document_title: Conducting

question_text: what is the conductor of a choir called

question_tokens: what is the conductor of a choir called

text: Conducting

text: Nomenclature[edit]

text: The principal conductor of an orchestra or opera company is sometimes referred to as a music director or chief conductor, or by the German words Kapellmeister or Dirigent. Conductors of choirs or choruses are sometimes referred to as choral director, chorus master, or choirmaster, particularly for choirs associated with an orchestra. Conductors of concert bands, military bands, marching bands and other bands may hold the title of band director, bandmaster, or drum major. Respected senior conductors are sometimes referred to by the Italian word, maestro ("master" as in "one who has mastered the art").

text: History[edit]

text: This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2012) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: Middle Ages to 18th century[edit]

text: An early form of conducting is cheironomy, the use of hand gestures to indicate melodic shape. This has been practiced at least as far back as the Middle Ages. In the Christian church, the person giving these symbols held a staff to signify his role, and it seems that as music became rhythmically more complex, the staff was moved up and down to indicate the beat, acting as an early form of baton.

text: In the 17th century, other devices to indicate the passing of time came into use. Rolled up sheets of paper, smaller sticks and unadorned hands are all shown in pictures from this period. The large staff was responsible for the death of Jean-Baptiste Lully, who injured his foot with one while conducting a Te Deum for the King's recovery from illness. The wound became gangrenous and Lully refused amputation, whereupon the gangrene spread to his leg and he died two months later.[5]

text: In instrumental music throughout the 18th century, a member of the ensemble usually acted as the conductor. This was sometimes the concertmaster, who could use his bow as a baton, or a lutenist who would move the neck of his instrument in time with the beat. It was common to conduct from the harpsichord in pieces that had a basso continuo part. In opera performances, there were sometimes two conductors – the keyboard player was in charge of the singers, and the principal violinist or leader was in charge of the orchestra.

text: 19th century[edit]

text: By the early 19th century (ca. 1820), it became the norm to have a dedicated conductor, who did not also play an instrument during the performance. While some orchestras protested the introduction of the conductor, since they were used to having a concertmaster or keyboard player act as leader, eventually the role of a conductor was established. The size of the usual orchestra expanded during this period, and the use of a baton became more common, as it was easier to see than bare hands or rolled-up paper. Among the earliest notable conductors were Louis Spohr, Carl Maria von Weber, Louis-Antoine Jullien and Felix Mendelssohn, all of whom were also composers. Mendelssohn is claimed to have been the first conductor to utilize a wooden baton to keep time, a practice still generally in use in the 2010s. Prominent conductors who did not or do not use a baton include Pierre Boulez, Kurt Masur, James Conlon, Yuri Temirkanov,[6] Leopold Stokowski, Vasily Safonov, Eugene Ormandy (for a period), and Dimitri Mitropoulos.[7]

text: The composers Hector Berlioz and Richard Wagner attained greatness as conductors, and they wrote two of the earliest essays dedicated to the subject. Berlioz is considered the first virtuoso conductor. Wagner was largely responsible for shaping the conductor's role as one who imposes his own view of a piece onto the performance rather than one who is just responsible for ensuring entries are made at the right time and that there is a unified beat. Predecessors who focused on conducting include François Habeneck, who founded the Orchestre de la Société des concerts du Conservatoire in 1828, though Berlioz was later to be alarmed at Habeneck's loose standards of rehearsal. Pianist and composer Franz Liszt was also a conductor.

text: Wagner's one-time champion Hans von Bülow (1830–1894) was particularly celebrated as a conductor, although he also maintained his initial career as a pianist, an instrument on which he was regarded as among the greatest performers (he was a prized piano student of Franz Liszt, whose daughter Cosima he married – although she was to abandon him for Wagner. Liszt was a major figure in the history of conducting, who attained remarkable performances).

text: Bülow raised the technical standards of conducting to an unprecedented level through such innovations as separate, detailed rehearsals of different sections of the orchestra ("sectional rehearsal"). In his posts as head of (sequentially) the Bavarian State Opera, Meiningen Court Orchestra, and Berlin Philharmonic he brought a level of nuance and subtlety to orchestral performance previously heard only in solo instrumental playing, and in doing so made a profound impression on young artists like Richard Strauss, who at the age of 20 served as his assistant, and Felix Weingartner, who came to disapprove of his interpretations but was deeply impressed by his orchestral standards. Composer Gustav Mahler was also a noted conductor.

text: 20th century[edit]

text: The next generation of conductors brought technical standards to new levels; perhaps most notable was the Hungarian-born Arthur Nikisch (1855–1922), who succeeded Bülow as music director of the Berlin Philharmonic in 1895. He had previously served as head of the Leipzig Opera, Boston Symphony Orchestra, and Leipzig Gewandhaus Orchestra, and was to serve as music director of the London Symphony Orchestra. Nikisch premiered important works by Anton Bruckner and Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky, who greatly admired his work; Johannes Brahms, after hearing him conduct his Fourth Symphony, said it was "quite exemplary, it's impossible to hear it any better."

text: Nikisch took the London Symphony Orchestra on tour through the United States in April 1912, the first American tour by a European orchestra. He also made one of the earliest recordings of a complete symphony: the Beethoven Fifth with the Berlin Philharmonic in November 1913. Nikisch was also the first conductor to have his art captured on film – alas, silently. The film confirms reports that he made particularly mesmerizing use of eye contact and expression to communicate with an orchestra; such later conductors as Fritz Reiner stated that this aspect of his technique had a strong influence on their own.

text: Conductors of the generations after Nikisch often left extensive recorded evidence of their arts. Two particularly influential and widely recorded figures are often treated, somewhat inaccurately, as interpretive antipodes. They were the Italian conductor Arturo Toscanini (1867–1957) and the German conductor Wilhelm Furtwängler (1886–1954). Toscanini played in orchestras under Giuseppe Verdi and made his debut conducting Aida in 1886, filling in at the last minute for an indisposed conductor. He is to this day regarded by such authorities as James Levine as the greatest of all Verdi conductors. But Toscanini's repertory was wide, and it was in his interpretations of the German symphonists Beethoven and Brahms that he was particularly renowned and influential, favoring stricter and faster tempi than a conductor like Bülow or, before him, Wagner. Still, his style shows more inflection than his reputation may suggest, and he was particularly gifted at revealing detail and getting orchestras to play in a singing manner.

text: Furtwängler, whom many regard as the greatest interpreter of Wagner (although Toscanini was also admired in this composer) and Bruckner, conducted Beethoven and Brahms with a good deal of inflection of tempo – but generally in a manner that revealed the structure and direction of the music particularly clearly. He was an accomplished composer as well as performer, and a disciple of the theorist Heinrich Schenker, who emphasized concern for underlying long-range harmonic tensions and resolutions in a piece, a strength of Furtwängler's conducting. Along with his interest in the large-scale, Furtwängler also shaped the details of the piece in a particularly compelling and expressive manner.

text: The two men had very different techniques: Toscanini's was Italianate, with a long, large baton and clear beats (often not using his left hand); Furtwängler beat time with less apparent precision, because he wanted a more rounded sound (although it is a myth that his technique was vague; many musicians have attested that he was easy to follow in his own way). In any event, their examples illustrate a larger point about conducting technique in the first half of the 20th century: it was not standardized. Great and influential conductors of the middle 20th century like Leopold Stokowski (1882–1977), Otto Klemperer (1885–1973), Herbert von Karajan (1908–1989) and Leonard Bernstein (1918–1990) – incidentally, the first American conductor to attain greatness and international fame – had widely varied techniques.

text: Karajan and Bernstein formed another apparent antipode in the 1960s–80s, Karajan as music director of the Berlin Philharmonic (1955–89) and Bernstein as, for part of that period, music director of the New York Philharmonic (1957–69), and later frequent guest conductor in Europe. Karajan's technique was highly controlled, and eventually he conducted with his eyes often closed; Bernstein's technique was demonstrative, with highly expressive facial gestures and hand and body movements. Karajan could conduct for hours without moving his feet, while Bernstein was known at times to leap into the air at a great climax. As the music director of the Berlin Philharmonic, Karajan cultivated warm, blended beauty of tone, which has sometimes been criticized as too uniformly applied; by contrast, in Bernstein's only appearance with the Berlin Philharmonic in 1979 – performing Mahler's Symphony No. 9 – he tried to get the orchestra to produce an "ugly" tone in a certain passage in which he believed it suited the expressive meaning of the music (the first horn player refused, and finally agreed to let an understudy play instead of himself).

text: Both Karajan and Bernstein made extensive use of advances in media to convey their art, but in tellingly different ways. Bernstein hosted major prime-time national television series to educate and reach out to children and the public at large about classical music; Karajan made a series of films late in his life, but in them, he did not talk. Both made numerous recordings, but their attitudes toward recording differed: Karajan frequently made new studio recordings to take advantage of advances in recording technique, which fascinated him – he played a role in setting the specifications of the compact disc – but Bernstein, in his post-New York days, came to insist on (for the most part) live concert recordings, believing that music-making did not come to life in a studio without an audience.

