phase by factually submitting a report to the then Chief Election Commissioner Lyndoh during his visit to the State. This was contrary to the stand taken by the State Chief Secretary and Home Secretary who only toed the line of State set up. But Lyndoh could identify the truth and the elections were postponed. The truth really won; but Sreekumar suffered. His due promotion as DGP was withheld and he was unceremoniously shifted to an innocuous post in State Police Hqrs. In 2004, I saw Sreekumar there; confined to small room without any police paraphernalia, but with an old vehicle and an old police driver.While walking along the corridors of that big building, I saw officers with stars and baton turning their face away from Sreekumar! So much was the fear psychosis among those IPS and other police officers of the State who virtually turned into slaves under the new political dispensation in the State. Again I witnessed such servile attitude among the senior IPS officers when they virtually ostracized Sreekumar during a banquet hosted as part of an all India conference in which the State Chief Minister was the Chief guest! But actions could never adversely affect his indomitable will or the fight for justice.His affidavits before NanavatI Commission or Banerjee Commission or SIT led by RK Raghavan or Amicus Curie Raju Ramachandran which run in hundreds of pages and consisting of true and factual accounts of killings and incidents and the actual perpetrators speak volumes of his great commitment to truth and justice. Perhaps, he is one among the few IPS officers who was brave enough to openly challenge the findings of Nanavati Commission or that of SIT.Sreekumar does not limit his crusade by merely submitting affidavits. His activities at ground level were equally praiseworthy. In infamous cases like Best bakery, Naroda-Patiya, Gulberg society etc, he along with Teesta Setalvad played a key role in checkmating the efforts of State machinery to manipulate the evidence through coercive tactics of witnesses etc . Their intervention to a great extent could help to bring hundreds of perpetrators including state minister Maya Kotwani before justice. Despite organized efforts to stall his ongoing crusade by implicating him in false cases etc, Sreekumar continues his struggles upholding the Constitutional and Legal provisions and procedures that ensure justice to all citizens of India.In his struggles, he had his own losses. Through the intervention of CAT, he could avail his promotion as DGP after retirement. The UPA considered him as Member Central Information Commission, but was opposed by BJP representative. Thus UPA which has the past history of appointing their henchmen to various Constitutional or statutory bodies like NHRC, CVC, UPSC etc conveniently avoided him accepting BJP's contention! But, Sreekumar is not power hungry and not in the habit of greasing the palms of senior political masters who have their own agenda. His ongoing crusade is not for any personal gains or for any political parties, but for larger goals like preserving the secular credentials of the nation, peace and harmony and an egalitarian society in which all should get due justice. His fight focusing on the issues in Gujarat really reflect these great ideals.In the present scenario in the country when corruption and malpractices eat away the vitals of democracy and governance, civil servants play fiddle to the corrupt politicians, police and security agencies resort to cold-blooded killings through fake encounters to boost up the image of their political masters, RB Sreekumar shines like a golden star in the horizons of Indian Police Service with his great commitment to secularism, democracy and free and fair society in which the marginalized, exploited and underprivileged should get justice. He is single man army ; really a Goliath fighting a great war on his own will power and dedication. Behind him, there is no uniformed force or band of committed civil servants. That is why, he is the best IPS/IAS officer, India has seen..

