Prelude To Programming 6th Edition Venit Test Bank

Prelude to Programming 6th Edition
Venit Test Bank

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://testbankdeal.com/download/prelude-to-programming-6th-edition-venit-test-ban
k/
Prelude to Programming 6th Edition Venit Test Bank
Prelude to Programming 6th edition Elizabeth Drake
Test Bank for Prelude to Programming Chapter 0
MULTIPLE CHOICE
1. Which of the following is not an attribute of a computer?

a. can act on intermediate results without human intervention
b. has its roots over 20,000 years in the past
c. can be a mechanical or an electronic device
d. can store, retrieve, and manipulate large amounts of information
e. works at high speed with great accuracy
ANS: B
2. One of the earliest computers, built in the mid-1800s, was called:

a. ADA
b. Babbage
c. Apple IIE
d. Analytical Engine
ANS: D
3. A microchip is made:
a. of silicon
b. from the same material as a postage stamp
c. by the Altair company
d. All of the above are true
ANS: A
4. One of the most important inventions of the 20th Century which subsequently allowed for the rapid
increase in types and uses of computers was the:
a. vacuum tube
b. ENIAC computer
c. transistor
d. Mark I
ANS: C
5. An integrated circuit is:

a. a network of vacuum tubes
b. a small package of transistors
c. a switching device
d. the same as a microchip
ANS: B
© 2015 Pearson Education 1
Visit TestBankDeal.com to get complete for all chapters

6. The operating system developed by Google is:

a. Motorola
b. iOS
c. Windows
d. Android
ANS: D
7. The brain of a computer is its:

a. hard drive
b. central processing unit
c. system unit
d. RAM
ANS: B
8. The basic unit of memory in a computer is:

a. hertz
b. bytes
c. characters
d. meters
ANS: B
9. DVDs and flash drives are types of:

a. internal memory
b. processors
c. external memory
d. programs
ANS: C
10. Which of the following is both an input and an output device?

a. keyboard
b. monitor
c. modem/Internet connection
d. mouse
ANS: C
11. The programs used by the computer to control and maintain hardware and to communicate with
the user are:
a. applications software
b. browsers
c. shareware
d. system software
ANS: D

12. Which type of programming language is understood directly by the computer?

a. Assembly language
b. Machine language
c. VisualBasic
d. Java
ANS: B
13. The following instruction is an example of which type of programming language:

ADD C, D
b. Machine language
c. VisualBasic
d. Java
ANS: A
14. Which of the following is a scripting language?

b. Visual Basic
c. JavaScript
d. COBOL
ANS: C
15. Which of the following are normally used to write a program in a high-level language?
a. a text editor
b. a debugger
c. a compiler or interpreter
d. all of the above are needed
ANS: D

Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
[179] Gamarekian, loc. cit., pp. 32-34.
[180] Record, Aug. 25, 1955, p. 4-A.
[181] News and Courier, Aug. 31, 1955, p. 10-A.
[182] Ibid., Aug. 24, 1955, p. 10-A.
CHAPTER V
[183] News and Courier, May 6, 1956, p. 16-A; July 1, 1956, p. 14-A.
[184] Morning News, Mar. 6, 1955, p. 4-A; May 19, 1955, p. 4-A.
[185] Independent, Oct. 22, 1954, p. 1.
[186] News and Courier, Oct. 24, 1954, p. 4-A.
[187] Ibid., Aug. 31, 1955, p. 10-A.
[188] Record, Sept. 6, 1955, p. 7-A.
[189] Morning News, Oct. 3, 1955, p. 1.
[190] Ibid., Sept. 15, 1955, p. 1.
[191] News and Courier, Sept. 6, 1955, p. 1-B.
[192] Morning News, Aug. 29, 1955, p. 4.
[193] Ibid., Dec. 28, 1955, p. 5.
[194] Morning News, Dec. 23, 1955, p. 5.
[195] News and Courier, Aug. 27, 1954, p. 1.
[196] Record, Aug. 15, 1957, p. 1; News and Courier, Aug. 16, 1957, p. 1.
[197] Morning News, Nov. 10, 1954, p. 5.
[197] Independent, Feb. 5, 1956, p. 1.
[199] Record, Feb. 21, 1956, p. 7-A.
[200] Ibid., Feb. 22, 1956, p. 10-A.
[201] State, June 27, 1957, p. 1; Sept 10, 1957, p. 7-A; Sept. 27, 1957, p. 3-A;
News and Courier, Oct. 17, 1957, p. 1-B.
[202] News and Courier, May 8, 1956, p. 7-A.
[203] Independent, Apr. 19, 1956, p. 1.
[205] Ibid., Oct. 7, 1955, p. 1-B.
[207] News and Courier, July 15, 1955, p. 12-A.
[208] Morning News, Sept. 2, 1954, p. 1.
[210] Ibid., Sept. 19, 1954, p. 14-D; Sept. 8, 1954, p. 1.
[211] Ibid., Aug. 16, 1955, p. 8-A; Independent, Oct. 26, 1954, p. 14.
[212] Morning News, May 27, 1954, p. 4; May 29, 1954, p. 2.
[213] Record, Sept. 8, 1955, p. 1.
[214] News and Courier, July 18, 1956, p. 1-B; Aug. 28, 1955, p. 10-A.
[215] Morning News, Mar. 5, 1956, p. 5.
[216] News and Courier, May 30, 1954, p. 3-B.
[217] State, July 20, 1956, p. 10-B; News and Courier, Dec. 18, 1956, p. 10-
B.
[218] News and Courier, Feb. 16, 1957, p. 9-A.
[219] Morning News, Sept. 2, 1954, p. 3-A.
[220] Independent, May 25, 1954, p. 6; June 1, 1954, p. 14.
[221] News and Courier, July 19, 1954, p. 4.
[222] Ibid., Feb. 5, 1956, p. 4-A.
[223] Ibid., Sept. 12, 1954, p. 4.
[224] Ibid., Sept. 11, 1955, p. 2-C.
[225] Ibid., Oct. 24, 1954, p. 12-A.
[226] Ibid., Sept. 4, 1955, p. 8-A; Feb. 13, 1956, p. 8-A; Aug. 31, 1954, p. 4-
A.
[227] Morning News, May 13, 1954, p. 4.
[228] News and Courier, Feb. 28, 1956, p. 8-A.
[229] In this summary the following News and Courier editorials were
considered: June 3, 1954, p. 4-A; Aug. 8, 1954, p. 4-A; Aug. 26, 1954, p. 4-A;
Feb. 8, 1955, p. 8-A; June 12, 1955, p. 14-A; June 5, 1955, p. 14-A; Aug. 14,
1955, p. 12-A; Feb. 19, 1956, p. 12-A; May 6, 1956, p. 16-A; July 1, 1956, p.
14-A.
[230] Ibid., Aug. 31, 1954, p. 4-A.
CHAPTER VI
[232] Ibid., Feb. 28, 1955, p. 1; News and Courier, June 29, 1954, p. 4-A.
[233] News and Courier, Dec. 7, 1955, p. 12-A; Aug. 26, 1955, p. 12-A; also
Thomas R. Waring, “The Southern Case Against Desegregation,” Harper’s,
CCXII (Jan., 1956), 43.
[234] News and Courier, Dec. 5, 1955, p. 3.
[235] Record, Aug. 5, 1954, p. 4-A.
[236] Independent, Feb. 27, 1956, p. 13-A. For comparison, 71 percent of the
people outside the South (35 states) approved the decision, 24 percent
disapproved it and five percent were undecided.
[237] News and Courier, Mar. 1, 1956, p. 13-A; Mar. 15, 1956, p. 2-B.
[238] Independent, June 13, 1956, p. 37.
[239] News and Courier, Mar. 16, 1956, p. 1-B; Nov. 24, 1955, p. 1-B.
[240] Record, Nov. 10, 1955, p. 1-B; Morning News, June 15, 1954, p. 10-B;
Record, Jan. 14, 1955, p. 1.
[241] News and Courier, June 1, 1954, p. 6; May 26, 1954, p. 1; May 21,
1954, p. 10-A.
[242] Morning News, Mar. 7, 1956, p. 2; June 24, 1955, p. 6-B; Sept. 19,
1955, p. 8-A.
[243] News and Courier, Sept. 20, 1955, p. 8-A; Sept. 22, 1955, p. 14-A;
Independent, Sept. 29, 1955, p. 4.
[244] News and Courier, Mar. 16, 1956, p. 1-B; Oct. 22, 1955, p. 1-B; Oct.
19, 1955, p. 12-A.
[245] Independent, May 6, 1954, p. 16.
[246] News and Courier, Dec. 5, 1955, p. 3; Record, Apr. 26, 1956, p. 2-B.
[247] News and Courier, Sept. 19, 1954, p. 14-D; May 4, 1956, p. 16-A.
[248] Independent, May 18, 1954, p. 1; News and Courier, May 20, 1954, p.
15-B.
[249] News and Courier, Oct. 7, 1955, p. 1-B.
[250] Record, June 22, 1955, p. 1.
[252] Morning News, Feb. 26, 1956, p. 1; News and Courier, Dec. 5, 1955, p.
3; Record, Aug. 5, 1954, p. 4-A.
[253] News and Courier, Jan. 20, 1955, p. 11-A; Sept. 6, 1955, p. 1-B;
Independent, July 5, 1954, p. 4.
[254] News and Courier, Sept. 4, 1955, p. 8-A; Independent, Nov. 14, 1956,
p. 4; Morning News, Aug. 5, 1956, p. 4-A.
[255] Morning News, Aug. 5, 1956, p. 4-A; Aug. 30, 1956, p. 4-A.
[256] Ibid., Sept. 23, 1956, p. 4-A.
[257] News and Courier, May 28, 1956, p. 6-A; Sept. 8, 1955, p. 1-B; Aug.
30, 1955, p. 1-B; July 15, 1955, p. 12-A.
[258] Ibid., Nov. 21, 1955, p. 10.
[260] News and Courier, Feb. 19, 1955, p. 8-A; Jan. 12, 1955, p. 8-A.
[261] For example there were only two Negro delegates to the state
Democratic convention in 1956. Morning News, Mar. 22, 1956, p. 1.
[262] Independent, Aug. 2, 1956, p. 11.
[263] Morning News, Aug. 11, 1956, p. 1; News and Courier, May 4, 1956, p.
1-B.
[264] News and Courier, Dec. 30, 1954, p. 12-A.
[265] Independent, Mar. 18, 1956, p. 1.
[266] NAACP Civil Rights Handbook (New York, Apr., 1953), p. 5.
[267] Record, Mar. 29, 1956, p. 4-A.
[268] Ibid., Mar. 26, 1956, p. 1.
[269] News and Courier, Mar. 29, 1956, p. 1-B; Nov. 7, 1954, p. 8-A.
[272] Record, Sept. 12, 1955, p. 1.
[273] Morning News, June 30, 1955, p. 1.
[274] Ibid., July 1, 1955, p. 4-A; News and Courier, Aug. 11, 1955, p. 14-A.