text: In the last third of the 20th century, conducting technique – particularly with the right hand and the baton – became increasingly standardized. Conductors like Willem Mengelberg in Amsterdam until the end of World War II had had extensive rehearsal time to mold orchestras very precisely, and thus could have idiosyncratic techniques; modern conductors, who spend less time with any given orchestra, must get results with much less rehearsal time. A more standardized technique allows communication to be much more rapid. Nonetheless, conductors' techniques still show a great deal of variety, particularly with the use of the left hand, facial and eye expression, and body language.

text: 21st century[edit]

text: Women conductors were almost unheard of in the ranks of leading orchestral conductors through most of the 19th and 20th centuries, but today, artists like Hortense von Gelmini (de),[8] Marin Alsop and Simone Young have broken the gender barrier. Alsop was appointed music director of the Baltimore Symphony Orchestra in 2007 – the first woman ever appointed to head a major US orchestra – and also of the Orquestra Sinfônica do Estado de São Paulo in 2012, and Alsop was the first woman to conduct on the last night of The Proms. Young scored similar firsts when she became head of the Hamburg State Opera and Philharmoniker Hamburg in 2005; she is also the first woman conductor to record the Ring Cycle of Richard Wagner. The Guardian called conducting "one of the last glass ceilings in the music industry".[9] A 2013 article stated that in France, out of 574 concerts only 17 were conducted by women and no women conducted at the National Opéra in Paris.[10] "Bachtrack reported that, in a list of the world's 150 top conductors that year, only five were women."[11]

text: While Mexico has produced several major international conductors, Alondra de la Parra has become the first Mexican-born woman to attain distinction in the profession. Similarly, Asian origin has become unremarkable, because of the international successes of conductors from the Far East such as Seiji Ozawa, who was the Boston Symphony Orchestra's music director from 1973 until 2002 after holding similar posts in San Francisco and Toronto, and Myung-Whun Chung, who has held major posts in Germany and France and now is bringing the Seoul Philharmonic Orchestra to international attention. There is still under-representation of artists of black origin in the conducting profession, but there have been notable exceptions, such as Henry Lewis, Dean Dixon, James DePreist, Paul Freeman, and Michael Morgan. For more information on black conductors, see Black conductors. According to a 2004 article in The Guardian, "black conductors are rare in the classical music world and even in symphony orchestras it is unusual to see more than one or two black musicians."[12]

text: Technique[edit]

text: Conducting is a means of communicating artistic directions to performers during a performance. Although there are many formal rules on how to conduct correctly, others are subjective, and a wide variety of different conducting styles exist depending upon the training and sophistication of the conductor. The primary responsibilities of the conductor are to unify performers, set the tempo, execute clear preparations and beats, listen critically and shape the sound of the ensemble, and to control the interpretation and pacing of the music. Communication is non-verbal during a performance, however in rehearsal frequent interruptions allow directions as to how the music should be played. During rehearsals, the conductor may stop the playing of a piece to request changes in the phrasing or request a change in the timbre of a certain section. In amateur orchestras, the rehearsals are often stopped to draw the musicians' attentions to performance errors or transposition mistakes.

text: Conducting requires an understanding of the elements of musical expression (tempo, dynamics, articulation) and the ability to communicate them effectively to an ensemble. The ability to communicate nuances of phrasing and expression through gestures is also beneficial. Conducting gestures are preferably prepared beforehand by the conductor while studying the score, but may sometimes be spontaneous.

text: A distinction is sometimes made between orchestral conducting and choral conducting. Typically, orchestral conductors use a baton more often than choral conductors. The grip of the baton varies from conductor to conductor.

text: Beat and tempo[edit]

text: At the beginning of a piece of music, the conductor raises his or her hands (or hand if he or she only uses a single hand) to indicate that the piece is about to begin. This is a signal for the orchestra members to ready their instruments to be played or for the choristers to be ready and watching. The conductor then looks at the different sections of the orchestra (winds, strings, etc.) or choir to ensure that all the orchestra members are ready to play and choir members are ready. In some choral works, the conductor may signal to a pianist or organist to play a note or chord so that the choir members can determine their starting notes. Then the conductor gives one or more preparatory beats to commence the music. The preparatory beat before the orchestra or choir begins is the upbeat. The beat of the music is typically indicated with the conductor's right hand, with or without a baton. The hand traces a shape in the air in every bar (measure) depending on the time signature, indicating each beat with a change from downward to upward motion.[13] The images show the most common beat patterns, as seen from the conductor's point of view.[citation needed]

text: The downbeat indicates the first beat of the bar, and the upbeat indicates the beat before the first note of the piece and the last beat of the bar. The instant at which the beat occurs is called the ictus (plural: ictūs or ictuses), and is usually indicated by a sudden (though not necessarily large) click of the wrist or change in baton direction. In some instances, "ictus" is also used to refer to a horizontal plane in which all the ictuses are physically located, such as the top of a music stand where a baton is tapped at each ictus. The gesture leading up to the ictus is called the "preparation", and the continuous flow of steady beats is called the "takt" (the German word for bar, measure and beat).

text: If the tempo is slow or slowing, or if the time signature is compound, a conductor will sometimes indicate "subdivisions" of the beats. The conductor can do this by adding a smaller movement in the same direction as the movement for the beat that it belongs to.

text: Changes to the tempo are indicated by changing the speed of the beat. To carry out and to control a rallentando (slowing down the pace of the music), a conductor may introduce beat subdivisions.

text: While some conductors use both hands to indicate the beat, with the left hand mirroring the right, formal education discourages such an approach. The second hand can be used for cueing the entrances of individual players or sections, and to aid indications of dynamics, phrasing, expression, and other elements.

text: During an instrumental solo section (or, in an opera orchestra during a vocalist's unaccompanied solo), some conductors stop counting out all the subdivisions and simply tap the baton down once per bar, to aid performers who are counting bars of rests.

text: There is a difference between the "textbook" definition of where the ictus of a downbeat occurs and the actual performance practice in professional orchestras. With an abrupt, loud sforzando chord, a professional orchestra will often play slightly after the striking of the ictus point of the baton stroke.

text: Dynamics[edit]

text: Dynamics are indicated in various ways. The dynamic may be communicated by the size of the conducting movements, larger shapes representing louder sounds. Changes in dynamic may be signalled with the hand that is not being used to indicate the beat: an upward motion (usually palm-up) indicates a crescendo; a downward motion (usually palm-down) indicates a diminuendo. Changing the size of conducting movements frequently results in changes in the character of the music depending upon the circumstances.

text: Dynamics can be fine-tuned using various gestures: showing one's palm to the performers or leaning away from them may demonstrate a decrease in volume. To adjust the overall balance of the various instruments or voices, these signals can be combined or directed toward a particular section or performer.

text: Cueing[edit]

text: The indication of entries, when a performer or section should begin playing (perhaps after a long period of rests), is called "cueing". A cue must forecast with certainty the exact moment of the coming ictus, so that all the players or singers affected by the cue can begin playing simultaneously. Cueing is most important for cases where a performer or section has not been playing for a lengthy time. Cueing is also helpful in the case of a pedal point with string players, when a section has been playing the pedal point for a lengthy period; a cue is important to indicate when they should change to a new note. Cueing is achieved by "engaging" the players before their entry (by looking at them) and executing a clear preparation gesture, often directed toward the specific players. An inhalation, which may or may not be a semi-audible "sniff" from the conductor, is a common element in the cueing technique of some conductors. Mere eye contact or a look in the general direction of the players may be sufficient in many instances, as when more than one section of the ensemble enters at the same time. Larger musical events may warrant the use of a larger or more emphatic cue designed to encourage emotion and energy.

text: Other musical elements[edit]

text: Articulation may be indicated by the character of the ictus, ranging from short and sharp for staccato, to long and fluid for legato. Many conductors change the tension of the hands: strained muscles and rigid movements may correspond to marcato, while relaxed hands and soft movements may correspond to legato or espressivo. Phrasing may be indicated by wide overhead arcs or by a smooth hand motion either forwards or side-to-side. A held note is often indicated by a hand held flat with palm up. The end of a note, called a "cutoff" or "release", may be indicated by a circular motion, the closing of the palm, or the pinching of finger and thumb. A release is usually preceded by a preparation and concluded with a complete stillness.

text: Conductors aim to maintain eye contact with the ensemble as much as possible, encouraging eye contact in return and increasing the dialogue between players/singers and conductor. Facial expressions may also be important to demonstrate the character of the music or to encourage the players.

text:
In some cases, such as where there has been little rehearsal time to prepare a piece, a conductor may discreetly indicate how the bars of music will be beat immediately before the start of the movement by holding up their fingers in front of their chest (so only the performers can see). For example, in a 4
4 piece that the conductor will beat "in two" (two ictus points or beats per bar, as if it were 2
2), the conductor would hold up two fingers in front of his or her chest.

