Waching daily Sep 30 2018

A growing number of major American companies are warning that President Donald Trump's

tariffs on U.S. imports are raising their costs and prices.

Jim Hackett, head of Ford Motor Company, said on Wednesday that the new tariffs on steel

and aluminum are costing Ford $1 billion.

He also said the taxes may cause price increases in the automobile industry.

Ford is the second-largest automaker in the United States.

Walmart, America's largest store, has told the Trump administration that the latest tariffs

— on $200 billion of Chinese imports — could increase prices.

The company pointed to products like car seats, hats, and bicycles.

Procter & Gamble, the maker of cleansers and personal care products, has warned of possible

price increases and job losses because of the tariffs.

In addition, drinking Coca-Cola is costing Americans more because of the taxes.

Other businesses, like Macy's and Gap, warned of likely price increases.

On Wednesday, Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell spoke about the issue after the Fed's

members voted to raise interest rates.

The Federal Reserve System is America's central bank.

Asked about the tariffs forcing up prices for Americans, Powell said that Fed officials

are hearing from businesses about possible higher costs.

"You don't see it yet," the chairman said, commenting about reports the Fed studies.

However, Powell added that the tariffs might provide a reason for companies to raise prices

"in a world where they've been very reluctant to and unable to raise prices."

Speaking in New York Wednesday, Trump rejected the idea that the tariffs could create an

economic risk.

He said that Americans would not notice the new taxes.

"It's had no impact...on our economy," the president said after meetings with foreign

leaders at the United Nations General Assembly.

Ford Motor Company's Jim Hackett said that he estimates the latest tariffs will cost

his company about $1 billion.

Ford buys most of its metals from U.S. producers.

They have raised prices this year as a result of the tariffs on foreign competitors, the

company has said.

Other companies that make cars in the U.S. are seeing the same price increases, said

Peter Nagle of the IHS Markit research service.

For now, these businesses are paying the increased costs themselves, but eventually they will

have to raise prices, he added.

Car manufacturers are keeping prices low because they think Americans cannot pay higher prices,

Nagle said.

But if the tariffs continue, "some of those costs would have to start being passed along"

to U.S. buyers.

The Trump administration set a 25 percent tariff on imported steel and 10 percent tariff

on aluminum from some countries, including China, in March.

It added Canada, Mexico and the European Union to the list in June.

The administration justified the tariffs by saying foreign steel and aluminum are a threat

to U.S. national security.

Nagle said steel prices are up 25 percent since the tariffs began, and he expects that

to rise to near 30 percent next year.

I'm Susan Shand.

Almost anywhere in the world, you are likely to find people doing the same thing at eateries

and in other public places, on trains and buses or wherever else you look.

More and more people spend their day looking at laptop computers, smartphones or other

personal electronic devices.

They are thinking mainly about their electronic devices, and not much else.

The same can be said about the world of higher education.

More and more college students have no problem walking into a classroom and immediately opening

their laptops.

Others may spend an entire study period with a smartphone in hand.

Some people argue that the increasing use of technology can have many helpful effects

on society.

But recent research suggests that using technology during class time may harm college students'

ability to remember and process the subject material they are learning.

Arnold Glass is a professor in the School of Arts and Sciences at Rutgers University

in New Brunswick, New Jersey.

Glass and a student researcher investigated the issue of divided student attention.

They reported their findings in July 2018 in the publication Educational Psychology.

The study involved 118 Rutgers students who were taking the same upper level college class

in psychology.

The students were permitted to use any electronic device as much as they wanted during half

of their daily class periods.

During the other half, researchers closely watched them to make sure no one was using

any technology.

The students' academic performance was measured in several ways throughout the semester.

The students took a short test every day, longer tests every few weeks and a final exam

covering all the class material.

The researchers found that the average daily quiz results showed no evidence of harmful

effects from the use of technology.

However, the average results of the larger tests and final exam told a different story.

They showed that all the students performed poorly on questions covering material taught

on days when they were permitted to use technology in the classroom.

It did not matter whether or not the students reported that they had actually used a laptop

or cellphone on those days.

This is by no means the first or largest study to look at this issue.