Let me decide the process here in Utah.First a note: I retired from teaching in 2006, and have not kept up on curriculum development since then, but before I retired, I was actively involved at the state level in several areas of curriculum development. One state office administrator told me that I had had more influence on the fourth and fifth grade math and science curriculum than any other individual.What I will describe is how curriculum was developed prior to 2006.Each curricular area (art, language arts, foods, computer science, etc.) K-12 was on a six year cycle for update. As soon as the curriculum was adopted by the State Board of Education, teams would begin developing new curriculum for six years in the future. This was staggered so that all the curriculum did not change at once.The teams were made up of teachers, parents, administrators, university professors, and experts in each area. There would be a number of standards by grade for each curricular area. These standards were established by the State Board of Education after recommendation from the State Office of Education (USOE), who, again, would have sought input from teachers, parents, administrators, university professors, and experts in the field. Different areas had different numbers of standards, with fifth grade language arts having 46, and fourth grade science having 5.Each standard then had a subset of objectives. Here is Standard 1, Objective 1, from the current Fourth Grade Science Curriculum. (Science - 4th Grade Core)****************************************snip*********************************Standard 1Students will understand that water changes state as it moves through the water cycle.Objective 1Describe the relationship between heat energy, evaporation and condensation of water on EarthIdentify the relative amount and kind of water found in various locations on Earth (e.g., oceans have most of the water, glaciers and snowfields contain most fresh water).Identify the sun as the source of energy that evaporates water from the surface of Earth.Compare the processes of evaporation and condensation of water.Investigate and record temperature data to show the effects of heat energy on changing the states of water.******************************************snip*****************************Different teams would work on different standards to determine objectives. Once these were decided, they would be submitted to the USOE. Sometimes, the objectives would be accepted, other times they would be sent back for revision.Once all the objectives for a standard had been approved, that standard would be written into the new state core. The first one completed would become Standard 1, the second Standard 2, etc.Once all the standards were approved by USOE, the new curriculum would be submitted to the State Board of Education, who were elected officials whose job was to oversee all K-12 education in the state. Sometimes the entire new curriculum would be approved, sometimes it would be sent back for revision. Since those approving it were politicians, not educators, you can imagine that sometimes parts of the new curriculum were rejected for political, not educational reasons.Once the curriculum itself was approved, new teams, which might or might not include a few members of the original teams, would be formed to write sample lesson plans and state tests. Also, a list of vocabulary words for the standard would be developed, and test item writers could not use technical words that were not on that list unless they defined that word in the question.The lesson plans and tests went through a similar process for approval as was outlined above.The next step would be to beta test the curriculum by having it taught in selected schools throughout the state. The entire curriculum would not be taught in a single school, but a single standard would be taught in perhaps three schools, perhaps more. An effort was made to test standards in schools of high, medium, and low socio-economic levels, and also in urban, suburban, and rural areas. Feedback from teachers and analysis of the test results might indicate some things needed to be changed, but the changes would also have to be approved by the process outlined above.Once the final curriculum was done, it would be rolled out throughout the state, and inservice classes would be held for the teachers who would be teaching it. In this operation, a teacher mentor from each school district would attend an advanced week-long workshop on how to teach the curriculum, then go back and teach worskshops to teachers in his or her district. Large school districts were allowed more than one teacher mentor. Funds were also allocated so that the teachers who attended these workshops received the supplies necessary to teach the new curriculum.By this time, six years would have passed, and the new curriculum would be taught beginning in the seventh year, which would be the first year of the new cycle.It would be unethical for a teacher to copy a test and teach the test, and anyone who did that would be subject to termination. But to prevent the possibility, tests, manuals, and answer sheets were kept under lock and key and were checked out by teachers. Teachers were expected to keep tests locked up except while giving the tests.There would be a new test each year for six years. Each end of year test had about 20% of the questions that did not count toward a student’s score, but which were being evaluated for future tests.Two types of questions were immediately thrown out: those which everyone got right, and those which everyone got wrong. Why? Because you don’t need to test something if you already know what the results will be. Some of those questions would be re-written to be tried another year. Others would just be thrown away. Questions which indicated cultural or racial bias never made it to the test, nor did poorly written questions, such as multiple choice questions where “distractor” answers were obviously wrong. Questions that were missed primarily by students of a particular ethnicity or socioeconomic level would be analyzed to see what was arong with the question.The last thing to happen would be “bookmarking” the tests. This would be where teams of teachers, administrators, and university professors would receive a list of test questions ranked in order from most answered correctly to least answered correctly. The teams would work in small groups to insert bookmarks at certain points, dividing the test questions into four sections.State tests at that time were all multiple choice (Not the case any more, thank God. But I am not qualified to comment on the current tests.) . If there were a hundred questions, a person could get 25 right just by guessing. Therefore, you had to get 26 right before you had a score. This was the lowest section—the students who did not appear to know anything about the subject. The next section would include the students who seemed to know something, but not enough to do well in the next grade without help. These were the twos. The next section would be the solid students who knew enough to do well in the next grade. These were the threes. And the top section were the advanced learners. These were the fours, and this was, or should have been, the smallest section.The results of the small groups would be displayed for the entire team, and discussion might move a bookmark up or down a few points. Then the “cut scores” would go through the approval process. I’m sorry to say that the State Board would sometimes arbitrarily move cut scores down so that more students statewide would “pass” the test. That’s what happens sometimes when politicians make educational decisions.One last thing I should point out—not everything in the curriculum is intended to be taught to every student. There are some things in the curriculum that would only be taught to advanced students, and other things that would be taught to everyone.TL;DR Curriculum development is done by teams of teachers, administrators, parents, university professors, and experts in the field over a six year period.