[275] Morning News, Aug. 21, 1955, p. 3-A.
[276] Record, Sept. 1, 1955, p. 1; Sept. 14, 1955, p. 5-A.
[277] Evans to A. J. Clement, Jr., printed in program of 13th annual session of
the state NAACP (1953).
[279] Ibid., Aug. 20, 1954, p. 4-A; May 25, 1954, p. 4; Independent, Nov. 18,
1955, p. 4; Record, May 26, 1954, p. 8-A.
[280] Record, Oct. 11, 1955, p. 3-A; News and Courier, Apr. 2, 1956, p. 6-A;
Feb. 15, 1956, p. 10-A.
[281] Record, June 30, 1956, p. 4-A; State, July 20, 1956, p. 5-A.
[282] Record, Dec. 12, 1955, p. 1. In a paper delivered at the annual meeting
of the American Sociological Society in Washington, D. C. on August 29, 1957,
Professor Wilson Record of Sacramento State College showed the wide
divergences between the NAACP and the Communist Party in structure,
methods, and basic ideology.
[283] Morning News, Aug. 30, 1955, p. 1; Apr. 28, 1956, p. 1; Aug. 19, 1955,
p. 4-A.
[284] News and Courier, Oct. 14, 1954, p. 15-A; May 30, 1954, p. 4-A; July
17, 1955, p. 6-A.
[285] Ibid., Aug. 25, 1955, p. 1-B.
[286] Record, Mar. 29, 1956, p. 4-A.
[287] In connection with the use of this system against labor organizers, Rep.
Gary Brown of Abbeville County said, “As for unions we don’t have any trouble
in the county.... We are expecting to get some new industry and I would pass 50
bills to protect it.” News and Courier, Apr. 22, 1957, p. 8.
[289] Morning News, Aug. 19, 1955, p. 4-A; Mar. 12, 1956, p. 4.
[290] News and Courier, July 20, 1955, p. 1-B; Record, Nov. 22, 1955, p. 4-
A.
[291] News and Courier, Nov. 22, 1955, p. 1-B; Morning News, Aug. 30,
1955, p. 1; S. C. House Journal (1956), p. 450.
[292] Record, Aug. 11, 1955, p. 4-A; Nov. 4, 1955, p. 7-A.
[294] Myrdal, An American Dilemma, pp. 831, 820, 830.
[295] Record, Feb. 13, 1956, p. 1; News and Courier, Feb. 25, 1956, p. 10-A;
Dec. 19, 1954, p. 14-A.
[296] Record, Aug. 30, 1955, p. 1; Sept. 12, 1955, p. 1.
CHAPTER VII
[298] News and Courier, May 19, 1954, p. 4; May 20, 1954, p. 4.
[301] Morning News, May 21, 1954, p. 1; July 16, 1954, p. 3-A; Sept. 1,
1954, p. 1.
[302] Record, Jan. 4, 1956, p. 1; Morning News, Jan. 15, 1956, p. 3-B.
[304] Independent, July 29, 1955, p. 1; Nov. 4, 1955, p. 28.
[306] S. C. Senate Journal (1956), p. 55.
[307] News and Courier, Jan. 20, 1955, p. 11-A.
[308] Record, Nov. 4, 1955, p. 7-A.
[309] South Carolina Senate Journal (1955), p. 15.
[311] Morning News, Apr. 27, 1956, p. 10-A.
[312] News and Courier, Jan. 13, 1955, p. 14-A.
[313] Morning News, July 9, 1954, p. 4-A; Aug. 4, 1954, p. 4.
[316] Ibid., Nov. 29, 1955, p. 1-B; Sept. 8, 1955, p. 1-B; also South Carolina
Senate Journal (1955), pp. 14-27; South Carolina Senate Journal (1956), pp. 38-
44.
[319] Independent, July 25, 1954, p. 4.
[321] Ibid., May 30, 1954, p. 8-A; Oct. 29, 1955, p. 8-A; May 25, 1956, p. 4.
[322] Morning News, Apr. 28, 1956, p. 1; Aug. 7, 1956, p. 5.
[325] News and Courier, May 25, 1954, p. 6.
[326] Ibid., Oct. 10, 1954, p. 2-A.
[327] Morning News, Aug. 12, 1955, p. 1; Aug. 7, 1955, p. 1.
[328] News and Courier, June 30, 1955, p. 10-A; S. C. Senate Journal
(1956), pp. 52-53.
[329] Independent, Jan. 9, 1956, p. 1.
[330] News and Courier, Mar. 29, 1957, p. 1.
[331] Independent, Oct. 26, 1955, p. 14.
[332] Ibid., Jan. 7, 1956, p. 5. According to the annual report of the state
Superintendent of Education for 1953-54 South Carolina received $8,216,840
from the federal government for education in 1952-53 and $5,946,597 for 1953-
54. These figures represented 8.88 percent and 4.38 percent respectively of the
total school budget.
[333] News and Courier, Feb. 26, 1956, p. 8-A; Record, May 24, 1954, p. 4-
A; Morning News, Aug. 26, 1955, p. 4-A.
[334] Independent, Dec. 17, 1955, p. 4; Morning News, July 15, 1956, p. 4-A.
[335] Record, Aug. 15, 1957, p. 1; State, Aug. 19, 1957, p. 4-A; News and
Courier, Aug. 17, 1957, p. 6-A.
[336] News and Courier, Nov. 29, 1955, p. 1-B; South Carolina Senate
Journal (1955), pp. 19-27.
[337] Morning News, Feb. 9, 1955, p. 1; Mar. 2, 1955, p. 1; Independent, Feb.
23, 1955, p. 1.
[339] News and Courier, Mar. 12, 1955, p. 6-A.
[340] Ibid., May 28, 1955, p. 1.
[341] South Carolina Senate Journal (1955), pp. 134, 652.
[342] Morning News, May 26, 1956, p. 10. A further example of the frame of
mind of the legislature was the passage of a resolution which declared that the
Confederate Battle Flag symbolized “the divine cause of human freedom for
which our forefathers fought and for which the men, women and children of the
South displayed a courage and devotion to duty unparalleled in the history of the
world.” South Carolina Senate Journal (1956), p. 1185.
[343] News and Courier, Dec. 18, 1955, p. 1.
[344] Morning News, Dec. 29, 1955, p. 1; Feb. 15, 1956, p. 6.
[345] News and Courier, Feb. 7, 1956, p. 1-B.
[346] Record, May 1, 1956, p. 4-A.
[347] Ibid., Jan. 10, 1956, p. 4-A.
[348] Morning News, Dec. 30, 1955, p. 4.
[349] Independent, Feb. 1, 1956, p. 4; Feb. 5, 1956, p. 4.
[350] News and Courier, Feb. 3, 1956, p. 16-A; Dec. 17, 1955, p. 6-A; Apr.
26, 1956, p. 16-A.
[352] Ibid., pp. 150-155.
[353] Morning News, Jan. 11, 1956, p. 1.
[354] South Carolina House Journal (1956), p. 322.
[355] News and Courier, Feb. 3, 1956, p. 1.
[357] Record, Feb. 3, 1956, p. 4-A.
[358] Morning News, Feb. 3, 1956, p. 1.
[359] News and Courier, Sept. 4, 1957, p. 10-A; State, Sept. 5, 1957, p. 4-A;
Sept. 7, 1957, p. 4-A.
[360] South Carolina Senate Journal (1956), pp. 387-388.
[361] News and Courier, Jan. 24, 1957, p. 12-A. Most, though not all of
