Create a a Pecha Kucha style presentation, which discusses the following questions that
⢠Investigate and present how your selected HERO actions or activities are related to the United Nations
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
⢠Identify what challenges they faced and how they overcame them.
⢠Suggest what we could learn from their actions.
⢠Based on their work, provide suggestions for current and future generations.
Pecha Kucha (pronounced peh-cha ku-cha) is a presentation technique especially for those that embrace
PowerPoint, but this method ensures it is fun, fast and interesting.
Presentation targets:1. Develop an understanding of the scope and interrelationships between Business
Ethics, CSR and Sustainability, demonstrating how Business Ethics, CSR and Sustainability models and
theories can be applied to modern national and international organisations.
- Identify the way in which technology impacts on ethical organisational operations.
- Recognise how organisations develop ethical programmes, strategy in order to become
good corporate citizens whilst remaining profitable. - Critically evaluate how leadership, culture and society impact on innovative sustainable
initiatives. - Explore the implications of management, marketing, codes of conduct and international
relations together with how these formulate the ethical principles and values of sustainable organisations.
Practical, Professional or Subject Specific Skills
Sample Solution
Data for the study Root Surface Roughness After Scaling and Root Planing with Er:YAG Laster Compared to Hand and Ultrasonic Instruments by Profilometry (Attaei, E.; Birang, E.; Birang, R.; Naghsh, N.; Yaghini, J., 2015) utilized 56 extracted sound single rooted teeth with moderate level of calculus which were selected and randomly divided into four groups: SRP was performed with Er.YAG later) in group 1, Manual in group 2, and ultrasonic in group 3. Group 4 was considered the control group. After SRP all samples were cut by a Servocut cutting machine into pieces. The samples were mounted in acrylic resin. The surface roughness of the samples were evaluated with profile entry, and the data was analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukeyâs test in SPSS software. Bozbay et al. (2018) found that the percentage of coronal cementum remaining following subgingival instrumentation was 84% for U, 80% for U + AP, 94% for AP and 65% for HC. Although subgingival instrumentation of apical portions of the cementum demonstrated 6% less retained cementum in comparison with coronal portions, the amount of retained cementum with AP was still significantly higher than with HC. SEM results found the smoothest root surfaces created by the HC followed by the AP, while root surfaces instrumented by U or U + AP presented grooves and scratches. This study demonstrated that AP was superior to U devices in preserving cementum, whereas HC were the most effective instruments in removing cementum. While Devaraj C G, Marda P, Prakash S, Vastardis S. (2012) determined that the RCI and LTSI show statistically nonsignificant differences between all the three experiment cohorts, the RLTSI showed a statistically significant difference between the Slimline⢠ultrasonic insert and a hand curette as well as between the Slimline⢠and the Desmo-Clean⢠ultrasonic. The Slimline⢠showed the least mean scores for RCI, LTSI, and RLTSI. Though the difference was not correctable, the Slimline⢠insert was shown to be more effective than the other methods as scored by the indices and the instrumentation>
Data for the study Root Surface Roughness After Scaling and Root Planing with Er:YAG Laster Compared to Hand and Ultrasonic Instruments by Profilometry (Attaei, E.; Birang, E.; Birang, R.; Naghsh, N.; Yaghini, J., 2015) utilized 56 extracted sound single rooted teeth with moderate level of calculus which were selected and randomly divided into four groups: SRP was performed with Er.YAG later) in group 1, Manual in group 2, and ultrasonic in group 3. Group 4 was considered the control group. After SRP all samples were cut by a Servocut cutting machine into pieces. The samples were mounted in acrylic resin. The surface roughness of the samples were evaluated with profile entry, and the data was analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukeyâs test in SPSS software. Bozbay et al. (2018) found that the percentage of coronal cementum remaining following subgingival instrumentation was 84% for U, 80% for U + AP, 94% for AP and 65% for HC. Although subgingival instrumentation of apical portions of the cementum demonstrated 6% less retained cementum in comparison with coronal portions, the amount of retained cementum with AP was still significantly higher than with HC. SEM results found the smoothest root surfaces created by the HC followed by the AP, while root surfaces instrumented by U or U + AP presented grooves and scratches. This study demonstrated that AP was superior to U devices in preserving cementum, whereas HC were the most effective instruments in removing cementum. While Devaraj C G, Marda P, Prakash S, Vastardis S. (2012) determined that the RCI and LTSI show statistically nonsignificant differences between all the three experiment cohorts, the RLTSI showed a statistically significant difference between the Slimline⢠ultrasonic insert and a hand curette as well as between the Slimline⢠and the Desmo-Clean⢠ultrasonic. The Slimline⢠showed the least mean scores for RCI, LTSI, and RLTSI. Though the difference was not correctable, the Slimline⢠insert was shown to be more effective than the other methods as scored by the indices and the instrumentation>
Is this question part of your Assignment?
We can help
Our aim is to help you get A+ grades on your Coursework.
We handle assignments in a multiplicity of subject areas including Admission Essays, General Essays, Case Studies, Coursework, Dissertations, Editing, Research Papers, and Research proposals
Header Button Label: Get Started NowGet Started Header Button Label: View writing samplesView writing samples