Answer to Question 1
Answer: The number of U.S. high school students employed during the school year rises with age, from 40 percent of tenth graders to nearly 50 percent of twelfth gradersrates that exceed youth employment in other developed nations. Most are middle-SES youths in pursuit of spending money rather than vocational exploration and training. Low-SES teenagers who need to contribute to family income or to support themselves find it harder to get jobs. But when African-American and Hispanic teenagers from economically disadvantaged homes are employed, they generally put in more work hours. Adolescents typically hold jobs that involve low-level, repetitive tasks and provide little contact with adult supervisors. A heavy commitment to such jobs is harmful. The more hours students work, the poorer their school attendance, the lower their grades, the less likely they are to participate in extracurricular activities, and the more likely they are to drop out. Students who spend many hours at such jobs also report more drug and alcohol use and delinquent acts. In contrast, steady, moderate hours of employment predict higher grades and greater likelihood of attending and completing college, especially among students who began high school with weak academic records. For these youths, perhaps paid work promotes effective time management, sense of responsibility, and self-confidence. Workstudy programs or other jobs that combine academic and vocational learning opportunities are also linked to favorable outcomespositive school and work attitudes, improved academic performance, and reduced delinquency. Yet high-quality vocational preparation for non-college-bound U.S. adolescents is scarce; just 6 percent of twelfth graders report participating in workstudy programs. Unlike some European nations, the United States has no widespread training system to prepare youths for skilled business and industrial occupations and manual trades. Although U.S. federal and state governments support some job-training programs, most are too brief to make a difference and serve too few young people in need of assistance.
Answer to Question 2
Answer: Although sibling relationships bring many benefits, they are not essential for healthy development. Contrary to popular belief, only children are not spoiled, and in some respects, they are advantaged. U.S. children growing up in one-child and multichild families do not differ in self-rated personality traits. And compared to children with siblings, only children are higher in self-esteem and achievement motivation, do better in school, and attain higher levels of education. One reason may be that only children have somewhat closer relationships with parents, who may exert more pressure for mastery and accomplishment and can invest more time in their childs educational experiences. However, only children tend to be less well-accepted in the peer group, perhaps because they have not had opportunities to learn effective conflict-resolution strategies through sibling interactions. Favorable development also characterizes only children in China, where a one-child family policy was enforced in urban areas for more than three decades, until it was abolished in 2015. Compared with agemates who have siblings, Chinese only children are slightly advantaged in cognitive development and academic achievement. They also feel more emotionally secure, perhaps because government disapproval led to tension in families with more than one child. Chinese mothers usually ensure that their children have regular contact with first cousins (who are considered siblings). Perhaps as a result, Chinese only children do not differ from agemates with siblings in social skills and peer acceptance.
Changes in Time Spent with Family Members
Effects of the Autonomic Nervous System
Contrasting Colors (Part 2)
Placebo Effects and Viagra
Time vs. USA Population Exponential
Plot of land (Part a)