Still, Glass argues that it shows the use of electronic devices in the classroom prevents

students from processing information.

The students hear what the professor is saying.

But they might be buying things online or reading unrelated emails at the same time,

for example.

So they are not thinking deeply about the subject matter as they are hearing it.

And that, Glass says, makes it harder for the information to enter their long term memory.

"Even though a few minutes later they know what the professor said, a week later if you

ask them, all they remember is that they were in class a week ago," he told VOA.

"They no longer remember what the professor said because they eliminated the opportunity."

University of Michigan professor Kentaro Toyama says he has seen this problem progressing

for years now.

Toyama teaches classes on information technology at the university's School of Information.

So it was no surprise to him when many students started bringing laptops to his classes about

10 years ago.

At first, Toyama thought it was a good idea as it could help students in their note keeping,

or could quickly provide information during class discussions.

But then he started noticing troubling behavior.

"Students would be looking at their laptop and they would suddenly smile, and it wasn't

because ... there was anything funny happening in the class," Toyama noted.

"What I realized very quickly was ... these students ... were on social media ... and

that's what they were smiling about.

And over time, as ... this increased, I just felt like I no longer had the attention of

my students."

At that point, Toyama decided to bar students from bringing laptops to his classes.

Yet it was not a total ban.

His classes often include activities that involve working with technology.

So he says he only bans laptops during the lecture part of his classes, where he needs

students' full attention.

Toyama says the ban is partial because he feels that technology can intensify both good

and bad qualities in anyone.

He notes that professors can make classes more interesting by using technology to present

information in different ways.

And there are many students who can listen, process information and investigate something

online to add to discussions all at the same time.

But even if technology is helpful to some students, there are times when it needs to

be turned off, as it may harm others, he notes.

In 2013, researchers at two Canadian universities reported that laptops not only harmed the

academic performance of users.

Students without computers were also distracted and, as a result, suffered academically.

However, Lauren Margulieux argues that even Toyama's relatively balanced way of dealing

with technology represents a limited understanding of the issue.

Margulieux is an assistant professor of learning sciences at Georgia State University in Atlanta.

She says there are times in which classroom use of technology is completely unavoidable,

as with students with disabilities.

And in the current job market, students need to be able to develop the skills that will

make their divided attention not only possible but successful.

For example, at many modern business meetings, people might be talking, listening and operating

a device all at the same time.

So, Margulieux says, educators need to think about preparing their students to enter this

quickly changing workforce.

And in doing so, they may have to consider that something other than technology is distracting

students.

Traditional methods of teaching, such as a professor standing and talking in front of

a class for an hour, may not be as interesting to today's college students.

In fact, the University of Michigan's Center for Research on Teaching and Learning has

created a special software program, called Lecture Tools.

Students can use the program on their personal devices during a given class.

It lets them inform the professor of how well they are understanding the course material.

"Designing instruction in a way that gets students to engage with that material more

would be a better solution than to ban laptops, because technology, in general, is not the

only way that students find to distract themselves in class," said Margulieux.

She and Toyama agree that one other way of solving the problem may be technology itself.

Special software already exists for online teaching and testing programs.

It can be used to observe student activity on a given electronic device and prevent them

from opening unrelated pages and programs.

At the start of this school year, Purdue University in Indiana announced it would be using similar

software in several of its lecture halls.

This aims to prevent students from distracting themselves by blocking video services like

Netflix.

I'm Pete Musto.

And I'm Lucija Millonig.

A South Sudanese surgeon has been named the winner of a United Nations award for assisting

refugees.

Evan Atar Adaha received the 2018 Nansen Refugee Award for 20 years of giving medical care

to people fleeing Sudan and South Sudan.

The award is presented by the UN Refugee Agency, or UNHCR.

Adaha, who is age 52, is based in the town of Bunj in northeastern South Sudan.

There, he runs the only hospital still in operation, which serves around 200,000 people.

Babar Baloch is a representative for UNHCR.

He told VOA that Adaha's hospital is surrounded by an active conflict area.

He said the doctor provides medical services under very dangerous conditions.

"The only line of defense he has is his reputation and his humanitarian work.

Luckily, so far, his work has been respected by all sides.