South Carolina’s Negro teachers apparently answered these questions
satisfactorily. Those who did not lost their jobs. However, when considering this
fact one should also bear in mind that the Palmetto Education Association, which
represents the state’s approximately 7,000 Negro teachers, adopted a resolution
in 1955 stating its approval of the Supreme Court’s desegregation decision and
offering its assistance to white school authorities in “discussing, outlining, and
implementing plans for universal public education” in South Carolina “within
the framework of the recent ruling of the United States Supreme Court.”
[362] Morning News, Jan. 18, 1956, p. 1.
[363] Ibid., Feb. 10, 1956, p. 4-A; Jan. 20, 1956, p. 4-A.
[364] Independent, Feb. 21, 1956, p. 1. The quotation from the Walterboro
Press and Standard appears in this article.
[365] Record, Feb. 16, 1956, p. 4-A.
[366] News and Courier, July 15, 1955, p. 12-A; Jan. 21, 1956, p. 6-A.
[367] Morning News, Jan. 18, 1956, p. 1; Feb. 18, 1956, p. 7.
[368] Ibid., Mar. 1, 1956, p. 2.
[369] Jerrold Beim, The Swimming Hole, (New York: Morrow and Co.,
1950).
[370] This summary of the Swimming Hole affair was taken from Morning
News, Mar. 2, 1956, p. 1; Mar. 7, 1956, p. 1; and Mar. 9, 1956, p. 1; South
Carolina House Journal (1956), pp. 936-937; Record, Mar. 10, 1956, p. 4-A; and
News and Courier, Mar. 8, 1956, p. 16-A.
[371] News and Courier, Apr. 24, 1957, p. 1-B; Apr. 27, 1957, p. 8-A; State,
Apr. 17, 1957; Apr. 24, 1957.
[372] State, Apr. 17, 1957; Apr. 24, 1957.
[373] News and Courier, Mar. 1, 1957, p. 1; Mar. 2, 1957, p. 8-A.
[374] Ibid., Feb. 10, 1957, p. 3-A; Apr. 25, 1957, p. 1; Apr. 8, 1957, p. 12;
Jan. 17, 1957, p. 14-A; Mar. 8, 1957, p. 1-B.
[375] Record, May 2, 1957.
[376] State, Aug. 6, 1957, p. 1; Sept. 10, 1957, p. 1; Record, Aug. 6, 1957, p.
1.
[377] Record, Sept. 21, 1957, p. 10-A.
[378] Radio WIS broadcast, Sept. 14, 1957.
[379] State, Sept. 21, 1957, p. 3-B.
[380] Morning News, Sept. 24, 1957, p. 4.
[381] Record, Jan. 10, 1958, p. 1; State, Jan. 11, 1958, p. 1; Baltimore Afro-
American, Jan. 11, 1958, p. 2.
[382] State, Jan. 1, 1958, p. 1; Jan. 3, 1958, p. 1; Record, Jan. 2, 1958, p. 1;
New York Times, Jan. 3, 1958, p. 14.
[383] Record, Jan. 10, 1958, p. 1; State, Jan. 11, 1958, p. 1; News and
Courier, Jan. 11, 1958, p. 1-B.
[384] Record, Jan. 15, 1958, p. 8-B. On April 9 the South Carolina general
assembly provided for a 6 man committee, 3 members from the Senate and 3
from the House, to probe Communism and Communist activities in the state.
Ibid., April 9, 1958.
[385] U.P. Wire, Jan. 16, 1958.
[386] State, Jan. 16, 1958, p. 1; ibid., Jan. 17, 1958, p. 1-B; ibid., Jan. 23,
1958, p. 8-A; Record, Jan. 17, 1958, p. 3-A.
[387] State, Jan. 16, 1958, p. 1; Record, Jan. 17, 1958, p. 3-A.
[388] State, Jan. 17, 1958, p. 1-B.
[389] Record, Jan. 29, 1958, pp. 1, 6-A.
[390] State, Feb. 5, 1958, p. 8-B; Feb. 8, 1958, p. 1-B; Feb. 4, 1958, p. 9-B;
Record, Feb. 1, 1958, p. 10-A.
[391] Record, Feb. 14, 1958, p. 6-A; Feb. 20, 1958, p. 1; State, Feb. 25, 1958,
p. 9-A.
[392] News and Courier, Dec. 1, 1955, p. 1-B; Dec. 2, 1955, p. 8-A.
[393] S. C. Senate Journal (1956), pp. 226-227.
[394] News and Courier, Apr. 28, 1956, p. 1.
[395] Record, Apr. 23, 1956, p. 1; Apr. 26, 1956, p. 4-A; Morning News, Apr.
24, 1956, p. 1.
[396] Morning News, Apr. 24, 1956, p. 3; News and Courier, Dec. 8, 1955, p.
8-A; S. C. House Journal (1956), p. 15.
[397] Independent, July 24, 1955, p. 1; July 25, 1955, p. 3; Aug. 18, 1955, p.
1.
[398] State, June 26, 1957, p. 4-A.
CHAPTER VIII
[399] News and Courier, Feb. 14, 1956, p. 8-A; Sept. 15, 1956, p. 9-A.
[401] Ibid., May 26, 1954, p. 3; May 27, 1954, p. 22.
[403] Independent, May 9, 1954, p. 28; May 16, 1955, p. 22; May 19, 1954,
p. 2; Morning News, May 2, 1954, p. 1.
[404] Quoted in Independent, June 3, 1954, p. 18.
[405] Record, May 22, 1954, p. 4-A.
[406] News and Courier, Jan. 9, 1956, p. 12; July 31, 1956, p. 8-A.
[407] Record, Apr. 23, 1955, p. 4-A.
[408] News and Courier, Mar. 10, 1956, p. 1-B.
[409] Morning News, Oct. 11, 1956, p. 4-A.
[410] Ibid., Mar. 6, 1956, p. 1.
[411] Ibid., Mar. 27, 1956, p. 1.
[412] S. C. House Journal (1956), pp. 1303-1304.
[413] Record, Mar. 22, 1956, p. 11-C.
[414] Ibid., June 20, 1956, p. 1; July 16, 1956, p. 10-A.
[415] Ibid., Aug. 2, 1956, p. 1; Aug. 3, 1956, p. 4-A.
[416] Morning News, July 13, 1956, p. 4-A.
[417] News and Courier, June 26, 1956, p. 8-A.
[418] Record, Aug. 3, 1956, p. 4-A.
[419] Independent, Aug. 11, 1956, pp. 1, 3.
[421] News and Courier, Aug. 16, 1956, p. 16-A; Aug. 21, 1956, p. 8-A.
[422] Record, Aug. 17, 1956, p. 4-A.
[423] News and Courier, Aug. 19, 1956, p. 14-A; Record, Oct. 31, 1956, p. 4.
[424] Independent, Aug. 17, 1956, p. 4; Aug. 18, 1956, p. 4.
[426] News and Courier, Aug. 28, 1956, pp. 1, 8-A.
[427] Independent, Feb. 10, 1956, p. 4; Mar. 7, 1956, p. 4.
[428] Morning News, Mar. 21, 1956, p. 4; June 26, 1956, p. 4; Aug. 22, 1956,
p. 4.
[429] News and Courier, Mar. 11, 1956, p. 14-A; May 23, 1956, p. 12-A;
June 25, 1956, p. 6-A; Aug. 2, 1956, p. 14-A; Aug. 9, 1956, p. 14-A; Aug. 24,
1956, p. 12-A.
[430] Ibid., Aug. 23, 1956, p. 8-A.
[431] Quotations in order are from News and Courier, Aug. 26, 1956, p. 15-
A; Aug. 30, 1956, p. 17-A; Sept. 1, 1956, p. 6-A; Sept. 9, 1956, p. 12-A; Sept.
14, 1956, p. 12-A; Aug. 27, 1956 p. 7-A; Aug. 28, 1956, p. 10-A; Sept. 2, 1956,
p. 11-A.
[433] Morning News, Aug. 28, 1956, p. 1; News and Courier, Aug. 28, 1956,
p. 1.
[435] Ibid., Oct. 4, 1956, p. 1; Sept. 21, 1956, p. 1.
