Harvard at a Glance | Harvard University
Established
Harvard is the oldest institution of higher education in the United States,
by vote of the Great and General Court of the Massachusetts Bay Colony.
About 2,400
and more than 10,400 academic appointments in affiliated teaching hospitals
Harvard College: About 6,700
Graduate and professional students: About 14,500
Total: About 21,000
School Color
PMS 187U PMS 1807C
C= 7 M= 94 Y= 65 K= 25
R= 165 G= 28 B= 48
More than 323,000 living , over 271,000 in the U.S., nearly 52,000 in some 201 other countries.
47 , 32 , 48
Veritas (Latin for “truth”)
Real Estate Holdings
5,083 acres
Library Collection
The —the largest academic library in the world—includes 20.4 million volumes, 180,000 serial titles, an estimated 400 million manuscript items, 10 million photographs, 124 million archived web pages, and 5.4 terabytes of born-digital archives and manuscripts. Access to this rich collection is provided by nearly 800 library staff members who operate more than 70 separate library units.
Faculties, Schools, and an Institute
Harvard University is made up of 11 principal academic units – ten faculties and the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study. The ten faculties oversee schools and divisions that offer courses and award academic degrees.
Undergraduate Cost And Financial Aid
Families with students on scholarship pay an average of $11,500 annually toward the cost of a Harvard education. More than 65 percent of Harvard College students receive , and the average grant this year is $46,000. &
Since 2007,
has climbed by more than 70 percent, from $96.6 million to $166 million per year.
During the
academic year, students from families with incomes below $65,000, and with assets typical for that income level, will generally pay nothing toward the cost of attending Harvard College. &Families with incomes between $65,000 and $150,000 will contribute from 0 to 10 percent of income, depending on individual circumstances. &Significant financial aid also is available for families above those income ranges.
Harvard College launched a &into which applicants and their families can enter their financial data to estimate the net price they will be expected to pay for a year at Harvard. &Please use the calculator to estimate the net cost of attendance.
cost of attending Harvard College without financial aid is $45,278 for tuition and $60,659 for tuition, room, board and fees combined.
University Professors
The title of
was created in 1935 to honor individuals whose groundbreaking work crosses the boundaries of multiple disciplines, allowing them to pursue research at any of Harvard’s Schools. View the list of .
Harvard University President
is the 28th president of Harvard University and the Lincoln Professor of History in Harvard's Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
Drew Gilpin Faust
This photograph is released under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license by Harvard University.
University Income (Fiscal Year 2015)
$4.5 billion
University Expenses (Fiscal Year 2015)
$4.5 billion
Endowment (Fiscal Year 2015)
$37.6 billion
Harvard University Shields
The name Harvard , the young minister John Harvard of Charlestown. Upon his death in 1638, he left his library and half his estate to the institution established in 1636 by vote of the Great and General Court of the Massachusetts Bay Colony.
Mission Statement
Harvard University (comprising the undergraduate college, the graduate schools, other academic bodies, research centers and affiliated institutions) does not have a formal mission statement.
is to educate the citizens and citizen-leaders for our society. We do this through our commitment to the transformative power of a liberal arts and sciences education.
Harvard Campaign
is designed to embrace the future and to ensure Harvard’s leadership as it approaches its fifth century of education and inquiry in the pursuit of enduring truth.
&is a University-wide strategic initiative, overseen by the Office of the Vice Provost for Advances in Learning (VPAL), to enable faculty to build and create open online learning experiences (free, low-touch, high-touch) for residential and online use, and to enable groundbreaking research in online pedagogies. To date, HarvardX has engaged more than 90 faculty across 10 schools, producing more than 60 open online courses with 3 million global registrants. On-campus, HarvardX has supported nearly 20 blended courses, convened 225 individuals (faculty, undergraduates, graduates, technologies) in developing content, teaching, and conducting research, and built new educational tools and technologies. A leader in advancing the science of learning, HarvardX has produced more than 95 related research publications and produced two major benchmark reports on MOOC learner demographics and behavior.