text: In most cases, there is a short pause between movements of a symphony, concerto or dance suite. This brief pause gives orchestra or choir members time to turn the pages of their part and ready themselves for the start of the next movement. String players may apply rosin or wipe sweat off their hands with a handkerchief. Reed players may take this time to change to a new reed. In some cases, woodwind or brass players will use the pause to switch to a different instrument (e.g., from trumpet to cornet or from clarinet to E♭ clarinet). If the conductor wishes to immediately begin one movement after another for musical reasons, this is called attacca. The conductor will instruct the orchestra members and choristers to write the term in their parts, so that they will be ready to go immediately to the next movement.

text: Roles[edit]

text: The roles of a conductor vary a great deal between different conducting positions and different ensembles. In some cases, a conductor will also be the musical director of the symphony, choosing the program for the entire season, including concerts by guest conductors, concerto soloists, pop concerts, and so on. A senior conductor may attend some or all of the auditions for new members of the orchestra, to ensure that the candidates have the playing style and tone that the conductor prefers and that candidates meet the highest performance standards. Some choral conductors are hired to prepare a choir for several weeks which will subsequently be directed by another conductor. The choral conductor is usually acknowledged for their preparatory work in the concert program.

text: Some conductors may have a significant public relations role, giving interviews to the local news channel and appearing on television talk shows to promote the upcoming season or particular concerts. On the other hand, a conductor hired to guest conduct a single concert may only have the responsibility of rehearsing the orchestra for several pieces and conducting one or two concerts. While a handful of conductors have become well-known celebrities, such as Leonard Bernstein, most are only known within the Classical music scene.

text: Training and education[edit]

text: Classical choral and instrumental conducting have established comprehensive systems of instruction and training. Aspiring conductors can study at colleges, conservatories, and universities. Conservatories, which are the standard musical training system in France and in Quebec (Canada) provide lessons and amateur conducting experience. Universities offer a range of conducting programs, including courses in conducting as part of bachelor's degrees, a small number of Master of Music degrees in conducting, and an even smaller number of Doctor of Musical Arts degrees in conducting.

text: As well, there are a variety of other training programs such as classical summer camps and training festivals, which give students the opportunity to conduct a wide range of music. Aspiring conductors need to obtain a broad education about the history of music, including the major periods of classical music and regarding music theory. Many conductors learn to play a keyboard instrument such as the piano or the pipe organ, a skill that helps them to be able to analyze symphonies and try out their interpretations before they have access to an orchestra to conduct. Many conductors get experience playing in an orchestra or singing in a choir, an experience which gives them good insights into how orchestras and choirs are conducted and rehearsed.

text: In 2014, orchestra conductors typically hold a master's degree in music and choir conductors in the US typically hold a bachelor's degree in music.[14] Bachelor's degrees (referred to as B.Mus. or B.M) are four-year programs that include conducting lessons, amateur orchestra experience, and a sequence of courses in music history, music theory, and liberal arts courses (e.g., English literature), which give the student a more well-rounded education. Students do not usually specialize in conducting at the B.Mus. stage; instead, they usually develop general music skills such as singing, playing an orchestral instrument, performing in a choir, playing in orchestra, and playing a keyboard instrument such as the piano or the organ.

text: Another topic that conducting students study is the languages used in Classical music opera. Orchestral conductors are expected to be able to rehearse and lead choirs in works for orchestra and choir. As such, orchestral conductors need to know the major languages used in choral writing (including French, Italian and Latin, among others) and they must understand the correct diction of these languages in a choral singing context. The opposite is also true: a choral conductor will be expected to rehearse and lead a string orchestra or full orchestra when performing works for choir and orchestra. As such, a choral conductor needs to know how to rehearse and lead instrument sections.

text: Master of music degrees (M.mus.) in conducting consist of private conducting lessons, ensemble experience, coaching, and graduate courses in music history and music theory, along with one or two conducted concerts. A Master's degree in music (referred to as an M.Mus. or M.M.) is often the required minimum credential for people who wish to become a professor of conducting.

text: Doctor of Musical Arts (referred to as D.M.A., DMA, D.Mus.A. or A.Mus.D) degrees in conducting provide an opportunity for advanced study at the highest artistic and pedagogical level, requiring usually an additional 54+ credit hours beyond a master's degree (which is about 30+ credits beyond a bachelor's degree). For this reason, admission is highly selective. Examinations in music history, music theory, ear training/dictation, and an entrance examination and conducting audition are required. Students perform a number of conducted concerts, including a combination lecture-conducted concert with an accompanying doctoral dissertation, advanced coursework. Students must typically maintain a minimum B average. A DMA in conducting is a terminal degree, and as such, it qualifies the holder to teach in colleges, universities and conservatories. In addition to academic study, another part of the training pathway for many conductors is conducting amateur orchestras, such as youth orchestras, school orchestras and community orchestras.

text: A small number of conductors become professionals without formal training in conducting. These individuals often have achieved renown as an instrumental or vocal performer, and they have often undertaken a great deal of training in their area of expertise (instrumental performance or singing). Another way that a small number of conductors become professionals without formal training in conducting is by learning on the job by conducting amateur orchestras, school orchestras, and community orchestras (or the equivalent choral ensembles).

text: The average salary of conductors in the US in 2014 was $48,180. A 3% growth rate is forecast for conducting jobs from 2014 to 2024, a slower than average growth rate.[14]


document_title: Young Sheldon

question_text: when does the new tv show young sheldon start

root

text: Young Sheldon

text: Premise[edit]

text: The series follows gifted 9-year-old Sheldon Cooper as he attends high school in East Texas and attempts to deal with the world around him while his otherwise normal family attempts to deal with him.[1][2]

tag: p

text: Cast and characters[edit]

text:
Iain Armitage as Sheldon Cooper, a 9-year-old with a "once-in-a-generation mind capable of advanced mathematics and science".[3][2]

Jim Parsons narrates the series as the older, present-day, Sheldon Cooper.[1]

Zoe Perry as Mary Cooper, Sheldon's mother. Perry is the daughter of Laurie Metcalf, who portrays Mary Cooper on The Big Bang Theory.[3]
Lance Barber as George Cooper, Sr., Sheldon's father.[1][2]
Raegan Revord as Missy Cooper, Sheldon's twin sister.[1]
Montana Jordan as George Cooper, Jr., Sheldon's older brother.[1][2]
Annie Potts as Meemaw, Sheldon's grandmother. The character was portrayed by June Squibb on The Big Bang Theory.[4]

tag: ul

text: Episodes[edit]

text:
No.
Title
Directed by
Written by
Original air date
Prod.
code
U.S. viewers
(millions)

1
"Pilot"[5]
Jon Favreau
Chuck Lorre & Steve Molaro
September 25, 2017 (2017-09-25)
TBA
TBD

tag: table

text: Production[edit]

text: Development[edit]

text: In November 2016, it was reported that CBS was in negotiations to create a spin-off of The Big Bang Theory centered on Sheldon Cooper as a young boy. The prequel series, described as "a Malcolm in the Middle-esque single-camera family comedy" would be executive produced by The Big Bang Theory creatives Chuck Lorre and Steven Molaro, with The Big Bang Theory co-creator Bill Prady expected to be involved in some capacity, and intended to air in the 2017–18 season alongside The Big Bang Theory.[6][7] The initial idea for the series came from Jim Parsons (who portrays Sheldon on The Big Bang Theory), who passed it along to The Big Bang Theory producers.[3] On March 13, 2017, CBS ordered the spin-off Young Sheldon series, which was created by Lorre and Molaro. Jon Favreau will direct and executive produce the pilot. Parsons, Lorre, Molaro and Todd Spiewak will also serve as executive producers on the series, for Chuck Lorre Productions, Inc. in association with Warner Bros. Television.[1]

text: Casting[edit]

text: In early March 2017, Iain Armitage was cast as the younger Sheldon, as well as Zoe Perry as his mother, Mary Cooper. Perry is the real-life daughter of Laurie Metcalf, who portrays Mary Cooper on The Big Bang Theory.[3] Additionally, Lance Barber stars as George Cooper, Sr., Sheldon's father; Raegan Revord stars as Missy Cooper, Sheldon's twin sister; and Montana Jordan as George Cooper, Jr., Sheldon's older brother. Jim Parsons reprises his role as adult Sheldon Cooper, as narrator for the series.[2] In July 2017, Annie Potts was cast as Meemaw, Sheldon's grandmother.[4]

text: Release[edit]

text: Young Sheldon is scheduled to begin airing on CBS on November 2, 2017, after The Big Bang Theory. It will have a special preview on September 25, 2017.[2]

text: Critical response[edit]

text: The series' premise, as conveyed by a May 2017 trailer, gained favorable comparisons to the 1990s sitcom Smart Guy from HuffPost.[8]


document_title: Zone of proximal development

question_text: scaffolding is a vygotskian term that refers to ____

question_tokens: scaffolding is a vygotskian term that refers to -- -- -- --

text: Zone of proximal development

text: Origins[edit]