[436] Record, Oct. 25, 1956, p. 2-B.
[437] Morning News, Sept. 28, 1956, p. 6-B.
[438] News and Courier, Oct. 17, 1956, p. 10-A; Oct. 22, 1956, p. 6-A.
[439] Independent, Nov. 4, 1956, p. 28; Oct. 31, 1956, p. 11; News and
Courier, Oct. 28, 1956, p. 4-C; Nov. 4, 1956, p. 12-A.
[440] Morning News, Oct. 27, 1956, p. 2-A; News and Courier, Oct. 28,
1956, p. 14-A; Independent, Oct. 27, 1956, p. 1.
[441] Record, Aug. 31, 1956, p. 3-A; News and Courier, Sept. 3, 1956, p. 6-
A; Oct. 24, 1956, p. 10-A.
[442] Independent, June 7, 1956, p. 4; Oct. 19, 1956, p. 4; Oct. 24, 1956, p. 4.
[443] Ibid., Oct. 19, 1956, p. 4.
[444] Ibid., Oct. 21, 1956, p. 28; Morning News, Oct. 9, 1956, p. 8; Nov. 2,
1956, p. 9-B.
[445] Independent, Oct. 31, 1956, p. 10; Nov. 2, 1956, p. 5.
[446] Open letter from South Carolina Republican Party, signed by Oscar W.
Pitts, chairman, undated.
[448] Ibid., Oct. 31, 1956, p. 2.
[450] Ibid., Nov. 14, 1956, p. 12-A.
[451] Morning News, Nov. 8, 1956, p. 9-A.
[452] News and Courier, Jan. 16, 1957, p. 1-B. At the state Democratic Party
Convention on March 25, 1958, the “Independent” faction made a bid to capture
the party chairmanship but was decisively defeated.
[453] State, Nov. 27, 1956, p. 6-B.
CHAPTER IX
[454] News and Courier, July 18, 1955, p. 6-A; Sept. 21, 1956, p. 15-A; Mar.
27, 1957, p. 10-A.
[455] Morning News, July 1, 1956, p. 4-A.
[456] News and Courier, June 30, 1956, p. 10-A.
[457] Ibid., June 17, 1955, p. 12-A.
[458] Ibid., Jan. 26, 1957, p. 1-B.
[459] Ibid., Jan. 30, 1956, p. 12.
[460] Ibid., Apr. 15, 1955, p. 12-A.
[461] Ibid., May 12, 1956, p. 1; July 3, 1954.
[462] Ibid., Nov. 20, 1954, p. 14.
[463] State, July 15, 1957, p. 4.
[465] Ibid., Aug. 27, 1957, p. 8-A.
[466] State, Aug. 20, 1957, p. 4-A.
[467] News and Courier, Dec. 13, 1954, p. 8-A; July 3, 1955, p. 14-A; May 8,
1955, p. 14-A.
[468] Ibid., Mar. 3, 1955, p. 14-A; Dec. 18, 1956, p. 10-A.
[469] Ibid., Jan. 30, 1956, p. 12.
[470] Ibid., Aug. 2, 1956, p. 12.
[471] Ibid., Sept. 24, 1957, p. 8-A.
[472] State, Oct. 2, 1957, p. 1.
[473] News and Courier, May 8, 1955, p. 14-A; Oct. 29, 1954, p. 4-A.
[474] Ibid., July 13, 1955, p. 10-A; Feb. 19, 1956, p. 4-A; Independent, Mar.
11, 1956, p. 4.
[476] Ibid., July 23, 1955, p. 4-A.
[477] Ibid., Sept. 24, 1957, p. 10-A. Much to the disgust of many members of
the faculty, the University of South Carolina awarded David Lawrence an
honorary degree in June, 1957.
[478] Ibid., Feb. 1, 1957, p. 1-B.
[479] Record, Apr. 9, 1956, p. 1.
[480] Independent, Apr. 10, 1956, p. 1; Apr. 13, 1956, p. 4; News and
Courier, Apr. 11, 1956, p. 10-A.
[481] News and Courier, Feb. 6, 1957, pp. 1, 15-A; Feb. 27, 1957, p. 1.
[482] Ibid., Feb. 27, 1957, p. 1; Feb. 15, 1957, p. 1.
[483] Ibid., Feb. 28, 1957, p. 6-A.
[484] See Walter F. Murphy, “Some Strange New Converts to the Cause of
Civil Rights,” Reporter, (June 27, 1957), 13.
[485] Douglass Cater, “How the Senate Passed the Civil-Rights Bill,” ibid.
(Sept. 5, 1957), 9.
[486] State, Aug. 12, 1957, p. 1-B; Aug. 24, 1957, p. I; Independent, Aug. 29,
1957, p. 1.
[487] State, Aug. 28, 1957, p. 1-B.
[488] Ibid., p. 1; Record, Aug. 28, 1957, p. 1.
[489] Record, Aug. 30, 1957, p. 1.
[490] New York Times, Aug. 31, 1957, p. 1; State, Aug. 30, 1957, p. 1;
Record, Aug. 30, 1957, p. 1. Thurmond maintained that only purpose of the
filibuster “was to arouse the American people.” He denied that he had broken
any agreement with his fellow Southern senators. He contended that the caucus
had agreed against an organized filibuster but permitted each individual Senator
to “oppose the bill in his own way.” According to Thurmond, “Senator Russell
said it would be up to each Senator as to how long he would talk, so a Senator
was free to make a long speech if he chose to do so. I chose to make a long one
and told Senator Russell in his office the following Wednesday that I was going
to make a long speech face.... I spoke 24 hours and 20 minutes and do not think
it was too long to talk against such a dangerous bill.” State, Sept. 5, 1957, p. 1-D.
Senator Johnston, nettled by the filibuster of his colleague, sent out a circular
letter to constituents which by indirection slapped hard at Thurmond. Without
comment of his own, Johnston referred to the various criticisms of Thurmond’s
action made by his Senatorial colleagues from the South.
[492] News and Courier, Aug. 31, 1957, p. 8-A; Morning News, Aug. 31,
1957, p. 4; State, Aug. 30, 1957, p. 4-A.
[495] State, Sept. 26, 1957, p. 4-A. The Record entitled its editorial comment
on President Eisenhower’s sending of troops to Little Rock: “General
Eisenhower Succumbs to Hysteria,” Sept. 25, 1957, p. 4-A. “Governor Faubus
chose to follow the course of ultimate legal resistance. He made it clear that he
would exhaust all avenues of appeal to overturn the injunction,” commented the
Morning News, Sept. 22, 1957, p. 4. The Independent praised Governor Faubus
for standing up to the pressure of Winthrop Rockefeller and other Arkansas
businessmen who allegedly tried to get him to submit to integration without
resistance and thus not discourage industrialists from investing in Arkansas. The
Independent termed them the “Don’t Rock-the-Boat-Crowd.” Sept. 17, 1957, p.
4; ibid., Sept. 25, 1957, p. 4. Of South Carolina newspapers only the weekly
Cheraw Chronicle, which has been an editorial voice of moderation in the state,
censured Faubus. “Whatever his motives, Governor Faubus must be curbed,” it
asserted. Quoted in News and Courier, Sept. 23, 1957, p. 12.