His clinic is open for all sides, whoever needs his assistance."

Baloch said Adaha and his medical team perform around 58 operations each week with limited

supplies and equipment.

He said the doctor may be called at any hour and sometimes sleeps only one hour each day.

Resources and conditions in the hospital make Adaha's work extremely difficult.

Much of the equipment is broken.

The surgical theater is lit by only one light.

Electricity comes from generators that often break down.

The hospital is often too crowded with patients.

South Sudan's civil war is now in its fifth year.

It has killed tens of thousands and caused more than four million people to flee.

Filippo Grandi leads the UNHCR.

In a statement, he called Adaha's work a "shining example of...humanity and selflessness."

Adaha was born in Torit, South Sudan.

As a young man, he earned an award to study medicine in Khartoum, Sudan.

Later, he practiced medicine in Egypt.

He returned home in 1997 to establish his first hospital in Kurmuk, a town in Sudan's

Blue Nile state.

Increased fighting between Sudan's government and rebels forced Adaha to flee Kurmuk in

2011.

He moved with his workers and equipment to Bunj in Upper Nile state, where 300,000 Sudanese

refugees live in temporary housing.

UNHCR's Nansen Refugee Award honors extraordinary service to refugees.

Recent winners include Sister Angelique Namaika from the Democratic Republic of the Congo

and Zannah Mustapha, a lawyer and mediator from Borno state in northeastern Nigeria.

The 2018 award ceremony will be held October 1 in Geneva, Switzerland, with a speech delivered

by UNHCR Goodwill Ambassador and actor Cate Blanchett.

The Nansen Refugee Award is named for Fridtjof Nansen, a Norwegian explorer, scientist, diplomat,

humanitarian and Nobel Peace Prize winner.

Award winners receive a medal and a $150,000 prize.

I'm Alice Bryant.

Researchers are noting changes in American public opinion on the issue of woman in politics.

A new study by the Pew Research Center tries to explore how Americans truly feel about

the subject.

Two years have passed since former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton became the first

woman to win the presidential nomination of a major party in the United States.

In 2018, a record number of American women are seeking elected office.

Also this year, more women than ever before have won major party primary elections for

state governor, the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives.

The Associated Press reports that most of these female candidates support the policies

of the Democratic Party.

Some say they decided to enter politics because of President Donald Trump's election and the

Republican Party's control of Congress.

Others were influenced by the #MeToo movement and protest marches organized by and for women.

"We are seeing a level of enthusiasm among women voters that we haven't seen in a long

time," said Laura Kelly, a Democrat.

She is seeking to become governor in the state of Kansas.

Currently, women hold just about a fifth of the 535 seats in the U.S. Congress.

And six of the nation's governors are women.

Yet more than half of the U.S. population is female.

In a new study, the Pew Research Center found that a large majority of women (69 percent)

are likely to say that too few women are politicians.

Forty-eight percent of men agree.

The study noted that nearly two-thirds of Americans think it is easier for a man to

get elected than a woman.

One in four think that men and women have an equal chance, while only five percent think

it is easier for women.

The Pew researchers also found that 61 percent of Americans think "women who run for office

have to do more to prove themselves than men."

Seventy-two percent of women felt that way, compared to 48 percent of men.

Some Americans believe the country is not ready to elect women to higher office.

Pew researchers said 57 percent of the women they questioned agreed with that statement,

compared to 32 percent of men.

When Pew asked if gender discrimination was a reason for fewer women in politics, it found

that younger women were more likely than older women to answer 'yes'.

Sixty-eight percent of women under age 50 said 'yes', while 50 percent of those over

age 50 agreed.

Among men, there was little difference between younger and older men.

More than six in 10 Americans said women are better than men at showing concern.

Forty-two percent said women are better at working out compromises, while 41 percent

said women make better examples for children.

The Pew Research Center also found that Americans think men are more likely to have success

in politics because they are more willing to take risks.

The study found that being decisive, forceful and ambitious helps men, while women are seen

as more approachable, better-looking and caring.

But most Americans did see benefits to having women in leadership positions.

A majority said that having women in top positions in business and government would improve the

quality of life at least somewhat for all Americans.

I'm Phil Dierking