text: The concept of the zone of proximal development was originally developed by Vygotsky to argue against the use of academic, knowledge-based tests as a means to gauge students' intelligence. He also created ZPD to further develop Jean Piaget's theory of children being lone learners.[5] Vygotsky spent a lot of time studying the impact of school instruction on children and noted that children grasp language concepts quite naturally, but that maths and writing don’t come naturally, that these are concepts taught in schools and tend to come along with some difficulty, while Piaget believed that there was a clear distinction between development and teaching. He said that development is a spontaneous process that is initiated and completed by the children, stemming from their own efforts. Piaget was a proponent of independent thinking and critical of the standard teacher-led instruction that was common practice in schools.[6]

text: Alternatively, Vygotsky saw natural, spontaneous development as important, but not all-important. He believed that children would not advance very far if they were left to discover everything on their own. He noted cultural experiences where children are greatly helped by knowledge and tools handed down from previous generations. Vygotsky noted that good teachers shouldn't present material that is too difficult and “pull the students along.”[6]

text: Vygotsky argued that, rather than examining what a student knows to determine intelligence, it is better to examine his or her ability to solve problems independently and his or her ability to solve problems with an adult's help.[7] He proposed a question: "if two children perform the same on a test, are their levels of development the same?" He concluded that they were not.[8] However, Vygotsky's untimely death interrupted his work on the zone of proximal development, and it remained mostly incomplete.[9]

text: Definition[edit]

text: Since Vygotsky's original conception, the definition for the zone of proximal development has been expanded and modified. The zone of proximal development is an area of learning that occurs when a person is assisted by a teacher or peer with a skill set higher than that of the subject.[1] The person learning the skill set cannot complete it without the assistance of the teacher or peer. The teacher then helps the student attain the skill the student is trying to master, in hopes that the teacher will no longer be needed for that task.[10]

text: Any function within the zone of proximal development matures within a particular internal context that includes not only the function’s actual level but also how susceptible the child is to types of help, the sequence in which these types of help are offered, the flexibility or rigidity of previously formed stereotypes, how willing the child is to collaborate, along with other factors.[11] This context can impact the diagnosis of a function’s potential level of development.[9]

text: Vygotsky stated that we can’t just look at what students are capable of doing on their own; we have to look at what they are capable of doing in a social setting. In many cases students are able to complete a task within a group before they are able to complete it on their own. He notes that the teacher’s job is to move the child’s mind forward step-by-step (after all, teachers can’t teach complex chemical equations to first-graders). At the same time, teachers can’t teach all children equally; they must determine which students are ready for which lessons.[6] An example is the often-used accelerated reading program in schools. Students are assessed and given a reading level and a range. Books rated below their level are easy to read, while books above their level will challenge the student. Sometimes students are not even allowed to check out books from the school library that are outside of their range. Vygotsky argued that a major shortcoming of standardized tests is that they only measure what students are capable of on their own, not in a group setting where their minds are being pushed by other students.[6]

text: Scaffolding[edit]

text: The concept of the ZPD is widely used to study children's mental development as it relates to education. The ZPD concept is seen as a scaffolding, a structure of "support points" for performing an action.[12] This refers to the help or guidance received from an adult or more competent peer to permit the child to work within the ZPD.[13] Although Vygotsky himself never mentioned the term, scaffolding was first developed by Jerome Bruner, David Wood, and Gail Ross, while applying Vygotsky's concept of ZPD to various educational contexts.[5] According to Wass and Golding, giving students the hardest tasks they can do with scaffolding will lead to the greatest learning gains.[14]

text: Scaffolding is a process through which a teacher or a more competent peer helps the student in his or her ZPD as necessary and tapers off this aid as it becomes unnecessary, much as a scaffold is removed from a building after construction is completed. "Scaffolding [is] the way the adult guides the child's learning via focused questions and positive interactions."[15] This concept has been further developed by Mercedes Chaves Jaime, Ann Brown, among others. Several instructional programs were developed based on this interpretation of the ZPD, including reciprocal teaching and dynamic assessment. In order for scaffolding to work and have an effect, one must start at the child's level of knowledge and build from there.[13]

text: One example of children using ZPD is when they are learning to speak. As their speech develops, it influences the way the child thinks, which in turn also influences the child's manner of speaking.[8] Wells gives the example of dancing: when a person is learning how to dance, they look to others around them on the dance floor and imitate their moves. A person does not copy the dance moves exactly, but takes what they can and adds their own personality to it.[16]

text: In mathematics, proximal development uses mathematical exercises for which students have seen one or more worked examples. In secondary school some scaffolding is provided, and generally much less at the tertiary level. Ultimately students must find library resources or a tutor when presented with challenges beyond the zone.

text: Another example of scaffolding is learning to drive. Parents and driving instructors guide driving students along the way by showing them the mechanics of how the car operates, the correct hand positions on the steering wheel, the technique of scanning the roadway, etc. As the student progresses, less and less instruction is needed, until they are ready to drive on their own.

text: Implications for educators[edit]

text: Various investigations, using different approaches and research frameworks have proved collaborative learning to be effective in many kinds of settings and contexts.[17] Teachers should assign tasks that students cannot do on their own, but which they can do with assistance; they should provide just enough assistance so that students learn to complete the tasks independently and then provide an environment that enables students to do harder tasks than would otherwise be possible.[14] In the context of adults, peers should challenge each other in order to support collaboration and success.[18]


document_title: FIFA World Cup hosts

question_text: when was the last fifa world cup held

question_tokens: when was the last fifa world cup held

text: FIFA World Cup hosts

text: List of hosts[edit]

text:
Year

Host

Continent

Winner

1930
 Uruguay

South America

 Uruguay

1934
 Italy

Europe

 Italy

1938
 France

Europe

 Italy

1942

Cancelled because of World War II *1

1946

Cancelled because of World War II

1950
 Brazil

South America

 Uruguay

1954
  Switzerland

Europe

 Germany

1958
 Sweden

Europe

 Brazil

1962
 Chile

South America

 Brazil

1966
 England

Europe

 England

1970
 Mexico

North America

 Brazil

1974
 Germany

Europe

 Germany

1978
 Argentina

South America

 Argentina

1982
 Spain

Europe

 Italy

1986
 Mexico

North America

 Argentina

1990
 Italy

Europe

 Germany

1994
 United States

North America

 Brazil

1998
 France

Europe

 France

2002
 Japan South Korea

Asia

 Brazil

2006
 Germany

Europe

 Italy

2010
 South Africa

Africa

 Spain

2014
 Brazil

South America

 Germany

2018
 Russia

Europe

 France

2022
 Qatar

Asia

2026
 Canada Mexico  United States

North America

2030
TBD

2034
TBD

text: 1. In 1942, Germany was expected to be the host country, but because of the World War II, the World Cup was cancelled.

text: Results of hosts[edit]

text: Except 1934, host nations are granted an automatic spot in the World Cup group stages. The first host ever to fail to advance past the first round was South Africa in 2010.  denotes the best result in the team's history,  - the best result at the time of the competition (improved later).

text:
No.

Year

Host nation

Finish

1

1930

 Uruguay

Champions

2

1934

 Italy

Champions

3

1938

 France

Quarter-final‡

—

1942

 Germany (expected)

Tournament is canceled due to World War II

—

1946

Tournament canceled, during the World War II

4

1950

 Brazil

Runners-up

5

1954

  Switzerland

Quarter-final†

6

1958

 Sweden

Runners-up

7

1962

 Chile

Third place

8

1966

 England

Champions

9

1970

 Mexico

Quarter-final†

10

1974

 West Germany

Champions

11

1978

 Argentina

Champions

12

1982

 Spain

Round 2 (Top 12)  (Format was different from other cups.)