More Information
These numbers come from many sources, including the
to receive&highlights about faculty news, research projects, staff developments, student life, and daily events in your inbox.Industries at a Glance
FONT SIZE:
Industries by Supersector and NAICS Code
This list of industries included in
is arranged in North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code order.
Each industry sector and subsector is placed into the appropriate group:
These industries are also arranged in
(NAICS 11)
(NAICS 111)
(NAICS 112)
(NAICS 113)
(NAICS 114)
(NAICS 115)
(NAICS 21)
(NAICS 211)
(NAICS 212)
(NAICS 213)
Construction
(NAICS 23)
(NAICS 236)
(NAICS 237)
(NAICS 238)
Manufacturing
(NAICS 31-33)
(NAICS 311)
(NAICS 312)
(NAICS 313)
(NAICS 314)
(NAICS 315)
(NAICS 316)
(NAICS 321)
(NAICS 322)
(NAICS 323)
(NAICS 324)
(NAICS 325)
(NAICS 326)
(NAICS 327)
(NAICS 331)
(NAICS 332)
(NAICS 333)
(NAICS 334)
(NAICS 335)
(NAICS 336)
(NAICS 337)
(NAICS 339)
(NAICS 42)
(NAICS 423)
(NAICS 424)
(NAICS 425)
(NAICS 44-45)
(NAICS 441)
(NAICS 442)
(NAICS 443)
(NAICS 444)
(NAICS 445)
(NAICS 446)
(NAICS 447)
(NAICS 448)
(NAICS 451)
(NAICS 452)
(NAICS 453)
(NAICS 454)
(NAICS 48-49)
(NAICS 481)
(NAICS 482)
(NAICS 483)
(NAICS 484)
(NAICS 485)
(NAICS 486)
(NAICS 487)
(NAICS 488)
(NAICS 491)
(NAICS 492)
(NAICS 493)
(NAICS 22)
Information
(NAICS 51)
(NAICS 511)
(NAICS 512)
(NAICS 515)
(NAICS 516)
(NAICS 517)
(NAICS 518)
(NAICS 519)
(NAICS 52)
(NAICS 521)
(NAICS 522)
(NAICS 523)
(NAICS 524)
(NAICS 525)
(NAICS 53)
(NAICS 531)
(NAICS 532)
(NAICS 533)
(NAICS 54)
(NAICS 55)
(NAICS 56)
(NAICS 561)
(NAICS 562)
(NAICS 61)
(NAICS 62)
(NAICS 621)
(NAICS 622)
(NAICS 623)
(NAICS 624)
(NAICS 71)
(NAICS 711)
(NAICS 712)
(NAICS 713)
(NAICS 72)
(NAICS 721)
(NAICS 722)
Other Services (except Public Administration)
(NAICS 81)
(NAICS 811)
(NAICS 812)
(NAICS 813)
(NAICS 814)
Recommend this page using:
calculators谁帮我翻译下啊“I find myself glancing at my watch to see how long I have been standing in line."she said."Everywhere I go,I notice if the dumpster gates are open or if there is trash in the parking lot". Ms Clack is a"mystery shopper"-one of_百度作业帮
谁帮我翻译下啊“I find myself glancing at my watch to see how long I have been standing in line."she said."Everywhere I go,I notice if the dumpster gates are open or if there is trash in the parking lot". Ms Clack is a"mystery shopper"-one of thousands of workers that companies hire to act as regular customdrs in order to measure customer service,cleanliness,and whether a store is selling a product that meets a company's standards.
勾勾の小指头﹎说好﹎永远Bù分手メ_爱伱↘又怎能ヽoo轻易说ツ放弃．
“我发现自己翻阅我的观赏，看看如何，只要我一直站立在路线”她说： “我到处都去，我留意到，如果垃圾搜寻（ Dumpster的大门打开或如果有垃圾桶，在停车场” 。余瓣是“神秘购物者”之一，数以千计的工人说，公司租用作为定期customdrs ，以衡量顾客服务，清洁，以及是否商店是销售产品符合公司的标准。...