[496] Record, Sept. 28, 1957, p. 1. State Senator James Hugh McFaddin of
Clarendon County also resigned his commission in the U. S. Army Reserve. In a
letter to President Eisenhower he wrote: “In good conscience I could not obey
the orders now being issued by you to bayonet innocent people and to force
school children to eat lunch with undesirables, when the lunch is paid for by
their parents.” Ibid., Sept. 30, 1957, p. 1.
[497] State, Sept. 27, 1957, p. 1.
[498] Ibid., Sept. 25, 1957, p. 1-B. The Washington Post and Times Herald
editorially blasted Johnston for his remarks which it considered as seditious in
character. Cited in Record, Sept. 27, 1957, p. 3-A.
[499] State, Sept. 27, 1957, p. 1.
[500] Ibid., Sept. 26, 1957, p. 1-B.
[501] Ibid., p. 1.
[502] Ibid., p. 1-B.
[503] Ibid., Oct. 7, 1957, p. 1-B.
[504] News and Courier, May 17, 1956, p. 1-B.
[506] Ibid., May 14, 1956, p. 4.
[507] News and Courier, Feb. 25, 1956, p. 8-A; Independent, Dec. 13, 1955,
p. 8.
[508] News and Courier, Sept. 3, 1957, p. 10-A.
[509] News and Courier, Apr. 4, 1955, p. 12; July 1, 1956, p. 14-B; Mar. 8,
1955, p. 8-A.
[510] Morning News, Mar. 3, 1955, p. 8-A.
[511] News and Courier, Oct. 4, 1956, p. 1-B; Jan. 15, 1957, p. 1-B.
[512] Ibid., Jan. 16, 1957, p. 1-B.
[513] Ibid., Apr. 13, 1958, p. 10-B.
CHAPTER X
[515] Record, Oct. 5, 1956, p. 1.
[516] News and Courier, May 30, 1954, p. 4-A; July 18, 1955, p. 6-A; Aug.
24, 1955, p. 10-A; Oct. 6, 1955, p. 6-A; Feb. 2, 1956, p. 14-A.
[517] Ibid., Aug. 29, 1955, p. 6-A.
[518] Ibid., Mar. 16, 1956, p. 16-A; June 20, 1956, p. 12-A.
[519] Ibid., Aug. 10, 1955, p. 1-B.
[520] Independent, July 10, 1954, p. 2.
[521] Record, May 24, 1954, p. 12-A.
[522] News and Courier, Feb. 5, 1956, p. 5-D.
[523] Record, July 2, 1957, p. 1.
[524] Morning News, July 16, 1957, p. 1.
[525] South Carolinians Speak: A Moderate Approach to Race Relations
(Dillon, S. C., 1958).
[526] Record, Nov. 20, 1957, p. 1-A.
[528] South Carolinians Speak, p. 72.
[529] Ibid., p. 69.
[530] Record, Nov. 20, 1957, p. 1.
[531] Ibid., Dec. 7, 1957, p. 1.
[532] State, Nov. 28, 1957, p. 9-A.
[533] Ibid., Jan. 4, 1958, p. 1-B; Record, Jan. 13, 1958, p. 2.
[534] Ibid., May 19, 1954, p. 4; Feb. 5, 1956, p. 5-D; Mar. 26, 1957, p. 5.
[535] Ibid., Feb. 5, 1956, p. 5-D.
[536] Morning News, Dec. 5, 1956, p. 6; News and Courier, Aug. 8, 1955, p.
7-A; Oct. 12, 1954, p. 4-A; Sept. 3, 1955, p. 6-A.
[537] This summary of the Travelstead affair was taken largely from Chester
C. Travelstead, “Turmoil in the Deep South,” School and Society, LXXXIII (Apr.
28, 1956), 143-147; and Harry L. Golden, “No Dissent in Dixie,” Nation,
CLXXXI (Dec. 17, 1955), inside cover page.
[538] This summary of student reaction was taken from the Gamecock
(University of South Carolina), Dec. 2, 1955, p. 2; Dec. 9, 1955, pp. 2, 6.
[539] News and Courier, Nov. 25, 1955, p. 12-A.
[541] Ibid., May 13, 1954, p. 4; June 2, 1955, p. 4-A; June 3, 1955, p. 4-A;
June 17, 1955, p. 4-A; Jan. 29, 1956, p. 4-A; May 2, 1956, p. 10.
[542] Ibid., Feb. 26, 1956, p. 4.
[543] “Retreat from Reason,” Time, LXVII (Apr. 2, 1956), 85.
[544] Morning News, Mar. 11, 1956, p. 4-A.
[545] Ibid., Apr. 1, 1956, p. 4-A.
[546] News and Courier, Mar. 30, 1956, p. 12-A; Nov. 26, 1956, p. 6-A.
CHAPTER XI
[547] Francis B. Simkins, “Tolerating the South’s Past,” Journal of Southern
History, XXI (Feb. 1955), 5.
[548] Herbert R. Sass, “Mixed Schools and Mixed Blood,” Atlantic Monthly,
CXCVIII (Nov. 1956), 45-49.
[549] News and Courier, Sept. 3, 1955, p. 6-A.
[550] Ibid., Apr. 24, 1955, p. 10-A.
[551] Franz Boaz, Race, Language, Culture (New York, Macmillan Co.,
1940), pp. 19-21.
[552] News and Courier, Apr. 14, 1955, p. 16-A; Sept. 6, 1955, p. 9-A.
[554] News and Courier, May 8, 1955, p. 14-A; Feb. 19, 1955, p. 12-A; Feb.
25, 1956, p. 8-A.
[555] Ibid., July 3, 1955, p. 14-A; July 14, 1954, p. 4.
[556] Record, Aug. 20, 1954, p. 4-A; May 20, 1954, p. 4-A.
[557] News and Courier, Feb. 27, 1956, p. 12; Record, July 7, 1956, p. 4-A.
[558] Morning News, Dec. 16, 1956, p. 11-A; News and Courier, Dec. 10,
1954, p. 12-A.
[559] News and Courier, Dec. 13, 1954, p. 8-A.
[560] Ibid., July 7, 1955, p. 15-A; Sept. 5, 1954, p. 8-A.
[561] Morning News, Dec. 16, 1956, p. 11-A.
[562] News and Courier, June 26, 1954, p. 4.
APPENDIX
The following is the text of the decision, read by Chief Justice
Earl Warren, in the case of Briggs v. Elliott (in conjunction with
cases from Kansas, Virginia and Delaware) on May 17, 1954:
These cases come to us from the States of Kansas, South Carolina,
Virginia, and Delaware. They are premised on different facts and different
local conditions, but a common legal question justifies their consideration
together in this consolidated opinion.
In each of the cases, minors of the Negro race, through their legal
representatives, seek the aid of the courts in obtaining admission to the
public schools of their community on a nonsegregated basis. In each
instance, they had been denied admission to schools attended by white
children under laws requiring or permitting segregation according to race.
This segregation was alleged to deprive the plaintiffs of the equal protection
of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment. In each of the cases other
than the Delaware case, a three-judge federal district court denied relief to
the plaintiffs on the so-called “separate but equal” doctrine announced by
this Court in Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537. Under that doctrine, equality
of treatment is accorded when the races are provided substantially equal