13

1986

 Mexico

Quarter-final†

14

1990

 Italy

Third place

15

1994

 United States

Round of 16

16

1998

 France

Champions

17

2002

 South Korea

Fourth place

 Japan

Round of 16†

18

2006

 Germany

Third place

19

2010

 South Africa

Group stage

20

2014

 Brazil

Fourth place

21

2018

 Russia

Quarter-final

22

2022

 Qatar

TBD[note 1]

23

2026

 Canada

TBD

 Mexico

TBD

 United States

TBD

text: 1930 FIFA World Cup[edit]

text: Bids:

text:
Hungary
 Italy
 Netherlands
 Spain
 Sweden
 Uruguay

text: Before the FIFA Congress could vote on the first-ever World Cup host, a series of withdrawals led to the election of Uruguay. The Netherlands and Hungary withdrew, followed by Sweden withdrawing in favour of Italy. Then both Italy and Spain withdrew, in favour of the only remaining candidate, Uruguay. The FIFA Congress met in Barcelona, Spain on 18 May 1929 to ratify the decision, and Uruguay was chosen without a vote.[citation needed]

text: Results:

text:
Uruguay
 Italy withdrew
 Spain withdrew
 Sweden withdrew
 Netherlands withdrew
 Hungary withdrew

tag: ol

text: Notice that the celebration of the first World Cup coincided with the centennial anniversary of the first Constitution of Uruguay. For that reason, the main stadium built in Montevideo for the World Cup was named Estadio Centenario.

text: 1934 FIFA World Cup[edit]

text: Bids:

text:
Italy
 Sweden

text: Sweden decided to withdraw before the vote, allowing the only remaining candidate Italy to take the hosting job for the 1934 World Cup. The decision was ratified by the FIFA Congress in Stockholm, Sweden and Zürich, Switzerland on 14 May 1932. The Italian Football Federation accepted the hosting duties on 9 October 1932.

text: Results:

text:
Italy
 Sweden withdrew

text: 1938 FIFA World Cup[edit]

text: Bids:

text:
Argentina
 France
 Germany

text: Without any nations withdrawing their bids, the FIFA Congress convened in Berlin, Germany on 13 August 1936 to decide the next host. Electing France took only one ballot, as France had more than half of the votes in the first round.[4]

text: Results:

text:
France, 19 votes
 Argentina, 3 votes
 Germany, 1 vote

text: Cancelled FIFA World Cups 1942 and 1946[edit]

text: Bids for 1942:

text:
Argentina
 Brazil
 Germany

text: Cancelled FIFA election of the host for the outbreak of the Second World War in September 1939.

text: Bids for 1946:

text: 1950 and 1954 FIFA World Cups[edit]

text: 1950 bid[edit]

text: Bid:

text: Brazil

text: Brazil, Argentina, and Germany had officially bid for the 1942 World Cup, but the Cup was cancelled after the outbreak of World War II. The 1950 World Cup was originally scheduled for 1949, but the day after Brazil was selected by the FIFA Congress on 26 July 1946 in Luxembourg City, Luxembourg, the World Cup was rescheduled for 1950.

text: Result:

text: Brazil

text: 1954 bid[edit]

text: Bid:

text: Switzerland

text: The 1954 World Cup hosting duty was decided on 26 July 1946, the same day that Brazil was selected for the 1949 World Cup, in Luxembourg City. On 27 July, the FIFA Congress pushed back the 5th World Cup finals by three years, deciding it should take place in 1954.

text: Result:

text: Switzerland

text: 1958 FIFA World Cup[edit]

text: Bid:

text: Sweden

text: Argentina, Chile, Mexico, and Sweden expressed interest in hosting the tournament.[5] Swedish delegates lobbied other countries at the FIFA Congress held in Rio de Janeiro around the opening of the 1950 World Cup finals.[5] Sweden was awarded the 1958 tournament unopposed in on 23 June 1950.[6]

text: Result:

text: Sweden

text: 1962 FIFA World Cup[edit]

text: Bids:

text:
Argentina
 Chile
 West Germany

text: West Germany withdrew before the vote, which took place in Lisbon, Portugal on 10 June 1956, leaving two remaining bids. In one round of voting, Chile won over Argentina.

text: Results:

text:
Chile, 31 votes
 Argentina, 12 votes
 West Germany withdrew

text: 1966 FIFA World Cup[edit]

text: Bids:

text:
England
 West Germany
 Spain

text: Spain withdrew from the bidding prior to voting by the FIFA Congress, held in Rome, Italy on 22 August 1960. Again, there was only one round of voting, with England defeating West Germany.

text: Results:

text:
England, 34 votes
 West Germany, 27 votes
 Spain withdrew

text: 1970 FIFA World Cup[edit]

text: Bids:

text:
Argentina
 Australia
 Colombia
 Japan
 Mexico
 Peru

text: The FIFA Congress convened in Tokyo, Japan on 8 October 1964. One round of voting saw Mexico win the hosting duties over Argentina.

text: Results:

text:
Mexico, 56 votes
 Argentina, 32 votes
 Australia withdrew
 Colombia withdrew
 Japan withdrew
 Peru withdrew

text: 1974, 1978, 1982 FIFA World Cups[edit]

text: Three hosts for the 1974, 1978, and 1982 World Cups were chosen in London, England on 6 July 1966 by the FIFA Congress. Spain and West Germany, both facing each other in the running for hosting duties for the 1974 and 1982 World Cups, agreed to give one another a hosting job. Germany withdrew from the 1982 bidding process while Spain withdrew from the 1974 bidding process, essentially guaranteeing each a hosting spot. Mexico, who had won the 1970 hosting bid over Argentina just two years prior, agreed to withdraw and let Argentina take the 1978 hosting position.

text: 1974 results[edit]

text:
West Germany
 Spain withdrew in exchange for 1982 hosting duties
 Italy withdrew
 Netherlands withdrew

text: 1978 results[edit]

text:
Argentina
 Colombia withdrew
 Mexico withdrew, as they had won hosting for 1970

text: 1982 results[edit]

text:
Spain
 West Germany withdrew in exchange for 1974 hosting duties
 Italy withdrew

text: 1986 FIFA World Cup[edit]

text: Bid:

text: Colombia

text: Host voting, handled by the then-FIFA Executive Committee (or Exco), met in Stockholm on 9 June 1974 and ratified the unopposed Colombian bid.

text: Result:

text: Colombia

text: However, Colombia withdrew after being selected to host the World Cup for financial problems on 5 November 1982, less than four years before the event was to start. A call for bids was sent out again, and FIFA received intent from three nations:

text:
Canada
 Mexico
 United States

text: In Zürich on 20 May 1983, Mexico won the bidding unanimously as voted by the Executive Committee, for the first time in FIFA World Cup bidding history (except those nations who bid unopposed).

text: Results:

text:
Mexico unanimous vote
 United States 0 votes
 Canada 0 votes

text: 1990 FIFA World Cup[edit]

text: Bids:

text:
Austria
 England
 France
 Greece
 Iran
 Italy
 Soviet Union
 West Germany
 Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

text: Except Italy and the Soviet Union, all nations withdrew before the vote, which was to be conducted by Exco in Zürich on 19 May 1984. Once again, only one round of voting was required, as Italy won more votes than the Soviet Union.

text: Results:

text:
Italy, 11 votes
 Soviet Union, 5 votes
 Austria withdrew
 England withdrew
 France withdrew
 Greece withdrew
 Iran withdrew
 West Germany withdrew
 Yugoslavia withdrew

text: 1994 FIFA World Cup[edit]

text: Bids:

text:
Brazil
 Morocco
 United States
 Chile

text: Despite having three nations bidding, voting only took one round. The vote was held in Zürich (for the third straight time) on 4 July 1988. The United States gained a majority of votes of the Exco members.

text: Results:

text:
United States, 10 votes
 Morocco, 7 votes
 Brazil, 2 votes
 Chile withdrew

text: 1998 FIFA World Cup[edit]

text: Bids:

text:
England
 France
 Germany
 Morocco
  Switzerland

text: This vote was held in Zürich for the fourth straight time on 1 July 1992. Only one round of voting was required to have France assume the hosting job over Morocco.

text: Result:

text:
France, 12 votes
 Morocco, 7 votes
  Switzerland withdrew
 England withdrew
 Germany withdrew

text: 2002 FIFA World Cup[edit]

text: Bids:

text:
South Korea/ Japan
 Mexico

text: On 31 May 1996, the hosting selection meeting was held in Zürich for the fifth straight time. A joint bid was formed between Japan and South Korea, and the bid was "voted by acclamation", an oral vote without ballots. The first joint bid of the World Cup was approved, edging out Mexico.

text: Results:

text:
South Korea/ Japan (joint bid, voted by acclamation)
 Mexico

text: The 2002 FIFA World Cup was co-hosted in Asia for the first time by South Korea and Japan (the final was held in Japan). Initially, the two Asian countries were competitors in the bidding process. But just before the vote, they agreed with FIFA to co-host the event. However, the rivalry and distance between them led to organizational and logistical problems. FIFA has said that co-hosting is not likely to happen again, and in 2004 officially stated that its statutes did not allow co-hosting bids.[7]

text: 2006 FIFA World Cup[edit]

text: Bids:

text:
Brazil
 England
 Germany
 Morocco
 South Africa

text: On 6 July 2000, the host selection meeting was held for the sixth straight time in Zürich. Brazil withdrew its bid three days before the vote, and the field was narrowed to four. This was the first selection in which more than one vote round was required. Three votes were eventually needed. Germany was at least tied for first in each of the three votes, and ended up defeating South Africa by only one vote after an abstention (see below).