扫描下载二维码使用次数：0
入库时间：None
“I find myself glancing at my watch to see how long I’ve been standing in line,” she said. “Everywhere I go, I notice if the dumpster(垃圾罐)gates are open or if there’s trash in the parking lot.” Ms. Clark is a “mystery shopper”, one of thousands of contract workers that companies hire to pretend as regular customers in order to judge customer service, cleanliness and whether a store is selling a product that meets company specifications (规格).
Mystery shoppers can be found or, rather, not found, everywhere from restaurants and automotive shops to convenience stores and department stores. They play a constant cat-and-mouse game with store and restaurant employees and managers. However it’s not all fun and games. Once in the field, a mystery shopper will typically visit several stores or restaurants per hour, taking mental notes while inside, then jotting down physical notes after they leave.
It’s important for mystery shoppers to be as exact as possible, because the client companies are looking for data they can use to improve their service. The questionnaire won’t say, “Does the trash can need to be emptied?” What an educated shopper will say is, “The trash can to the left of the front door was overflowing with 10 pieces of trash on the ground.” Companies don’t need opinion but facts.
Nowadays mystery shoppers are armed with a number of high-tech devices, such as a digital scale and a digital thermometer, as well as a handheld PC for recording the entire experience. It’s a challenging job but a rewarding one. Mystery shoppers can be full time or part time, but the full-time workers tend to stick to standard mystery shopping while part-timers often choose the less complex reward-based programs. In those , the shoppers stay disguised(装扮的) only until the “shop” is finished, and then reveal (透漏) themselves to the store management and award prizes to employees who provided excellent service.
To be a mystery shopper, it’s important to be a good observer, but sometimes it’s important to have the right profile(外表), too. Companies often hire shoppers from particular backgrounds to better blend in with clients’ regular customers. If a secret shopper will be sent in, for example, to do a high-end automotive shop, the candidate must have a particular profile that meets a high-end, luxury car-type buyer profile. “It’s a challenge to perform your shop without being discovered,” Ms. Clark said, “because most of the people that we work for are very aware of the mystery shopping program.”
1. According to the text a “mystery shopper” would not have to&&&&&&& .
A. sign a contract with the employer &&& B. travel a lot around the city
C. provide exact facts to the company & D. fill in questionnaires&&
2. We learn from the text that Ms. Clark&&&&&&& .
A. visits some shops regularly and sometimes does something special
B. pretends to be a shopper and evaluates the services
C. is a government official looking into the services
D. is a manager of a company offering good services
3. People are willing to become a mystery shopper mainly because they can&&&&&&& .
A. get the best service and get paid at the same time
B. play a cat-and-mouse game with shop employees and managers
C. do the job either full time or part time and get paid well
D. observe clearly what happens in the shops
4. What does the underlined word “those” in the 4th paragraph refer to?
A. The shops where the mystery shoppers go.&&&&&
B. The less complex reward-based programs.
C. Part-time jobs.&&&&&&&&&&&
D. Excellent services.
如果没有找到你要的答案，请尝试下下面的试题答案搜索功能。
用户评论纠错：
&&&&&&暂无评论
我来说几句：
备课中心教案课件试卷下载Risk management: ALARP at a glance
This website uses non-intrusive cookies to improve your user experience. You can visit our
for more information.
Text size:
ALARP "at a glance"
ALARP &at a glance&
ALARP explained
This guide has been produced to explain the concept of &reasonably practicable& in a simple way for HSE staff and incorporates guidance currently held on HSE's website. It's aimed mainly at staff new to HSE and those new to decision making.
ALARP and SFAIRP
&ALARP& is short for &as low as reasonably practicable&. &SFAIRP& is short for &so far as is reasonably practicable&. The two terms mean essentially the same thing and at their core is the concept of &reasonably practicable&; this involves weighing a risk against the trouble, time and money needed to control it. Thus, ALARP describes the level to which we expect to see workplace risks controlled.
How we use ALARP
Using &reasonably practicable& allows us to set goals for duty-holders, rather than being prescriptive. This flexibility is a great advantage but it has its drawbacks, too. Deciding whether a risk is ALARP can be challenging because it requires duty-holders and us to exercise judgement. In the great majority of cases, we can decide by referring to existing &good practice& that has been established by a process of discussion with stakeholders to achieve a consensus about what is ALARP. For high hazards, complex or novel situations, we build on good practice, using more formal decision making techniques, including cost-benefit analysis, to inform our judgement.