facilities, even though these facilities be separate. In the Delaware case, the
Supreme Court of Delaware adhered to that doctrine, but ordered that the
plaintiffs be admitted to the white schools because of their superiority to the
Negro schools.
The plaintiffs contend that segregated public schools are not “equal” and
cannot be made “equal,” and that hence they are deprived of the equal
protection of the laws. Because of the obvious importance of the question
presented the Court took jurisdiction. Argument was heard in the 1952
Term, and reargument was heard this Term on certain questions propounded
by the Court.
Reargument was largely devoted to the circumstances surrounding the
adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868. It covered exhaustively
consideration of the Amendment in Congress, ratification by the states, then
existing practices in racial segregation, and the views of proponents and
opponents of the Amendment. This discussion and our own investigation
convinced us that although these sources cast some light, it is not enough to
resolve the problem with which we are faced. At best, they are
inconclusive. The most avid proponents of the post-War Amendments
undoubtedly intended them to remove all legal distinctions among “all
persons born or naturalized in the United States.” Their opponents, just as
certainly, were antagonistic to both the letter and the spirit of the
Amendments and wished them to have the most limited effect. What others
in Congress and the state legislatures had in mind cannot be determined
with any degree of certainty.
An additional reason for the inconclusive nature of the Amendment’s
history, with respect to segregated schools, is the status of public education
at that time. In the South, the movement toward free common schools,
supported by general taxation, had not yet taken hold. Education of white
children was largely in the hands of private groups. Education of Negroes
was almost nonexistent, and practically all of the race were illiterate. In
fact, any education of Negroes was forbidden by law in some states. Today,
in contrast, many Negroes have achieved outstanding success in the arts and
sciences as well as in the business and professional world. It is true that
public education had already advanced further in the North, but the effect of
the Amendment on Northern States was generally ignored in the
congressional debates. Even in the North, the conditions of public education
did not approximate those existing today. The curriculum was usually
rudimentary; ungraded schools were common in rural areas; the school term
was but three months a year in many states; and compulsory school
attendance was virtually unknown. As a consequence, it is not surprising
that there should be so little in the history of the Fourteenth Amendment
relating to its intended effect on public education.
In the first cases in this Court construing the Fourteenth Amendment,
decided shortly after its adoption, the Court interpreted it as proscribing all
state-imposed discriminations against the Negro race. The doctrine of
“separate but equal” did not make its appearance in this Court until 1896 in
the case of Plessy v. Ferguson, supra, involving not education but
transportation. American courts have since labored with the doctrine for
over half a century. In this Court, there have been six cases involving the
“separate but equal” doctrine in the field of public education. In Cumming v.
County Board of Education, 175 U.S. 528, and Gong Lum v. Rice, 275 U.S.
78, the validity of the doctrine itself was not challenged. In more recent
cases, all on the graduate school level, inequality was found in that specific
benefits enjoyed by white students were denied to Negro students of the
same educational qualifications. Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada, 305.
U.S. 337; Sipuel v. Oklahoma, 332 U.S. 631; Sweatt v. Painter, 339 U.S.
629; McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637. In none of these
cases was it necessary to re-examine the doctrine to grant relief to the
Negro plaintiff. And in Sweatt v. Painter, supra, the Court expressly
reserved decision on the question whether Plessy v. Ferguson should be
held inapplicable to public education.
In the instant cases, that question is directly presented. Here, unlike
Sweatt v. Painter, there are findings below that the Negro and white schools
involved have been equalized, or are being equalized, with respect to
buildings, curricula, qualifications and salaries of teachers, and other
“tangible” factors. Our decision, therefore, cannot turn on merely a
comparison of these tangible factors in the Negro and white schools
involved in each of the cases. We must look instead to the effect of
segregation itself on public education.
In approaching this problem, we cannot turn the clock back to 1868
when the Amendment was adopted, or even to 1896 when Plessy v.
Ferguson was written. We must consider public education in the light of its
full development and its present place in American life throughout the
Nation. Only in this way can it be determined if segregation in public
schools deprives these plaintiffs of the equal protection of the laws.
Today, education is perhaps the most important function of state and
local governments. Compulsory school attendance laws and the great
expenditures for education both demonstrate our recognition of the
importance of education to our democratic society. It is required in the