text:
Results

Nation

Vote

Round 1

Round 2

Round 3

 Germany

10

11

12

 South Africa

6

11

11

 England

5

2

Eliminated

 Morocco

2

Eliminated

Eliminated

Total votes

23

24

23

text: Controversy[edit]

text: The controversy over the decision to award the 2006 FIFA World Cup to Germany led to a further change in practice. The final tally was 12 votes to 11 in favour of Germany over the contenders South Africa, who had been favorites to win. New Zealand FIFA member Charlie Dempsey, who was instructed to vote for South Africa by the Oceania Football Confederation, abstained from voting at the last minute. If he had voted for the South African bid, the tally would have been 12–12, giving the decision to FIFA President Sepp Blatter, who, it was widely believed, would then have voted for South Africa.[8]

text: Dempsey was among eight members of the Executive Committee to receive a fax by editors of the German satirical magazine Titanic on Wednesday, the night before the vote, promising a cuckoo clock and Black Forest ham in exchange for voting for Germany. He argued that the pressure from all sides including "an attempt to bribe" him had become too much for him.[9]

text: On 4 August 2000, consequently, FIFA decided to rotate the hosting of the final tournaments between its constituent confederations. This was until October 2007, during the selection of the host for the 2014 FIFA World Cup, when they announced that they will no longer continue with their continental rotation policy (see below).[10][11]

text: 2010 FIFA World Cup[edit]

text: Bids:

text:
Egypt
 Morocco
 Nigeria
 South Africa
 Tunisia /  Libya

text: The first World Cup bidding process under continental rotation (the process of rotating hosting of the World Cup to each confederation in turn) was the 2010 FIFA World Cup,[7] the first World Cup to be held in Africa. On 7 July 2001, during the FIFA Congress in Buenos Aires, a decision was ratified, which was that the rotation will begin in Africa.[12] On 23 September 2002, FIFA's Executive Committee confirmed that only African member associations, would be invited to submit bids to host the 2010 FIFA World Cup.[13]

text: In January 2003, Nigeria entered the bidding process, but withdrew their bid in September.[14][15] In March 2003, Sepp Blatter initially said Nigeria's plan to co host the 2010 FIFA World Cup with four African countries would not work.[16] Nigeria had originally hoped to bid jointly with West African neighbours Benin, Ghana, and Togo.

text: After it was confirmed by FIFA that joint bidding would not be allowed in the future, Libya and Tunisia withdrew both of their bids on 8 May 2004. On 15 May 2004 in Zürich (the seventh consecutive time that a host selection has been made there), South Africa, after a narrow loss in the 2006 bidding, defeated perennial candidate Morocco to host, 14 votes to 10. Egypt received no votes.

text:
Results

Nation

Vote

Round 1

 South Africa

14

 Morocco

10

 Egypt

0

 Tunisia /  Libya

Withdrew

 Nigeria

Withdrew

Total votes

24

text: Controversy[edit]

text: On 28 May 2015, media covering the 2015 FIFA corruption case reported that high-ranking officials from the South African bid committee had secured the right to host the World Cup by paying US$10 million in bribes to then-FIFA Vice President Jack Warner and to other FIFA Executive Committee members.[17]

text: On 4 June 2015, FIFA executive Chuck Blazer, having co-operated with the FBI and the Swiss authorities, confirmed that he and the other members of FIFA's executive committee were bribed in order to promote the South African 1998 and 2010 World Cups. Blazer stated, "I and others on the FIFA executive committee agreed to accept bribes in conjunction with the selection of South Africa as the host nation for the 2010 World Cup."[18][19]

text: On 6 June 2015, The Daily Telegraph reported that Morocco had received the most votes, but South Africa was awarded the tournament instead.[20]

text: 2014 FIFA World Cup[edit]

text: Bids:

text:
Argentina
 Brazil
 Colombia

text: FIFA continued its continental rotation procedure by earmarking the 2014 World Cup for South America. FIFA initially indicated that it might back out of the rotation concept,[21] but later decided to continue it through the 2014 host decision, after which it was dropped.

text: Colombia had expressed interest in hosting the 2014 World Cup,[22] but withdrew undertaking the 2011 FIFA U-20 World Cup.[23] Brazil also expressed interest in hosting the World Cup. CONMEBOL, the South American Football Federation, indicated their preference for Brazil as a host.[24] Brazil was the only nation to submit a formal bid when the official bidding procedure for CONMEBOL member associations was opened in December 2006, as by that time, Colombia, Chile and Argentina had already withdrawn, and Venezuela was not allowed to bid.

text: Brazil made the first unopposed bid since the initial selection of the 1986 FIFA World Cup (when Colombia was selected as host, but later withdrew for financial problems). The FIFA Executive Committee confirmed it as the host country on 30 October 2007 by a unanimous decision.[25]

text: Result:

text:
2014 FIFA bidding (majority 12 votes)

Bidders

Votes

Round 1

Round 2

 Brazil

N/A

N/A

 Argentina

Withdrew

 Colombia

Withdrew

text: 2018 and 2022 FIFA World Cups[edit]

text:
2018 Bids:

 Belgium /  Netherlands
 England
 Spain /  Portugal
 Russia

2022 Bids:

 Australia
 Japan
 South Korea
 Qatar
 United States

text:
Wikinews has related news:
 FIFA receives eleven bids for 2018 and 2022 World Cups

text: FIFA announced on 29 October 2007 that it will no longer continue with its continental rotation policy, implemented after the 2006 World Cup host selection. The newest host selection policy is that any country may bid for a World Cup, provided that their continental confederation has not hosted either of the past two World Cups. For the 2018 World Cup bidding process, this meant that bids from Africa and South America were not allowed.

text: For the 2022 World Cup bidding process, this meant that bids from South America and Europe were not allowed.[26][27] Also, FIFA formally allowed joint bids once more (after they were banned in 2002), because there was only one organizing committee per joint bid, unlike Korea–Japan, which had two different organizing committees.[28] Countries that announced their interest included Australia, England, Indonesia, Japan, Qatar, Russia, South Korea, United States, the joint bid of Spain and Portugal and the joint bid of Belgium and Netherlands.[26][29][30]

text: The hosts for both World Cups were announced by the FIFA Executive Committee on 2 December 2010. Russia was selected to host the 2018 FIFA World Cup, making it the first time that the World Cup will be hosted in Eastern Europe and making it the biggest country geographically to host the World Cup. Qatar was selected to host the 2022 FIFA World Cup, making it the first time a World Cup will be held in the Arab World and the second time in Asia since the 2002 tournament in South Korea and Japan. Also, the decision made it the smallest country geographically to host the World Cup.[31]

text:
2018 Results

Nation

Vote

Round 1

Round 2

 Russia

9

13

 Spain /  Portugal

7

7

 Netherlands /  Belgium

4

2

 England

2

Eliminated

Total votes

22

22

text:
2022 results

Nation

Vote

Round 1

Round 2

Round 3

Round 4

 Qatar

11

10

11

14

 United States

3

5

6

8

 South Korea

4

5

5

Eliminated

 Japan

3

2

Eliminated

Eliminated

 Australia

1

Eliminated

Eliminated

Eliminated

Total votes

22

22

22

22

text: 2026 FIFA World Cup[edit]

text: Bids:

text:
Canada /  Mexico /  USA
 Morocco

text: Under FIFA rules as of 2016, the 2026 Cup could not be in either Europe (UEFA) or Asia (AFC),[32][33] leaving an African (CAF) bid, a North American (CONCACAF) bid, a South American (CONMEBOL) bid or an Oceanian (OFC) bid as other possible options.[34] In March 2017, FIFA's president Gianni Infantino confirmed that "Europe (UEFA) and Asia (AFC) had been excluded from the bidding following the selection of Russia and Qatar in 2018 and 2022 respectively."[35]

text: The bidding process was originally scheduled to start in 2015, with the appointment of hosts scheduled for the FIFA Congress on 10 May 2017 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.[36][37] On 10 June 2015, FIFA announced that the bid process for the 2026 FIFA World Cup was postponed.[38][39] However, following the FIFA Council meeting on 10 May 2016, a new bid schedule was announced for May 2020 as the last in a four-phase process.[40]

text: On 14 October 2016, FIFA said it would accept a tournament-sharing bid by CONCACAF members Canada, Mexico and the United States.[41]

text: On 10 April 2017, Canada, the United States, and Mexico announced their intention to submit a joint bid to co-host, with three-quarters of the games to be played in the U.S., including the final.[42]

text: On 11 August 2017, Morocco officially announced a bid to host.[43]

text: Therefore, the official 2026 FIFA World Cup bids were from two  football confederations. The first one was from CONCACAF, which was triple bid by Canada, United States and Mexico,[41][44][45][46] and the second one was from CAF with a bid by Morocco.[47][48]

text: The host was announced on 13 June 2018 at the 68th FIFA Congress in Moscow, Russia.[49] The United Bid from Canada, Mexico and the United States was selected over the Morocco bid by 134 votes to 65 with 1 selecting neither and 3 abstentions. This will be the first World Cup to be hosted by more than two countries. Mexico becomes the first country to host three men's World Cups and its Estadio Azteca, should selected, will become the first stadium to stage three World Cup tournaments. On the other hand, Canada becomes the fifth country to host both the men's and women's World Cups, after Sweden (Men's: 1958/Women's: 1995), United States (Men's: 1994/Women's: 1999, 2003), Germany (Men's: 1974, 2006/Women's: 2011), and France (Men's: 1934, 1998/Women's: 2019). The United States becomes the first country to host both men's and women's World Cup twice each.