Why do I need to know about ALARP?
The concept of &reasonably practicable& lies at the heart of the British health and safety system. It is a key part of the general duties of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and many sets of health and safety regulations that we and Local Authorities enforce. HSC&s policy is that any proposed regulatory action (Regulations, ACOPs, guidance, campaigns, etc.) should be based on what is reasonably practicable. In some cases, however, this may not be possible because the Regulations implement a European directive or other international measure that adopt a risk control standard different from &reasonably practicable& (i.e. different from what is ALARP).
Because ALARP is fundamental to the work of the whole organisation, it is important that everyone, whatever their role, knows about it. Here are some specific reasons for you to know about ALARP and its relationship with good practice, but this is not an exhaustive list.
Policy makers and those engaged in Programme delivery need to know about ALARP because when you make proposals for HSC/E action to control health or safety risks, you need to make sure that, as far as possible, those controls will reduce the risks to employees (or other people, as the case may be) ALARP.
Enforcers need to know about ALARP because you will have to decide whether duty-holders have reduced their risks ALARP and so have complied with the law.
Technical specialists in HSE need to know about ALARP because you advise colleagues in HSE about whether control measures reduce risks ALARP and you help identify standards of risk control that are ALARP.
What is meant by reasonably practicable?
You may come across it as SFAIRP (&so far as is reasonably practicable&) or ALARP (&as low as reasonably practicable&). SFAIRP is the term most often used in the Health and Safety at Work etc Act and in Regulations. ALARP is the term used by risk specialists, and duty-holders are more likely to know it. We use ALARP in this guidance. In HSE&s view, the two terms are interchangeable except if you are drafting formal legal documents when you must use the correct legal phrase.
The definition set out by the Court of Appeal (in its judgment in Edwards v. National Coal Board, [1949] 1 All ER 743) is:
&&Reasonably practicable& is a narrower term than &physically possible& & a computation must be made by the owner in which the quantum of risk is placed on one scale and the sacrifice involved in the measures necessary for averting the risk (whether in money, time or trouble) is placed in the other, and that, if it be shown that there is a gross disproportion between them & the risk being insignificant in relation to the sacrifice & the defendants discharge the onus on them.&
In essence, making sure a risk has been reduced ALARP is about weighing the risk against the sacrifice needed to further reduce it. The decision is weighted in favour of health and safety because the presumption is that the duty-holder should implement the risk reduction measure. To avoid having to make this sacrifice, the duty-holder must be able to show that it would be grossly disproportionate to the benefits of risk reduction that would be achieved. Thus, the process is not one of balancing the costs and benefits of measures but, rather, of adopting measures except where they are ruled out because they involve grossly disproportionate sacrifices. Extreme examples might be:
To spend &1m to prevent five staff suffering bruised knees is obviously gros but
To spend &1m to prevent a major explosion capable of killing 150 people is obviously proportionate.
Of course, in reality many decisions about risk and the controls that achieve ALARP are not so obvious. Factors come into play such as ongoing costs set against remote chances of one-off events, or daily expense and supervision time required to ensure that, for example, employees wear ear defenders set against a chance of developing hearing loss at some time in the future. It requires judgment. There is no simple formula for computing what is ALARP.
It can get very complicated. More detailed
and your Directorate/Divisional ALARP guidance (where available) explains how to deal with some of these complications.
Hazard or risk?
Definition of a hazard
A hazard is something (e.g. an object, a property of a substance, a phenomenon or an activity) that can cause adverse effects. For example:
Water on a staircase is a hazard, because you could slip on it, fall and hurt yourself.
Loud noise is a hazard because it can cause hearing loss.
Breathing in asbestos dust is a hazard because it can cause cancer.