performance of our most basic public responsibilities, even service in the
armed forces. It is the very foundation of good citizenship. Today it is a
principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing
him for later professional training, and in helping him to adjust normally to
his environment. In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably
be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an
education. Such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide
it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms.
We come then to the question presented: Does segregation of children in
public schools solely on the basis of race, even though the physical facilities
and other “tangible” factors may be equal, deprive the children of the
minority group of equal educational opportunities? We believe that it does.
In Sweatt v. Painter, supra, in finding that a segregated law school for
Negroes could not provide them equal educational opportunities, this Court
relied in large part on “those qualities which are incapable of objective
measurement but which make for greatness in a law school.” In McLaurin v.
Oklahoma State Regents, supra, the Court, in requiring that a Negro
admitted to a white graduate school be treated like all other students, again
resorted to intangible considerations:
“... his ability to study, to engage in discussions and exchange views
with other students, and, in general, to learn his profession.” Such
considerations apply with added force to children in grade and high schools.
To separate them from others of similar age and qualifications solely
because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in
the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely ever
to be undone. The effect of this separation on their educational
opportunities was well stated by a finding in the Kansas case by a court
which nevertheless felt compelled to rule against the Negro plaintiffs:
“Segregation of white and colored children in public schools has
a detrimental effect upon the colored children. The impact is greater
when it has the sanction of the law; for the policy of separating the
races is usually interpreted as denoting the inferiority of the Negro
group. A sense of inferiority affects the motivation of a child to
learn. Segregation with the sanction of law, therefore, has a
tendency to retard the educational and mental development of Negro
children and to deprive them of some of the benefits they would
receive in a racially integrated school system.”
Whatever may have been the extent of psychological knowledge at the
time of Plessy v. Ferguson, this finding is amply supported by modern
authority. Any language in Plessy v. Ferguson contrary to this finding is
rejected.
We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of
“separate but equal” has no place. Separate educational facilities are
inherently unequal. Therefore, we hold that the plaintiffs and others
similarly situated for whom the actions have been brought are, by reason of
the segregation complained of, deprived of the equal protection of the laws
guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. This disposition makes
unnecessary any discussion whether such segregation also violates the Due
Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Because these are class actions, because of the wide applicability of this
decision and because of the great variety of local conditions, the
formulation of decrees in these cases presents problems of considerable
complexity. On reargument, the consideration of appropriate relief was
necessarily subordinated to the primary question—the constitutionality of
segregation in public education. We have now announced that such
segregation is a denial of the equal protection of the laws. In order that we
may have the full assistance of the parties in formulating decrees, the cases
will be restored to the docket, and the parties are requested to present
further argument on Questions 4 and 5 previously propounded by the Court
for reargument this Term. The Attorney General of the United States is
again invited to participate. The Attorneys General of the states requiring or
permitting segregaion in public education will also be permitted to appear
as amici curiae upon request to do so by September 15, 1954, and
submission of briefs by October 1, 1954.

Prelude To Programming 6th Edition Venit Test Bank

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Prelude To Programming 6th Edition Venit Test Bank

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Prelude to Programming 6th Edition

Venit Test Bank

Prelude to Programming 6th edition Elizabeth Drake

Test Bank for Prelude to Programming Chapter 0

1. Which of the following is not an attribute of a computer?

2. One of the earliest computers, built in the mid-1800s, was called:

5. An integrated circuit is:

© 2015 Pearson Education 1

Visit TestBankDeal.com to get complete for all chapters

6. The operating system developed by Google is:

7. The brain of a computer is its:

8. The basic unit of memory in a computer is:

9. DVDs and flash drives are types of:

10. Which of the following is both an input and an output device?

© 2015 Pearson Education 2

12. Which type of programming language is understood directly by the computer?

13. The following instruction is an example of which type of programming language:

14. Which of the following is a scripting language?

© 2015 Pearson Education 3

You might also like