text:
2026 Results

Nation

Vote

Round 1

 Canada /  Mexico /  United States

134

 Morocco

65

None of the Bids

1

Total votes

200

text: 2030 FIFA World Cup[edit]

text: The bidding process for the world cup is yet to start. Two early bids for the 2030 FIFA World Cup - the Centennial World Cup - have however been proposed. The first proposed bid has been a collective bid by the members of the Argentine Football Association and Uruguayan Football Association into a proposed joint bid from Uruguay and Argentina.[50] The second bid has been a proposed bid by The Football Association of England.[51] Under FIFA rules as of 2017, the 2030 World Cup cannot be held in Asia (AFC) because the Asian Football Confederation is excluded from the bidding following the selection of Qatar in 2022.[35][51] Also in June 2017, UEFA's president Aleksander Čeferin stated that Europe (UEFA) will definitely fight for its right to host the 2030 World Cup.[52]

text: The Uruguay–Argentina proposed bid would not coincide with the centennial anniversary of the first FIFA World Cup final, and the bicentennial of the first Constitution of Uruguay, but if selected the tournament dates would coincide. The Uruguay-Argentina bid was officially confirmed on 29 July 2017. A joint bid was announced by the Argentine Football Association and the Uruguayan Football Association on 29 July 2017.[53] Before Uruguay and Argentina played out a goalless draw in Montevideo, FC Barcelona players Luis Suárez and Lionel Messi promoted the bid with commemorative shirts.[54] On 31 August 2017, it was suggested Paraguay would join as a third host.[55] CONMEBOL, the South American confederation (which can not bid under current FIFA rules), confirmed the joint three-way bid in September 2017.[56]

text: English FA vice chairman David Gill has proposed that his country could bid for 2030, provided the bidding process is made more transparent.[57] "England is one of few countries that could stage even a 48-nation event in its entirety, while Football Association chief executive Martin Glenn made it clear earlier this year bidding for 2030 was an option."[51] In June 2017, UEFA stated that "it would support a pan-British bid for 2030 or even a single bid from England."[58] Moreover, a possible English bid for 2030 was also backed by the German Football Association.[59] On 15 July 2018, Deputy Leader of the UK Labour Party, Tom Watson, said in an interview that he and his party backed a 2030 World Cup bid for the UK saying that "I hope it's one of the first things a Labour government does, which is work with our FA to try and put a World Cup bid together."[60] On 16 July 2018, British Prime Minister Theresa May expressed her support of the bid and her openness about discussions with football authorities.[61][62] Although there had been no prior discussion with the Football Association, the Scottish FA also expressed its interest about joining a Home Nations bid.[63] Former Scottish First Minister Henry McLeish has called the Scottish government and the Scottish Football Association to bid for the 2030 FIFA World Cup with the other British nations.[64]

text: On 17 June 2018, the Royal Moroccan Football Federation announced its co-bidding for the 2030 World Cup. There are two possible joint bids one with the Tunisia and the Algeria[65] or the other with two UEFA members Spain and Portugal.[66]

text: On 17 June 2018, the English Football Association announced that they are in talks with home nations over a UK-wide bid to host 2030 World Cup.[67] On 1 August 2018, it was reported that the FA was preparing a bid for England to host the World Cup in 2030. A decision is expected to be made in 2019, after the FA will conduct a feasibility work on a potential bid.[68]

text: On 10 July 2018, Egypt's Sports Minister expressed interest in bidding to host.[69]

text: Confirmed plan to bid:

text:
CONMEBOL:
 Uruguay /  Argentina /  Paraguay: Uruguay–Argentina–Paraguay 2030 FIFA World Cup bid[70][71][72][50][58][73]
CAF/UEFA:
 Morocco (pending on  Algeria and  Tunisia or pending on  Spain and  Portugal):Morocco 2030 FIFA World Cup bid[74][75]

text: Potential bid:

text:
UEFA:
 United Kingdom ( England/ Scotland/ Northern Ireland/ Wales ): United Kingdom 2030 FIFA World Cup bid[57][51][58][76][67][73]

text: Expressed interest in bidding:

text:
CAF:
 Egypt[69]

text: 2034 FIFA World Cup[edit]

text: The first bid for the 2034 FIFA World Cup has been proposed as a collective bid by the members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. The idea of a combined ASEAN bid had been mooted as early as January 2011, when the Football Association of Singapore's then-President, Zainudin Nordin, said in a statement that the proposal had been made at an ASEAN Foreign Ministers meeting.[77] In 2013, Nordin and Special Olympics Malaysia President, Datuk Mohamed Feisol Hassan, recalled the idea for ASEAN to jointly host a World Cup. Under FIFA rules as of 2017, the 2030 World Cup cannot be held in Asia (AFC) as Asian Football Confederation members are excluded from the bidding following the selection of Qatar in 2022.[35][51] Therefore, the earliest bid by an AFC member could be made for 2034.[78][79][80][81][82]

text: Later, Malaysia has withdrawn from involvement but Singapore and other ASEAN countries continued the campaign to submit a joint bid for the World Cup in 2034. In February 2017, ASEAN held talks on launching a joint bid during a visit by FIFA chief Gianni Infantino to Yangon, Myanmar.[83]

text: In July 2017, Joko Driyono, the Vice-President of Indonesia's Football Association, during the meeting in Vietnam said that Indonesia and Thailand were set to lead a consortium of South-East Asian nations in the bid. Driyono added that, for geographic and infrastructure considerations and the expanded format (48 teams), at least two or three ASEAN countries combined would be in a position necessary to host matches.[84][82]

text: In September 2017, the Football Association of Thailand's Deputy CEO, Benjamin Tan, at the ASEAN Football Federation (AFF) Council meeting, confirmed that his Association has "put in their interest to bid and co-host" the 2034 World Cup with Indonesia.[82][77] On the same occasion, the General Secretary of the AFF, Dato Sri Azzuddin Ahmad, confirmed that Indonesia and Thailand will submit a joint bid.[80][81]

text: Indonesia is the only Southeast Asian country to have participated in the World Cup;[85] its national team was the first from Asia to do so and it became one of the fewest World Cup teams to qualify without playing a match because of opponents' withdrawals.[86] The 1938 World Cup is the Indonesians' only appearance to date when they were known as the Dutch East Indies. A loss to Hungary made Indonesia the only national team in World Cup history to have played a single match.[86] Far from ever hosting the World Cup, no other Southeast Asian country has ever played at the tournament. As of June 2018, Indonesia is ranked by FIFA at 164th place.[87]

text: China has announced its interest in bidding several times and reports stated "that China is likely to host the World Cup for the first time in 2034."[88]

text: In July 2018 Egypt's sports minister Ashraf Sobhy expressed interest in bidding to host.[89]

text: Expressed interest in bidding:

text:
AFC:
 Indonesia,  Thailand and  Vietnam[80][81][82]
 China[88]
CAF:
 Egypt[90]
 Zimbabwe[91]

text: Total bids by country[edit]

text: World Cup-winning bids are bolded. Planned but not-yet-official bids for 2030 and beyond are not included.

text:
Country

Bids

Years

 Germany

6

1938, 1962,[a] 1966,[a] 1974,[a] 1982,[a] 2006

 Morocco

1994, 1998, 2006, 2010, 2026, 2030[b][c]

 Spain

1930, 1966, 1974, 1982, 2018,[d], 2030[c]

 Argentina

5

1938, 1962, 1970, 1978, 2030[e]

 Mexico

1970, 1978, 1986,[f] 2002, 2026[g]

 Brazil

4

1950, 1994, 2006, 2014

 England

1966, 1990, 2006, 2018

 United States

1986, 1994, 2022, 2026[g]

 Italy

3

1930, 1934, 1990

 Japan

1970, 2002,[h] 2022

 Australia

2

1970, 2022

 Canada

1986, 2026[g]

 Chile

1962, 2014

 Colombia

1986,[f] 2014

 Egypt

2010, 2030

 France

1938, 1998

 Netherlands

1930, 2018[i]

 Portugal

2018,[d], 2030,[c]

 Russia

1990,[j] 2018

 South Africa

2006, 2010

 South Korea

2002,[h] 2022

  Switzerland

1954, 1998

 Sweden

1934, 1958

 Tunisia

2010[k], 2030[b]

 Uruguay

1930, 2030[e]

 Algeria

1

2030[b]

 Belgium

2018[i]

 Greece

1990

 Hungary

1930

 Iran

1990

 Libya

2010[k]

 Paraguay

2030[e]

 Qatar

2022

text:
^ Jump up to: a b c d Bid by West Germany, which was joined by East Germany in 1990 to form the reunified nation of Germany.

^ Jump up to: a b c Joint bid by Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria.

^ Jump up to: a b c Joint bid by Morocco, Spain and Portugal.

^ Jump up to: a b Joint bid by Portugal and Spain.

^ Jump up to: a b c Joint bid by Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay.

^ Jump up to: a b Colombia was originally chosen to host the 1986 World Cup, but withdrew from hosting for economic concerns. After a second bidding, Mexico was selected as the replacement host.