Definition of a risk
A risk is the likelihood that a hazard will actually cause its adverse effects, together with a measure of the effect. It is a two-part concept and you have to have both parts to make sense of it. Likelihoods can be expressed as probabilities (e.g. &one in a thousand&), frequencies (e.g. &1000 cases per year&) or in a qualitative way (e.g. &negligible&, &significant&, etc.). The effect can be described in many different ways. For example:
The annual risk of a worker in Great Britain experiencing a fatal accident [effect] at work [hazard] is less than one in 100,000 [likelihood];
About 1500 workers each year [likelihood] in Great Britain suffer a non-fatal major injury [effect] from contact with moving machinery [hazard]; or
The lifetime risk of an employee developing asthma [effect] from exposure to substance X [hazard] is significant [likelihood].
How to tell if a risk is ALARP
Using &reasonably practicable& allows us to set goals for duty-holders, rather than being prescriptive. This flexibility is a great advantage. It allows duty-holders to choose the method that is best for them and so it supports innovation, but it has its drawbacks, too. Deciding whether a risk is ALARP can be challenging because it requires duty-holders and us to exercise judgment.
Deciding by good practice
In most situations, deciding whether the risks are ALARP involves a comparison between the control measures a duty-holder has in place or is proposing and the measures we would normally expect to see in such circumstances i.e. relevant good practice. &Good practice& is defined in the
as &those standards for controlling risk that HSE has judged and recognised as satisfying the law, when applied to a particular relevant case, in an appropriate manner.& We decide by consensus what is good practice through a process of discussion with stakeholders, such as employers, trade associations, other Government departments, trade unions, health and safety professionals and suppliers.
Once what is good practice has been determined, much of the discussion with duty-holders about whether a risk is or will be ALARP is likely to be concerned with the relevance of the good practice, and how appropriately it has been (or will be) implemented.. Where there is relevant, recognised good practice, we expect duty-holders to follow it. If they want to do something different, they must be able to demonstrate to our satisfaction that the measures they propose to use are at least as effective in controlling the risk.
Deciding on &first principles&
Where the situation is complex, it may be difficult to reach a decision on the basis of good practice alone. There may also be some cases (for example, a new technology) where there is no relevant good practice. In such cases, good practice should be followed as far as it can be, and then consideration given to whether there is any more that can be done to reduce the risk. If there is more, the presumption is that duty-holders will implement these further measures but this needs to be confirmed by going back to first principles to compare the risk with the sacrifice involved in further reducing it.
Often such &first principles& comparisons can be done qualitatively, i.e. by applying common sense and/or exercising professional judgment. or experience. For example if the costs are clearly very high and the reduction in risk is only marginal, then it is likely that the situation is already ALARP and further improvements are not required. In other circumstances the improvements may be relatively simple or cheap to implement and the risk reduction significant: here the existing situation is unlikely to be ALARP and the improvement is required. In many of these cases a decision can be reached without further analysis.
But there are some instances (often in high hazard industries or where there is a new technology with potentially serious consequences) where the situation is less clear-cut. In such cases, a more detailed comparison has to be undertaken. The trouble is that risk and sacrifice are not usually measured in the same units, so it&s a bit like comparing apples and pears. In these instances, a more formal Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) may provide additional insight to help come to a judgment.
In a CBA, we convert both risk and sacrifice to a common set of units & money & so that we can compare them. We represent:
Sacrifice and
Risk , in so far as it is being reduced, as a benefit.
There&s more detail (such as which costs to take into account and which risks to consider) in the
and Directorates& own guidance.
We then compare the sacrifice (cost) and the risk reduction (benefits). In a standard CBA, the usual rule applied is that the measure should be adopted only if benefits outweigh costs. However, in ALARP judgments, the rule is that the measure must be adopted unless the sacrifice is grossly disproportionate to the risk. So, the costs can outweigh benefits and the measure could still be reasonably practicable to introduce. How much costs can outweigh benefits before being judged grossly disproportionate depends on factors such as how big the risk is to begin with (the larger the risk, the greater can be the disproportion between the cost and risk).
This looks straightforward, but it is worth noting that there are many assumptions and uncertainties involved in CBA & further discussion can be found in && - and indeed in many aspects of risk analysis. In any case, the outcome of a CBA is only one of several considerations that go towards the judgment that a risk has been reduced ALARP. For example, in policy work and in those parts of operational work dealing with high hazards you may also need to consider how the public feel about the risk. There is more detail about taking account of such &societal concerns& in &Reducing Risks, Protecting People&.
Some fallacies about ALARP
Some myths or fallacies about what ALARP means have grown up over the years. Here we explain what some of these myths are and, why they are wrong.
Fallacy 1 - Ensuring that risks are reduced ALARP means that we have to raise standards continually
It is part of HSC/E&s philosophy that we seek continual improvements in health and safety standards. That philosophy is widely shared in HSE and because of it, Britain has one of the best records for occupational health and safety in the world. HSE is rightly respected for this. However, we need to make sure that we encourage improvements in a responsible way.
Deciding whether something is safe enough (i.e. the risk is reduced ALARP) is a separate exercise from seeking a continual improvement in standards. Of course, as technology develops, new and better methods of risk control become available. Duty-holders should review what is available from time to time and consider whether they need to implement new controls. But that doesn't mean that the best risk controls available are necessarily reasonably practicable. It is only if the cost of implementing these new methods of control is not grossly disproportionate to the reduction in risk they achieve that their implementation is reasonably practicable. For that reason, we accept that it may not be reasonably practicable to upgrade older plant and equipment to modern standards. However, there may still be other measures that are required to reduce the risk ALARP: for example, partial upgrades or alternative measures.
Our decision about what is ALARP will also be affected by changes in knowledge about the size or nature of the risk presented by a hazard. If there is sound evidence to show that a hazard presents significantly greater risks than previously thought, then of course we should press for stronger controls to tackle the new situation. However, if the evidence shows the hazard presents significantly lesser risks than previously thought, then we should accept a relaxation in control provided the new arrangements ensure the risks are ALARP.
Fallacy 2 - If a few employers have adopted a high standard of risk control, that standard is ALARP
Some organisations implement standards of risk control that are more stringent than good practice. They may do this for a number of reasons, such as meeting corporate social responsibility goals, or because they strive to be the best at all they do, or because they have reached an agreement with their staff to provide additional controls. It does not follow that these risk control standards are reasonably practicable, just because a few organisations have adopted them. Until such practices are evaluated and recognised by HSE as representing good practice, you should not seek to enforce them (whether at a policy level or an operational one). It is also acceptable for a duty holder to choose to relax from a self-imposed higher standard to one which is accepted as ALARP (e.g. just meeting the requirements of a relevant ACOP).
Fallacy 3 - Ensuring that risks are reduced ALARP means that we can insist on all possible risk controls
ALARP does not mean that every measure that could possibly be taken (however theoretical) to reduce risk must be taken. Sometimes, there is more than one way of controlling a risk. These controls can be thought of as barriers that prevent the risk being realised and there is a temptation to require more and more of these protective barriers, to reduce the risk as low as possible. (The so-called &belt and braces& approach.) You must remember that ALARP means that a barrier can be required only if its introduction does not involve grossly disproportionate cost.
Fallacy 4 - Ensuring that risks are reduced ALARP means that there will be no accidents or ill-health
ALARP does not represent zero risk. We have to expect the risk arising from a hazard to be realised sometimes, and so for harm to occur, even though the risk is ALARP. This is an uncomfortable thought for many people, but it is inescapable. Of course we should strive to make sure that duty-holders reduce and maintain the risks ALARP, and we should never be complacent but, nevertheless, we have to accept that risk from an activity can never be entirely eliminated unless the activity is stopped. This relates to the issue of the &tolerability& of a risk, which is covered in detail in
(88 pages). It also goes some way to explaining why risk assessments feed into contingency planning.
Useful links and divisional contacts
Directorate/Divisional ALARP guidance
Some parts of HSE have also produced supplementary ALARP guidance that put the issues in context for different sectors:
Useful documentation
HSE has also published a document that sets out how we use risk ideas to take decisions about heath and safety regulation. While not written as guidance, it summarises some of the important concepts relating to ALARP:
(88 pages)
HSE aims to reduce work-related death, injury and ill health.