^ Jump up to: a b c Joint bid by Canada, Mexico and the United States.

^ Jump up to: a b Joint bid by Japan and South Korea.

^ Jump up to: a b Joint bid by Belgium and the Netherlands.

Jump up ^ Bid by the Soviet Union, which dissolved into multiple countries in 1991 and whose records are inherited by Russia.

^ Jump up to: a b Joint bid by Libya and Tunisia.

text: Host country performances[edit]

text: It is widely considered that home advantage is common in the World Cup, with the host team usually performing above average.[92] Of the eight countries that have won the tournament, only Brazil and Spain have not been champions while hosting, and England has their only title as hosts.

text: Further, Sweden got to its only final as hosts of the 1958 tournament, and only the Swedes and Brazilians finished as runner-up in home soil.[93] The host country reached the semi-finals thirteen times in twenty tournaments, and both Chile and South Korea had their only finishes on the top four at home. Only South Africa in 2010 managed to not go past the group stage.[94]

text:
#

Performance

Team

Year

Pld

W

D

L

Win%

GF

GA

GD

GD/M

GF/M

1

Champion

 Uruguay
1930

4

4

0

0

100%

15

3

12

3

3.8

2

Champion

 France
1998

7

6

1

0

93%

15

2

13

1.9

2.1

3

Champion

 England
1966

6

5

1

0

92%

11

3

8

1.3

1.8

4

Champion

 Italy
1934

5

4

1

0

90%

12

3

9

1.8

2.4

5

Champion

 West Germany
1974

7

6

0

1

86%

13

4

9

1.3

1.9

6

Champion

 Argentina
1978

7

5

1

1

79%

15

4

9

1.3

2.1

7

Runner-up

 Brazil
1950

6

4

1

1

75%

22

6

16

2.7

3.7

8

Runner-up

 Sweden
1958

6

4

1

1

75%

12

7

5

0.8

2

9

Third place

 Italy
1990

7

6

1

0

93%

10

2

8

1.1

1.4

10

Third place

 Germany
2006

7

5

1

1

79%

14

6

8

1.1

2

11

Third place

 Chile
1962

6

4

0

2

67%

10

8

2

0.33

1.3

12

Fourth place

 South Korea
2002

7

3

2

2

57%

8

6

2

0.3

1.1

13

Fourth place

 Brazil
2014

7

3

2

2

57%

11

14

−3

−0.4

1.57

14

Quarter-final

 Russia
2018

5

2

2

1

60%

11

7

4

0.8

2.2

15

Quarter-final

 Mexico
1986

5

3

2

0

80%

6

2

4

0.8

1.2

16

Quarter-final

 Mexico
1970

4

2

1

1

63%

6

4

2

0.5

1.5

17

Quarter-final

  Switzerland
1954

4

2

0

2

50%

11

11

0

0

2.8

18

Quarter-final

 France
1938

2

1

0

1

50%

4

4

0

0

2

19

Second round

 Spain
1982

5

1

2

2

40%

4

5

−1

−0.2

0.8

20

Round of 16

 Japan
2002

4

2

1

1

63%

5

3

2

0.5

1.25

21

Round of 16

 United States
1994

4

1

1

2

38%

3

4

−1

−0.3

0.8

22

Group stage

 South Africa
2010

3

1

1

1

50%

3

5

−2

−0.7

1

text: Win% → Every draw counted as a half win. Wins on penalty shootouts are counted as draws.

text: Notes[edit]

text: Jump up ^ Qatar will debut in the competition in 2022, so its result will also be its best result in history.


document_title: Foreign policy analysis

question_text: what do foreign policy analysis (fpa) approaches to international relations seek to explain

question_tokens: what do foreign policy analysis ( fpa ) approaches to international relations seek to explain

text: Foreign policy analysis

text: Study[edit]

text: Foreign policy analysis involves the study of how a state makes foreign policy. As it analyzes the decision making process, FPA involves the study of both international and domestic politics. FPA also draws upon the study of diplomacy, war, intergovernmental organizations, and economic sanctions, each of which are means by which a state may implement foreign policy. In academia, foreign policy analysis is most commonly taught within the discipline of public policy within political science or political studies, and the study of international relations. FPA can also be considered a sub-field of the study of international relations, which aims to understand the processes behind foreign policy decision making. The most prominent scholars in this field of study include Richard Snyder, James Rosenau, Alexander George, Graham Allison and Irving Janis.[2]

text: According to foreignpolicyanalysis.org, "As a field of study, foreign policy analysis is characterized by its actor-specific focus. In the simplest terms, it is the study of the process, effects, causes, or outputs of foreign policy decision-making in either a comparative or case-specific manner. The underlying and often implicit argument theorizes that human beings, acting as a group or within a group, compose and cause change in international politics."[3] In other words, Foreign Policy Analysis can be understood as a critique of the dominant structuralist approaches in international relations.

text: Stages in decision making[edit]

text: The making of foreign policy involves a number of stages:

text:
Assessment of the international and domestic political environment - Foreign policy is made and implemented within an international and domestic political context, which must be understood by a state in order to determine the best foreign policy option. For example, a state may need to respond to an international crisis.
Goal setting - A state has multiple foreign policy goals. A state must determine which goal is affected by the international and domestic political environment at any given time. In addition, foreign policy goals may conflict, which will require the state to prioritize.
Determination of policy options - A state must then determine what policy options are available to meet the goal or goals set in light of the political environment. This will involve an assessment of the state's capacity implement policy options and an assessment of the consequences of each policy option.
Formal decision making action - A formal foreign policy decision will be taken at some level within a government. Foreign policy decisions are usually made by the executive branch of government. Common governmental actors or institutions which make foreign policy decisions include: the head of state (such as a president) or head of government (such as a prime minister), cabinet, or minister.
Implementation of chosen policy option - Once a foreign policy option has been chosen, and a formal decision has been made, then the policy must be implemented. Foreign policy is most commonly implemented by specialist foreign policy arms of the state bureaucracy, such as a Ministry of Foreign Affairs or State Department. Other departments may also have a role in implementing foreign policy, such as departments for: trade, defence, and aid.

text: Key approaches[edit]

text: (as put forward by Graham T. Allison in 1969.[4] For a more comprehensive description see his Book Essence of Decision 1971/1999)

text: Rational actor model[edit]

text: The rational actor model is based on rational choice theory. The model adopts the state as the primary unit of analysis, and inter-state relations (or international relations) as the context for analysis. The state is seen as a monolithic unitary actor, capable of making rational decisions based on preference ranking and value maximization.

text: According to the rational actor model, a rational decision making process is used by a state. This process includes:

text:
Goal setting and ranking.
Consideration of options.
Assessment of consequences.
Profit-maximization.

text: In other words, it provides models for answering the question: with that information what would be the best decision for reaching one's goal? In this theory, the underlying assumption is that governments are unified and rational, in this manner, they would seek for carefully planned and well-defined foreign policy goals. In this sense, rational choice model is primarily a realist perspective of foreign policy level of analysis.[5] The rational actor model has been subject to criticism. The model tends to neglect a range of political variables, of which Michael Clarke includes: "political decisions, non-political decisions, bureaucratic procedures, continuations of previous policy, and sheer accident." [6] It also ignores emotions, emotional flooding, selective attention, and groupthink.

text: Governmental Bargaining Model[edit]

text: In this model the state is not seen as a monolithic unitary actor. Instead it is a collection of different bureaucracies vying for increasing their funding and size. Individual decision makers try to bargain and compete for influence with their own particular goal in mind.[1] Things are often viewed as a zero sum game where one bureaucracy's "win" or increasing their level of funding is seen as a loss for another bureaucracy. Here decisions are made by bureaucracies competing against each other and suggesting solutions to problems that would involve using their resources so as to increase their level of importance. Bureaucratic politics model, in keeping with its pluralistic connotation, can also refer to that inner state processes including no institutional actors, who with their informal channels would affect policy results.

text: Organizational Process Model[edit]

text: Organizational Processes model emerges from clusters of governmental organizations that look after their own best interests and follow 'standard operating procedures'.[1] In this model different bureaucracies have different standard operating procedures. These procedures are made in order to allow day-to-day operations to be carried out. Often an order or decision will have to work around these standard procedures. It is often exceedingly difficult for a bureaucracy to do something "out of character" or contrary to their standard procedures.

text: Other models[edit]

text:
Inter-branch politics model
Self-aggrandizement model - In this model one leader acts on behalf of his or her interests. (also known as cognitive processes and psychology approach)
Political process model - In this model the decision making body is affected by many non-governmental actors such as NGOs or the media.
Multilevel and Multidimensional approach - In this model, scholars study particular aspects of foreign policy making by using various major theories.
Social constructivist approach - In this model, scholars focus on the role of ideas, discourse, and identity to make foreign policy analysis.

text: Institutions[edit]

text:
Council on Foreign Relations
Chatham House
American Enterprise Institute
Brookings Institution
Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars